RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:World's slowest lineout

We've made enough mistakes we don't need to worry about the speed of France’s lineouts.

We had nothing left to get back up the other end anyway. Both teams faded badly, but at least we time wasted with the ball in play

Mellsblue wrote:Considering the size difference and the disparity in the scrum, I thought our boys went very well.

This. We got overpowered up front, coughed up a lot of actual penalties, as well as a good number that were purely in the ref's head, and still only lost by 8.

Too many errors and penalties. French scrum really gave them a decisive edge. We were second best.
Thought Curry and Hill were very impressive. Kpoku has got better throughout the tournament.
Brand and Grayson definitely lifted the team and should have been on a lot sooner.

Renniks wrote:France deserved winners
England did some good things
Ref was another level of awful

Just got home and seen the score.

What did the ref do? Ping every possible potential infringement of ours (however harsh) and give France carte blanche? That’s usually he way it goes ...

some surprised form this tournament for me.
Painter IMO not as good as made out to be, certainly struggled in the looser style of this comp, and part f a pack that got mashed today.
Kpoku Couldn't believe he got into the squad at first but he has bee brilliant.
Smith not as composed as I thought he would be.
Olowofela being Englands best outside back was a major surprise.


Hopefully Hill can progress as he is the perfect 6 type.

Scrumhead wrote:

Renniks wrote:France deserved winners
England did some good things
Ref was another level of awful

Just got home and seen the score.

What did the ref do? Ping every possible potential infringement of ours (however harsh) and give France carte blanche? That’s usually he way it goes ...

He made some poor calls, mostly against us but not exclusively.
One incident stood out. Its the 73rd minute, the French in particular have been sealing the ball off routinely throughout the game and arent penalised. We get pinged 10 meters from our line for the first and only time that the offence is blown for. The ref could have blown for this offence dozens of times throughout the game but doesnt.
That said, he wasnt the reason we lost.
France were the better side and deserved to win.

Scrumhead wrote:

Renniks wrote:France deserved winners
England did some good things
Ref was another level of awful

Just got home and seen the score.

What did the ref do? Ping every possible potential infringement of ours (however harsh) and give France carte blanche? That’s usually he way it goes ...

Not far off. Classic example of being laissez faire one way whilst being very hot on things the other way.

Just like the seniors we didn't help ourselves though.

Not knowing a huge amount about some of these players before the tournament. I feel once again we have some really talented players coming through!

Kpoku looks really good. As do the backs who have been given a huge amount of justifiable praise. Dingwall looks a bit of a machine defensively!

As a Worcester fan I am really excited about the prospects of Ted Hill!! Think he has had an outstanding tournament. Tackles everything that comes near him and almost always makes yards with ball in hand!

Did Eddie Jones lose this tournament for us?? The inclusion of Isiekwe, Earl and Redpath could have made a difference!

I’m sure it wasn’t the reason we lost, it’s just such an irritating pattern. We have to be whiter than the shirts we play in where other teams can take the laws to the absolute limit.

To Warrior85’s point, Isiekwe, Earl and Redpath would definitely have helped (even if Redpath hadn’t been injured, he’d have been with the seniors).

He was pretty awful to both teams, but it seemed to favour France…

Like others have said, it's not why we lost - but it was an awful reffing performance

Warrior85 wrote:
Did Eddie Jones lose this tournament for us?? The inclusion of Isiekwe, Earl and Redpath could have made a difference!

Normally you'd say that those 3, as well as T'other Curry would have gained more from a 3 match tour of SA. They way that the trip and the deterioration of our displays have gone, I'm not sure that's true this time.

I'm generally less concerned about us winning the tournament and more about the players development… And sadly I think Isiekwe would have been better off with the U20s

Kpoku, Dingwall and Olowofela to Bedford, please.

Its been a pretty good year. 1 defeat in the 6N's and finalists in the JWC.
Off the top of my head i think the following are available next year - Heyes, Cutting, Oghre, Scott, Hill, Basham, Hinkley, Willis, Brand, Hardwick, Dingwall, Loader plus Ollie Lawrence and possibly Marcus Street.

I'm baffled as to why White is rated so highly. He looks slow to the rucks, indecisive when he gets there, and with a glacial service. He's definitely learned from Youngs.

Brand looked significantly better when he came on, hair notwithstanding.

Puja

Puja wrote:I'm baffled as to why White is rated so highly. He looks slow to the rucks, indecisive when he gets there, and with a glacial service. He's definitely learned from Youngs.

Brand looked significantly better when he came on, hair notwithstanding.

Puja

First game I watched in full, our starting 9 looked knackered almost from the off, our replacement 9 came on with a team too tired to get into shape/position

It's a brutal tournament with games so closely spaced, whether we could have done more with rotation I don't know

fivepointer wrote:Its been a pretty good year. 1 defeat in the 6N's and finalists in the JWC.
Off the top of my head i think the following are available next year - Heyes, Cutting, Oghre, Scott, Hill, Basham, Hinkley, Willis, Brand, Hardwick, Dingwall, Loader plus Ollie Lawrence and possibly Marcus Street.

Loader and Brand isn't
But Kpoku and Smith are also.
And Redpath of course.

2. Cutting
3. Heyes
4. Scott
5. Kpoku
6. Hill
7. Willis
8. Basham
9.
10. Smith
11.
12. Redpath
13. Dingwall
14.
15.

16. Oghre
17.
18. Street
19.
20. Hinkley
21.
22. Hardwick
23. Lawerance
Is a good foundation.

Puja wrote:I'm baffled as to why White is rated so highly. He looks slow to the rucks, indecisive when he gets there, and with a glacial service. He's definitely learned from Youngs.

Brand looked significantly better when he came on, hair notwithstanding.

Puja

Not sure.
Simmons is the better player at Tigers IMO.

But white wouldn't be the first meh 9 at U20's level England that has come good.

I really enjoyed the game though the ref was irritating. The application was good throughout and we have some good players coming through.

After the SF, I mentioned that Hill looked a better player than Curry based on a single game. Watching again this evening, I'd say Hill is a great prospect. I hope his development is managed properly.

I thought the French did well to confine play to the centre ground, negating our threats wide. Their coach exploited their strengths well. I've no idea who he is. Might he be available?

Oakboy wrote:I've no idea who he is.

He's getting rather old but he's a good mouse

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:I've no idea who he is.

He's getting rather old but he's a good mouse

Gerald?

francoisfou wrote:

Digby wrote:

Oakboy wrote:I've no idea who he is.

He's getting rather old but he's a good mouse

Gerald?

Indeed, though I don't know why