RugbyRebels

Raggs wrote:Twitter video showing that the first Welsh player to touch the ball before the Anscombe dot down, actually knocked it on, so no try anyway.

Mikey Brown wrote:Just to be clear my comment about Simmonds was about everyone else writing him off, I’m still a fan despite Saturday suiting him an awful lot less. As someone mentioned Hughes got 10 caps before he was anything other than crap. Hopefully Simmonds gets a go like Hughes, not like Clifford.

I was just fucking bored yesterday. There were big patches where it didn’t even look like we were trying to build anything, just waiting for Wales to drop one of our terrible, terrible kicks. It was like watching a worst-of-Gatball compilation.

Do you wish we played more like Scotland?

Simmonds has made striking progress to this point, so I don't think the hope now is steady as she goes

Timbo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Just to be clear my comment about Simmonds was about everyone else writing him off, I’m still a fan despite Saturday suiting him an awful lot less. As someone mentioned Hughes got 10 caps before he was anything other than crap. Hopefully Simmonds gets a go like Hughes, not like Clifford.

I was just fucking bored yesterday. There were big patches where it didn’t even look like we were trying to build anything, just waiting for Wales to drop one of our terrible, terrible kicks. It was like watching a worst-of-Gatball compilation.

Do you wish we played more like Scotland?

Err. In some aspects. Not that many.

We made mistakes moving the ball wide and had a dodgy setpiece, that is aping Scotland at least in part.

I like that people are looking for positives, and there were some, but I hope the coaches are having a serious rethink.

Lawes isn't working as a six. I'd be happy with it if we were destroying opposition lineouts or scrums, but we're not do the trade off isn't worth it. I hope this is the end of that experiment and we move forward with Simmonds, Mercer, Underhill or maybe Willis at Wasps.

On espn it said Cole made two runs for zero meters and Hartley 4 for six. Hartley only made 5 tackles and Cole at least got eight, but of course he gave away a couple of pens. In the loose these two are basically passengers and Eddie sticking by his guns is harming England's chances. I get we don't have a lot of Tight Heads, but Hartley is at best forth best hooker available.

Wriggleswoth an impact sub? Wtf? Bite the bullet and pick Robson.

England played their best (ignoring a lineout failure) in the opening period with Hartley off for an HIA. With Dylan coming back Wales gradually gained control of the emotion and momentum though in the final reckoning Wales are limited in their kicking and attack and couldn't wrestle a win from a game they were perhaps dominant in.

I’d disagree that Wales were ‘dominant’. They had some good spells, particularly in the last quarter, but I think that is the wrong word to use.

With Sinckler and Marler back, I’d be quite keen to see Eddie start with Marler and Williams with Mako and Sinckler providing the impact off the bench.

I’m sure I’ll be shouted down, but I wouldn’t be averse to seeing Robshaw moving to 6 with Haskell coming back in at 7 for the Scotland game.

Itoje or Lawes is a tough one, but I’d go with Courtney right now.

Instead of the words ‘Wales were dominant’,I would perhaps use the words ‘Wales were clear second best for an hour and could easily have been 15 points down at that stage’.

In truth we should have put that Welsh side away,securing the BP. We didn’t and linked with Jones’s attack on the media would suggest that we have been flatlining for a while now.

Couldn’t care less for the reasons behind it but the selection of Wigglesworth and then the replacement of Ford with T”eo are the signs of uncertainty within the coaching set up.

p/d wrote:In truth we should have put that Welsh side away,securing the BP. We didn’t and linked with Jones’s attack on the media would suggest that we have been flatlining for a while now.

Couldn’t care less for the reasons behind it but the selection of Wigglesworth and then the replacement of Ford with T”eo are the signs of uncertainty within the coaching set up.

Do you think the two changes were linked? Was it an admission that Ford and Wigglesworth would have been vulnerable defensively? I'd have picked Spencer.

