RugbyRebels

Spiffy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:Oh come on! Fitness is far more complicated than how big you are! It's far more complicated than how much fat you're carrying too.
Having said that, I think maybe the fitness and discipline were linked innthe 6N. The aerobic fitness needed to play the quick recycle game as we were attempting is ridiculously high. And with partial lockdown/less time with the players etc, maybe we just didn't get up to the levels required. There's then, of course, the knock on effects on decision making, which was the main problem with the pens.

I don’t agree on the pens tbh. The most glaring penalty strings were early in the games v both Wales and Scotland (albeit with shockers from the subs late on v Wales). I simply can’t explain our stupidity tbh- I agree it was poor ‘decision making’ but can’t put a lot down to being knackered.

On the fitness front, we weren’t prepared for the game we aspired to play I’d suggest-partly rust from a good chunk of the team possibly, but you probably need a long term schedule inked in too....which as Digby alludes to is a challenge.

Perhaps England were not fit enough to play the game they wanted to play. There are two obvious solutions to this. Get them fit enough or adopt another, less taxing, game plan that they can handle. Either way, this is a coaching call and if there was not enough time to get them fit, (Sarries contingent etc) Jones bears the decision to go the route he did and play the style they played, when they were not up to it.
In the bigger picture, any international team should be as fit as they can possibly be any time they take the field, irrespective of game plan, and should not run out of puff. That would not be an acceptable reason for losing. If some players are not fit, just drop them and replace with fitter ones until they shape up. I would not really see this as a challenge just a basic component of coaching.

Oakboy wrote:Conceding loads of penalties is what - a technical issue, an organisational issue, an on-field leadership issue, a fitness issue, an individual issue (i.e. a selection issue)?

OK, I am fanatically anti-Jones (allegedly) but how the hell can it be anyone else's fault than his?

He selects the team and his coaching crew. The training routine is his. He appoints the captain and dictates the strategy and tactics. He sends the messages with the water boys, does the HT team talk and determines the replacement schedule. Etc. Etc.

What part of his responsibility are we (you) trying to unload? The buck stops with him!

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:

Spiffy wrote:
Perhaps England were not fit enough to play the game they wanted to play. There are two obvious solutions to this. Get them fit enough or adopt another, less taxing, game plan that they can handle. Either way, this is a coaching call and if there was not enough time to get them fit, (Sarries contingent etc) Jones bears the decision to go the route he did and play the style they played, when they were not up to it.

So, only ever play a gameplan your players can cope with immediately. Never try to push the boundaries or improve anything. Don't have a long term plan.
Sounds like pretty shoddy coaching to me. Not to mention exactly what we have been complaining about for years when England win ugly, kick the leather off it etc.
I'm not an Eddie fanboy by any means, I'm just with Digby and Puja in A) thinking that the 6N is, especially with Covid, the best place to experiment under pressured circumstances. B) not thinking the 6N is a tournament that I want to win anywhere near as much as the World Cup. C) Give Eddie a lot of credit for getting us to a World Cup final + having the best record of any England coach ever. D) Feel like the attacking structure that's being put in place (alongside a sensible territorial tactical kicking game) has pretty exciting potential. E) Have a fair bit of faith in Eddie understanding how to get the players to their peak for when it's really important - the World Cup.
I was very pissed off after the Ireland game as we seemed to just revert to playing really stupid rugby, including the pens. And you're all probably right about them not being fitness related, I'm just clutching at straws to explain the inexplicable. Also, defence was alright, but nowhere near as good as it has been, even since the World Cup. But I'm more than willing to go along with the plan at the moment. Especially with nothing better waiting in the wings.

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Conceding loads of penalties is what - a technical issue, an organisational issue, an on-field leadership issue, a fitness issue, an individual issue (i.e. a selection issue)?

OK, I am fanatically anti-Jones (allegedly) but how the hell can it be anyone else's fault than his?

