Team vs Scotland

[Mr Mwenda]

MB, your comments about Genge have got me wondering and comparing with Ireland, say. Is there any unit of the team that is performing to its maximum? I'd think the front row ought to be settled and functioning at best, but it's not. The 2nd row can't survive an injury or two. The back row is Curry and two more on rotation with Lawes out etc. We look 3 or 4 years off a fully structured side whereas Ireland look settled and at a comfortable state for fine-tuning.

I don't think anyone is selecting markedly different players to Jones, esp up front. If we aren't looking sh*t hot, maybe its because we don't have the quality of players- we consistently over estimate how good our players are imo. For example, Genge has looked the best all round loose head in the prem- Marler a better tight player- but isn't all that internationally.

For me, for years, we have needed a better player in almost every unit, as the incumbents haven't been quite top notch; international coaches can improve players, but sometimes not enough. I haven't thought this through, but if you picked a world 23, how many England players would be in it....or even two world 23's...

all that said, I have run out of patience a bit with Jones. We were set up poorly yesterday, and that's down to him. Scotland did play pretty well, but even so, our defence was bad, our options were bad, and the subs were bad. Even the detail of WTAF was Marler doing throwing into a key lineout.....George should have already been on the park.

This is more where I'm leaning. Not enough players are cracking on to the top level. Jones takes some flak for that certainly.

[Puja]

I must have somehow missed that. Marler threw in? That’s gotta have been comedy gold. Though seriously how on earth does that happen in an international or even professional set up??! Maybe they practice for having no hooker - but somehow I doubt it.

The problem is that there had been no scrum and we'd used our back row replacement - if George came on, it'd have to be a permanent change, which means losing a back (so that Nowell could then come on for LCD), taking off Simmonds and having to replace him with Ewels after the sin bin, or taking off Isiekwe and leaving us 8 minutes with Dombrandt at second row. I'd've probably gone with the latter, but it's not an obvious choice.

Marler has played hooker before and is capable of throwing in (not brilliantly, but he can do it). It was actually Dombrandt who fucked that lineout - it was meant to be the pod going to the middle and him going to take it on a front peel move, but he went far too early, before the pod had retreated, and at far too high a speed. That meant that he had to dodge around the pod, meaning there was no straight throw possible and he was already in the 5m channel by the time the ball got to him.

Puja

That’s what Jones is paid for on the earlier point. On the latter, they won’t have practiced it, and that’s not a culpable tbh.

They would have practiced that move though (or, if they hadn't, what the fuck were they doing calling it 5m out), even if not necessarily without their main hookers.

Comedy it was. First Youngs wiped the ball - and I was convinced he had planned to take it - then Marler strolls over, takes the ball and amateur hour commences.

5m out from our line we played Russian roulette with a loaded gun. For all the downside of sacrificing a player we should have brought George on. Mind you in light of what followed no guarantee he would have done any better than Marler

I'm still saying it's not Marler's fault. Youngs probably practiced as the thrower for "What if we lose our hooker to a yellow" drills in practice on the basis that Marler might not be on the pitch. However, Marler was almost certainly the main backup option in training - he has played hooker before, can throw in competently and, once he was on the pitch, was the obvious choice. As above, it was Dombrandt who screwed up the move and left Marler with no legal throw that he could make - his choices were either throwing not straight, waiting and throwing to someone inside the 5m, or not throwing and getting pinged for delaying.

Puja

[Banquo]

The problem is that there had been no scrum and we'd used our back row replacement - if George came on, it'd have to be a permanent change, which means losing a back (so that Nowell could then come on for LCD), taking off Simmonds and having to replace him with Ewels after the sin bin, or taking off Isiekwe and leaving us 8 minutes with Dombrandt at second row. I'd've probably gone with the latter, but it's not an obvious choice.

