RugbyRebels

fivepointer wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote: actually, Curry and Wilson missed a lot of tackles, not a biggy, but something to watch for.

Do you feel that 'missed tackles' need more in-depth study these days? I'm just often seeing such a fast game that an attempted tackle is sometimes an effective delaying factor leading to a stopping hit. With such good ground coverage by the whole XV, wildish tackles (statistically recorded as 'missed') are not the mistakes that they used to be.

Yes, i think they do.
We made 148 out of 179 attempts (83%); France made 94 out of 110 (85%)
Some of the other stats make interesting reading too -
Meters made E 425 F 591
Possession E 47% F 53%
Clean breaks E 9 F 12
Defenders beaten E 16 F 31

Looking at those you might be surprised that the score ended 44-8 but stats are only telling us part of the story.

Same story last week- had you given stats without saying which team was which and picked a likely winner, it would have been Ireland. But individual stats are revealing almost always.

Couldn’t help but note that three Wasps came off the bench and then England won.

Fact.

Not sure what to say, we refused to play at pace, butchered loads of points, gave away daft points in defence and had some stupid ill discipline, and not many locks can be worse than Launchbury at restarts

Against which France left so much space to kick into it would have been rude not to, delighted for George, and we've won by 36

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote: actually, Curry and Wilson missed a lot of tackles, not a biggy, but something to watch for.

Do you feel that 'missed tackles' need more in-depth study these days? I'm just often seeing such a fast game that an attempted tackle is sometimes an effective delaying factor leading to a stopping hit. With such good ground coverage by the whole XV, wildish tackles (statistically recorded as 'missed') are not the mistakes that they used to be.

Its a good point, but France did make a lot of metres today; some of the missed tackles may be a missed 'double team' as it were, as we are very aggressive. But look at the French metres made as a key indicator.

Fair comment. I'm only floating thoughts and statistics are not my thing. For example, take out the metres made in scoring their try and are you left with much ground gained anywhere near our 22?

Its like american football where lots of passing yards often goes with defeat. Its not that passing a lot costs you the game, but when they're losing, teams have to pass more.

England had a comfy lead and were happy to hoof it. France felt compelled to run - racking up the meters, without achieving too much/

Buggaluggs wrote:Its like american football where lots of passing yards often goes with defeat. Its not that passing a lot costs you the game, but when they're losing, teams have to pass more.

England had a comfy lead and were happy to hoof it. France felt compelled to run - racking up the meters, without achieving too much/

But they did break through the midfield defense way too much. Especially AFTER Tuilagi went off.

So perhaps I was wrong in Farrell being our 2nd best 12. It'd be interesting to see how many of his missed tackles came in those last 20 minutes when he was at 12...

Buggaluggs wrote:Its like american football where lots of passing yards often goes with defeat. Its not that passing a lot costs you the game, but when they're losing, teams have to pass more.

England had a comfy lead and were happy to hoof it. France felt compelled to run - racking up the meters, without achieving too much/

Poor finishing its true. But they did make a lot of line breaks, too many to be cocky.

Oh, one negative: LCD. He was off the pace quite considerably.

He should get gametime against Italy...but if he doesn't make use of it, is there anyone else who could be parachuted into the 3rd hooker slot pre-WC?

Just imagine how good you will be when Brad Shields comes back in.

Digby wrote:Not sure what to say, we refused to play at pace, butchered loads of points, gave away daft points in defence and had some stupid ill discipline, and not many locks can be worse than Launchbury at restarts

Against which France left so much space to kick into it would have been rude not to, delighted for George, and we've won by 36

..or.....
the game plan was to control the pace; tick
we conceded far fewer penalties than for ages (4), and very few in dangerous places; tick
we gave away one daft try, small mercies; tick

Ashton butchered one try, actually two, but somehow we got a penalty try.....so he may get dropped; tick
Farrell generally did the right thing and showed good running lines; tick.

and

agreed on Launchbury, and we missed Itoje. France were there for the taking, and we took them without having to play too hard. Tuilagi and Billy survived two games, and did well generally. Wilson and Curry are excellent, and Lawes proved he is an excellent lock; props came on and did a number. George was very good, as was Kruis.

but....Daly is vulnerable if a star with the ball; Youngs service would shame an Italian flanker. LCD is a mixed blessing, and ushered Hartley back in. Too many tackles missed.