He selects the team and his coaching crew. The training routine is his. He appoints the captain and dictates the strategy and tactics. He sends the messages with the water boys, does the HT team talk and determines the replacement schedule. Etc. Etc.

What part of his responsibility are we (you) trying to unload? The buck stops with him!

How is it an 'insult' to the clubs was the question?

I agree on the accountability. And you are a tad fanatical on this.

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Conceding loads of penalties is what - a technical issue, an organisational issue, an on-field leadership issue, a fitness issue, an individual issue (i.e. a selection issue)?

OK, I am fanatically anti-Jones (allegedly) but how the hell can it be anyone else's fault than his?

He selects the team and his coaching crew. The training routine is his. He appoints the captain and dictates the strategy and tactics. He sends the messages with the water boys, does the HT team talk and determines the replacement schedule. Etc. Etc.

What part of his responsibility are we (you) trying to unload? The buck stops with him!

How is it an 'insult' to the clubs was the question?

I agree on the accountability. And you are a tad fanatical on this.

The insult bit was a suggestion that a two week England camp might do more for a player's fitness than a club's all-season regime.

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:So, only ever play a gameplan your players can cope with immediately. Never try to push the boundaries or improve anything. Don't have a long term plan.
Sounds like pretty shoddy coaching to me. Not to mention exactly what we have been complaining about for years when England win ugly, kick the leather off it etc.
I'm not an Eddie fanboy by any means, I'm just with Digby and Puja in A) thinking that the 6N is, especially with Covid, the best place to experiment under pressured circumstances. B) not thinking the 6N is a tournament that I want to win anywhere near as much as the World Cup. C) Give Eddie a lot of credit for getting us to a World Cup final + having the best record of any England coach ever. D) Feel like the attacking structure that's being put in place (alongside a sensible territorial tactical kicking game) has pretty exciting potential. E) Have a fair bit of faith in Eddie understanding how to get the players to their peak for when it's really important - the World Cup.
I was very pissed off after the Ireland game as we seemed to just revert to playing really stupid rugby, including the pens. And you're all probably right about them not being fitness related, I'm just clutching at straws to explain the inexplicable. Also, defence was alright, but nowhere near as good as it has been, even since the World Cup. But I'm more than willing to go along with the plan at the moment. Especially with nothing better waiting in the wings.

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Conceding loads of penalties is what - a technical issue, an organisational issue, an on-field leadership issue, a fitness issue, an individual issue (i.e. a selection issue)?

OK, I am fanatically anti-Jones (allegedly) but how the hell can it be anyone else's fault than his?

He selects the team and his coaching crew. The training routine is his. He appoints the captain and dictates the strategy and tactics. He sends the messages with the water boys, does the HT team talk and determines the replacement schedule. Etc. Etc.

What part of his responsibility are we (you) trying to unload? The buck stops with him!

How is it an 'insult' to the clubs was the question?

I agree on the accountability. And you are a tad fanatical on this.

The insult bit was a suggestion that a two week England camp might do more for a player's fitness than a club's all-season regime.

Dan. Dan. Dan. wrote:

Spiffy wrote:
Perhaps England were not fit enough to play the game they wanted to play. There are two obvious solutions to this. Get them fit enough or adopt another, less taxing, game plan that they can handle. Either way, this is a coaching call and if there was not enough time to get them fit, (Sarries contingent etc) Jones bears the decision to go the route he did and play the style they played, when they were not up to it.

