Borthwick’s England 2.0

[Margin_Walker]

Arundell's probably got a decision to make when it comes to next season and beyond. It's likely he ends up back in Bath or another club here, but there must be at least a part of him that will be tempted to resign for Racing if he's enjoying it there.

He's young enough to come back in 3 or 4 years if he wants. He's just not the right wing for the game Borthwick is playing at the moment and I can't imagine the England experience was particularly enjoyable. At the moment, our wings are there to hold the width, chase kicks and rarely get their hands on the ball. Outside of the Chile game, no wing actually scored a try. There will be better wings in the prem than him, for that gameplan.

[Oakboy]

Arundell's probably got a decision to make when it comes to next season and beyond. It's likely he ends up back in Bath or another club here, but there must be at least a part of him that will be tempted to resign for Racing if he's enjoying it there.

He's young enough to come back in 3 or 4 years if he wants. He's just not the right wing for the game Borthwick is playing at the moment and I can't imagine the England experience was particularly enjoyable. At the moment, our wings are there to hold the width, chase kicks and rarely get their hands on the ball. Outside of the Chile game, no wing actually scored a try. There will be better wings in the prem than him, for that gameplan.

That's another reason to start afresh with new halfbacks, IMO.

[Margin_Walker]

Arundell's probably got a decision to make when it comes to next season and beyond. It's likely he ends up back in Bath or another club here, but there must be at least a part of him that will be tempted to resign for Racing if he's enjoying it there.

He's young enough to come back in 3 or 4 years if he wants. He's just not the right wing for the game Borthwick is playing at the moment and I can't imagine the England experience was particularly enjoyable. At the moment, our wings are there to hold the width, chase kicks and rarely get their hands on the ball. Outside of the Chile game, no wing actually scored a try. There will be better wings in the prem than him, for that gameplan.

That's another reason to start afresh with new halfbacks, IMO.

Perhaps, but I don't think it's really all about the half backs, and I doubt Farrell is going anywhere anytime soon anyway. Farrell can look pretty good for Sarries, as they do play some decent rugby (helped by a dominant pack clearly).

It's down to the way Borthwick wants to play. The endless up and unders are his baby.

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah. Putting Marcus Smith or Carlos Spencer at 10 won't necessarily create a lot of tries if the general ethos of the team is still to be scared of having the ball. Putting a fresh new back division out while Borthwick attempts to work out what direction he's facing could set quite a few players back, never mind the results.

[Epaminondas Pules]

Arundell's probably got a decision to make when it comes to next season and beyond. It's likely he ends up back in Bath or another club here, but there must be at least a part of him that will be tempted to resign for Racing if he's enjoying it there.

He's young enough to come back in 3 or 4 years if he wants. He's just not the right wing for the game Borthwick is playing at the moment and I can't imagine the England experience was particularly enjoyable. At the moment, our wings are there to hold the width, chase kicks and rarely get their hands on the ball. Outside of the Chile game, no wing actually scored a try. There will be better wings in the prem than him, for that gameplan.

That's another reason to start afresh with new halfbacks, IMO.

Perhaps, but I don't think it's really all about the half backs, and I doubt Farrell is going anywhere anytime soon anyway. Farrell can look pretty good for Sarries, as they do play some decent rugby (helped by a dominant pack clearly).

It's down to the way Borthwick wants to play. The endless up and unders are his baby.

Agreed. Changing the half backs only potentially works, IF we change the game plan, and also up the pack considerably at the breakdown and carry, on both sides of it. We can't become more expansive if we continue to present the slowest ruck speed since time was invented. But that requires genuine carriers, dynamism, multi-option, targeting space not bodies, breakdown intelligence, clearance, repeat. Our pack is competitive at set piece, competes at the breakdown ok, defends pretty well, has good line speed, but in attack offers little to nothing. It is static, targets contact, does not combat opposition compete / slowing, is slow to reform into more static positions. Occasionally we get 3 or 4 little offloads and make real inroads, or get a decent carrier with some actual momentum, and then go back to static slow nonsense. What is really frustrating is the players can do it. The can change the point of attack, can deceive defenders. We just do it incredibly rarely, favouring straight up one out contact over manipulation.

