RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

fivepointer wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... ix-nations

Kitson has lost faith in Jones and i'm sure there are others in the media who would agree.

I think he's safe for now. The RFU arent going for the nuclear option just yet but what happens if we get badly beaten by Australia in the summer?

I seem to recall Jones spouting off about it being a test if we looked at the three matches remaining in KO terms. He barely scraped through the QF and lost in the SF to fail dismally in the challenge that HE set for HIS team. Maybe, the blazers are still drunk on the waves of emotion at Twickenham with the crowd getting behind the heroic 14.

Out of interest, why do you keep calling the leaders at Twickenham 'blazers'- they are the polar opposite of the folks who used to run the RFU pre pro era.

Are they? Not from any dealings I have been involved in with them. Still backward thinking, not caring about grass roots despite propaganda, inconsistent and devoid of all logic (as can be seen with the promotion debacle) as if they applied logic they would have to lose face. I have no faith in them at all and the 57 old farts synonym still resonates i'm afraid.

Oakboy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

fivepointer wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... ix-nations

Kitson has lost faith in Jones and i'm sure there are others in the media who would agree.

I think he's safe for now. The RFU arent going for the nuclear option just yet but what happens if we get badly beaten by Australia in the summer?

Jesus, that guy is in to his cringey word play isn’t he?

Even Australia might think they can beat us? Wow. Didn’t they beat SA and NZ last year?

Even we beat SA! Shame about Scotland, Ireland and France. What do you think would be a reasonable return from three matches against Australia? Just asking.

Like others have said we have no idea how close to full strength either squad will be.

I just always find the idea England have this divine right to be a top 3 team kind of embarrassing. We should be making more of our resources, definitely, but it’s still just sport and we can’t field any more players than they can.

It was the “even Australia” bit that I found grating. We should aim to win, but I have no trouble at all seeing why everybody fucking hates us.

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

fivepointer wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... ix-nations

Kitson has lost faith in Jones and i'm sure there are others in the media who would agree.

I think he's safe for now. The RFU arent going for the nuclear option just yet but what happens if we get badly beaten by Australia in the summer?

I seem to recall Jones spouting off about it being a test if we looked at the three matches remaining in KO terms. He barely scraped through the QF and lost in the SF to fail dismally in the challenge that HE set for HIS team. Maybe, the blazers are still drunk on the waves of emotion at Twickenham with the crowd getting behind the heroic 14.

Out of interest, why do you keep calling the leaders at Twickenham 'blazers'- they are the polar opposite of the folks who used to run the RFU pre pro era.

Pure laziness in that it's shorter to type than RFU Board Members and Senior Management or whatever is the correct expression. I suppose the word 'blazers' implies some contempt and I admit feeling in that direction because they are out of line with most supporters about many things, their assessment of Jones pretty high on the list!

p/d wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
I seem to recall Jones spouting off about it being a test if we looked at the three matches remaining in KO terms. He barely scraped through the QF and lost in the SF to fail dismally in the challenge that HE set for HIS team. Maybe, the blazers are still drunk on the waves of emotion at Twickenham with the crowd getting behind the heroic 14.

Out of interest, why do you keep calling the leaders at Twickenham 'blazers'- they are the polar opposite of the folks who used to run the RFU pre pro era.

Squash, racketball, pipe smoker, thick cord - smart & casual - Dors is a man of discerning taste. Not one to deem trackies a suitable modern day alternative to an Austin Reed ensemble

I've never smoked!

Mikey Brown wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:
Jesus, that guy is in to his cringey word play isn’t he?

Even Australia might think they can beat us? Wow. Didn’t they beat SA and NZ last year?

Even we beat SA! Shame about Scotland, Ireland and France. What do you think would be a reasonable return from three matches against Australia? Just asking.

Like others have said we have no idea how close to full strength either squad will be.

I just always find the idea England have this divine right to be a top 3 team kind of embarrassing. We should be making more of our resources, definitely, but it’s still just sport and we can’t field any more players than they can.

It was the “even Australia” bit that I found grating. We should aim to win, but I have no trouble at all seeing why everybody fucking hates us.