So, only ever play a gameplan your players can cope with immediately. Never try to push the boundaries or improve anything. Don't have a long term plan.
Sounds like pretty shoddy coaching to me. Not to mention exactly what we have been complaining about for years when England win ugly, kick the leather off it etc.
I'm not an Eddie fanboy by any means, I'm just with Digby and Puja in A) thinking that the 6N is, especially with Covid, the best place to experiment under pressured circumstances. B) not thinking the 6N is a tournament that I want to win anywhere near as much as the World Cup. C) Give Eddie a lot of credit for getting us to a World Cup final + having the best record of any England coach ever. D) Feel like the attacking structure that's being put in place (alongside a sensible territorial tactical kicking game) has pretty exciting potential. E) Have a fair bit of faith in Eddie understanding how to get the players to their peak for when it's really important - the World Cup.
I was very pissed off after the Ireland game as we seemed to just revert to playing really stupid rugby, including the pens. And you're all probably right about them not being fitness related, I'm just clutching at straws to explain the inexplicable. Also, defence was alright, but nowhere near as good as it has been, even since the World Cup. But I'm more than willing to go along with the plan at the moment. Especially with nothing better waiting in the wings.

Raggs wrote:Seeing a rumour that Eddie wanted Amor gone after the second game in the 6N. It was after that we started to really play fast right?

Oakboy wrote:

Raggs wrote:Seeing a rumour that Eddie wanted Amor gone after the second game in the 6N. It was after that we started to really play fast right?

Sorry, do you mean that Jones wanted us to play fast but Amor didn't or vice-versa?

Raggs wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Raggs wrote:Seeing a rumour that Eddie wanted Amor gone after the second game in the 6N. It was after that we started to really play fast right?

Sorry, do you mean that Jones wanted us to play fast but Amor didn't or vice-versa?

I mean Eddie wanted him gone after 2 games, and I'd guess at that point, started calling the shots in attack completely, it's also when we really started to play fast in my memory.

Oakboy wrote:What's the longest any of the coaches have lasted? There seems to have been quite a turnover.

Tigersman wrote:

Oakboy wrote:What's the longest any of the coaches have lasted? There seems to have been quite a turnover.

Borthwick - 5 years went to Leicester Tigers Head Coach role
Hatley - 4 years went to Bath Head Coach role
Mitchell - 3 years still in coaching team
Gustard - 2 years went to Quins head coach role
Teague - 1 year went to Bordeaux-Begles skills coach (Ended up head coach after a year)

Eddie has had multiple skills coaches but don't feel personally like I would consider it a main role. (Like kicking coaches etc)

Oakboy wrote:

Tigersman wrote:

Oakboy wrote:What's the longest any of the coaches have lasted? There seems to have been quite a turnover.

Borthwick - 5 years went to Leicester Tigers Head Coach role
Hatley - 4 years went to Bath Head Coach role
Mitchell - 3 years still in coaching team
Gustard - 2 years went to Quins head coach role
Teague - 1 year went to Bordeaux-Begles skills coach (Ended up head coach after a year)

Eddie has had multiple skills coaches but don't feel personally like I would consider it a main role. (Like kicking coaches etc)

Thanks, that's a fair list. Apart from, maybe, Mitchell, would you describe any of them as top-flight? Is that Jones's big issue?

Raggs wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Raggs wrote:Seeing a rumour that Eddie wanted Amor gone after the second game in the 6N. It was after that we started to really play fast right?

Sorry, do you mean that Jones wanted us to play fast but Amor didn't or vice-versa?

I mean Eddie wanted him gone after 2 games, and I'd guess at that point, started calling the shots in attack completely, it's also when we really started to play fast in my memory.

Oakboy wrote:

Tigersman wrote:

Oakboy wrote:What's the longest any of the coaches have lasted? There seems to have been quite a turnover.

Borthwick - 5 years went to Leicester Tigers Head Coach role
Hatley - 4 years went to Bath Head Coach role
Mitchell - 3 years still in coaching team
Gustard - 2 years went to Quins head coach role
Teague - 1 year went to Bordeaux-Begles skills coach (Ended up head coach after a year)

Eddie has had multiple skills coaches but don't feel personally like I would consider it a main role. (Like kicking coaches etc)

Thanks, that's a fair list. Apart from, maybe, Mitchell, would you describe any of them as top-flight? Is that Jones's big issue?