RugbyRebels

It wasnt quite the hiding i thought was coming our way at h/t. To their credit the players dug in and produced a far better 2nd half, scoring a good try and looking a lot more together.
we did some good things and a few players put in good performances but overall we've not played with anything like enough consistency and quality.
France are simply a better team.

Just waiting now for the usual Eddie Jones “l prepared properly but the players didn’t stick to the plan/execute it properly mate” interview.

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:meh. coulda been worse, coulda been better

I'd say that was the worst possible result actually. If we'd got cuffed by 40 points, then change would've been required, either change of coach or change of approach. Alternately, had we looked convincing, then I was willing to be persuaded that there was something to our "plan".

As it is, we were comfortably taken care of, but not so decisively on the scoreboard that anyone has to admit anything is wrong.

Puja

Yes.

Shiny wrote:Just waiting now for the usual Eddie Jones “l prepared properly but the players didn’t stick to the plan/execute it properly mate” interview.

He never says anything close to that. Always says he didn’t coach the team well enough.

To many errors, attack to ineffective. Different weekend same story.

France deserved champions, best team by a distance currently.

At FT: bad selection, bad tactics, bad result. Head coach incompetent. 2 wins out of 5 is simply at sacking level with no defence.

Marchant brilliant.
Itoje, Lawes, Simmonds, George and Stuart all grafted well defensively.
Steward ridiculous in the air, Smith looked dangerous but at times naive. Genge was extremely entertaining, but a lot of those metres were very cheap and he generally ran down blind alleys.
Otherwise, Youngs was awful. The ball died with Slade constantly. Isiekwe was pretty anonymous as was Underhill outside a couple of signature chops. Daly meh. And I still just don't see what Furbank's usp is. He's a solid PRM pro, a decent secondary playmaker, but he's not a strike runner, isn't great under the high ball, is an ineffective tackler and questionable decision maker. Just don't get it. He's decent on the volley though...
Main problem today was those one up carries with nobody clearing out. You know France are superb at the breakdown, it's just immensely stupid to keep handing them either a turnover or the chance to slow down (the already creakingly slow) Youngs ball. Partly we missed Curry, but it's on the whole pack to carry as a team not as individuals. Also another reason why Lawes should be in the 2nd row, we need a flanker that will hit rucks and follow the ball to play alongside Underhill and Simmonds.
Be happy if Youngs is never seen in an England shirt again. Same Furbank unless I'm just missing something. Starting to think Slade is a massive liability too.

Oakboy wrote:At FT: bad selection, bad tactics, bad result. Head coach incompetent. 2 wins out of 5 is simply at sacking level with no defence.

You'd hope they would look at performance and relative results, e.g. we beat Wales by 3, Italy beat Wales.

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:Marchant brilliant.
Itoje, Lawes, Simmonds, George and Stuart all grafted well defensively.
Steward ridiculous in the air, Smith looked dangerous but at times naive. Genge was extremely entertaining, but a lot of those metres were very cheap and he generally ran down blind alleys.
Otherwise, Youngs was awful. The ball died with Slade constantly. Isiekwe was pretty anonymous as was Underhill outside a couple of signature chops. Daly meh. And I still just don't see what Furbank's usp is. He's a solid PRM pro, a decent secondary playmaker, but he's not a strike runner, isn't great under the high ball, is an ineffective tackler and questionable decision maker. Just don't get it. He's decent on the volley though...
Main problem today was those one up carries with nobody clearing out. You know France are superb at the breakdown, it's just immensely stupid to keep handing them either a turnover or the chance to slow down (the already creakingly slow) Youngs ball. Partly we missed Curry, but it's on the whole pack to carry as a team not as individuals. Also another reason why Lawes should be in the 2nd row, we need a flanker that will hit rucks and follow the ball to play alongside Underhill and Simmonds.
Be happy if Youngs is never seen in an England shirt again. Same Furbank unless I'm just missing something. Starting to think Slade is a massive liability too.

Not having that Underhill was anonymous. Kept us in the game at times on his own. He workrate and defensive ability on the gainline was different level.

