Borthwick’s England 2.0

[p/d]

sliming down into 5 Provinces if it is to be truly aligned to serving national needs - probably worthy of a thread on its own as I know this is polarising!)

Erm…..

…. the experiment of Genge or Sinckler tried out at 8

Bingo! There is your new thread

[jngf]

sliming down into 5 Provinces if it is to be truly aligned to serving national needs - probably worthy of a thread on its own as I know this is polarising!)

Erm…..

…. the experiment of Genge or Sinckler tried out at 8

Bingo! There is your new thread

I fear it might end up as Macbeth 2.0

[Stom]

Maybe it was just in comparison to Farrell, but Genge was wonderful talking to the ref about the scrums. Didn't work, but the way he got his point across while engaging the ref in an actual conversation rather than screaming in his face...

Yeah, shame about the scrummaging.

[Mikey Brown]

It’s funny the way we’re talking about Earl being a revelation at 8. Whilst I agree he has played very well (exceeding expectation) you’d think anybody would have looked at the crop of players we have at 8 - Dombrandt, Simmonds, Mercer, Willis - and looked to make something of a mobile 8 who can run at weak shoulders, rather than hope Billy will turn back time if we just keep smashing him in to brick walls enough times.

I think of that lot Willis could at least do the basic truck-up job we seemed to want from Billy, but whatever. It’s done now.

I just want to see a game built around the strengths of the players we have available rather than deciding what we think are historically English strengths (that whole concept is fucking stupid if you don’t have those sorts of players available) and trying to crowbar players in to that game-plan.

There seems to be a reasonable consensus on where we’d like to go from here player wise: Earl has earned the right to play at 7 alongside an actual flanker and an 8. Martin has shown he could be the business alongside Itoje in the long term. We desperately need some new front rows to step up and would love to see Barbeary concentrate on playing 2 again.

Phase out the old, injury prone, past their best back-three players like Daly, May, Watson, Malins, Freeman and stop being so scared to make something of the exciting attacking talents we have.

And yes, find a captain (ideally a few) who can actually talk to referees.

[Scrumhead]

It’s funny the way we’re talking about Earl being a revelation at 8. Whilst I agree he has played very well (exceeding expectation) you’d think anybody would have looked at the crop of players we have at 8 - Dombrandt, Simmonds, Mercer, Willis - and looked to make something of a mobile 8 who can run at weak shoulders, rather than hope Billy will turn back time if we just keep smashing him in to brick walls enough times.

I think of that lot Willis could at least do the basic truck-up job we seemed to want from Billy, but whatever. It’s done now.

I just want to see a game built around the strengths of the players we have available rather than deciding what we think are historically English strengths (that whole concept is fucking stupid if you don’t have those sorts of players available) and trying to crowbar players in to that game-plan.

There seems to be a reasonable consensus on where we’d like to go from here player wise: Earl has earned the right to play at 7 alongside an actual flanker and an 8. Martin has shown he could be the business alongside Itoje in the long term. We desperately need some new front rows to step up and would love to see Barbeary concentrate on playing 2 again.

Phase out the old, injury prone, past their best back-three players like Daly, May, Watson, Malins, Freeman and stop being so scared to make something of the exciting attacking talents we have.

And yes, find a captain (ideally a few) who can actually talk to referees.

This is exactly what I meant in the OP. On the whole, we seem to be producing more mobile players rather than heavyweights, so it makes no sense to go for a power based game plan.

IMO, playing Arundell, Murley or Radwan on one wing gives us pace and trickery while Freeman or OHC would give us a bit more size as on the other wing. Not totally dissimilar (at least in concept) to what Scotland have with DvdM and Graham.

[jngf]

It’s funny the way we’re talking about Earl being a revelation at 8. Whilst I agree he has played very well (exceeding expectation) you’d think anybody would have looked at the crop of players we have at 8 - Dombrandt, Simmonds, Mercer, Willis - and looked to make something of a mobile 8 who can run at weak shoulders, rather than hope Billy will turn back time if we just keep smashing him in to brick walls enough times.

