Team for Argentina

[Mikey Brown]

Well that was a step down from the summer.


Main issue for me was that we simply couldn't get the ball, and when we did someone often messed it up.

Questions need to be asked of the pack. Very little go forward, Hughes and Mako aside, and we barely disrupted Thier ball at all. I known Underhill tackled like a monster, but there is more to rugby than that.

Krius was anonymous, Hartley poor.

Slades performance may have cemented Ford/Faz for the foreseeable future.

Slade that bad? I don’t recall him getting much ball to do anything with, and got it away well a few times in tight situations. Really seemed to drop off in the second half though. Farrell has played far, far worse but I know that doesn’t mean much.

[Mellsblue]

Any news on Brown. It looked bad, he has history after getting knocked out against Italy and we were informed he wasn’t coming back on very quickly.

[Banquo]

Kruis was but I’d say he has more credit in the bank. For me, our strongest side probably doesn’t contain either.

either of Itoje amd Launchbury?

In isolation I’d go with Itoje and Launchbury with Lawes coming off the bench. With the likely first choice backrow - Robshaw, Underhill & Billy - I’d probably swap Launchbury and Lawes for lineout reasons.

did you mean neither Kruis nor Hughes to start, I wasn't clear

[Banquo]

Well that was a step down from the summer.


Main issue for me was that we simply couldn't get the ball, and when we did someone often messed it up.

Questions need to be asked of the pack. Very little go forward, Hughes and Mako aside, and we barely disrupted Thier ball at all. I known Underhill tackled like a monster, but there is more to rugby than that.

Krius was anonymous, Hartley poor.

Slades performance may have cemented Ford/Faz for the foreseeable future.

Slade that bad? I don’t recall him getting much ball to do anything with, and got it away well a few times in tight situations. Really seemed to drop off in the second half though. Farrell has played far, far worse but I know that doesn’t mean much.

Slade wasn't 'that bad'. He simply wasnt anything.

[Mellsblue]

either of Itoje amd Launchbury?

In isolation I’d go with Itoje and Launchbury with Lawes coming off the bench. With the likely first choice backrow - Robshaw, Underhill & Billy - I’d probably swap Launchbury and Lawes for lineout reasons.

did you mean neither Kruis nor Hughes to start, I wasn't clear

Yes. I like Kruis but I think Lawes has gone past him this year. Hughes is a poor man’s Billy.

[Mellsblue]

Well that was a step down from the summer.


Main issue for me was that we simply couldn't get the ball, and when we did someone often messed it up.

Questions need to be asked of the pack. Very little go forward, Hughes and Mako aside, and we barely disrupted Thier ball at all. I known Underhill tackled like a monster, but there is more to rugby than that.

Krius was anonymous, Hartley poor.

Slades performance may have cemented Ford/Faz for the foreseeable future.

Slade that bad? I don’t recall him getting much ball to do anything with, and got it away well a few times in tight situations. Really seemed to drop off in the second half though. Farrell has played far, far worse but I know that doesn’t mean much.

Slade wasn't 'that bad'. He simply wasnt anything.

Yep. If he’d been pulled back for the pass to Roko you could’ve classed it as a shocker.

[Banquo]

Slade that bad? I don’t recall him getting much ball to do anything with, and got it away well a few times in tight situations. Really seemed to drop off in the second half though. Farrell has played far, far worse but I know that doesn’t mean much.

Slade wasn't 'that bad'. He simply wasnt anything.

Yep. If he’d been pulled back for the pass to Roko you could’ve classed it as a shocker.

It wasn't interesting enough to even be a shocker. Though had Faz done that pass to touch, he'd have been reamed on here.

[Mikey Brown]

Slade wasn't 'that bad'. He simply wasnt anything.

Yep. If he’d been pulled back for the pass to Roko you could’ve classed it as a shocker.

It wasn't interesting enough to even be a shocker. Though had Faz done that pass to touch, he'd have been reamed on here.

Whereas in the tv world Slade is held to a high standard when passing, with a few caps, and it doesn’t seem to be a point to even discuss with Farrell. Except when he does a good one.

That’s not me saying Slade was even good. I just find it curious.

Not really listening to commentary today (had the other game on) it looked like they were pointing the cameras at Slade a whole lot.

[Mikey Brown]

TL:DR I didn’t watch the game and don’t have a clue what I’m talking about.

[Peat]

My theory is Ford's problem is that he always looks slightly nervous regardless of his actual mental or emotional state. Farrell looks determined by default. Thus are reputations made.

aye a determined look will deter the AB's for sure.

It will if they know their physiognomy. One look at that steely narrow eyed gaze will let them know they are dealing with a mental titan of a chap. The ice man himself no less. They shall be so afraid, their bones will turn to water.

...

Actually, seriously, I think Mr Mwenda is right, at least in terms of press perception. I also think this extends to the second row, where Launchbury looking like an overgrown schoolboy whose dog was just ran over leads people to think he's not proper hard like.