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:Marchant brilliant.
Itoje, Lawes, Simmonds, George and Stuart all grafted well defensively.
Steward ridiculous in the air, Smith looked dangerous but at times naive. Genge was extremely entertaining, but a lot of those metres were very cheap and he generally ran down blind alleys.
Otherwise, Youngs was awful. The ball died with Slade constantly. Isiekwe was pretty anonymous as was Underhill outside a couple of signature chops. Daly meh. And I still just don't see what Furbank's usp is. He's a solid PRM pro, a decent secondary playmaker, but he's not a strike runner, isn't great under the high ball, is an ineffective tackler and questionable decision maker. Just don't get it. He's decent on the volley though...
Main problem today was those one up carries with nobody clearing out. You know France are superb at the breakdown, it's just immensely stupid to keep handing them either a turnover or the chance to slow down (the already creakingly slow) Youngs ball. Partly we missed Curry, but it's on the whole pack to carry as a team not as individuals. Also another reason why Lawes should be in the 2nd row, we need a flanker that will hit rucks and follow the ball to play alongside Underhill and Simmonds.
Be happy if Youngs is never seen in an England shirt again. Same Furbank unless I'm just missing something. Starting to think Slade is a massive liability too.

Playing Genge at 8 for kicks was almost comedic.
Agree on Furbank, Slade, the former probably isn't ever going to be an international (25 y.o.) and the latter is playing himself out of contention more often than not

Id argue the breakdown is half lacking Curry and half lacking the pod system in favour of this unstructured shite. People running away from support was endemic, but support failing to run after them was worse

Otherwise yeah, Youngs had one of his worst matches, the box kick into France aside, every pass had the runner checking himself. Smith needs more time/experience and a spell on the bench while Ford guides him will hopefully help, and ffs we need wingers. Actual wingers.

fivepointer wrote:It wasnt quite the hiding i thought was coming our way at h/t. To their credit the players dug in and produced a far better 2nd half, scoring a good try and looking a lot more together.
we did some good things and a few players put in good performances but overall we've not played with anything like enough consistency and quality.
France are simply a better team.

yup. BUT discipline cannot carry on being so crap nor the breakdown. And little (but important) things like good touchfinders from penalties, and actually looking to be scoring a try through thoughtful play from penalty advantage rather than a hasty hail mary etc need the attention to detail.

Timbo wrote:

Shiny wrote:Just waiting now for the usual Eddie Jones “l prepared properly but the players didn’t stick to the plan/execute it properly mate” interview.

He never says anything close to that. Always says he didn’t coach the team well enough.

tru dis

Hard to criticise any individual player when the team is so clearly dysfunctional. There’s no coherence, no discernible plan. They’ve even managed to make Itoje look useless. Chapeau.

Mellsblue wrote:Hard to criticise any individual player when the team is so clearly dysfunctional. There’s no coherence, no discernible plan. They’ve even managed to make Itoje look useless. Chapeau.

Bang on
Except Youngs.

Danno wrote:Id argue the breakdown is half lacking Curry and half lacking the pod system in favour of this unstructured shite. People running away from support was endemic, but support failing to run after them was worse.

Yes, Eddie needs to forget having no ceiling to his attack, some support would be nice.

A lot of us getting drilled at the breakdown was down to not getting over the gainline & not getting over the gainline largely comes from having a very unorganised attacking structure….and round we go.

Danno wrote:

