RugbyRebels

Puja wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Knowing the esteem in which this board is held in Twickenham’s corridors of power, are they not one and the same thing.

Could be. So sack Jones if we lose all three? Could his credibility survive that (with us, the dressing room or the blazers)?

Possibly. But what happens if we win all three? Or win one by 50, lose one by 50, and draw the third? What happens if our tour leads to a revolution in South Africa that puts Pieter de Villiers in charge of the country? What happens then?

I can't believe we've got a thread asking "What happens if we get whitewashed?" before the team have even left the country. Have a little bit of faith people!

Puja

Puja, old friend, faith means always supporting the England rugby team. It does not mean excusing failure or incompetence. Both applied to the 6N. I cannot comment on the Barbarians game as I did not see it.

Now, we have a tour against a SA team that is not the best by their own historical standards. Faith in a decent coaching crew would result in a high expectation of winning all three games, especially in the run-up to a RWC. I doubt we will win all three and I would not want Jones to stay in the job if we lose all three. My minimum satisfaction level would be a 2-1 series win with performance indications of better to come. If it was not part of the RWC run-up I might tolerate a 1-2 defeat if the performances were good.

The faith or no-faith debate hinges on Jones winning matches. He offers nothing else. We do not play stylish rugby. He has done nothing about our basic problems - SH, IC, open-side etc.

About the only thing he has got right is picking Daly on the wing (and he had to read this board to get that message ).

Mellsblue wrote:

Puja wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Could be. So sack Jones if we lose all three? Could his credibility survive that (with us, the dressing room or the blazers)?

Possibly. But what happens if we win all three? Or win one by 50, lose one by 50, and draw the third? What happens if our tour leads to a revolution in South Africa that puts Pieter de Villiers in charge of the country? What happens then?

I can't believe we've got a thread asking "What happens if we get whitewashed?" before the team have even left the country. Have a little bit of faith people!

Puja

Is it even called a whitewash in SA?

I know little about labels but a colour wash relates to grey hair, doesn't it?

Oakboy wrote:

Puja wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Could be. So sack Jones if we lose all three? Could his credibility survive that (with us, the dressing room or the blazers)?

Possibly. But what happens if we win all three? Or win one by 50, lose one by 50, and draw the third? What happens if our tour leads to a revolution in South Africa that puts Pieter de Villiers in charge of the country? What happens then?

I can't believe we've got a thread asking "What happens if we get whitewashed?" before the team have even left the country. Have a little bit of faith people!

Puja

Puja, old friend, faith means always supporting the England rugby team. It does not mean excusing failure or incompetence. Both applied to the 6N. I cannot comment on the Barbarians game as I did not see it.

Now, we have a tour against a SA team that is not the best by their own historical standards. Faith in a decent coaching crew would result in a high expectation of winning all three games, especially in the run-up to a RWC. I doubt we will win all three and I would not want Jones to stay in the job if we lose all three. My minimum satisfaction level would be a 2-1 series win with performance indications of better to come. If it was not part of the RWC run-up I might tolerate a 1-2 defeat if the performances were good.

The faith or no-faith debate hinges on Jones winning matches. He offers nothing else. We do not play stylish rugby. He has done nothing about our basic problems - SH, IC, open-side etc.

About the only thing he has got right is picking Daly on the wing (and he had to read this board to get that message ).

I'm not writing off the 6N as anything close to okay - it went badly wrong. However, this is a new test window, with a fresh start, and the noises coming from the coaching staff are that they are aware they cocked up the 6N and want to make amends, which is promising.

I'm just amazed that one bad 6N and our default position has snapped back to, "What will the consequences be when we inevitably lose every game?"

Puja

Mellsblue wrote: Is it even called a whitewash in SA?

limey wash?

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Is it even called a whitewash in SA?

limey wash?

Zu lose?

Mellsblue wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Is it even called a whitewash in SA?

limey wash?

Zu lose?

Xhosa some good suggestions.

Puja

It would be a Rainbow Wash.

Can anyone find that thread from when Eddie was appointed where all the SH Rebellers told you he was good for two years then the wheels would come off?

Isn’t that every single thread since he signed up?

Ha. Maybe. I think I recall a post making some specific predictions about EJ losing the dressing room, making selections based on personality/pig-headedness rather than form etc. If I’m recalling correctly it would be interesting to revisit that.

Even with SA at a low ebb, we've gone a quare old way up in the world when we view the prospect of getting whitewashed in SA the Summer after a Lions tour with a callow squad as unacceptable. Remember when we were happy to get two losses and a draw from Lancaster's outing there? Truth told, we're not all that different in terms of player quality.