Marler has played hooker before and is capable of throwing in (not brilliantly, but he can do it). It was actually Dombrandt who fucked that lineout - it was meant to be the pod going to the middle and him going to take it on a front peel move, but he went far too early, before the pod had retreated, and at far too high a speed. That meant that he had to dodge around the pod, meaning there was no straight throw possible and he was already in the 5m channel by the time the ball got to him.

Puja

That’s what Jones is paid for on the earlier point. On the latter, they won’t have practiced it, and that’s not a culpable tbh.

They would have practiced that move though (or, if they hadn't, what the fuck were they doing calling it 5m out), even if not necessarily without their main hookers.

Comedy it was. First Youngs wiped the ball - and I was convinced he had planned to take it - then Marler strolls over, takes the ball and amateur hour commences.

5m out from our line we played Russian roulette with a loaded gun. For all the downside of sacrificing a player we should have brought George on. Mind you in light of what followed no guarantee he would have done any better than Marler

I'm still saying it's not Marler's fault. Youngs probably practiced as the thrower for "What if we lose our hooker to a yellow" drills in practice on the basis that Marler might not be on the pitch. However, Marler was almost certainly the main backup option in training - he has played hooker before, can throw in competently and, once he was on the pitch, was the obvious choice. As above, it was Dombrandt who screwed up the move and left Marler with no legal throw that he could make - his choices were either throwing not straight, waiting and throwing to someone inside the 5m, or not throwing and getting pinged for delaying.

Puja

I’d be staggered if they’d practiced it with Marler. If so, it didn’t translate well.

[Danno]

Could be a case of practising it with Marler but failing to account for Dombrandt screaming up like a teenager seeing his first booby

[badback]

Could be a case of practising it with Marler but failing to account for Dombrandt screaming up like a teenager seeing his first booby

[badback]

The problem is that there had been no scrum and we'd used our back row replacement - if George came on, it'd have to be a permanent change, which means losing a back (so that Nowell could then come on for LCD), taking off Simmonds and having to replace him with Ewels after the sin bin, or taking off Isiekwe and leaving us 8 minutes with Dombrandt at second row. I'd've probably gone with the latter, but it's not an obvious choice.

Marler has played hooker before and is capable of throwing in (not brilliantly, but he can do it). It was actually Dombrandt who fucked that lineout - it was meant to be the pod going to the middle and him going to take it on a front peel move, but he went far too early, before the pod had retreated, and at far too high a speed. That meant that he had to dodge around the pod, meaning there was no straight throw possible and he was already in the 5m channel by the time the ball got to him.

Puja

That’s what Jones is paid for on the earlier point. On the latter, they won’t have practiced it, and that’s not a culpable tbh.

They would have practiced that move though (or, if they hadn't, what the fuck were they doing calling it 5m out), even if not necessarily without their main hookers.

Comedy it was. First Youngs wiped the ball - and I was convinced he had planned to take it - then Marler strolls over, takes the ball and amateur hour commences.

5m out from our line we played Russian roulette with a loaded gun. For all the downside of sacrificing a player we should have brought George on. Mind you in light of what followed no guarantee he would have done any better than Marler

I'm still saying it's not Marler's fault. Youngs probably practiced as the thrower for "What if we lose our hooker to a yellow" drills in practice on the basis that Marler might not be on the pitch. However, Marler was almost certainly the main backup option in training - he has played hooker before, can throw in competently and, once he was on the pitch, was the obvious choice. As above, it was Dombrandt who screwed up the move and left Marler with no legal throw that he could make - his choices were either throwing not straight, waiting and throwing to someone inside the 5m, or not throwing and getting pinged for delaying.

Puja

Good points. Thx

[badback]

I know they’re not going in the squad, and maybe Eddie is trying to build depth, but that performance makes me wonder about tried and tested internationals left out - eg Vunipolae

[WaspInWales]

Eddie Jones is seriously holding this England team back.

His selection and tactics have been dubious for a while now and he just isn't getting the best out of the players. I know most top coaches tinker with players out of their usual positions, but Eddie just can't help himself not to fuck about to shoehorn players in even when there is no need.

