We need to talk about Eddie...

[morepork]

Out of interest, are there any metrics for relative levels of support for the game, ticket sales, youth participation in the sport and the sort of things that indicate popularity of the sport under any given coaching regime? That's got be at least one part of the whole package that makes a coach successful, no? Or is it all fuck-by-numbers win/loss ratios and such?

[Banquo]

Are you in fact the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air?

No idea what you are on about,tbh.

well, sense Vs well sense

or maybe just nonsense

comma-nt?

[Doorzetbornandbred]

Out of interest, are there any metrics for relative levels of support for the game, ticket sales, youth participation in the sport and the sort of things that indicate popularity of the sport under any given coaching regime? That's got be at least one part of the whole package that makes a coach successful, no? Or is it all fuck-by-numbers win/loss ratios and such?

Participation numbers dropped from 251,200 in 2017 to 195,300 in 2020 a drop of 22%. When you consider how much the womens and girls game has grown in that same period thats pretty bloody grim reading...

[Mellsblue]

Out of interest, are there any metrics for relative levels of support for the game, ticket sales, youth participation in the sport and the sort of things that indicate popularity of the sport under any given coaching regime? That's got be at least one part of the whole package that makes a coach successful, no? Or is it all fuck-by-numbers win/loss ratios and such?

Participation numbers dropped from 251,200 in 2017 to 195,300 in 2020 a drop of 22%. When you consider how much the womens and girls game has grown in that same period thats pretty bloody grim reading...

It’s one way of denuding the argument that ‘you’ve the most players so should be far more successful’. It’s not the route I would’ve suggested if they’d been stupid enough to ask me but it’s a plan of sorts.

[morepork]

Out of interest, are there any metrics for relative levels of support for the game, ticket sales, youth participation in the sport and the sort of things that indicate popularity of the sport under any given coaching regime? That's got be at least one part of the whole package that makes a coach successful, no? Or is it all fuck-by-numbers win/loss ratios and such?

Participation numbers dropped from 251,200 in 2017 to 195,300 in 2020 a drop of 22%. When you consider how much the womens and girls game has grown in that same period thats pretty bloody grim reading...

Is that because people are bored with the game, worried about their brains turning to mashed potato....both?

[Puja]

Out of interest, are there any metrics for relative levels of support for the game, ticket sales, youth participation in the sport and the sort of things that indicate popularity of the sport under any given coaching regime? That's got be at least one part of the whole package that makes a coach successful, no? Or is it all fuck-by-numbers win/loss ratios and such?

Participation numbers dropped from 251,200 in 2017 to 195,300 in 2020 a drop of 22%. When you consider how much the womens and girls game has grown in that same period thats pretty bloody grim reading...

Is that because people are bored with the game, worried about their brains turning to mashed potato....both?

Part of a general down-turn in male sports participation in England. Every sport is seeing similar reductions in playing numbers.

Puja

[Dan. Dan. Dan.]

It's the unstoppable rise of individualism. People would rather stay fit in a gym than have to talk to other people...

[Stom]

It's the unstoppable rise of individualism. People would rather stay fit in a gym than have to talk to other people...

Yep, that.

[Mr Mwenda]

I was chatting to a Dutch mate who was saying rugby clubs were booming in the Netherlands on the back of increasing negative perceptions of football. He wasn't really sure why the club sports model seemed to be prospering there where elsewhere it's in decline. It does give one hope that maybe as an institution it can be rejuvenated. At least my home town club is booming with minis, juniors and women. It's post 18 men that are disappearing and apparently have no need of the place.

[Gloskarlos]

Same in Germany. And many football clubs at a lower level using the same minis and juniors 'treds' discipline as standard, trying to eradicate swearing, over zealous touchline parenting and better attitude from players etc.

[Oakboy]

There are some horror stories about what referees have to tolerate in junior football. I think rugby needs to be very careful about top-level player attitude towards refs. The game needs to get back to only captains being allowed to talk to refs and we need to see more 10 metre punishments for talking out of turn. Referees need to be seen to be treated with respect.

[Digby]

only captains talking to the refs is I think a daft idea, but how the game is letting players talk to refs has gone to far

[16th man]

only captains talking to the refs is I think a daft idea, but how the game is letting players talk to refs has gone to far

I think some of the top level refs could do with someone having a chat with them about the degree of influence that they have over how people at all levels perceive referees.

Yes, be more willing to move penalties 10ms for back chat.

No, just because your decision is final doesn't mean you can be a humility free zone and be a dick about how you speak to players.

