Team news for Ireland.

[Puja]

Jones just seems to me quite prescriptive. A lot of the more successful, or if we’re being realistic, moderately successful coaches are. But I feel as if we need, as a whole, a change to more heads up rugby. English rugby has seriously skilled up in recent years and we need to make use of that.

Has English rugby seriously skilled up? In what way? Is that a thing to do with the england team of general league approach?

And why do you think Jones is prescriptive? From everything I hear he is the antithesis of that but has a workforce of players who are largely coached prescriptive rugby.

I remember around, maybe 2006-ish, we scored a try against France and it was through Danny Grewcock offloading out of a tackle. People raved about it being great skill from a lock. It was the only offload we did the whole game.

We certainly expect much more dynamic and skillful play from our forwards than we used to and generally we get it.

Puja

[jngf]

Jones just seems to me quite prescriptive. A lot of the more successful, or if we’re being realistic, moderately successful coaches are. But I feel as if we need, as a whole, a change to more heads up rugby. English rugby has seriously skilled up in recent years and we need to make use of that.

Has English rugby seriously skilled up? In what way? Is that a thing to do with the england team of general league approach?

And why do you think Jones is prescriptive? From everything I hear he is the antithesis of that but has a workforce of players who are largely coached prescriptive rugby.

I remember around, maybe 2006-ish, we scored a try against France and it was through Danny Grewcock offloading out of a tackle. People raved about it being great skill from a lock. It was the only offload we did the whole game.

We certainly expect much more dynamic and skillful play from our forwards than we used to and generally we get it.

Puja

To be fair 2006 was not a vintage season for English rugby and we were relying on a lot of the 2nd XV from the SCW era.

[Stom]

Jones just seems to me quite prescriptive. A lot of the more successful, or if we’re being realistic, moderately successful coaches are. But I feel as if we need, as a whole, a change to more heads up rugby. English rugby has seriously skilled up in recent years and we need to make use of that.

Has English rugby seriously skilled up? In what way? Is that a thing to do with the england team of general league approach?

And why do you think Jones is prescriptive? From everything I hear he is the antithesis of that but has a workforce of players who are largely coached prescriptive rugby.

The standard of play in the u20s is exceptionally high from what I remember when I was that age. We produce a lot of forwards who can handle the ball effectively.

As for the prescriptive play, it's apparent in the way we play. We only play off set plays. Yes, there is some flexibility in how those plays can be executed, but it's very structured.

That's the way of most modern rugby, though. I don't like it, because it leads to poor spectacle for too much of the game. He's not the worst offender, but he definitely likes to have control over his team's play. Considerable control.

[Oakboy]

Could not do what? Get us into the final of a world cup, and on the way, beating the ABs in pretty much the most dominant performance against them that has been seen in some time?

It's not like he got knocked out in the quarters or something.

So, by definition, losing is OK because we were magnificent against NZ? You might be happy being second best but I think we should aim to be the best. When it mattered, in the final, Jones's team, for whatever reason, did not turn up. Regardless of our glorious SF performance, we seriously underperformed at crunch time. Under him, we have lost other crucial competitive games in the 6N when we should have won. Oh, and if you are saying how well we played against NZ, maybe, just maybe, we should concede that they did not turn up for that game just as we did not against SA. Either way, we were losers, as were NZ a game earlier.

[p/d]

Could not do what? Get us into the final of a world cup, and on the way, beating the ABs in pretty much the most dominant performance against them that has been seen in some time?

It's not like he got knocked out in the quarters or something.

So, by definition, losing is OK because we were magnificent against NZ? You might be happy being second best but I think we should aim to be the best. When it mattered, in the final, Jones's team, for whatever reason, did not turn up. Regardless of our glorious SF performance, we seriously underperformed at crunch time. Under him, we have lost other crucial competitive games in the 6N when we should have won. Oh, and if you are saying how well we played against NZ, maybe, just maybe, we should concede that they did not turn up for that game just as we did not against SA. Either way, we were losers, as were NZ a game earlier.

Come on Dors!!! Can’t believe you ain’t still all misty eyed over the NZ win.

[Raggs]

Could not do what? Get us into the final of a world cup, and on the way, beating the ABs in pretty much the most dominant performance against them that has been seen in some time?

It's not like he got knocked out in the quarters or something.

So, by definition, losing is OK because we were magnificent against NZ? You might be happy being second best but I think we should aim to be the best. When it mattered, in the final, Jones's team, for whatever reason, did not turn up. Regardless of our glorious SF performance, we seriously underperformed at crunch time. Under him, we have lost other crucial competitive games in the 6N when we should have won. Oh, and if you are saying how well we played against NZ, maybe, just maybe, we should concede that they did not turn up for that game just as we did not against SA. Either way, we were losers, as were NZ a game earlier.