Which is why I'd suggest anything less than the team quitting on him is going to result in little activity other than a few muted statements of criticism from the powers that be should we get whitewashed. The media will be a bit more vocal, but will probably kick major criticisms down the road until after the autumn if that goes poorly.

Surely history has some lessons in regard to OP’s question

What happened after the tour whitewashes of 2014 (NZ), 2009 (ARG), 2008 (NZ), 2007 (SA), 2006 (AUS), 2004 (NZ & AUS), 1999 (AUS), 1998 (AUS, NZ & SA), 1997 (AUS), 1991 (AUS), 1988 (AUS), 1985 (NZ), 1984 (SA*), 1975 (AUS) and 1963 (NZ & AUS)?

*Shame on you, you rascists.

Liz, don’t you worry. MP pops in every now and then to remind us of the two year implosion predictions.

Mellsblue wrote:Liz, don’t you worry. MP pops in every now and then to remind us of the two year implosion predictions.

Ah, good. Nice to know someone is on to it.

Seriously, though. You’re whitewashed more often than not on your summer tours. I wouldn’t worry about it.

Peat wrote:Even with SA at a low ebb, we've gone a quare old way up in the world when we view the prospect of getting whitewashed in SA the Summer after a Lions tour with a callow squad as unacceptable. Remember when we were happy to get two losses and a draw from Lancaster's outing there? Truth told, we're not all that different in terms of player quality.

Which is why I'd suggest anything less than the team quitting on him is going to result in little activity other than a few muted statements of criticism from the powers that be should we get whitewashed. The media will be a bit more vocal, but will probably kick major criticisms down the road until after the autumn if that goes poorly.

The team quitting on Jones is an interesting thought in the light of another injury withdrawal (T'eo) and press talk of continued brutal training. Jones's approach on the back of a Lions-preceded hard season may be simply wrong. None of us know if we are not there but I assume that most of the journalists are quoting players in using words like 'brutal'. SA are a physical side but do the likes of the Vunipolas need violence-slanted training at this point? Billy did not even train before the AP final according to a report that I read.

Just my opinion, but looking at the quality and experience of the teams we put out in SAfrica last time, i’d suggest the starting 23’s this time round will be significantly better equipped to do well.

Oakboy wrote:

Peat wrote:Even with SA at a low ebb, we've gone a quare old way up in the world when we view the prospect of getting whitewashed in SA the Summer after a Lions tour with a callow squad as unacceptable. Remember when we were happy to get two losses and a draw from Lancaster's outing there? Truth told, we're not all that different in terms of player quality.

Which is why I'd suggest anything less than the team quitting on him is going to result in little activity other than a few muted statements of criticism from the powers that be should we get whitewashed. The media will be a bit more vocal, but will probably kick major criticisms down the road until after the autumn if that goes poorly.

The team quitting on Jones is an interesting thought in the light of another injury withdrawal (T'eo) and press talk of continued brutal training. Jones's approach on the back of a Lions-preceded hard season may be simply wrong. None of us know if we are not there but I assume that most of the journalists are quoting players in using words like 'brutal'. SA are a physical side but do the likes of the Vunipolas need violence-slanted training at this point? Billy did not even train before the AP final according to a report that I read.

The likelihood of them just quitting on him is really low and I don't really see enough evidence to justify speculating in that direction. At least at this point.

The likelihood of the team simply not being able to perform to the right level because their limbs are too heavy is a different matter though. I wanted players rested this year and I am worried it will come back to bite us in the arse.

Lizard wrote:Surely history has some lessons in regard to OP’s question

What happened after the tour whitewashes of 2014 (NZ), 2009 (ARG), 2008 (NZ), 2007 (SA), 2006 (AUS), 2004 (NZ & AUS), 1999 (AUS), 1998 (AUS, NZ & SA), 1997 (AUS), 1991 (AUS), 1988 (AUS), 1985 (NZ), 1984 (SA*), 1975 (AUS) and 1963 (NZ & AUS)?

*Shame on you, you rascists.

While it may appear as nit-picking, given the vast range of other fixtures, none of 2009, 1999, 1997. or 1991 were whitewashes (can't be bothered to look back further than that. 2009 was a loss and a draw and the other three were one-off tests.

So really it's just 2014, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2004, and 1998. Much better!

Puja

Mellsblue wrote:Liz, don’t you worry. MP pops in every now and then to remind us of the two year implosion predictions.

Ciao.

morepork wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Liz, don’t you worry. MP pops in every now and then to remind us of the two year implosion predictions.

Ciao.