Fair enough. Don't disagree with any of that. What really bothers ME is that Jones appears to have no targets or measures publicly laid down. How is success/failure being assessed? The RFU seem not to consider a 40% win capacity in two successive 6Ns as failure. So what does that leave? Jones reached the last RWC final. Is that the only guideline? If so, improvement is defined as winning it. That has to be the ultimate arrogance - far above anything expressed by punditry or the fans.

The Rugby Football Union's claim that England made "solid progress" during the Six Nations is "dishonest", says former wing Ugo Monye.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/60815649

Oakboy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Even we beat SA! Shame about Scotland, Ireland and France. What do you think would be a reasonable return from three matches against Australia? Just asking.

Like others have said we have no idea how close to full strength either squad will be.

I just always find the idea England have this divine right to be a top 3 team kind of embarrassing. We should be making more of our resources, definitely, but it’s still just sport and we can’t field any more players than they can.

It was the “even Australia” bit that I found grating. We should aim to win, but I have no trouble at all seeing why everybody fucking hates us.

Fair enough. Don't disagree with any of that. What really bothers ME is that Jones appears to have no targets or measures publicly laid down. How is success/failure being assessed? The RFU seem not to consider a 40% win capacity in two successive 6Ns as failure. So what does that leave? Jones reached the last RWC final. Is that the only guideline? If so, improvement is defined as winning it. That has to be the ultimate arrogance - far above anything expressed by punditry or the fans.

Yeah, the "look how unbelievably shit we were in 2018 and still got to the final in 2019" line has been doing a lot of work for Jones in the last couple of years. I've flip-flopped on it, but being honest it's probably kept him in the job.

Just started watching this and got as far as him saying we're 3% away from clicking. And no, my optimism from Friday about everything falling in to place did not survive the weekend.

Eddie Jones said he wanted to unleash an expansive and attacking brand of rugby,"

Makes me chuckle every time.. if it wasn’t for Wales on Saturday stealing Jones’ thunder

I think we missed Ewels

p/d wrote:I think we missed Ewels

Agreed, but who do you blame?

Mellsblue wrote:

p/d wrote:I think we missed Ewels

Agreed, but who do you blame?

Well, it goes without saying really
.
.
.
Smith

Mellsblue wrote:

twitchy wrote: In this cycle, England just do not have the same talent as other teams do. When you look at the current crop of available England players, can you honestly say you can select a different starting squad of sufficiently talented, experienced, in-form and fit players who would be the equal of the French and potential world-beaters?

A) Has anyone ever seen Moore and Banquo in the same room?
B) Moore is spot on with that entire piece, I’d suggest.

While I don’t disagree, I’d argue that no-one else in the NH is on par with the French at the moment. They really do seem to have an amazing reservoir of top class talent as well as being tactically excellent.

Ireland have the potential to be very good and are reaping the rewards of a hugely successful Leinster academy, but they’re still a way off the French IMO.

Mikey Brown wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:
Jesus, that guy is in to his cringey word play isn’t he?

Even Australia might think they can beat us? Wow. Didn’t they beat SA and NZ last year?

Even we beat SA! Shame about Scotland, Ireland and France. What do you think would be a reasonable return from three matches against Australia? Just asking.

Like others have said we have no idea how close to full strength either squad will be.

I just always find the idea England have this divine right to be a top 3 team kind of embarrassing. We should be making more of our resources, definitely, but it’s still just sport and we can’t field any more players than they can.

It was the “even Australia” bit that I found grating. We should aim to win, but I have no trouble at all seeing why everybody fucking hates us.

Very well said Mikey. That’s very much my line of thinking.

The whole ‘player resources’ thing is overblown IMO and if anything only really guarantees volume, not quality.

Again, I agree that we absolutely should be making more of the players we have than we are, but we still can’t legislate for what other teams have available to them.

I’m with Ugo Monye. It is ‘dishonest’ to say we’re making progress when any idiot can see we’re not. If we’d had exactly the same results but played significantly better and shown obvious signs of things coming together, I could just about buy it, but when my eyes tell me something very different, no amount of window-dressing is going to change it.

