RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:If a cross field kick can be the difference between a team winning and losing, can we discuss Smith missing a wide open Slade with what should’ve been a regulation cross field kick.

Feel free

Imagine sitting there in the Monday review/watching the game as Randall or Quirke respectively and thinking "apparently my standard of play is lower than this"

Scrumhead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:If a cross field kick can be the difference between a team winning and losing, can we discuss Smith missing a wide open Slade with what should’ve been a regulation cross field kick.

Oh come on. You’re making out it was a gimme which it wasn’t. It was within about a foot of being on the money. Hardly a howler.

I'm going to have to side with Mells on this one. It wasn't a foot away, it was massively overcooked as Slade was on the touchline, jumped and put his hand up but still couldn't get a touch on it. There was a good 10m circle which it could've been landed in to make that a certain try try and Smith did not hit it. If that had been Farrell, we'd've been slating him. Compare and contrast to Russell nailing two more difficult ones perfectly, one after the other.

It doesn't make him a bad player by any stretch - he's a young player who had a bad game in his first time in a febrile atmosphere and under such pressure - hardly unforgivable. However, that and the missed touch were moments he'll be hugely disappointed with - had he nailed one or the other, we would likely have won, and he'll know he's good enough that he should've nailed both.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:If a cross field kick can be the difference between a team winning and losing, can we discuss Smith missing a wide open Slade with what should’ve been a regulation cross field kick.

Oh come on. You’re making out it was a gimme which it wasn’t. It was within about a foot of being on the money. Hardly a howler.

I'm going to have to side with Mells on this one. It wasn't a foot away, it was massively overcooked as Slade was on the touchline, jumped and put his hand up but still couldn't get a touch on it. There was a good 10m circle which it could've been landed in to make that a certain try try and Smith did not hit it. If that had been Farrell, we'd've been slating him. Compare and contrast to Russell nailing two more difficult ones perfectly, one after the other.

It doesn't make him a bad player by any stretch - he's a young player who had a bad game in his first time in a febrile atmosphere and under such pressure - hardly unforgivable. However, that and the missed touch were moments he'll be hugely disappointed with - had he nailed one or the other, we would likely have won, and he'll know he's good enough that he should've nailed both.

Puja

This, other than siding with me, obvs. Plus…..

Where did I say it was a gimme? I’m just saying that if one moment can turn a match then this moment is worthy of discussion…. along with at least 3 or 4 more.

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:If a cross field kick can be the difference between a team winning and losing, can we discuss Smith missing a wide open Slade with what should’ve been a regulation cross field kick.

Feel free

Cool, cos we seem to be doing so.

Scrumhead wrote:

jngf wrote:Well deserved win by Scotland.

Big point: Sam Simmonds looks most potent when presented with the ball in his hands to exploit his gap using his explosive pace. I simply don’t see him looking at home with the tight “piano shifting” elements of no.8 at test level. He’s a very talented player but you start him at either 6,7 or at a pinch 12 at this level.

Btw what was the point of sticking Dombrandt at 6 and leaving Simmonds at 8 when Ludlum was subbed?

In fairness to you, I thought Ludlam was one of our best players, but I absolutely refuse to accept that win was ‘deserved’ by Scotland.

To be fair, we could only play what was in front of us.

Some posters being a tad hard on Smith.
Yes - of course he is still relatively inexperienced but wasn't all that bad. He was not getting much help from 9 or 12. He was probably the best of the England backs which looked quite a sloppy and poorly organized lot.
I hope England stick with him and address the problems at 9 and with the outside backs.Had to smile when the commentator suggested Marchant was selected for his defensive strength, after he was stepped with ease by Graham, leading to a Scotland try.

Smith was a part of a backline that struggled to make any hay. He must take some responsibility but to be honest I am more disappointed with Slade. Daly hardly shin brightly either.

I'm hoping for a MBM.


(Ahem, hint.)

All the debate on Smith missing one kick pass yet little on Ford taking two penalty kicks to the RH touchline and making half the distance that Slade was managing while Smith was on. Whose genius idea was that?