I think of that lot Willis could at least do the basic truck-up job we seemed to want from Billy, but whatever. It’s done now.

I just want to see a game built around the strengths of the players we have available rather than deciding what we think are historically English strengths (that whole concept is fucking stupid if you don’t have those sorts of players available) and trying to crowbar players in to that game-plan.

There seems to be a reasonable consensus on where we’d like to go from here player wise: Earl has earned the right to play at 7 alongside an actual flanker and an 8. Martin has shown he could be the business alongside Itoje in the long term. We desperately need some new front rows to step up and would love to see Barbeary concentrate on playing 2 again.

Phase out the old, injury prone, past their best back-three players like Daly, May, Watson, Malins, Freeman and stop being so scared to make something of the exciting attacking talents we have.

And yes, find a captain (ideally a few) who can actually talk to referees.

This is exactly what I meant in the OP. On the whole, we seem to be producing more mobile players rather than heavyweights, so it makes no sense to go for a power based game plan.

IMO, playing Arundell, Murley or Radwan on one wing gives us pace and trickery while Freeman or OHC would give us a bit more size as on the other wing. Not totally dissimilar (at least in concept) to what Scotland have with DvdM and Graham.

Maybe we actually need to start producing some heavyweights as our mobile front 5 is far from perfect (and was shown to be underpowered ) ? I’d be quite happy to give passports to some more Polynesians, Saffas and French if it would help speed things along

Further to all intents and purposes exiling players like Ribbans to protect a sub optimal (imo) English club rugby setup is the wrong priority for RFU

[francoisfou]

Has Ted Hill’s form dropped off a cliff?

[jngf]

Has Ted Hill’s form dropped off a cliff?

Playing for Worcester can’t have helped - would see him as a future test 4 alongside Itoje and Martin - not a 6 as playing locks there isn’t needed if you have flankers who can jump and take ball

[Mikey Brown]

Has Ted Hill’s form dropped off a cliff?

Playing for Worcester can’t have helped - would see him as a future test 4 alongside Itoje and Martin - not a 6 as playing locks there isn’t needed if you have flankers who can jump and take ball

He is a flanker who can jump and take the ball...

Why the distinction of Itoje and Martin both playing 4. Were you watching yesterday?

I agree we'd ideally develop some beefy tight-five forwards, but importing from abroad (or what? growing them in a lab?) doesn't fix many of the issues that have been highlighted recently with the game in England mid/long-term. It will be a long process and in the mean time that means making the most of the players we have.

[FKAS]

Has Ted Hill’s form dropped off a cliff?

Playing for Worcester can’t have helped - would see him as a future test 4 alongside Itoje and Martin - not a 6 as playing locks there isn’t needed if you have flankers who can jump and take ball

He is a flanker who can jump and take the ball...

Why the distinction of Itoje and Martin both playing 4. Were you watching yesterday?

I agree we'd ideally develop some beefy tight-five forwards, but importing from abroad (or what? growing them in a lab?) doesn't fix many of the issues that have been highlighted recently with the game in England mid/long-term. It will be a long process and in the mean time that means making the most of the players we have.

Martin and Chessum are both tighthead locks as you say.

Also agree Hill isn't a lock and the experiments where he was shoehorned in there didn't really work. He's a younger and more mobile Lawes.

He's one I'd like to see us have a look at if he's in good form. I don't think Borthwick is going to abandon the physical aspect he wants in his team and I think over time we'll move to a more mobile iteration of it though. As has been pointed out we're providing more mobility than just massive units so it makes sense though the Tigers lock pipeline is in full flow with some big guys emerging.