At the moment we present a ball in hand attack that most sides would love an opposition side to play, so the only other option is kick to compete as we do have good chasers who are largely good in the air from 13 outwards.

[Oakboy]

If Smith x 2 need time to develop, learning their trade with Ford/Farrell should May/Daly be retained to help Arundell? Or, is that so much bollix and we should back fresh, new potential wherever it is available?

The difference is that May/Daly are on the wane and Arundell is clearly better, whereas Ford is still beating out both Smiths and showing no signs of falling away. We should back fresh, new potential when it's earning a shirt, not just gift it caps because we think it's got the potential to be good enough with time. That way lies Joe Cokanasiga.

Puja

That is theoretically the case with Ford perhaps. In reality, though, he has never been 1st choice for England unless it was together with Farrell at 12. I think Ford is a gifted rugby player with the capacity to run a top club side as well as anybody. At international level, IMO, he is a better FH than Farrell (although no head-coach for England or Lions has agreed) but he is tainted by the kicking era of which he has been an integral part. I think both Smiths are close to being able to do everything that Ford can do (apart from kick so well). Both though, and Marcus especially, are quicker over the ground by a significant margin.

We need to move on.

[Oakboy]

That's another reason to start afresh with new halfbacks, IMO.

Perhaps, but I don't think it's really all about the half backs, and I doubt Farrell is going anywhere anytime soon anyway. Farrell can look pretty good for Sarries, as they do play some decent rugby (helped by a dominant pack clearly).

It's down to the way Borthwick wants to play. The endless up and unders are his baby.

Agreed. Changing the half backs only potentially works, IF we change the game plan, and also up the pack considerably at the breakdown and carry, on both sides of it. We can't become more expansive if we continue to present the slowest ruck speed since time was invented. But that requires genuine carriers, dynamism, multi-option, targeting space not bodies, breakdown intelligence, clearance, repeat. Our pack is competitive at set piece, competes at the breakdown ok, defends pretty well, has good line speed, but in attack offers little to nothing. It is static, targets contact, does not combat opposition compete / slowing, is slow to reform into more static positions. Occasionally we get 3 or 4 little offloads and make real inroads, or get a decent carrier with some actual momentum, and then go back to static slow nonsense. What is really frustrating is the players can do it. The can change the point of attack, can deceive defenders. We just do it incredibly rarely, favouring straight up one out contact over manipulation.

At the moment we present a ball in hand attack that most sides would love an opposition side to play, so the only other option is kick to compete as we do have good chasers who are largely good in the air from 13 outwards.

Fair comment. Chicken/egg to an extent, though. I think changing the style will be slicker with a change of personnel.

[Puja]

It's hardly as if Alex Mitchell is a dour scrum-half with no attacking instincts either. Claiming that ditching him is part of the solution to our lack of attack seems weird.

I do harbour a lot of hope that we will see a very different England approach, come the 6N. Safety first was to get us through the RWC, and now we're starting from where Borthwick was supposed to start from, with an actual attack coach in place, no less.

That whole Sinfield-leaving rumour appears to have blown over, doesn't it? It genuinely seems that it sprung fully formed from one Telegraph article, was repeated often enough to become near fact, and then has vanished without a trace. Anyone know if there was anything to it?

Puja

[FKAS]

It's hardly as if Alex Mitchell is a dour scrum-half with no attacking instincts either. Claiming that ditching him is part of the solution to our lack of attack seems weird.

I do harbour a lot of hope that we will see a very different England approach, come the 6N. Safety first was to get us through the RWC, and now we're starting from where Borthwick was supposed to start from, with an actual attack coach in place, no less.

That whole Sinfield-leaving rumour appears to have blown over, doesn't it? It genuinely seems that it sprung fully formed from one Telegraph article, was repeated often enough to become near fact, and then has vanished without a trace. Anyone know if there was anything to it?

Puja

Telegraph seem to have created and the fed that rumour and then let it die. Ruck and Rugby Pass etc do tend to collate and parott the rumours from elsewhere which give them legs.