Whilst I wasn't expecting Eddie to crucify LCD to the media for his lack of ability to catch a ball that he is paid to throw, I think he should have critical of him as it did affect the result. We were ahead and in control at the time, plus discipline was good.

I have no idea how the final 15 minutes played out, so don't know how the 'finishers' went, but I still think there was no need to replace Smith but every reason to replace Youngs.

[WaspInWales]

Maybe, Jones just does not concentrate on the SH position. Presumably, had Youngs been injured in the 1st minute, he would have been happy to go with Randall for 79. Why, then, not give him the last 15 to shake things up? None of it makes any sense.

I think there was good reason to bring Randall on with 30 minutes to go. I don't get why Eddie rates Youngs so highly. At times he has been fantastic for England, but those games could be years apart and his issues with passing and service are blindingly obvious. I really thought Dawson would've at least mentioned Randall in his article. It seems Farrell's Teflon treatment has rubbed off on Youngs as he constantly escapes criticism for poor performances.

I don't agree with Dawson on Scotland being world class yesterday. They were certainly more intelligent in that they avoided getting a player sin-binned and not conceding a penalty try. Their defence was pretty good, but they struggled with our maul and we were getting over the gain line. Don't get me wrong, I think Scotland are in a great place at the moment. They're getting the consistency their performances deserve, but I don't think that they were close to their best yesterday and had LCD been slightly taller and smarter, I don't think Scotland would have won.

[Raggs]

Some of rucks were quite fast, but it felt like they would have been faster with a better SH.

Forwards and backs had a disconnect, little support. Think we needed a more direct runner. Steward didn't seem to fill that role like I was expecting.

[Banquo]

Could be a case of practising it with Marler but failing to account for Dombrandt screaming up like a teenager seeing his first booby

or comms broke down.

[Mikey Brown]

Maybe, Jones just does not concentrate on the SH position. Presumably, had Youngs been injured in the 1st minute, he would have been happy to go with Randall for 79. Why, then, not give him the last 15 to shake things up? None of it makes any sense.

I think there was good reason to bring Randall on with 30 minutes to go. I don't get why Eddie rates Youngs so highly. At times he has been fantastic for England, but those games could be years apart and his issues with passing and service are blindingly obvious. I really thought Dawson would've at least mentioned Randall in his article. It seems Farrell's Teflon treatment has rubbed off on Youngs as he constantly escapes criticism for poor performances.

I don't agree with Dawson on Scotland being world class yesterday. They were certainly more intelligent in that they avoided getting a player sin-binned and not conceding a penalty try. Their defence was pretty good, but they struggled with our maul and we were getting over the gain line. Don't get me wrong, I think Scotland are in a great place at the moment. They're getting the consistency their performances deserve, but I don't think that they were close to their best yesterday and had LCD been slightly taller and smarter, I don't think Scotland would have won.

Seeing it back I actually think LCD did well to get across to even be close to that ball. The tight angle, slow motion replays made it seem like he should easily have taken it, but I think it was just a great bit of work from Scotland moving England from side to side, tying in the whole back 3 in and leaving a hooker to try and defend a cross kick.

Batting it away was daft, but it’s not like England would have been in a fantastic position if he’d actually caught it. I just find the focus (and anger from many, it seems) on this incident kind of bizarre.

It’s fair to say Scotland were not at their best, or “world class”, and listening to Dawson is generally a waste of time.

[p/d]

Agree ref LCD
Though do think Scotland were excellent without the ball

[Banquo]

Maybe, Jones just does not concentrate on the SH position. Presumably, had Youngs been injured in the 1st minute, he would have been happy to go with Randall for 79. Why, then, not give him the last 15 to shake things up? None of it makes any sense.

I think there was good reason to bring Randall on with 30 minutes to go. I don't get why Eddie rates Youngs so highly. At times he has been fantastic for England, but those games could be years apart and his issues with passing and service are blindingly obvious. I really thought Dawson would've at least mentioned Randall in his article. It seems Farrell's Teflon treatment has rubbed off on Youngs as he constantly escapes criticism for poor performances.