[Scrumhead]

It’s funny the way we’re talking about Earl being a revelation at 8. Whilst I agree he has played very well (exceeding expectation) you’d think anybody would have looked at the crop of players we have at 8 - Dombrandt, Simmonds, Mercer, Willis - and looked to make something of a mobile 8 who can run at weak shoulders, rather than hope Billy will turn back time if we just keep smashing him in to brick walls enough times.

I think of that lot Willis could at least do the basic truck-up job we seemed to want from Billy, but whatever. It’s done now.

I just want to see a game built around the strengths of the players we have available rather than deciding what we think are historically English strengths (that whole concept is fucking stupid if you don’t have those sorts of players available) and trying to crowbar players in to that game-plan.

There seems to be a reasonable consensus on where we’d like to go from here player wise: Earl has earned the right to play at 7 alongside an actual flanker and an 8. Martin has shown he could be the business alongside Itoje in the long term. We desperately need some new front rows to step up and would love to see Barbeary concentrate on playing 2 again.

Phase out the old, injury prone, past their best back-three players like Daly, May, Watson, Malins, Freeman and stop being so scared to make something of the exciting attacking talents we have.

And yes, find a captain (ideally a few) who can actually talk to referees.

This is exactly what I meant in the OP. On the whole, we seem to be producing more mobile players rather than heavyweights, so it makes no sense to go for a power based game plan.

IMO, playing Arundell, Murley or Radwan on one wing gives us pace and trickery while Freeman or OHC would give us a bit more size as on the other wing. Not totally dissimilar (at least in concept) to what Scotland have with DvdM and Graham.

Maybe we actually need to start producing some heavyweights as our mobile front 5 is far from perfect (and was shown to be underpowered ) ? I’d be quite happy to give passports to some more Polynesians, Saffas and French if it would help speed things along

Further to all intents and purposes exiling players like Ribbans to protect a sub optimal (imo) English club rugby setup is the wrong priority for RFU

I don’t think we’re choosing to produce mobile players over and above heavyweights.

I’ve got 0 interest in giving passports to players who aren’t in the least bit English. That wouldn’t feel like success to me.

Ribbans is a good player, but he’s at best 4th choice, potentially dropping further back if Lewis Chessum starts getting some decent exposure with Tigers. I’m really not too bothered about him moving overseas.

Overall, the point is that you have to work with what you have. We can’t magic up players that simply don’t exist. We just need to do a better job of matching our resources with a game plan that plays to the strengths of the players we have.

[Oakboy]

Another question based on Earl's success at 8 might be, "How good could Simmonds have been, picked at his peak?"

Simmonds was not a fashionable lump, of course.

[jngf]

Another question based on Earl's success at 8 might be, "How good could Simmonds have been, picked at his peak?"

Simmonds was not a fashionable lump, of course.

Indeed how good could either be at 12 or 13?

Both very talented and explosive but neither the close quarter carriers that England badly need to balance back row. Alternatively if the loosehead lock Berth had more of a carrier then the scope for either being a long term test 8 becomes more viable

[Mellsblue]

Another question based on Earl's success at 8 might be, "How good could Simmonds have been, picked at his peak?"

Simmonds was not a fashionable lump, of course.

We saw what Simmonds could be…

[Danno]

So Borthwick 1.0.1 then

There was an article after the Arg match, praising SB's innovative introduction of the DG into training, and how they'd trained for it.
IIRC the story was that SB had them practicing various scenarios, and one of them was attacking centre of the pitch, around the 22, all the defenders on their feet and in the line, but X England players in the ruck.
To everyone's surprise, Ford dropped back into the pocket and hit the DG.

It was ridiculous. All these claims about tactical masterstroke from SB, and training for DGs, and it came down to one incident of Ford going off-script for a scenario training drill.

Interesting, thanks! I can't help wondering how good Ford could have been if Farrell had emigrated 10 years ago. Now, I hope both announce their international retirement gracefully. The team needs to move on.

Gavin Mairs suggesting Farrell will play a "key role" in the next WC cycle.....