Oakboy wrote:

p/d wrote:In truth we should have put that Welsh side away,securing the BP. We didn’t and linked with Jones’s attack on the media would suggest that we have been flatlining for a while now.

Couldn’t care less for the reasons behind it but the selection of Wigglesworth and then the replacement of Ford with T”eo are the signs of uncertainty within the coaching set up.

Do you think the two changes were linked? Was it an admission that Ford and Wigglesworth would have been vulnerable defensively? I'd have picked Spencer.

Yes and yes. The Wigglesworth/Farrell is a known, clearly a combo with history of bringing a game home.

p/d wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

p/d wrote:In truth we should have put that Welsh side away,securing the BP. We didn’t and linked with Jones’s attack on the media would suggest that we have been flatlining for a while now.

Couldn’t care less for the reasons behind it but the selection of Wigglesworth and then the replacement of Ford with T”eo are the signs of uncertainty within the coaching set up.

Do you think the two changes were linked? Was it an admission that Ford and Wigglesworth would have been vulnerable defensively? I'd have picked Spencer.

Yes and yes. The Wigglesworth/Farrell is a known, clearly a combo with history of bringing a game home.

Yet a sigh of coaching uncertainty?

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Do you think the two changes were linked? Was it an admission that Ford and Wigglesworth would have been vulnerable defensively? I'd have picked Spencer.

Yes and yes. The Wigglesworth/Farrell is a known, clearly a combo with history of bringing a game home.

Yet a sigh of coaching uncertainty?

Without question. The Ford / Farrell combo was far from the reason Wales we’re back in the game.

p/d wrote:

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:
Yes and yes. The Wigglesworth/Farrell is a known, clearly a combo with history of bringing a game home.

Yet a sigh of coaching uncertainty?

Without question. The Ford / Farrell combo was far from the reason Wales we’re back in the game.

No, care blowing out of his arse was though. That’s why he got yanked, and that’s why the familiar half backs were reunited. Looked like pretty certain planning to me, not that wiggy should have been on the bench in the first place.

Care had gone to pieces, but the belief Ford couldn’t operate outside a limited 9 is a false one. However, more ineffectual was replacing him with T’eo. Just failed to see the need for it

p/d wrote:Care had gone to pieces, but the belief Ford couldn’t operate outside a limited 9 is a false one. However, more ineffectual was replacing him with T’eo. Just failed to see the need for it

But you said it yourself though. Wanted them to close the game out. No lack of certainty for me, you can question the rationale, but it wasn’t a knee jerk, and indeed has been done a few times before.

(Plus he might have been fed up of Faz missing all those tackles )

Just fresh legs. We weren’t doing much more than tackling, standing up and tackling again at that stage, so no need for Ford.

The only thing the Wigglesworth selection is an admission of is that we don’t have a really top 9 battering the door down as 3rd choice. Wigglesworth has quite a few caps and performed in Champions Cup finals etc. We at least know he’s not going to come on and play like an idiot/Baptiste Serin/Finn Russell.

Timbo wrote:Just fresh legs. We weren’t doing much more than tackling, standing up and tackling again at that stage, so no need for Ford.

The only thing the Wigglesworth selection is an admission of is that we don’t have a really top 9 battering the door down as 3rd choice. Wigglesworth has quite a few caps and performed in Champions Cup finals etc. We at least know he’s not going to come on and play like an idiot/Baptiste Serin/Finn Russell.

True, but we've also had plenty of proof that he's just not up to international level. He's Great playing a very structured game behind a massively dominant pack at club level
But that's it.

What next? Should we give Goode a shot?

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:Care had gone to pieces, but the belief Ford couldn’t operate outside a limited 9 is a false one. However, more ineffectual was replacing him with T’eo. Just failed to see the need for it

But you said it yourself though. Wanted them to close the game out. No lack of certainty for me, you can question the rationale, but it wasn’t a knee jerk, and indeed has been done a few times before.