I don't agree with Dawson on Scotland being world class yesterday. They were certainly more intelligent in that they avoided getting a player sin-binned and not conceding a penalty try. Their defence was pretty good, but they struggled with our maul and we were getting over the gain line. Don't get me wrong, I think Scotland are in a great place at the moment. They're getting the consistency their performances deserve, but I don't think that they were close to their best yesterday and had LCD been slightly taller and smarter, I don't think Scotland would have won.

Seeing it back I actually think LCD did well to get across to even be close to that ball. The tight angle, slow motion replays made it seem like he should easily have taken it, but I think it was just a great bit of work from Scotland moving England from side to side, tying in the whole back 3 in and leaving a hooker to try and defend a cross kick.

Batting it away was daft, but it’s not like England would have been in a fantastic position if he’d actually caught it. I just find the focus (and anger from many, it seems) on this incident kind of bizarre.

It’s fair to say Scotland were not at their best, or “world class”, and listening to Dawson is generally a waste of time.

Where was the wing/defending back of some sort? Had they all bu55ered off right?

Scots defence was world class I thought, and Russell had fair few world class touches. Overall pretty good.

[WaspInWales]

Where was the wing/defending back of some sort? Had they all bu55ered off right?

Scots defence was world class I thought, and Russell had fair few world class touches. Overall pretty good.

Yep, agree about having a hooker on wing defence to cover the cross field kick...you would think they would train to cover such scenarios. Just like losing a hooker to the bin and not replacing him for a lineout.

Just looked at the stats and it says Scotland only missed 8 tackles. I am genuinely surprised it's as few as I thought there were periods where we seemed to get over the gain line and out of a few tackles.

Agree on Russell too. Don't think Smith had a bad game at all though.

[WaspInWales]

Seeing it back I actually think LCD did well to get across to even be close to that ball. The tight angle, slow motion replays made it seem like he should easily have taken it, but I think it was just a great bit of work from Scotland moving England from side to side, tying in the whole back 3 in and leaving a hooker to try and defend a cross kick.

Batting it away was daft, but it’s not like England would have been in a fantastic position if he’d actually caught it. I just find the focus (and anger from many, it seems) on this incident kind of bizarre.

It’s fair to say Scotland were not at their best, or “world class”, and listening to Dawson is generally a waste of time.

Disagree, LCD would've been in under the posts had he intercepted it. Probably would've sorted the conversion with a drop goal before the rest of our boys had passed the halfway line.

Fair comment tbh and he probably would've been pinged for holding on once tackled, but did he even have to be there to defend it? Was it great work from Scotland or shoddy organisation from us?

[WaspInWales]

Does anyone know if Radwan is injured atm?

[Banquo]

Does anyone know if Radwan is injured atm?

played yesterday

[Puja]

Seeing it back I actually think LCD did well to get across to even be close to that ball. The tight angle, slow motion replays made it seem like he should easily have taken it, but I think it was just a great bit of work from Scotland moving England from side to side, tying in the whole back 3 in and leaving a hooker to try and defend a cross kick.

Batting it away was daft, but it’s not like England would have been in a fantastic position if he’d actually caught it. I just find the focus (and anger from many, it seems) on this incident kind of bizarre.

It’s fair to say Scotland were not at their best, or “world class”, and listening to Dawson is generally a waste of time.

Disagree, LCD would've been in under the posts had he intercepted it. Probably would've sorted the conversion with a drop goal before the rest of our boys had passed the halfway line.

Fair comment tbh and he probably would've been pinged for holding on once tackled, but did he even have to be there to defend it? Was it great work from Scotland or shoddy organisation from us?

TBF, Scotland landed a pin-point cross-field kick from one side of the pitch to another, the winger than broke two tackles and made 10m, they had a sub-2s ruck, before pinging a cross-field kick to the opposite wing. They moved about 40m forwards very quickly and moved from touchline to touchline twice in quick succession. As far as disarranging defences goes, that's pretty much insuperable. We're lucky a player was there at all.