Another question is, what if we win 3-0 in South Africa? Will there be a sudden volte-face from the doomsayers of the board, or will it be just a minor blip in Eddie's inexorable trajectory of doom?

Puja

Puja wrote:

morepork wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Liz, don’t you worry. MP pops in every now and then to remind us of the two year implosion predictions.

Ciao.

Another question is, what if we win 3-0 in South Africa? Will there be a sudden volte-face from the doomsayers of the board, or will it be just a minor blip in Eddie's inexorable trajectory of doom?

Puja

I'm not as set in my ways as Edward, so congratulations will be in order.

Puja wrote:

morepork wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Liz, don’t you worry. MP pops in every now and then to remind us of the two year implosion predictions.

Ciao.

Another question is, what if we win 3-0 in South Africa? Will there be a sudden volte-face from the doomsayers of the board, or will it be just a minor blip in Eddie's inexorable trajectory of doom?

Puja

The point of the thread was to debate what might happen IF we lost all three in SA.

I am genuinely concerned that it may happen, but as I also said, I think a lot depends on the performances.

I’m not a ‘doom sayer’, I was just asking ‘what if’ which I think is perfectly valid after an awful 6 Nations and a Barbarians game where we conceded more than 60 points.

If we win 3-0 with three excellent performances, I’ll be delighted.

Puja wrote:

Lizard wrote:Surely history has some lessons in regard to OP’s question

What happened after the tour whitewashes of 2014 (NZ), 2009 (ARG), 2008 (NZ), 2007 (SA), 2006 (AUS), 2004 (NZ & AUS), 1999 (AUS), 1998 (AUS, NZ & SA), 1997 (AUS), 1991 (AUS), 1988 (AUS), 1985 (NZ), 1984 (SA*), 1975 (AUS) and 1963 (NZ & AUS)?

*Shame on you, you rascists.

While it may appear as nit-picking, given the vast range of other fixtures, none of 2009, 1999, 1997. or 1991 were whitewashes (can't be bothered to look back further than that. 2009 was a loss and a draw and the other three were one-off tests.

So really it's just 2014, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2004, and 1998. Much better!

Puja

If we’re nitpicking, in June 2009 England played Argentina home (winning at Manchester) and away. Only the latter can be considered a tour match and England lost it.

If you don’t categorise losing a one-off as a “whitewash” then fair enough, I guess. There’s a more nuanced break down on the stats thread.

A whitewash will give the media all the ammo they need to start an 'Eddie must go' campaign.

We've been dreadful of late. Leaked points, chasing games, injuries, poor home form, poor away form, missed tackles, lack of attack...

The bubble will have certainly burst and you know the press will intensify their attacks. There's nothing they would love more than the RFU needing to replace the head coach so close to the RWC.

Tbh, I'm struggling to see positives for the 3 tests against SA. The first 2 tests are at altitude so that will count against us and the 3rd test could be about saving face or capitulating.

I suppose we'll see what kinda form SA are in against Wales...but we've already seen where we're at and what we're unable to do, so we're kinda boned already.

Puja wrote:

morepork wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Liz, don’t you worry. MP pops in every now and then to remind us of the two year implosion predictions.

Ciao.

Another question is, what if we win 3-0 in South Africa? Will there be a sudden volte-face from the doomsayers of the board, or will it be just a minor blip in Eddie's inexorable trajectory of doom?

Puja

That would be amazing!

SA aren't exactly the force they once were at the momet, so it's not out of the question but I just can't get over out form.

We have been poor.

Rumour has it, we have no attack coach and a defence coach who is on his way out.

Never would've guessed that would be the case

WaspInWales wrote:A whitewash will give the media all the ammo they need to start an 'Eddie must go' campaign.

We've been dreadful of late. Leaked points, chasing games, injuries, poor home form, poor away form, missed tackles, lack of attack...

The bubble will have certainly burst and you know the press will intensify their attacks. There's nothing they would love more than the RFU needing to replace the head coach so close to the RWC.

Tbh, I'm struggling to see positives for the 3 tests against SA. The first 2 tests are at altitude so that will count against us and the 3rd test could be about saving face or capitulating.

I suppose we'll see what kinda form SA are in against Wales...but we've already seen where we're at and what we're unable to do, so we're kinda boned already.

This assumes they get any column inches with which to do so what with the World Cup, French Open, England vs Australia ODIs, US Open, build up tournaments to Wimbledon, F1 and so on. June's a good month to bury bad sporting news and by the time the rugby journalists get pride of place back, it'll be the autumn and I think they'll keep their powder dry until they see how the next window goes.