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:Marchant brilliant.
Itoje, Lawes, Simmonds, George and Stuart all grafted well defensively.
Steward ridiculous in the air, Smith looked dangerous but at times naive. Genge was extremely entertaining, but a lot of those metres were very cheap and he generally ran down blind alleys.
Otherwise, Youngs was awful. The ball died with Slade constantly. Isiekwe was pretty anonymous as was Underhill outside a couple of signature chops. Daly meh. And I still just don't see what Furbank's usp is. He's a solid PRM pro, a decent secondary playmaker, but he's not a strike runner, isn't great under the high ball, is an ineffective tackler and questionable decision maker. Just don't get it. He's decent on the volley though...
Main problem today was those one up carries with nobody clearing out. You know France are superb at the breakdown, it's just immensely stupid to keep handing them either a turnover or the chance to slow down (the already creakingly slow) Youngs ball. Partly we missed Curry, but it's on the whole pack to carry as a team not as individuals. Also another reason why Lawes should be in the 2nd row, we need a flanker that will hit rucks and follow the ball to play alongside Underhill and Simmonds.
Be happy if Youngs is never seen in an England shirt again. Same Furbank unless I'm just missing something. Starting to think Slade is a massive liability too.

Playing Genge at 8 for kicks was almost comedic.
Agree on Furbank, Slade, the former probably isn't ever going to be an international (25 y.o.) and the latter is playing himself out of contention more often than not

Id argue the breakdown is half lacking Curry and half lacking the pod system in favour of this unstructured shite. People running away from support was endemic, but support failing to run after them was worse

Otherwise yeah, Youngs had one of his worst matches, the box kick into France aside, every pass had the runner checking himself. Smith needs more time/experience and a spell on the bench while Ford guides him will hopefully help, and ffs we need wingers. Actual wingers.

I thought his best match this tournament, not that the bar was particularly high. His passing on a par with Randall's not that says much as Randall's passing was oddly inaccurate. Box kicks bar the fumbled one forced France into problems and generated territory we weren't going to get any other way.

I hope we drop both before the summer tour and give Quirke and Mitchell a go instead.

Agree re Smith. I'd have liked to see Ford enter the fray a lot earlier than 75 mins particularly when he was replacing Furbank who was pretty dire. Not that Smith was much better, really odd performance from him as his attacking kicks (crossfields and grubbers) are normally a strength but he miss hit most of them today. Return of the unnecessary goose step in attack wasn't helping things. England looked better when Slade stood at first receiver though Marchant was comfortably the pick of the midfield.

Danno wrote: Except Youngs.

Youngs looked like he was concussed. I'm assuming the decision to kick to the tall winger was a tactic from the coach? He caught most of the ones that were on target, but then the whole team did a collective, "OK. Wot now?". I can't believe that this is essentially the team that gave us such an emphatic reaming in a world cup semi two and a half years ago.

Have to say the backs looked ok from time to time with the ball against a very good defence, (as above when Smith wrapped) though most of the attacking kicks were dire, and our starting half backs have big question marks for me. Defence wasnt really tested but looked soft in the face of having to backpedal. Steward was fine in his tasking in attack- but needs to be at 15. Desperately need a cutting edge somewhere.

Up front, esp 1st half, support for carriers was either absent or making bad decisions, and our mauling was technically weak and rushed.

Thats a good french team but they kicked us a lot of ball, and we did rack up a lot of yards- but we didnt use thm well....see breakdown... and when France chose to play in the final third we were torn part...also see breakdown

FKAS wrote:

Danno wrote:

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:Marchant brilliant.
Itoje, Lawes, Simmonds, George and Stuart all grafted well defensively.
Steward ridiculous in the air, Smith looked dangerous but at times naive. Genge was extremely entertaining, but a lot of those metres were very cheap and he generally ran down blind alleys.
Otherwise, Youngs was awful. The ball died with Slade constantly. Isiekwe was pretty anonymous as was Underhill outside a couple of signature chops. Daly meh. And I still just don't see what Furbank's usp is. He's a solid PRM pro, a decent secondary playmaker, but he's not a strike runner, isn't great under the high ball, is an ineffective tackler and questionable decision maker. Just don't get it. He's decent on the volley though...
Main problem today was those one up carries with nobody clearing out. You know France are superb at the breakdown, it's just immensely stupid to keep handing them either a turnover or the chance to slow down (the already creakingly slow) Youngs ball. Partly we missed Curry, but it's on the whole pack to carry as a team not as individuals. Also another reason why Lawes should be in the 2nd row, we need a flanker that will hit rucks and follow the ball to play alongside Underhill and Simmonds.
Be happy if Youngs is never seen in an England shirt again. Same Furbank unless I'm just missing something. Starting to think Slade is a massive liability too.