(Plus he might have been fed up of Faz missing all those tackles )

Just been reading all the glowing press reports about Faz. He is now in the position once held by Jonny Wilkinson. In the eyes of many media pundits and fans he is the Prince Valiant of the England team; the stellar leading light; every match is preordained to be a great one; he can do no wrong; no critisizm will be considered or tolerated; national adulation is rampant and mandatory. Don't hold yer breath - it will only get worse.

In his defence (no pun intended) he has improved as a runner and distributor. But he still looks like a 10 playing at 12.

Spiffy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:Care had gone to pieces, but the belief Ford couldn’t operate outside a limited 9 is a false one. However, more ineffectual was replacing him with T’eo. Just failed to see the need for it

But you said it yourself though. Wanted them to close the game out. No lack of certainty for me, you can question the rationale, but it wasn’t a knee jerk, and indeed has been done a few times before.

(Plus he might have been fed up of Faz missing all those tackles )

Just been reading all the glowing press reports about Faz. He is now in the position once held by Jonny Wilkinson. In the eyes of many media pundits and fans he is the Prince Valiant of the England team; the stellar leading light; every match is preordained to be a great one; he can do no wrong; no critisizm will be considered or tolerated; national adulation is rampant and mandatory. Don't hold yer breath - it will only get worse.

In his defence (no pun intended) he has improved as a runner and distributor. But he still looks like a 10 playing at 12.

For the first time Faz has actually got his shit together as an attacking twelve, and I can see Ford/Faz taking England to the World Cup and doing well.

Weirdly his kicking has gone a bit off, although noone is allowed to mention that.

He did do a lot of good things on Sat, and was probably our best back, but he did miss some iffy tackles that can't be excused by the style of defense.

Spiffy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:Care had gone to pieces, but the belief Ford couldn’t operate outside a limited 9 is a false one. However, more ineffectual was replacing him with T’eo. Just failed to see the need for it

But you said it yourself though. Wanted them to close the game out. No lack of certainty for me, you can question the rationale, but it wasn’t a knee jerk, and indeed has been done a few times before.

(Plus he might have been fed up of Faz missing all those tackles )

Just been reading all the glowing press reports about Faz. He is now in the position once held by Jonny Wilkinson. In the eyes of many media pundits and fans he is the Prince Valiant of the England team; the stellar leading light; every match is preordained to be a great one; he can do no wrong; no critisizm will be considered or tolerated; national adulation is rampant and mandatory. Don't hold yer breath - it will only get worse.

In his defence (no pun intended) he has improved as a runner and distributor. But he still looks like a 10 playing at 12.

One write up I saw, I think it was on the been highlighted the missed tackles.

Mr Mwenda wrote:

Spiffy wrote:

Banquo wrote: But you said it yourself though. Wanted them to close the game out. No lack of certainty for me, you can question the rationale, but it wasn’t a knee jerk, and indeed has been done a few times before.

(Plus he might have been fed up of Faz missing all those tackles )

Just been reading all the glowing press reports about Faz. He is now in the position once held by Jonny Wilkinson. In the eyes of many media pundits and fans he is the Prince Valiant of the England team; the stellar leading light; every match is preordained to be a great one; he can do no wrong; no critisizm will be considered or tolerated; national adulation is rampant and mandatory. Don't hold yer breath - it will only get worse.

In his defence (no pun intended) he has improved as a runner and distributor. But he still looks like a 10 playing at 12.

One write up I saw, I think it was on the been highlighted the missed tackles.

In the Guardian's player ratings : "Owen Farrell left a mark with some thumping tackles" - makes no mention of the missed ones.

Which Tyler wrote:

Raggs wrote:Twitter video showing that the first Welsh player to touch the ball before the Anscombe dot down, actually knocked it on, so no try anyway.

I did think it looked like he'd touched it, but hadn't been able to get a good view of it. Good find!

Puja

Yep. The fingers definitely move when the ball touches them. Knock on. No try.