That last 20 minutes was designed for Nowell - extra distance through traffic etc. No, save him for the 83rd minute!

We were chasing the game and needed the quickest possible SH service. Randall could do that. No, he was needed to keep that bench warm.

Management is making best use of resources . . .

Nowt wrong with Smith, bringing Ford on was pointless when the option to bring on Randall and Nowell were effing obvious

Oakboy wrote:All the debate on Smith missing one kick pass yet little on Ford taking two penalty kicks to the RH touchline and making half the distance that Slade was managing while Smith was on. Whose genius idea was that?

That last 20 minutes was designed for Nowell - extra distance through traffic etc. No, save him for the 83rd minute!

We were chasing the game and needed the quickest possible SH service. Randall could do that. No, he was needed to keep that bench warm.

Management is making best use of resources . . .

I'd have pulled Daly for Nowell at H/T and put Marchant at 13. Such is life. I've already aired my views on Youngs. I hope Isiekwe doesn't suffer for this, he made a couple of mistakes but thought he was decent overall. If the alternative is Ewels then no thank-you

Oakboy wrote:All the debate on Smith missing one kick pass yet little on Ford taking two penalty kicks to the RH touchline and making half the distance that Slade was managing while Smith was on. Whose genius idea was that?

That last 20 minutes was designed for Nowell - extra distance through traffic etc. No, save him for the 83rd minute!

We were chasing the game and needed the quickest possible SH service. Randall could do that. No, he was needed to keep that bench warm.

Management is making best use of resources . . .

Bringing Ford on was madness. Even if Smith was having a slightly below par game (which is only because he has a very high par), he should not have come off the pitch, barring injury or complete meltdown. The 10 is the heartbeat of the team and taking him off disrupted us. Ford was... fine, two crap touch kicks notwithstanding (although we fucked the lineout on one of them, so it's a moot point), but we shouldn't have needed to adapt to a new 10.

Puja

Danno wrote:

Oakboy wrote:All the debate on Smith missing one kick pass yet little on Ford taking two penalty kicks to the RH touchline and making half the distance that Slade was managing while Smith was on. Whose genius idea was that?

That last 20 minutes was designed for Nowell - extra distance through traffic etc. No, save him for the 83rd minute!

We were chasing the game and needed the quickest possible SH service. Randall could do that. No, he was needed to keep that bench warm.

Management is making best use of resources . . .

I'd have pulled Daly for Nowell at H/T and put Marchant at 13. Such is life. I've already aired my views on Youngs.I hope Isiekwe doesn't suffer for this, he made a couple of mistakes but thought he was decent overall. If the alternative is Ewels then no thank-you

Don't be surprised if he is scapegoated by Jones and never wears the shirt again.

Stom wrote:Our wide defense has been awful. Guess that’s what we get for picking no wingers.

It was called before we started, but made worse by the inside defence being both narrow and half blitzing

Spiffy wrote:

Danno wrote:

Oakboy wrote:All the debate on Smith missing one kick pass yet little on Ford taking two penalty kicks to the RH touchline and making half the distance that Slade was managing while Smith was on. Whose genius idea was that?

That last 20 minutes was designed for Nowell - extra distance through traffic etc. No, save him for the 83rd minute!

We were chasing the game and needed the quickest possible SH service. Randall could do that. No, he was needed to keep that bench warm.

Management is making best use of resources . . .

I'd have pulled Daly for Nowell at H/T and put Marchant at 13. Such is life. I've already aired my views on Youngs.I hope Isiekwe doesn't suffer for this, he made a couple of mistakes but thought he was decent overall. If the alternative is Ewels then no thank-you

Don't be surprised if he is scapegoated by Jones and never wears the shirt again.

Indeed.