I have no problem with LCD failing to catch the ball or stop the try - as above, it was expertly executed and him being there was a minor miracle, let alone him being in a position to stop it (although a clean catch would've allowed him to call mark, so it wasn't quite as hopeless as it looked). My issue with him was the sheer force and gusto with which he committed to the deliberate knock-on. Flail at the ball and you've got a half-decent argument that you were attempting to catch it and hope the ref just gives a knock on. Get both hands to it and flip the ball firmly forwards like a volleyballer smacking it over the net and not even the most one eyed of fans can defend you. He knows the TMO exists - what exactly was he hoping to accomplish with the world's most obvious professional foul?

Puja

[WaspInWales]

TBF, Scotland landed a pin-point cross-field kick from one side of the pitch to another, the winger than broke two tackles and made 10m, they had a sub-2s ruck, before pinging a cross-field kick to the opposite wing. They moved about 40m forwards very quickly and moved from touchline to touchline twice in quick succession. As far as disarranging defences goes, that's pretty much insuperable. We're lucky a player was there at all.

I have no problem with LCD failing to catch the ball or stop the try - as above, it was expertly executed and him being there was a minor miracle, let alone him being in a position to stop it (although a clean catch would've allowed him to call mark, so it wasn't quite as hopeless as it looked). My issue with him was the sheer force and gusto with which he committed to the deliberate knock-on. Flail at the ball and you've got a half-decent argument that you were attempting to catch it and hope the ref just gives a knock on. Get both hands to it and flip the ball firmly forwards like a volleyballer smacking it over the net and not even the most one eyed of fans can defend you. He knows the TMO exists - what exactly was he hoping to accomplish with the world's most obvious professional foul?

Puja

Cheers Puja. Just watched it again and fair play, Scotland made the most of what they had in front of them. Marchant didn't help by flying across from his wing to cover. Was he really needed? This made LCD retreat from the scrum a bit too narrow considering Marchant had just remembered he left the oven on.

Key moment was a few minutes before when Eddie probably should've replaced LCD (and Youngs) and this would all have been avoided. What was he thinking leaving LCD on so he could do that?

[p/d]

Still can’t fathom why they went with Ford’s sand wedge rather than Slade for that last kick to touch

[Mikey Brown]

VDM took all of Daly, Malins and Slade out of the game from Russell’s kick to the left, having just come from the right where I think Marchant was tied in. England were just stretched too far. It would have been very impressive to cover it perfectly.

Not actually being 100% certain who is playing wing at any point probably doesn’t help those situations either.

[fivepointer]

Marchant is trying to get across to the kick but he's moved too far to the right giving himself too much room to make up, leaving LCD exposed out wide.
Scotland moved the ball astutely but you would still have expected our left wing to have been the last man on our defensive line.
LCD does make an awful hash of dealing with the kick, but he's a hooker and wouldnt normally be posted out on the wing.

[Banquo]

Marchant is trying to get across to the kick but he's moved too far to the right giving himself too much room to make up, leaving LCD exposed out wide.
Scotland moved the ball astutely but you would still have expected our left wing to have been the last man on our defensive line.
LCD does make an awful hash of dealing with the kick, but he's a hooker and wouldnt normally be posted out on the wing.

Exactly. Our defensive organisation was pony in the backs out wide all day, and it was called before the game, as was Russell's ability to exploit that sort of defence.

As above, I'm very grumpy now about how the backs are being run. There is a fair amount of skill and talent available and playing, but its all a bit Morecambe and Wise.

[Oakboy]

I've read all the comments on the LCD knock-on incident. It was a predictable (and predicted) incident resulting from the team's defensive incompetence as a direct result of a selection (positional) error. Basically, wacky ideas have wacky outcomes.

Punditry appears to be waking up to evidence of mismanagement judging by press coverage since the game. Odd that????