A settled coaching staff would be good for us. The defence looked like it might actually work reliably by the end of the world cup.

[Puja]

It's hardly as if Alex Mitchell is a dour scrum-half with no attacking instincts either. Claiming that ditching him is part of the solution to our lack of attack seems weird.

I do harbour a lot of hope that we will see a very different England approach, come the 6N. Safety first was to get us through the RWC, and now we're starting from where Borthwick was supposed to start from, with an actual attack coach in place, no less.

That whole Sinfield-leaving rumour appears to have blown over, doesn't it? It genuinely seems that it sprung fully formed from one Telegraph article, was repeated often enough to become near fact, and then has vanished without a trace. Anyone know if there was anything to it?

Puja

Telegraph seem to have created and the fed that rumour and then let it die. Ruck and Rugby Pass etc do tend to collate and parott the rumours from elsewhere which give them legs.

A settled coaching staff would be good for us. The defence looked like it might actually work reliably by the end of the world cup.

I'm more worried that, if Jones is coming in to replace Sinfield for defence, that would leave us once again without an attack coach. Mike Catt's out of a job nowadays, I suppose, but if it is the case that we're changing things, I'd prefer to have everything settled and in place as quickly as possible.

Puja

[Mikey Brown]

Does anyone actually know much about Jones’s coaching history or speciality?

Initially it seems strange we’re bringing in a defence coach (from one of the best defensive sides in the world) to coach the attack, but I’d assume Neinaber continued to have quite a big role in that area as HC and maybe Jones has always been working in other areas.

I wouldn’t say no to having Catt back if Jones ends up as defence though.

[Epaminondas Pules]

Does anyone actually know much about Jones’s coaching history or speciality?

Initially it seems strange we’re bringing in a defence coach (from one of the best defensive sides in the world) to coach the attack, but I’d assume Neinaber continued to have quite a big role in that area as HC and maybe Jones has always been working in other areas.

I wouldn’t say no to having Catt back if Jones ends up as defence though.

He was initially skills and then attack coach at Munster. Similar role with the Boks, then post 2019 focussing more on defence.

[Epaminondas Pules]

Perhaps, but I don't think it's really all about the half backs, and I doubt Farrell is going anywhere anytime soon anyway. Farrell can look pretty good for Sarries, as they do play some decent rugby (helped by a dominant pack clearly).

It's down to the way Borthwick wants to play. The endless up and unders are his baby.

Agreed. Changing the half backs only potentially works, IF we change the game plan, and also up the pack considerably at the breakdown and carry, on both sides of it. We can't become more expansive if we continue to present the slowest ruck speed since time was invented. But that requires genuine carriers, dynamism, multi-option, targeting space not bodies, breakdown intelligence, clearance, repeat. Our pack is competitive at set piece, competes at the breakdown ok, defends pretty well, has good line speed, but in attack offers little to nothing. It is static, targets contact, does not combat opposition compete / slowing, is slow to reform into more static positions. Occasionally we get 3 or 4 little offloads and make real inroads, or get a decent carrier with some actual momentum, and then go back to static slow nonsense. What is really frustrating is the players can do it. The can change the point of attack, can deceive defenders. We just do it incredibly rarely, favouring straight up one out contact over manipulation.

At the moment we present a ball in hand attack that most sides would love an opposition side to play, so the only other option is kick to compete as we do have good chasers who are largely good in the air from 13 outwards.

Fair comment. Chicken/egg to an extent, though. I think changing the style will be slicker with a change of personnel.

True dat. I think personell changes in areas will help. Whether they happen or not, who knows. With Lawes departure we might find a different backrow dynamic, or he could move Chessum / Martin (boo!). There will be two new nines post Care and Youngs. Who knows beyond that.

For me one of the key things is we need a serious forwards coach, or the incuments to get our forwards into a different mindset and approach. It all starts there. We have to move the point of attack, we have to make better decisions (e.g. when to offload and when the risk is too great so take contact and recycle), we have to get ferocious and accurate at the breakdown (I would get a breakdown specialist in to coach them), we have to do something a bit more imaginative than basic static pod structures, we have to stop telegraphing the receiver, etc. etc. etc.