Stom wrote:Oh, one negative: LCD. He was off the pace quite considerably.

He should get gametime against Italy...but if he doesn't make use of it, is there anyone else who could be parachuted into the 3rd hooker slot pre-WC?

I’d quite like to see Singleton get a go. He’s a very good all rounder with plenty of potential to keep developing.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:Not sure what to say, we refused to play at pace, butchered loads of points, gave away daft points in defence and had some stupid ill discipline, and not many locks can be worse than Launchbury at restarts

Against which France left so much space to kick into it would have been rude not to, delighted for George, and we've won by 36

..or.....
the game plan was to control the pace; tick
we conceded far fewer penalties than for ages (4), and very few in dangerous places; tick
we gave away one daft try, small mercies; tick

Ashton butchered one try, actually two, but somehow we got a penalty try.....so he may get dropped; tick
Farrell generally did the right thing and showed good running lines; tick.

and

agreed on Launchbury, and we missed Itoje. France were there for the taking, and we took them without having to play too hard. Tuilagi and Billy survived two games, and did well generally. Wilson and Curry are excellent, and Lawes proved he is an excellent lock; props came on and did a number. George was very good, as was Kruis.

but....Daly is vulnerable if a star with the ball; Youngs service would shame an Italian flanker. LCD is a mixed blessing, and ushered Hartley back in. Too many tackles missed.

Yep. I’d agree with all of the above.

George is justifiably first choice now and while Hartley is not much of an impact sub, his set piece reliability is still an asset off the bench.

Scrumhead wrote:

Stom wrote:Oh, one negative: LCD. He was off the pace quite considerably.

He should get gametime against Italy...but if he doesn't make use of it, is there anyone else who could be parachuted into the 3rd hooker slot pre-WC?

I’d quite like to see Singleton get a go. He’s a very good all rounder with plenty of potential to keep developing.

The question is whether he's ready...

But if he makes his throws and doesn't miss tackles, he'll be better than LCD on his recent England showings...

Which is a shame (for LCD and us) because he's better than he's been showing. Singleton has been good, too. I wonder how both Walker and Taylor are going to play over the next few years, too. Both are good players who have been derailed by injury.

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: and Curry not falling off the tackles as he was in SA. It’s all going far too smoothly......

actually, Curry and Wilson missed a lot of tackles, not a biggy, but something to watch for.

Do you feel that 'missed tackles' need more in-depth study these days? I'm just often seeing such a fast game that an attempted tackle is sometimes an effective delaying factor leading to a stopping hit. With such good ground coverage by the whole XV, wildish tackles (statistically recorded as 'missed') are not the mistakes that they used to be.

Missing tackles and getting bounced when attempting tackles, as he was in SA, are two different things. Not that one is better than the other.
Wilson missed a lot last week, too, but, on this form, he’s some player.

Banquo wrote:

fivepointer wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Do you feel that 'missed tackles' need more in-depth study these days? I'm just often seeing such a fast game that an attempted tackle is sometimes an effective delaying factor leading to a stopping hit. With such good ground coverage by the whole XV, wildish tackles (statistically recorded as 'missed') are not the mistakes that they used to be.

Yes, i think they do.
We made 148 out of 179 attempts (83%); France made 94 out of 110 (85%)
Some of the other stats make interesting reading too -
Meters made E 425 F 591
Possession E 47% F 53%
Clean breaks E 9 F 12
Defenders beaten E 16 F 31

Looking at those you might be surprised that the score ended 44-8 but stats are only telling us part of the story.