Am I the only one that cant see how lcd deliberately knocking on was a penalty try? Yellow yes, not a pen try for me. Youngs needs to go, appalling all game. Randall is better, and should’ve come on, he is international quality, if only by virtue of the fAct he is a damned sight better than Youngs. Simmonds did well, everyone else average, decision to bring ford on was ridiculous. Dodgy refereeing at the end throughout the rest scrums. Shouldn’t have lost that game.

fivepointer wrote:Pointless and grossly unfair to blame individuals for losing that game.
The failure was collective as everyone made their share of mistakes and no one stood up and delivered a high class, consistently effective performance.
We didnt make the most of our control in the 1st half and played the last 20 odd minutes very poorly.
We played some decent stuff at times, moving the ball nicely yet didnt create line breaks or try scoring opportunities with the possession.
Get points while on top is essential if you want to win close games. We didnt.

plus our defence was poor and poorly organised. eg why was LCD there in te 1st place

Puja wrote:

FKAS wrote:

p/d wrote:Why the feck was Ford brought on and Youngs given 80!! LCD an idiot, our wings pants and not bringing Nowell on until 81mins on the clock.

Great stuff Eddie

Ford came on because Smith barely featured despite having lots of ball.

Youngs played 80 mins because Randall isn't an international scrum half and Eddie didn't want someone that can't kick at 9 when we were in an arm wrestle in poor conditions.

Ordinarily, I'd give you that, but Youngs's kicking was atrocious today. There were only 2 box kicks that were contestable in the whole match - the rest were massively overcooked. He was continually passing behind and above players, even off basic lineout ball. His presence at the base was soporific, exemplified by him getting caught by Price. I'm not convinced by Randall as an international 9 either, but given how poor a game Youngs was having, how much worse could he really have been?

Puja

not only bad kicks, but poor options to kick. dire

Which Tyler wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Putting LCD's dick move aside, Eddie Jones lost us that game.

We were completely in control thanks to Smith and the forwards, so why the fuck take one of our best players off and leave Youngs on the pitch?!

I stopped watching at the penalty try as I knew we'd lose from there.

Trouble with that is "putting LCD's dick move aside" then we're 7 points up and favourites to win

Except the scores would have been level but for dick move, according to the ref.

....and to be fair, the Scots defence was exceptional, both statistically and in reality. Our tackle completion was nowhere near theirs

Banquo wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Pointless and grossly unfair to blame individuals for losing that game.
The failure was collective as everyone made their share of mistakes and no one stood up and delivered a high class, consistently effective performance.
We didnt make the most of our control in the 1st half and played the last 20 odd minutes very poorly.
We played some decent stuff at times, moving the ball nicely yet didnt create line breaks or try scoring opportunities with the possession.
Get points while on top is essential if you want to win close games. We didnt.

plus our defence was poor and poorly organised. eg why was LCD there in te 1st place

Centres on the wings. Someone had to be there and poor LCD thought he was playing basketball for a second.

Scottish defence was immense. Thought we would break them down in the second half, but nah

A further (and you’ll be relieved final thought on this point), doesn’t the Simmonds at 8 approach only really work consistently well when you have two really big hard carrying flankers to accompany him a la Exeter Chiefs?

Danno wrote:

Banquo wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Pointless and grossly unfair to blame individuals for losing that game.
The failure was collective as everyone made their share of mistakes and no one stood up and delivered a high class, consistently effective performance.
We didnt make the most of our control in the 1st half and played the last 20 odd minutes very poorly.
We played some decent stuff at times, moving the ball nicely yet didnt create line breaks or try scoring opportunities with the possession.
Get points while on top is essential if you want to win close games. We didnt.

plus our defence was poor and poorly organised. eg why was LCD there in te 1st place

Centres on the wings. Someone had to be there and poor LCD thought he was playing basketball for a second.

Scottish defence was immense. Thought we would break them down in the second half, but nah

partly that, but also system; Slade also learning at 12. Daly as I feared...and rotating positions in game can be an issue. '
The somebody should have been a wing- poor organisation and second mismatch costing a try.

jngf wrote:A further (and you’ll be relieved final thought on this point), doesn’t the Simmonds at 8 approach only really work consistently well when you have two really big hard carrying flankers to accompany him a la Exeter Chiefs?

So we can put a thunderbastard at 8, go Lawes/Ludlam - Curry and drop Simmonds now?