[Banquo]

If Smith x 2 need time to develop, learning their trade with Ford/Farrell should May/Daly be retained to help Arundell? Or, is that so much bollix and we should back fresh, new potential wherever it is available?

The difference is that May/Daly are on the wane and Arundell is clearly better, whereas Ford is still beating out both Smiths and showing no signs of falling away. We should back fresh, new potential when it's earning a shirt, not just gift it caps because we think it's got the potential to be good enough with time. That way lies Joe Cokanasiga.

Puja

I'd love to know what effort has actually been put into Joe, and what support he's had through injuries and the issues with his dad.

[Banquo]

That's another reason to start afresh with new halfbacks, IMO.

Perhaps, but I don't think it's really all about the half backs, and I doubt Farrell is going anywhere anytime soon anyway. Farrell can look pretty good for Sarries, as they do play some decent rugby (helped by a dominant pack clearly).

It's down to the way Borthwick wants to play. The endless up and unders are his baby.

Agreed. Changing the half backs only potentially works, IF we change the game plan, and also up the pack considerably at the breakdown and carry, on both sides of it. We can't become more expansive if we continue to present the slowest ruck speed since time was invented. But that requires genuine carriers, dynamism, multi-option, targeting space not bodies, breakdown intelligence, clearance, repeat. Our pack is competitive at set piece, competes at the breakdown ok, defends pretty well, has good line speed, but in attack offers little to nothing. It is static, targets contact, does not combat opposition compete / slowing, is slow to reform into more static positions. Occasionally we get 3 or 4 little offloads and make real inroads, or get a decent carrier with some actual momentum, and then go back to static slow nonsense. What is really frustrating is the players can do it. The can change the point of attack, can deceive defenders. We just do it incredibly rarely, favouring straight up one out contact over manipulation.

At the moment we present a ball in hand attack that most sides would love an opposition side to play, so the only other option is kick to compete as we do have good chasers who are largely good in the air from 13 outwards.

Exactly this- everybody gets very excited about backs selection, but unless the coach wants to actually use them creatively and picks,deploys and coaches the forwards to be able to support width/pace/linebreaks and generate the requisite speed of ball, its all hot air.

[rjjb]

Arundell's probably got a decision to make when it comes to next season and beyond. It's likely he ends up back in Bath or another club here, but there must be at least a part of him that will be tempted to resign for Racing if he's enjoying it there.

He's young enough to come back in 3 or 4 years if he wants. He's just not the right wing for the game Borthwick is playing at the moment and I can't imagine the England experience was particularly enjoyable. At the moment, our wings are there to hold the width, chase kicks and rarely get their hands on the ball. Outside of the Chile game, no wing actually scored a try. There will be better wings in the prem than him, for that gameplan.

Why would he come back to England though? He's presumably still qualified to switch to Scotland or Wales, subject to a qualifying period - do Scotland even have a "play at home" rule?

[Puja]

True dat. I think personell changes in areas will help. Whether they happen or not, who knows. With Lawes departure we might find a different backrow dynamic, or he could move Chessum / Martin (boo!). There will be two new nines post Care and Youngs. Who knows beyond that.

For me one of the key things is we need a serious forwards coach, or the incuments to get our forwards into a different mindset and approach. It all starts there. We have to move the point of attack, we have to make better decisions (e.g. when to offload and when the risk is too great so take contact and recycle), we have to get ferocious and accurate at the breakdown (I would get a breakdown specialist in to coach them), we have to do something a bit more imaginative than basic static pod structures, we have to stop telegraphing the receiver, etc. etc. etc.

+1. Absolutely this.

I will cry if we escape from Lawes at 6 only to try and recreate it with the next generation. There's a very good reason why our most fluid performance at the RWC was with Cunderhearl against Argentina - we've got such good quality at back row that it's arrant madness to pick a lock there to hamstring us. Yes, lineouts are important, but TWillis/Mercer are excellent lineout forwards, and Curry/Underhill/Pearson/Earl are all perfectly functional. We have many times more rucks in a game than we do lineouts and, if we can't make a third jumping option out of the above, then we may as well give up now.

