RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:Insert vomit emoji

That's more than a little embarrassing.

Viva WC 2031

Jones is quoted as saying (about hauling Smith off) that 'sometimes we get it right and sometimes we get it wrong. Elsewhere, he mentions such decisions being 'easy in hindsight'.

That got me thinking. First, he is paid to get those decisions right and he failed. Second, a minute before the substitution, was there a single English fan or pundit thinking, "We must get Smith off and Ford on." He was the only one, AT THE TIME, who thought it was a good idea - sweet FA to do with hindsight. It was just simple, indefensible, bad judgement.

He is just a stubborn prickly little shit. Not a sophisticated manager at all, we've seen all this before with him coaching other teams.

Oakboy wrote:Jones is quoted as saying (about hauling Smith off) that 'sometimes we get it right and sometimes we get it wrong. Elsewhere, he mentions such decisions being 'easy in hindsight'.

That got me thinking. First, he is paid to get those decisions right and he failed. Second, a minute before the substitution, was there a single English fan or pundit thinking, "We must get Smith off and Ford on." He was the only one, AT THE TIME, who thought it was a good idea - sweet FA to do with hindsight. It was just simple, indefensible, bad judgement.

I was surprised Smith was taken off. He was doing OK. I wouldnt have changed things at 10.
I've questioned Jones record on subbing before. It is the cause of intense frustration that he either leaves players on too long or drags them off early.
Ford has often been the victim of an early sub, rather than take off Farrell, Ford makes way.
On Saturday we had the nonsense of Nowell coming on in the 80th minute. This isnt the first time Jones makes a sub ridiculously late in a game (e.g Tom Dunn vs Italy). Meanwhile Randall is left kicking his heels while Youngs meanders through another less than scintillating display.
And not bringing on George when LCD is sinbinned was a questionable decision.
And its not "we" who get the decisions wrong, its I. Jones makes these calls.

fivepointer wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Jones is quoted as saying (about hauling Smith off) that 'sometimes we get it right and sometimes we get it wrong. Elsewhere, he mentions such decisions being 'easy in hindsight'.

That got me thinking. First, he is paid to get those decisions right and he failed. Second, a minute before the substitution, was there a single English fan or pundit thinking, "We must get Smith off and Ford on." He was the only one, AT THE TIME, who thought it was a good idea - sweet FA to do with hindsight. It was just simple, indefensible, bad judgement.

I was surprised Smith was taken off. He was doing OK. I wouldnt have changed things at 10.
I've questioned Jones record on subbing before. It is the cause of intense frustration that he either leaves players on too long or drags them off early.
Ford has often been the victim of an early sub, rather than take off Farrell, Ford makes way.
On Saturday we had the nonsense of Nowell coming on in the 80th minute. This isnt the first time Jones makes a sub ridiculously late in a game (e.g Tom Dunn vs Italy). Meanwhile Randall is left kicking his heels while Youngs meanders through another less than scintillating display.
And not bringing on George when LCD is sinbinned was a questionable decision.
And its not "we" who get the decisions wrong, its I. Jones makes these calls.

Or...Smith wasn't playing that well. Ford wasn't a bad call at the time in fairness. That IS hindsight.
But the rest...yes.

Yes, the subbing of Smith really isn't that controversial, particularly since the coaches presumably have real time data on fitness and such? Perhaps Smith was beginning to tire. Putting a quality player like Ford on doesn't seem to be so absurd to me.

Also, isn't putting Nowell on a thing to ensure he gets his match fee? Wasn't that the thing with Dunn (?) At hooker a few years back. Makes one feel doubly for Randall, mind.

The Smith substitution seems to be fixated on as things turned after he went off but the substitution had no actual impact in the implosion that followed. LCD and then the litany of unnecessary forward penalties that followed weren't influenced by who was at 10.

All you could say was Ford's kick to touch late on wasn't good enough, and it wasn't, but Smith had kicked a similar one dead as well. Ford actually ran a nice move off that last scrum and sent a runner through a gap, unfortunately the backs didn't react and clear out properly so Scotland scrabbled the turnover.

It's the same problem as we've seen before, England forwards discipline isn't good enough. Errors under little or no pressure isn't really good enough. Itoje's blatant offside charge down giving Scotland an easy out, Dombrandt messing up a simple catch at the front of the lineout. Eddie's inability to fashion an attacking structure that makes the most of the players he has and his inability to select a balanced backline don't help but the forwards have got to stop stuffing up.

FKAS wrote:The Smith substitution seems to be fixated on as things turned after he went off but the substitution had no actual impact in the implosion that followed. LCD and then the litany of unnecessary forward penalties that followed weren't influenced by who was at 10.