[LongForgotten]

Interesting that Sinfield is off. Hard to argue he's created a good international defence, but why did the RFU feel the need to buy a pretty inexperienced coach out of his contract? At least we'll have given him a nice international apprenticeship before he turns up somewhere else in the 6N!

[Puja]

Wait, what? Sinfield's off? I thought he was a package deal with Borthwick!

Annoyed on several counts - we missed out on Forshaw as we'd picked Sinfield, and Leicester would've been in a better position had we been left with Borthwick's no2, instead of having to abruptly retire Wigglesworth.

If we get Shaun Edwards, I will revert my grump, but otherwise, this is just baffling.

Puja

[Stom]

Wait, what? Sinfield's off? I thought he was a package deal with Borthwick!

Annoyed on several counts - we missed out on Forshaw as we'd picked Sinfield, and Leicester would've been in a better position had we been left with Borthwick's no2, instead of having to abruptly retire Wigglesworth.

If we get Shaun Edwards, I will revert my grump, but otherwise, this is just baffling.

Puja

Same article suggests Farrell will stay on...

[p/d]

Bloody joke isn’t it.

Mutual consent….. me thinks there might be more to it

[Epaminondas Pules]

Has Ted Hill’s form dropped off a cliff?

No, he’s been excellent, but badly torn his hammie and had operation. Will be out for a few months.

[LongForgotten]

Article implies Jones is coming in as defense coach, which surely can't have been what he was recruited for given Sinfield was in position at the time?

[Banquo]

On another matter we need a credible loose head lock alternative option to Itoje - he looks to have been flogged to a standstlll and cast in this unglamourous grafting role at the expense of his earlier fetching and poaching talents - I actually think that 4 shirt should be a straight shoot out between whoever is the form player out of Itoje and Martin going forward with the tighthead lock berth reserved for the best of Launchbury, Chessum brothers or any other up and comers who can bring some of the qualities of a Simon Shawesque big but skillful lock.

Itoje was great yesterday. Martin was excellent at tighthead lock. What are you on about!

[Danno]

Lawes has confirmed his retirement

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... -world-cup

I do miss the CGS days, those were his peak for me, but he reinvented himself as a hell of a flanker in barely 5 years and in the twilight of his career. Not many players manage that so successfully.

Phenomenal England player. Deserved to lead the side more as well.

[Insouciant]

One of the big positives to come out of the world cup has been Earls showing what a bit of speed and dynamism off the back of the scrum can offer.

Hopefully he'll have provided an evidence base to convince Smoked Bratwurst that there is another way to having a big bloke running straight at the line to try to tie in multiple tacklers, and we can stop trying a rotating cast of unsuitable players trying to replicate 2016-19 Vunipola.

If we're ditching Lawes, and Martin looks like he can do the Kruis job next to Itoje, rather than dicking about as a 4/6 hybrid, then a backrow of Earl, Curry, Mercer, Ludlum, Willis, with Pearson or even someone like Chessum being used as an extra bulk at 6 if needed, looks like a solid approach to building a unit over the next 4 years. Assuming Curry's body doesn't stand up to another 4 years, we need to get one of the other athletes to be as good a reader of the game.

You know what's crazy? Tom curry is only 25. I did not realise that, he must have had a tough paper round. You'd think he'd be about for 2027 though.

[FKAS]

Wait, what? Sinfield's off? I thought he was a package deal with Borthwick!

Annoyed on several counts - we missed out on Forshaw as we'd picked Sinfield, and Leicester would've been in a better position had we been left with Borthwick's no2, instead of having to abruptly retire Wigglesworth.

If we get Shaun Edwards, I will revert my grump, but otherwise, this is just baffling.

Puja

Well that is fecking annoying. The Sinfield defence finally looks like it's coming together and he's off? Torpedoed Tigers season for this. Big step back for England.

Edit - The Telegraph article does only speculate that Sinfield might be off with Jones coming in as he's a currently the defensive coach at the Boks.