Same story last week- had you given stats without saying which team was which and picked a likely winner, it would have been Ireland. But individual stats are revealing almost always.

There were some illuminating stats on 60 mins-ish. Not sure of the exact figures (or even ball park to be honest) but possession and accuracy in the 22’s were very much in favour of England. Also, it’s difficult to win the possession and metres gained stats when you kick the ball away as much as we did.

I'm planning on doing the minute by minute, but I suspect it'll be short posts after 56 minutes. Gods, what a dreary end to the game. I blame Dan Robson - drop him!

Puja

Tom Hamilton ESPN writer:

...with Owen Farrell producing a world-class performance.

K, fair enough...what did Farrell do so well Mr Hamilton?

The only other mentions of him in the article are:

Farrell's second-half try again came from a kick-focused move where Henry Slade intercepted a weak Camille Lopez and then nudged the ball forward for Farrell to dot down after the French defender spilled it backwards.

That said, England's greatest danger now is complacency. With Farrell at the helm and Jones in the hotseat, there's little chance of that.

Ffs.

He had a decent game, missed some kicks, missed some tackles.

If that accounts for being world class, I'm in with a shout.

Cannot stand this bollocks.

Will it be Biggar though? He was pretty crap yesterday. Maybe we should hope it is!

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:Not sure what to say, we refused to play at pace, butchered loads of points, gave away daft points in defence and had some stupid ill discipline, and not many locks can be worse than Launchbury at restarts

Against which France left so much space to kick into it would have been rude not to, delighted for George, and we've won by 36

..or.....
the game plan was to control the pace; tick
we conceded far fewer penalties than for ages (4), and very few in dangerous places; tick
we gave away one daft try, small mercies; tick

Ashton butchered one try, actually two, but somehow we got a penalty try.....so he may get dropped; tick
Farrell generally did the right thing and showed good running lines; tick.

and

agreed on Launchbury, and we missed Itoje. France were there for the taking, and we took them without having to play too hard. Tuilagi and Billy survived two games, and did well generally. Wilson and Curry are excellent, and Lawes proved he is an excellent lock; props came on and did a number. George was very good, as was Kruis.

but....Daly is vulnerable if a star with the ball; Youngs service would shame an Italian flanker. LCD is a mixed blessing, and ushered Hartley back in. Too many tackles missed.

I get we controlled the pace, we did so last week too, but I would be happier if we also attempted and executed playing at pace when surely at some point we'd either want to or even need to

Essentially I'm admiring of their ability to stay with the plan, it's great discipline and work ethic, I'd just like another plan other than maybe seeing one against Italy

Some objectivity would be nice when it comes to the Farrell wank-fest.

Last week, at half time in the Scotland match, they were talking about Finn Russell's mistakes!

Today on scrum v, it was Biggar's mistakes and a couple by Anscombe.

Do Farrell's mistake ever get a mention? No.

According to ESPN, the only player on the pitch who missed more tackles was Wilson (1 more than Farrell)....and he made double the number of tackles!

Peej wrote:Will it be Biggar though? He was pretty crap yesterday. Maybe we should hope it is!

I'd actually prefer Anscombe. I think we can get to and break him, whereas I think Biggar's kicking will seriously unpick us (unless he's kind like Ireland were and kicks to nobody but Jonny May).

Puja

Jiffy was talking on scrum v that Wales should target May under the high ball all match to see it he'll be a world class winger or back to his old ways...or words to those effects.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

WaspInWales wrote:Jiffy was talking on scrum v that Wales should target May under the high ball all match to see it he'll be a world class winger or back to his old ways...or words to those effects.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Wales should target Farrell's spot tackling and see if they can put the ball into the space left by the miss.

Farrell was very good under a game plan that suits his talents. I’d love it if we gave a running game more of a chance before kicking for territory but Farrell played this game plan very well. The wanking over his good bits and ignoring his poor bits still drives me mad, though.