All you could say was Ford's kick to touch late on wasn't good enough, and it wasn't, but Smith had kicked a similar one dead as well. Ford actually ran a nice move off that last scrum and sent a runner through a gap, unfortunately the backs didn't react and clear out properly so Scotland scrabbled the turnover.

It's the same problem as we've seen before, England forwards discipline isn't good enough. Errors under little or no pressure isn't really good enough. Itoje's blatant offside charge down giving Scotland an easy out, Dombrandt messing up a simple catch at the front of the lineout. Eddie's inability to fashion an attacking structure that makes the most of the players he has and his inability to select a balanced backline don't help but the forwards have got to stop stuffing up.

The issue was failing to score enough points when we dominated possession and territory, and soft wide defence.
I do agree discipline generally is a theme, but...

Banquo wrote: Or...Smith wasn't playing that well. Ford wasn't a bad call at the time in fairness. That IS hindsight.
But the rest...yes.

Come on, Banquo, were you shouting at the TV, "Take Smith off, 'cause he's not playing well"?

That's the point about hindsight, not what Ford did or did not do (f-all, frankly, but irrelevant).

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote: Or...Smith wasn't playing that well. Ford wasn't a bad call at the time in fairness. That IS hindsight.
But the rest...yes.

Come on, Banquo, were you shouting at the TV, "Take Smith off, 'cause he's not playing well"?

That's the point about hindsight, not what Ford did or did not do (f-all, frankly, but irrelevant).

Eh? That's not how tactical subs work. I might have been shouting that in the first half though. Ford is an excellent rugby player, it was not an unreasonable thing to do, to a player who'd been ok but no more.
If you think we lost the game cos Smith was yanked, I'm quite surprised.

FKAS wrote:The Smith substitution seems to be fixated on as things turned after he went off but the substitution had no actual impact in the implosion that followed.

That's not the point, IMO. It's about whether Jones's judgement is right or wrong. As regards Ford for Smith he was fundamentally wrong. His credibility in camp has to be rocky, at the very least. The players aren't in some sort of vacuum. They feel the hurt and the incompetence.

Oakboy wrote:

FKAS wrote:The Smith substitution seems to be fixated on as things turned after he went off but the substitution had no actual impact in the implosion that followed.

That's not the point, IMO. It's about whether Jones's judgement is right or wrong. As regards Ford for Smith he was fundamentally wrong. His credibility in camp has to be rocky, at the very least. The players aren't in some sort of vacuum. They feel the hurt and the incompetence.

Lol. 'the hurt'

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote: Or...Smith wasn't playing that well. Ford wasn't a bad call at the time in fairness. That IS hindsight.
But the rest...yes.

Come on, Banquo, were you shouting at the TV, "Take Smith off, 'cause he's not playing well"?

That's the point about hindsight, not what Ford did or did not do (f-all, frankly, but irrelevant).

Eh? That's not how tactical subs work. I might have been shouting that in the first half though. Ford is an excellent rugby player, it was not an unreasonable thing to do, to a player who'd been ok but no more.
If you think we lost the game cos Smith was yanked, I'm quite surprised.

Be frank, would you have hauled Smith off and, if so, when? I'm not arguing that he should or should not have been substituted necessarily, just totally rejecting Jones's point that anyone could only judge with hindsight.

I wouldn’t have been against seeing Smith do 80, he has been winning a lot of games in the final period recently, but Ford is class, in form and experienced. It wasn’t really a mad decision, and I agree probably not the deciding factor. At least he didn’t give him so negligible amount of time to try and make a difference.

I don’t think Smith was bad, but we seemed set up entirely for Slade to crash it up or get Daly on the outside arc so he can hoof it away. I simply don’t know what we were trying to do. It was a different kind of game but Ford came on and changed the feel entirely in that 38-38 game.

The Bowell thing was just stupid. I think the thing about match fees changed a while back. What does it mean as a “finisher” to not be needed until the 80th minute. I don’t get it. I’m just so bored of everything being about Jones and his “innovation”. Just pick people in the positions they play.

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:The Smith substitution seems to be fixated on as things turned after he went off but the substitution had no actual impact in the implosion that followed. LCD and then the litany of unnecessary forward penalties that followed weren't influenced by who was at 10.

All you could say was Ford's kick to touch late on wasn't good enough, and it wasn't, but Smith had kicked a similar one dead as well. Ford actually ran a nice move off that last scrum and sent a runner through a gap, unfortunately the backs didn't react and clear out properly so Scotland scrabbled the turnover.