[Scrumhead]

I think the truth is probably somewhere in between. Gatland would not be my choice, but I do think he’s better than he’s being given credit for here. At the same time, Edwards has clearly made a massive difference when they’ve worked together.

How or why Oakboy thinks Eddie is a 5/10 and Gatland a 6/10 is predictably ridiculous and one-eyed as well as being grossly unfair (to both). I’d love to know who the 10/10 coaches are. Let me guess? Rob Baxter or maybe the as yet unidentified ‘under 45’ with a ‘proven track record of innovation’.

Wow, you do like laying into me!

I think you are being too particular and critical really. Gatland and Jones are experienced international coaches though neither have won the RWC. IMO, both are unlikely to ever win it, though Gatland, got more out of Wales, relative to the standard of the players available, than Jones has done with England.

I think we agree that Baxter is unlikely to be England's next head coach. As for 10/10 coaches, they don't exist by definition. To achieve that standard a coach would need to win the RWC at least twice in succession or whatever.

I think it is much more simple than you imply. The RFU should not appoint losers just because they are experienced. Jones is a perennial loser. Quoting percentage wins is absolute bollix, IMO. How many crunch matches has he ever won? With England it is a grand total of one. And, before you mention 6N wins it has only been during his tenure that anybody has cared about that. Grand Slams used to be all that counted. This 6N, for example, there were two crunch matches (for various reasons of his making) - Scotland and Ireland. He lost both.

You keep asking me who I'd appoint and I can't give you an answer. Lam, Edwards and a good forwards coach would be the sort of inspirational crew that I would favour. We need a coaching outfit that would get the best out of the players more often than not.

It’s not laying in to you ... and I’m sorry if it comes across that way. You must know that you are going to be challenged (not just by me) when you make a statement like the 5/10 one?

I also think describing Eddie Jones as a ‘perennial loser’ is extremely harsh. By your definition, you’re only a ‘winner’ if you have grand slams and world cups in your trophy cabinet which means we’re talking about a very small group of currently active coaches in world rugby. It’s a wildly unrealistic scale.

As for the Pat Lam/Sean Edwards combination- I could absolutely get behind that. I’m not sure I see them working that well together, but as a pair of coaches with different (and potentially complimentary) strengths, I like it. Not sure Edwards would be happy playing second fiddle to a head coach with no experience of test rugby mind you.

[Oakboy]

I think the truth is probably somewhere in between. Gatland would not be my choice, but I do think he’s better than he’s being given credit for here. At the same time, Edwards has clearly made a massive difference when they’ve worked together.

How or why Oakboy thinks Eddie is a 5/10 and Gatland a 6/10 is predictably ridiculous and one-eyed as well as being grossly unfair (to both). I’d love to know who the 10/10 coaches are. Let me guess? Rob Baxter or maybe the as yet unidentified ‘under 45’ with a ‘proven track record of innovation’.

Wow, you do like laying into me!

I think you are being too particular and critical really. Gatland and Jones are experienced international coaches though neither have won the RWC. IMO, both are unlikely to ever win it, though Gatland, got more out of Wales, relative to the standard of the players available, than Jones has done with England.

I think we agree that Baxter is unlikely to be England's next head coach. As for 10/10 coaches, they don't exist by definition. To achieve that standard a coach would need to win the RWC at least twice in succession or whatever.

I think it is much more simple than you imply. The RFU should not appoint losers just because they are experienced. Jones is a perennial loser. Quoting percentage wins is absolute bollix, IMO. How many crunch matches has he ever won? With England it is a grand total of one. And, before you mention 6N wins it has only been during his tenure that anybody has cared about that. Grand Slams used to be all that counted. This 6N, for example, there were two crunch matches (for various reasons of his making) - Scotland and Ireland. He lost both.

You keep asking me who I'd appoint and I can't give you an answer. Lam, Edwards and a good forwards coach would be the sort of inspirational crew that I would favour. We need a coaching outfit that would get the best out of the players more often than not.

It’s not laying in to you ... and I’m sorry if it comes across that way. You must know that you are going to be challenged (not just by me) when you make a statement like the 5/10 one?

I also think describing Eddie Jones as a ‘perennial loser’ is extremely harsh. By your definition, you’re only a ‘winner’ if you have grand slams and world cups in your trophy cabinet which means we’re talking about a very small group of currently active coaches in world rugby. It’s a wildly unrealistic scale.