Puja

[Puja]

Arundell's probably got a decision to make when it comes to next season and beyond. It's likely he ends up back in Bath or another club here, but there must be at least a part of him that will be tempted to resign for Racing if he's enjoying it there.

He's young enough to come back in 3 or 4 years if he wants. He's just not the right wing for the game Borthwick is playing at the moment and I can't imagine the England experience was particularly enjoyable. At the moment, our wings are there to hold the width, chase kicks and rarely get their hands on the ball. Outside of the Chile game, no wing actually scored a try. There will be better wings in the prem than him, for that gameplan.

Why would he come back to England though? He's presumably still qualified to switch to Scotland or Wales, subject to a qualifying period - do Scotland even have a "play at home" rule?

I hate this suggestion.

I don't think it's likely - he is English through and through and reportedly didn't even consider eligibility for the Celts as an option when it first came around - but I don't like the idea of us testing that theory.

I wonder how the B&I Lions affects this. Caps for them are often added to a player's count for their country, but would it extend his eligibility for England? The instinct would be to say no, as Wales and Scotland are also part of the Lions and playing for them wouldn't seem to exclude, but what about if he wanted to switch to his other option of Cyprus? If it's been 3 years since his last England cap, but he's played for the Lions since, would that rule him out of playing for a non B&I side for three years?

Puja

[Oakboy]

Perhaps, but I don't think it's really all about the half backs, and I doubt Farrell is going anywhere anytime soon anyway. Farrell can look pretty good for Sarries, as they do play some decent rugby (helped by a dominant pack clearly).

It's down to the way Borthwick wants to play. The endless up and unders are his baby.

Agreed. Changing the half backs only potentially works, IF we change the game plan, and also up the pack considerably at the breakdown and carry, on both sides of it. We can't become more expansive if we continue to present the slowest ruck speed since time was invented. But that requires genuine carriers, dynamism, multi-option, targeting space not bodies, breakdown intelligence, clearance, repeat. Our pack is competitive at set piece, competes at the breakdown ok, defends pretty well, has good line speed, but in attack offers little to nothing. It is static, targets contact, does not combat opposition compete / slowing, is slow to reform into more static positions. Occasionally we get 3 or 4 little offloads and make real inroads, or get a decent carrier with some actual momentum, and then go back to static slow nonsense. What is really frustrating is the players can do it. The can change the point of attack, can deceive defenders. We just do it incredibly rarely, favouring straight up one out contact over manipulation.

At the moment we present a ball in hand attack that most sides would love an opposition side to play, so the only other option is kick to compete as we do have good chasers who are largely good in the air from 13 outwards.

Exactly this- everybody gets very excited about backs selection, but unless the coach wants to actually use them creatively and picks,deploys and coaches the forwards to be able to support width/pace/linebreaks and generate the requisite speed of ball, its all hot air.

Fair comment, of course. Any sensible definition of good management involves 'maximising resources'. We used to have an Australian head coach who was scathing of our skill levels and at various times employed a limited style of play to reflect that. One could argue that SB had little alternative but to follow that in the short-term for the RWC.

Now, though?

Our back row choices are pretty extensive in numbers and skill levels. We still have, in Itoje + 1, a competitive 2nd row. We have several feisty hookers who can stir up the 'loose pot'. The right coaching approach has the raw material to produce the quality ball that backs could use well.

It is surely a question of whether SB and his coaching crew are good enough. I see a pretty good set of potential across most of the fifteen positions. There is definitely enough to work with if the attitude is right and 'tired' thinking does not hold us back in playing style or selection.

[francoisfou]

Why would he come back to England though? He's presumably still qualified to switch to Scotland or Wales, subject to a qualifying period - do Scotland even have a "play at home" rule?

He should change his name to Henri, play for Racing and earn a million until he qualifies for les Bleus!