It's the same problem as we've seen before, England forwards discipline isn't good enough. Errors under little or no pressure isn't really good enough. Itoje's blatant offside charge down giving Scotland an easy out, Dombrandt messing up a simple catch at the front of the lineout. Eddie's inability to fashion an attacking structure that makes the most of the players he has and his inability to select a balanced backline don't help but the forwards have got to stop stuffing up.

The issue was failing to score enough points when we dominated possession and territory, and soft wide defence.
I do agree discipline generally is a theme, but...

Aye see my final sentence re attack. We really offered little threat. Really struggle to understand why we decided to do away much of the attacking staples in the backs that worked in the Autumn.

Mikey Brown wrote:I wouldn’t have been against seeing Smith do 80, he has been winning a lot of games in the final period recently, but Ford is class, in form and experienced. It wasn’t really a mad decision, and I agree probably not the deciding factor. At least he didn’t give him so negligible amount of time to try and make a difference.

I don’t think Smith was bad, but we seemed set up entirely for Slade to crash it up or get Daly on the outside arc so he can hoof it away. I simply don’t know what we were trying to do. It was a different kind of game but Ford came on and changed the feel entirely in that 38-38 game.

The Bowell thing was just stupid. I think the thing about match fees changed a while back. What does it mean as a “finisher” to not be needed until the 80th minute. I don’t get it. I’m just so bored of everything being about Jones and his “innovation”. Just pick people in the positions they play.

MB, you say 'Ford is class'. Whether I agree with that or not matters little. The point is that Jones dumped Ford and brought him back under adverse circumstances as 2nd, 3rd, 4th (or worse) choice (Jones's choice!!!). His pre-conceived decision to bring him on for HIS 1st choice FH is now not debatable according to Jones because everyone else can only apply hindsight. I simply don't understand how Jones retains any credibility in that context.

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Come on, Banquo, were you shouting at the TV, "Take Smith off, 'cause he's not playing well"?

That's the point about hindsight, not what Ford did or did not do (f-all, frankly, but irrelevant).

Eh? That's not how tactical subs work. I might have been shouting that in the first half though. Ford is an excellent rugby player, it was not an unreasonable thing to do, to a player who'd been ok but no more.
If you think we lost the game cos Smith was yanked, I'm quite surprised.

Be frank, would you have hauled Smith off and, if so, when? I'm not arguing that he should or should not have been substituted necessarily, just totally rejecting Jones's point that anyone could only judge with hindsight.

I would have started Ford. I think taking Smith off at 60 was fine.

Oakboy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I wouldn’t have been against seeing Smith do 80, he has been winning a lot of games in the final period recently, but Ford is class, in form and experienced. It wasn’t really a mad decision, and I agree probably not the deciding factor. At least he didn’t give him so negligible amount of time to try and make a difference.

I don’t think Smith was bad, but we seemed set up entirely for Slade to crash it up or get Daly on the outside arc so he can hoof it away. I simply don’t know what we were trying to do. It was a different kind of game but Ford came on and changed the feel entirely in that 38-38 game.

The Bowell thing was just stupid. I think the thing about match fees changed a while back. What does it mean as a “finisher” to not be needed until the 80th minute. I don’t get it. I’m just so bored of everything being about Jones and his “innovation”. Just pick people in the positions they play.

MB, you say 'Ford is class'. Whether I agree with that or not matters little. The point is that Jones dumped Ford and brought him back under adverse circumstances as 2nd, 3rd, 4th (or worse) choice (Jones's choice!!!). His pre-conceived decision to bring him on for HIS 1st choice FH is now not debatable according to Jones because everyone else can only apply hindsight. I simply don't understand how Jones retains any credibility in that context.

Oh yeah, that’s fair enough. It’s only Jones’s bizarre take on things that means he repeatedly paints himself in to a corner, and then has to either backtrack (correct decision here to bring Ford back) or double-down on whatever exclusion or positional switch he currently fancies.

None of that really changes the situation on Saturday though. He had an experienced guy on the bench who has saved this situation before. I wasn’t particularly glad to see the change, I’m just more concerned by England not being good enough to make more of so much possession while having 2 fantastic 10s available.

FKAS wrote:

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:The Smith substitution seems to be fixated on as things turned after he went off but the substitution had no actual impact in the implosion that followed. LCD and then the litany of unnecessary forward penalties that followed weren't influenced by who was at 10.

All you could say was Ford's kick to touch late on wasn't good enough, and it wasn't, but Smith had kicked a similar one dead as well. Ford actually ran a nice move off that last scrum and sent a runner through a gap, unfortunately the backs didn't react and clear out properly so Scotland scrabbled the turnover.