Playing Genge at 8 for kicks was almost comedic.
Agree on Furbank, Slade, the former probably isn't ever going to be an international (25 y.o.) and the latter is playing himself out of contention more often than not

Id argue the breakdown is half lacking Curry and half lacking the pod system in favour of this unstructured shite. People running away from support was endemic, but support failing to run after them was worse

Otherwise yeah, Youngs had one of his worst matches, the box kick into France aside, every pass had the runner checking himself. Smith needs more time/experience and a spell on the bench while Ford guides him will hopefully help, and ffs we need wingers. Actual wingers.

I thought his best match this tournament, not that the bar was particularly high. His passing on a par with Randall's not that says much as Randall's passing was oddly inaccurate. Box kicks bar the fumbled one forced France into problems and generated territory we weren't going to get any other way.

I hope we drop both before the summer tour and give Quirke and Mitchell a go instead.

Agree re Smith. I'd have liked to see Ford enter the fray a lot earlier than 75 mins particularly when he was replacing Furbank who was pretty dire. Not that Smith was much better, really odd performance from him as his attacking kicks (crossfields and grubbers) are normally a strength but he miss hit most of them today. Return of the unnecessary goose step in attack wasn't helping things. England looked better when Slade stood at first receiver though Marchant was comfortably the pick of the midfield.

Though Youngs very ponderous and not marshalling the pack. Smith was very hit and miss.

Adieu, Eddie!

Timbo wrote:

Danno wrote:Id argue the breakdown is half lacking Curry and half lacking the pod system in favour of this unstructured shite. People running away from support was endemic, but support failing to run after them was worse.

Yes, Eddie needs to forget having no ceiling to his attack, some support would be nice.

A lot of us getting drilled at the breakdown was down to not getting over the gainline & not getting over the gainline largely comes from having a very unorganised attacking structure….and round we go.

not sure i agree wholly with the not getting over gainline piece- we did get knocked back a fair bit, but generally recovered the ball....most of the rinsing iirc came from carriers making a half break and no support in the tight loose phases, or in Itojes case two very bad decisions after very good carries.I would agree the turnovers wider out were from static or backfoot ball.

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:Main problem today was those one up carries with nobody clearing out. You know France are superb at the breakdown, it's just immensely stupid to keep handing them either a turnover or the chance to slow down (the already creakingly slow) Youngs ball. Partly we missed Curry, but it's on the whole pack to carry as a team not as individuals. Also another reason why Lawes should be in the 2nd row, we need a flanker that will hit rucks and follow the ball to play alongside Underhill and Simmonds.

Watching that game, I couldn't help thinking of how we employed Haskell at 7 back in 2016-17 - just be first man in at the breakdown and clear out, nothing else. It's simple, it's basic, it's certainly not a "no ceiling" sort of tactic, but I can't help but feel that we'd've won at least four games this 6N if we'd played Lawes at 5 and had 2016!James Haskell or someone doing the same job in the back row.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:Main problem today was those one up carries with nobody clearing out. You know France are superb at the breakdown, it's just immensely stupid to keep handing them either a turnover or the chance to slow down (the already creakingly slow) Youngs ball. Partly we missed Curry, but it's on the whole pack to carry as a team not as individuals. Also another reason why Lawes should be in the 2nd row, we need a flanker that will hit rucks and follow the ball to play alongside Underhill and Simmonds.

Watching that game, I couldn't help thinking of how we employed Haskell at 7 back in 2016-17 - just be first man in at the breakdown and clear out, nothing else. It's simple, it's basic, it's certainly not a "no ceiling" sort of tactic, but I can't help but feel that we'd've won at least four games this 6N if we'd played Lawes at 5 and had 2016!James Haskell or someone doing the same job in the back row.

Puja

The thought of Haskell in this shapeless/podless/formationless/numberless/hopeless game plan makes me simultaneously shudder and cry with laughter.