[badback]

Perhaps, but I don't think it's really all about the half backs, and I doubt Farrell is going anywhere anytime soon anyway. Farrell can look pretty good for Sarries, as they do play some decent rugby (helped by a dominant pack clearly).

It's down to the way Borthwick wants to play. The endless up and unders are his baby.

Agreed. Changing the half backs only potentially works, IF we change the game plan, and also up the pack considerably at the breakdown and carry, on both sides of it. We can't become more expansive if we continue to present the slowest ruck speed since time was invented. But that requires genuine carriers, dynamism, multi-option, targeting space not bodies, breakdown intelligence, clearance, repeat. Our pack is competitive at set piece, competes at the breakdown ok, defends pretty well, has good line speed, but in attack offers little to nothing. It is static, targets contact, does not combat opposition compete / slowing, is slow to reform into more static positions. Occasionally we get 3 or 4 little offloads and make real inroads, or get a decent carrier with some actual momentum, and then go back to static slow nonsense. What is really frustrating is the players can do it. The can change the point of attack, can deceive defenders. We just do it incredibly rarely, favouring straight up one out contact over manipulation.

At the moment we present a ball in hand attack that most sides would love an opposition side to play, so the only other option is kick to compete as we do have good chasers who are largely good in the air from 13 outwards.

Exactly this- everybody gets very excited about backs selection, but unless the coach wants to actually use them creatively and picks,deploys and coaches the forwards to be able to support width/pace/linebreaks and generate the requisite speed of ball, its all hot air.

Also - no scrum no win. For sure the wider game. But if a pack is not able to be at least competitive against the very best / SA/ then they will continue to lose against the top. Marler is he retiring? What other very top levels scrummaging props are there around? I don’t watch enough club rugby to have any idea. But if I was England coach finding or developing some nightmarish for the opposition props would be #1 priority.

[Puja]

Why would he come back to England though? He's presumably still qualified to switch to Scotland or Wales, subject to a qualifying period - do Scotland even have a "play at home" rule?

He should change his name to Henri, play for Racing and earn a million until he qualifies for les Bleus!

He can't qualify for France, thank all the gods. You can only swap nations after being capped, if you're going to a nation that you've got parent, grandparent, or birthplace for. Can't swap through residency, mostly because of this very type of situation (although I still question whether having a grandparent born somewhere really gives you a credible link, more so than living in a country for 5 years).

Puja

[Mellsblue]

Why would he come back to England though? He's presumably still qualified to switch to Scotland or Wales, subject to a qualifying period - do Scotland even have a "play at home" rule?

He should change his name to Henri, play for Racing and earn a million until he qualifies for les Bleus!

He can't qualify for France, thank all the gods. You can only swap nations after being capped, if you're going to a nation that you've got parent, grandparent, or birthplace for. Can't swap through residency, mostly because of this very type of situation (although I still question whether having a grandparent born somewhere really gives you a credible link, more so than living in a country for 5 years).

Puja

It’s WR. They’ll be completely fooled by the change from Henry to Henri.

[Mellsblue]

Trigger warning:

‘Statistics from the World Cup reveal that Arundell, from his limited game time, had the highest number of carries per 80 minutes of any England wing — 5.5 carries per 80 minutes — and this did not place him in the top 30 wings in the tournament. In other words, England wings did not carry the ball, they got rid of it, usually by kicking.‘
and
‘None of England's wings were among the top ten for most carries per 80 minutes at the Rugby World Cup - their highest was Henry Arundell, in 36th - but Arundell and Elliot Daly were the 6th and 7th most prolific kickers.’

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/henr ... -x2z527hcj

[Puja]

He should change his name to Henri, play for Racing and earn a million until he qualifies for les Bleus!

He can't qualify for France, thank all the gods. You can only swap nations after being capped, if you're going to a nation that you've got parent, grandparent, or birthplace for. Can't swap through residency, mostly because of this very type of situation (although I still question whether having a grandparent born somewhere really gives you a credible link, more so than living in a country for 5 years).

Puja

It’s WR. They’ll be completely fooled by the change from Henry to Henri.

True. It's not like he'd be playing for Spain or anything.

Puja