Mikey Brown wrote:

fivepointer wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... ix-nations

Kitson has lost faith in Jones and i'm sure there are others in the media who would agree.

I think he's safe for now. The RFU arent going for the nuclear option just yet but what happens if we get badly beaten by Australia in the summer?

Jesus, that guy is in to his cringey word play isn’t he?

Even Australia might think they can beat us? Wow. Didn’t they beat SA and NZ last year?

To be honest, the make up of the increasing number of Jones critics (e.g. Kitson) actually makes me more disposed to retain him. I don't like agreeing with the lazy fools who "write" about rugby.

Scrumhead wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

twitchy wrote: In this cycle, England just do not have the same talent as other teams do. When you look at the current crop of available England players, can you honestly say you can select a different starting squad of sufficiently talented, experienced, in-form and fit players who would be the equal of the French and potential world-beaters?

A) Has anyone ever seen Moore and Banquo in the same room?
B) Moore is spot on with that entire piece, I’d suggest.

While I don’t disagree, I’d argue that no-one else in the NH is on par with the French at the moment. They really do seem to have an amazing reservoir of top class talent as well as being tactically excellent.

Ireland have the potential to be very good and are reaping the rewards of a hugely successful Leinster academy, but they’re still a way off the French IMO.

Mikey Brown wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Even we beat SA! Shame about Scotland, Ireland and France. What do you think would be a reasonable return from three matches against Australia? Just asking.

Like others have said we have no idea how close to full strength either squad will be.

I just always find the idea England have this divine right to be a top 3 team kind of embarrassing. We should be making more of our resources, definitely, but it’s still just sport and we can’t field any more players than they can.

It was the “even Australia” bit that I found grating. We should aim to win, but I have no trouble at all seeing why everybody fucking hates us.

Very well said Mikey. That’s very much my line of thinking.

The whole ‘player resources’ thing is overblown IMO and if anything only really guarantees volume, not quality.

Again, I agree that we absolutely should be making more of the players we have than we are, but we still can’t legislate for what other teams have available to them.

I’m with Ugo Monye. It is ‘dishonest’ to say we’re making progress when any idiot can see we’re not. If we’d had exactly the same results but played significantly better and shown obvious signs of things coming together, I could just about buy it, but when my eyes tell me something very different, no amount of window-dressing is going to change it.

Of course it's dishonest, but so is the idea that Jones really has to say to anything meaningful at press conferences.

I started to think about which of the players it could be said that Jones has really got to the point of playing at their best.

Genge, maybe, and Lawes. Then who? Curry and Underhill perhaps but both have suffered from the forwards' collective discipline issues. Itoje has even had disappointing games amongst some phenomenal efforts. LCD has had discipline issues. Sinckler has been inconsistent. Dombrandt and Simmonds have been messed about. Ewels is not worth mentioning and George was recalled having been dumped.

In unit terms, the front row has disappointed. The second row has been disrupted by injury and selecting Ewels. The back row has been a selection muddle.

The forwards as a whole have been poor.

The backs? Marchant has had a couple of good games in between being royally buggered about. Steward has done well despite the stupid move v France. Malins has run out of steam. Daly does not know where he should play. Slade has done OK but has suffered with inconsistent selection outside him. The same with Smith. Randall and Youngs may need replacing.

Try as I might, I simply can't find the wonderful progress reported, not in any part of the team. Genge has improved. Curry is solid. Itoje is class. But, real progress?

Gloskarlos wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
I seem to recall Jones spouting off about it being a test if we looked at the three matches remaining in KO terms. He barely scraped through the QF and lost in the SF to fail dismally in the challenge that HE set for HIS team. Maybe, the blazers are still drunk on the waves of emotion at Twickenham with the crowd getting behind the heroic 14.

Out of interest, why do you keep calling the leaders at Twickenham 'blazers'- they are the polar opposite of the folks who used to run the RFU pre pro era.

Are they? Not from any dealings I have been involved in with them. Still backward thinking, not caring about grass roots despite propaganda, inconsistent and devoid of all logic (as can be seen with the promotion debacle) as if they applied logic they would have to lose face. I have no faith in them at all and the 57 old farts synonym still resonates i'm afraid.