As for the Pat Lam/Sean Edwards combination- I could absolutely get behind that. I’m not sure I see them working that well together, but as a pair of coaches with different (and potentially complimentary) strengths, I like it. Not sure Edwards would be happy playing second fiddle to a head coach with no experience of test rugby mind you.

One of the problems I can see IF the RFU keep Jones till the end of his contract is that Baxter might then be near enough to the end of his for all parties to co-operate. My issue with that is not that I think Baxter could not do the job but that he is the wrong guy to be next.

I think Jones is the king of 'perspiration over inspiration' which translates, with his slant on the English rugby psyche, as 'do what you are told and work your balls off'. That is a generation out of date, IMO. In selection it leads to sticking stubbornly to the likes of Farrell and the Vs. In application it leads to inconsistency (just think of this 6N).

Baxter, has only been a one-club man. He is about consistency, inspiration and understanding our game at root level. I think he could be good for England but NOT as the next in line to Jones. It would develop into a Saracens v Exeter press stampede.

IMO, in an ideal world, IF one wanted Baxter in the job, the RFU would appoint a temporary head-coach to take us to the next RWC and then Baxter might have a chance. Get the current 'dominants' to their limit (i.e. both Vs, George, Youngs, Ford, Farrell etc.), dump them and build a new approach/environment from scratch.

Above all, my take on it is that day-to-day, match-to-match we need somebody who consistently gets the best out of the playing talent available (which Jones has never done). Baxter, assuming that the 'dominants' were discarded, might do a job. I think others might do it better. The RFU were incompetent in appointing Jones. Now, they are a bunch of snowflakes in keeping him.

[Digby]

What coach anywhere in world rugby isn't asking for perspiration over inspiration? Why do you think working hard is a generation too late?

I mean, who is playing flowing rugby without putting in a shift?

Nobody is just playing heads up rugby, you'd have to be so much better to make that work you'd just have an irrelevant game to begin with

[p/d]

5/10 is bloody generous.

[Scrumhead]

Wow, you do like laying into me!

I think you are being too particular and critical really. Gatland and Jones are experienced international coaches though neither have won the RWC. IMO, both are unlikely to ever win it, though Gatland, got more out of Wales, relative to the standard of the players available, than Jones has done with England.

I think we agree that Baxter is unlikely to be England's next head coach. As for 10/10 coaches, they don't exist by definition. To achieve that standard a coach would need to win the RWC at least twice in succession or whatever.

I think it is much more simple than you imply. The RFU should not appoint losers just because they are experienced. Jones is a perennial loser. Quoting percentage wins is absolute bollix, IMO. How many crunch matches has he ever won? With England it is a grand total of one. And, before you mention 6N wins it has only been during his tenure that anybody has cared about that. Grand Slams used to be all that counted. This 6N, for example, there were two crunch matches (for various reasons of his making) - Scotland and Ireland. He lost both.

You keep asking me who I'd appoint and I can't give you an answer. Lam, Edwards and a good forwards coach would be the sort of inspirational crew that I would favour. We need a coaching outfit that would get the best out of the players more often than not.

It’s not laying in to you ... and I’m sorry if it comes across that way. You must know that you are going to be challenged (not just by me) when you make a statement like the 5/10 one?

I also think describing Eddie Jones as a ‘perennial loser’ is extremely harsh. By your definition, you’re only a ‘winner’ if you have grand slams and world cups in your trophy cabinet which means we’re talking about a very small group of currently active coaches in world rugby. It’s a wildly unrealistic scale.

As for the Pat Lam/Sean Edwards combination- I could absolutely get behind that. I’m not sure I see them working that well together, but as a pair of coaches with different (and potentially complimentary) strengths, I like it. Not sure Edwards would be happy playing second fiddle to a head coach with no experience of test rugby mind you.

One of the problems I can see IF the RFU keep Jones till the end of his contract is that Baxter might then be near enough to the end of his for all parties to co-operate. My issue with that is not that I think Baxter could not do the job but that he is the wrong guy to be next.

I think Jones is the king of 'perspiration over inspiration' which translates, with his slant on the English rugby psyche, as 'do what you are told and work your balls off'. That is a generation out of date, IMO. In selection it leads to sticking stubbornly to the likes of Farrell and the Vs. In application it leads to inconsistency (just think of this 6N).

Baxter, has only been a one-club man. He is about consistency, inspiration and understanding our game at root level. I think he could be good for England but NOT as the next in line to Jones. It would develop into a Saracens v Exeter press stampede.