[Stom]

I still feel, for all his faults, Care's speed of service and passing ability would suit this team much better than Youngs. And that's saying something, as Care is hardly a world beater for speed of service of passing quality...

I also agree we need more carrying, but not sure exactly how that would work best. In fact, I actually feel the problem is more to do with speed of thought and body than it is actually big carries. When we moved the ball quickly, we were dangerous. But we were so ponderous most of the time, waiting until all the parts were in place before moving the ball. And I don't know how much of that must fall on Youngs' shoulders.

[Banquo]

My theory is Ford's problem is that he always looks slightly nervous regardless of his actual mental or emotional state. Farrell looks determined by default. Thus are reputations made.

aye a determined look will deter the AB's for sure.

It will if they know their physiognomy. One look at that steely narrow eyed gaze will let them know they are dealing with a mental titan of a chap. The ice man himself no less. They shall be so afraid, their bones will turn to water.

...

Actually, seriously, I think Mr Mwenda is right, at least in terms of press perception. I also think this extends to the second row, where Launchbury looking like an overgrown schoolboy whose dog was just ran over leads people to think he's not proper hard like.

or it may be, you know, Eddie's view, given that he sees a bit more of him than us? after all, the press would generally pick Launchbury.

[Stom]

Oh, and one thing...I know he hits rucks, but Cole's stats make for grim reading again. I honestly don't know how he's an international prop in 2017. He just does nothing except scrummage and lift.

[Peat]

Oh, and one thing...I know he hits rucks, but Cole's stats make for grim reading again. I honestly don't know how he's an international prop in 2017. He just does nothing except scrummage and lift.

He's an international prop because there's a shortage of people trusted to do the former. All previous fast trackees have burnt out.


Banquo - They'd pick him, but that doesn't mean they think he's hard.

[Peej]

Thought Loz looked much better at 12 than Slade did. Enough to keep the bench spot, with Slade dropping out the 23

[Peej]

Also, did anyone see Underhill do anything other than tackle? All very impressive, but is he just this England's Joe Worseley, capable of chopping down anything but not offering a lot else?

[Digby]

Worth keeping in mind Eddie's comments that the side would be going into these games fatigued as they'd be doing training with 2019 in mind, although one would also need to keep in mind Eddie's comments come from Eddie. Point being the game might have been an as expected

[Rich]

Also, did anyone see Underhill do anything other than tackle? All very impressive, but is he just this England's Joe Worseley, capable of chopping down anything but not offering a lot else?

He was often the first man over the tackled player protecting the ball

One player I saw almost nothing from was Robshaw.

[twitchy]

Yeah that was a really poor performance and showed how imbalanced we are. When you have so few ball carriers in the team you become incredibly predictable and ineffective.

[Digby]

I don't understand what the process was for Tuculet's yellow. The ref seemed wrong both on the idea he wasn't in a position to challenge and on where the player came down. Broadly I think it was simply a fair contest that ended badly and thus isn't even a penalty. Whereas if it's a penalty then it's a red card, and that depends on whether once he hasn't won the ball can Tuculet pull down in such fashion, i.e. where does he end on the ladder of destiny?

(I also wish I was making up the ladder of destiny phrase, but sadly it's very much in the ref briefing docs)

[twitchy]

The match succinctly summed up:

[fivepointer]

Thats a very unusual outburst from Eddie. I cant recall seeing him so angry about a performance.

[Raggs]

"Ahh Fuck! How fucking stupid are we!" I believe?

That was Underhill's really stupid penalty.

[Oakboy]

I don't understand what the process was for Tuculet's yellow. The ref seemed wrong both on the idea he wasn't in a position to challenge and on where the player came down. Broadly I think it was simply a fair contest that ended badly and thus isn't even a penalty. Whereas if it's a penalty then it's a red card, and that depends on whether once he hasn't won the ball can Tuculet pull down in such fashion, i.e. where does he end on the ladder of destiny?

(I also wish I was making up the ladder of destiny phrase, but sadly it's very much in the ref briefing docs)

I think the yellow was spot on. He challenged with little chance of doing anything except knock the ball on - only one hand really. Then, he showed insufficient duty of care without quite being reckless enough to deserve a red.

[Raggs]

I don't understand what the process was for Tuculet's yellow. The ref seemed wrong both on the idea he wasn't in a position to challenge and on where the player came down. Broadly I think it was simply a fair contest that ended badly and thus isn't even a penalty. Whereas if it's a penalty then it's a red card, and that depends on whether once he hasn't won the ball can Tuculet pull down in such fashion, i.e. where does he end on the ladder of destiny?

(I also wish I was making up the ladder of destiny phrase, but sadly it's very much in the ref briefing docs)

I think the yellow was spot on. He challenged with little chance of doing anything except knock the ball on - only one hand really. Then, he showed insufficient duty of care without quite being reckless enough to deserve a red.

He got a hand to the ball when leaping to catch it. Brown's hips weren't over his shoulders, which is what we heard from a ref a while ago as being considered the sort of cut-off point. So it's no penalty for me. But Brown then lands on his head first, so if it's a penalty, it's a red.