Is this those who run the pro game/england set up? I suspect we are talking two different bits of the RFU?

Oakboy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
I seem to recall Jones spouting off about it being a test if we looked at the three matches remaining in KO terms. He barely scraped through the QF and lost in the SF to fail dismally in the challenge that HE set for HIS team. Maybe, the blazers are still drunk on the waves of emotion at Twickenham with the crowd getting behind the heroic 14.

Out of interest, why do you keep calling the leaders at Twickenham 'blazers'- they are the polar opposite of the folks who used to run the RFU pre pro era.

Pure laziness in that it's shorter to type than RFU Board Members and Senior Management or whatever is the correct expression. I suppose the word 'blazers' implies some contempt and I admit feeling in that direction because they are out of line with most supporters about many things, their assessment of Jones pretty high on the list!

Ah ok- in my ,mind the blazers are the old county buffers- who in fairness did it all for nothing other than self aggrandisement and some good hospitality, vs the professional RFU employees.

Mellsblue wrote:

twitchy wrote: In this cycle, England just do not have the same talent as other teams do. When you look at the current crop of available England players, can you honestly say you can select a different starting squad of sufficiently talented, experienced, in-form and fit players who would be the equal of the French and potential world-beaters?

A) Has anyone ever seen Moore and Banquo in the same room?
B) Moore is spot on with that entire piece, I’d suggest.

It has been mentioned that I look like him....and had the same (now unrepeatable) nick name at uni.

Banquo wrote:

Gloskarlos wrote:

Banquo wrote: Out of interest, why do you keep calling the leaders at Twickenham 'blazers'- they are the polar opposite of the folks who used to run the RFU pre pro era.

Are they? Not from any dealings I have been involved in with them. Still backward thinking, not caring about grass roots despite propaganda, inconsistent and devoid of all logic (as can be seen with the promotion debacle) as if they applied logic they would have to lose face. I have no faith in them at all and the 57 old farts synonym still resonates i'm afraid.

Is this those who run the pro game/england set up? I suspect we are talking two different bits of the RFU?

potentially - I'm not sure at which level the split is - if there is indeed a split. According to my sources the group of people I am livid with are right at the top of HQ at Twickenham. I had imagined they would have fingers in most pies.

Gloskarlos wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Gloskarlos wrote:
Are they? Not from any dealings I have been involved in with them. Still backward thinking, not caring about grass roots despite propaganda, inconsistent and devoid of all logic (as can be seen with the promotion debacle) as if they applied logic they would have to lose face. I have no faith in them at all and the 57 old farts synonym still resonates i'm afraid.

Is this those who run the pro game/england set up? I suspect we are talking two different bits of the RFU?

potentially - I'm not sure at which level the split is - if there is indeed a split. According to my sources the group of people I am livid with are right at the top of HQ at Twickenham. I had imagined they would have fingers in most pies.

Will have a look- the blazers are still part of the RFU, but they don't get involved in the pro game as far as I can tell.....but then they do get the trickle down cash from the Pro/intl game.

successful international teams are built on successful domestic teams. Do we have particularly successful domestic teams atm?

badback wrote:successful international teams are built on successful domestic teams. Do we have particularly successful domestic teams atm?

My impression is that England success often seems to coincide with success at Heineken cup level. The year Exeter won it strikes me as the exception, but that was very COVID affected. It'd be interesting (hint hint) to see what correlation there is over the years.

An article on exactly this point - https://www.rugbypass.com/news/why-engl ... ince-2020/

It’s a very good point. When Sarries were breaching the salary cap at least they had the good grace to provide England with a quality spine of winners.

On which note, Leicester gave us Ben Youngs and a past it Dan Cole.

Mellsblue wrote:It’s a very good point. When Sarries were breaching the salary cap at least they had the good grace to provide England with a quality spine of winners.

On which note, Leicester gave us Ben Youngs and a past it Dan Cole.

Pfft I'd still take Dan Cole over Will Stuart every day of the week.