IMO, in an ideal world, IF one wanted Baxter in the job, the RFU would appoint a temporary head-coach to take us to the next RWC and then Baxter might have a chance. Get the current 'dominants' to their limit (i.e. both Vs, George, Youngs, Ford, Farrell etc.), dump them and build a new approach/environment from scratch.

Above all, my take on it is that day-to-day, match-to-match we need somebody who consistently gets the best out of the playing talent available (which Jones has never done). Baxter, assuming that the 'dominants' were discarded, might do a job. I think others might do it better. The RFU were incompetent in appointing Jones. Now, they are a bunch of snowflakes in keeping him.

The trouble is, you kill off any of the good points and valid arguments you do make when you make childish statements like the one I highlighted that only make sense to you.

The RFU are far from perfect, but to suggest they are ‘incompetent’ for appointing a coach with Eddie’s record is just plain ridiculous.

Based upon your recent posts, only an England coach wins every 6 Nations and World Cup is good enough for you. I mean, don’t get me wrong, I’d love it if that person existed, but they quite clearly don’t.

I accept your argument that Eddie is not consistently getting the best out of our player pool, but you are so blinded by your irrational hatred of him that your points get derailed by hysteria.

You have me down as Eddie’s champion. I’m really not, I just don’t find your arguments coherent or sensible.

I’m sure you find me equally tiresome.

[Danno]

Genuine question: Who else could have been appointed in the 2015 aftermath? How would they have been any better than Jones?

[Mr Mwenda]

My dad always says there's no point having a discussion with someone who is convinced, a fanatic. They're just dishonestly posing as someone willing to change their mind.

But to continue the endless cycle. I'm happy to be rid of Jones when a better candidate appears and is willing. I do not think this group of English players is outstanding and it cannot expect to do a slam each year. It can expect to do better than 5th, mind.

[p/d]

My dad always says there's no point having a discussion with someone who is convinced, a fanatic. They're just dishonestly posing as someone willing to change their mind.

But to continue the endless cycle. I'm happy to be rid of Jones when a better candidate appears and is willing. I do not think this group of English players is outstanding and it cannot expect to do a slam each year. It can expect to do better than 5th, mind.

Totally agree regards the quality of our players and how, as is I want, we elevate individuals to messiah status off the back of one scrum, carry or touch finder.

That said Jones was never my bag from the out so any opportunity to highlight his failure is grasped firmly. Though I do believe the sword he obnoxiously waved at critics is the same one he is slowly falling on.

In answer to an earlier question, I was fully behind the appointment of Nick ‘the hammer’ Mallet

[fivepointer]

I've never liked Jones but approved of his appointment. Seemed to me that an experienced older coach was exactly what we needed after Johnson and Lancaster. I do think its important the head coach has broad experience in the international arena, which Jones had in spades. Its for this reason that i think Baxter may not be a good pick in the short term.

Jones' record is very good. Even if you take out the first 2 years he was in charge, we still have a fine win/loss ratio. True, we've only won one Grand slam, but other 6N wins and a WC final are not insignificant achievements. Overall he has far more ticks in the credit column than in the debit.

I'm not sure that any other coach would have got a lot more out of the players, even though some of his picks and notably his shunning of players has been a bit hard to understand. He gets most of the selection calls right. He does have a lot of good players to draw upon, though not a great deal of depth in certain positions.

Right now the team is at something of a crossroads. Changes need to be made and the team needs to move on. Short term, Jones will oversee that. The RFU aren't going to fire him - i suspect the 6N review panel will mark his card and say must do better, but they arent going to release him now. I think, on balance, thats fair enough, though clearly we need to see improvements later this year. Things will have to get catastrophically bad for him to get axed before the WC, which is possible, but i think he will take us through.

Post 2023 we will be in the market for someone new and there should be a number of good candidates.

[Digby]

The really weird things Eddie have done are for me around the treatment of Isiekwe, a player he put there and then treated really badly for some hard to discern reason, and the treatment of Care, yes Care wasn't perfect but we then had so much time given over to Heinz and Wigglesworth, at best that's cutting off your nose

The annoying thing Eddie did was to look at our players and think they just can't play rugby and spend all those years trying not to have the ball bar for a couple of phases off a lineout in the opponent's territory.

Now he finally goes with a little ball in hand play at the same the same time as trying to bring through some new players and loses a few games to dent that win % and he's getting a kicking

[Digby]

No change at the top. Looks a pretty reasonable review taken in the round

[Stom]

Indeed. That seems eminently sensible. Which is pretty shocking for the RFU...maybe they have turned a corner?