It's the same problem as we've seen before, England forwards discipline isn't good enough. Errors under little or no pressure isn't really good enough. Itoje's blatant offside charge down giving Scotland an easy out, Dombrandt messing up a simple catch at the front of the lineout. Eddie's inability to fashion an attacking structure that makes the most of the players he has and his inability to select a balanced backline don't help but the forwards have got to stop stuffing up.

The issue was failing to score enough points when we dominated possession and territory, and soft wide defence.
I do agree discipline generally is a theme, but...

Aye see my final sentence re attack. We really offered little threat. Really struggle to understand why we decided to do away much of the attacking staples in the backs that worked in the Autumn.

Well, you seemed to be pushing at the the forwards, which unusually wasn't really the case. You've said this again about the autumn attack- v Oz, it was awful and worked v SA because we were forced into having two centres at centre and a standard back three doing standard stuff; again, on Saturday we tried two new combos at centre and back three and had some unfamiliar systems not using the strengths of eg and particularly Steward. IMO, whoever is running the backs is on acid.

Oakboy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:I wouldn’t have been against seeing Smith do 80, he has been winning a lot of games in the final period recently, but Ford is class, in form and experienced. It wasn’t really a mad decision, and I agree probably not the deciding factor. At least he didn’t give him so negligible amount of time to try and make a difference.

I don’t think Smith was bad, but we seemed set up entirely for Slade to crash it up or get Daly on the outside arc so he can hoof it away. I simply don’t know what we were trying to do. It was a different kind of game but Ford came on and changed the feel entirely in that 38-38 game.

The Bowell thing was just stupid. I think the thing about match fees changed a while back. What does it mean as a “finisher” to not be needed until the 80th minute. I don’t get it. I’m just so bored of everything being about Jones and his “innovation”. Just pick people in the positions they play.

MB, you say 'Ford is class'. Whether I agree with that or not matters little. The point is that Jones dumped Ford and brought him back under adverse circumstances as 2nd, 3rd, 4th (or worse) choice (Jones's choice!!!). His pre-conceived decision to bring him on for HIS 1st choice FH is now not debatable according to Jones because everyone else can only apply hindsight. I simply don't understand how Jones retains any credibility in that context.

You have NO idea whether pre-conceived or not. He brought him on at what would seem to be the optimum time for a class and experienced 10 to close out the game. That it didn't work is hindsight, and tbh not remotely down to the substitution- which is obviously an opinion.

If you want to criticise Jones there are far more verdant pastures, most of which I've already gone down

Oakboy wrote:
Come on, Banquo, were you shouting at the TV, "Take Smith off, 'cause he's not playing well"?

That's the point about hindsight, not what Ford did or did not do (f-all, frankly, but irrelevant).

With you on this Dors. A bollox of a substitution. All the talk of Smith not playing well and/or was knackered is fuelling credibility to the ‘master of the losing again interviewee’

Smith at 10 opposed to big boot Ford was not the problem that needed fixing

Joe Marler on the failed lineout.

“I’ve been practising every day. Cockers (forwards coach Richard Cockerill) has been giving me the eyes – ‘right, any danger this week mate?’. I was like ‘yes, OK, fine,” Marler said.

“I just didn’t throw it at the right time. I should have thrown it earlier at Dombrandt. Unfortunately I threw it later and he kept running past the five metres with the eyes of ‘mate, why are you not throwing the ball at me?’.

“And I went ‘I don’t know, I feel like Eminem in 8 Mile when he chokes on stage with his rap’. That’s how I’ve felt."

Also a take on Russell Vs Smith and yes the substitution gets mentioned.

p/d wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Come on, Banquo, were you shouting at the TV, "Take Smith off, 'cause he's not playing well"?

That's the point about hindsight, not what Ford did or did not do (f-all, frankly, but irrelevant).

With you on this Dors. A bollox of a substitution. All the talk of Smith not playing well and/or was knackered is fuelling credibility to the ‘master of the losing again interviewee’

Smith at 10 opposed to big boot Ford was not the problem that needed fixing

its about the least troubling call that EJ made, and not worth such a knicker twist from Eddies 'fan club'

FKAS wrote:Joe Marler on the failed lineout.

“I’ve been practising every day. Cockers (forwards coach Richard Cockerill) has been giving me the eyes – ‘right, any danger this week mate?’. I was like ‘yes, OK, fine,” Marler said.

“I just didn’t throw it at the right time. I should have thrown it earlier at Dombrandt. Unfortunately I threw it later and he kept running past the five metres with the eyes of ‘mate, why are you not throwing the ball at me?’.

“And I went ‘I don’t know, I feel like Eminem in 8 Mile when he chokes on stage with his rap’. That’s how I’ve felt."

That did make me smile.
However one bit not mentioned above is what throw in he and ‘Gengey’ had been nailing all week. Surely it wasn’t the one that took place?