Come on Dors!!! Can’t believe you ain’t still all misty eyed over the NZ win.

So basically any coach we hire, if they don't win the world cup, isn't good enough? Are they required to win the 6N every season too? Including grand slams?

[Oakboy]

So, by definition, losing is OK because we were magnificent against NZ? You might be happy being second best but I think we should aim to be the best. When it mattered, in the final, Jones's team, for whatever reason, did not turn up. Regardless of our glorious SF performance, we seriously underperformed at crunch time. Under him, we have lost other crucial competitive games in the 6N when we should have won. Oh, and if you are saying how well we played against NZ, maybe, just maybe, we should concede that they did not turn up for that game just as we did not against SA. Either way, we were losers, as were NZ a game earlier.

Come on Dors!!! Can’t believe you ain’t still all misty eyed over the NZ win.

So basically any coach we hire, if they don't win the world cup, isn't good enough? Are they required to win the 6N every season too? Including grand slams?

No, but I'd expect their team to give of their absolute best on the day when it mattered. If the player standard meant that they weren't good enough you'd not hear a complaint from me. If a head coach got the best possible from the team unit that's fine with me. Jones does not in the crunch matches. Also, I've always been in the camp of building for the future in the 4 year cycle. I can see nothing to crow about in winning the GS in year 1 but not in year 4. Playing a 33 year old SH in year 1, for example, is just a farce.

[jngf]

Come on Dors!!! Can’t believe you ain’t still all misty eyed over the NZ win.

So basically any coach we hire, if they don't win the world cup, isn't good enough? Are they required to win the 6N every season too? Including grand slams?

No, but I'd expect their team to give of their absolute best on the day when it mattered. If the player standard meant that they weren't good enough you'd not hear a complaint from me. If a head coach got the best possible from the team unit that's fine with me. Jones does not in the crunch matches. Also, I've always been in the camp of building for the future in the 4 year cycle. I can see nothing to crow about in winning the GS in year 1 but not in year 4. Playing a 33 year old SH in year 1, for example, is just a farce.

Agreed, I just don’t think Jones has anything fresh to bring to the party and it’s time to say thanks for the improvements you’ve made from the Burt Era but now’s it’s time to take the next step forward with a different Head Coach.

[Spiffy]

Jones just seems to me quite prescriptive. A lot of the more successful, or if we’re being realistic, moderately successful coaches are. But I feel as if we need, as a whole, a change to more heads up rugby. English rugby has seriously skilled up in recent years and we need to make use of that.

Has English rugby seriously skilled up? In what way? Is that a thing to do with the england team of general league approach?

And why do you think Jones is prescriptive? From everything I hear he is the antithesis of that but has a workforce of players who are largely coached prescriptive rugby.

I remember around, maybe 2006-ish, we scored a try against France and it was through Danny Grewcock offloading out of a tackle. People raved about it being great skill from a lock. It was the only offload we did the whole game.

We certainly expect much more dynamic and skillful play from our forwards than we used to and generally we get it.

Puja

Re.Skillful play (not just by forwards) - I'm fed up listening to commentators raving about skillful play when often there is nothing especially skillful about it. There is nothing particularly skillful in delivering ( or catching) a good pass . This should be automatic for professional rugby players who have bugger all to do but practice getting it right. Likewise, tactical and touch kicking; tackling; rucking; mauling etc. These are basic tools of the trade. They should be done well routinely and not regarded as something exceptional.
Donkeys years ago I played with and against others at school level who could execute the basic skills perfectly. And yes - I do know that everything is much faster at international level. The standard of skills with international teams these days is actually quite low. Can't believe the number of head-high, or forward- or or bootlace passes in a typical game, the knock ons and the poorly directed kicks. Sloppy play abounds. (watch the Welsh team of the 1970's, for example, to see how it should be done.)
Too much gym, not enough ball practice.
My other favourite hoot is when any attacking player touching the base of the goalpost with the ball is heralded as some kind of genius of the laws of rugby, who is smart enough to have the arcane knowledge that this will result in a try, while others apparently don't have a clue about this. Total bollocks - you just have to see it once and it's embedded.
Hoping for a skillful game of rugby between England and Ireland on Sunday - but don't hold yer breath since all the tactics seem to be about physicality, brutality, size etc...

[Epaminondas Pules]

Jones just seems to me quite prescriptive. A lot of the more successful, or if we’re being realistic, moderately successful coaches are. But I feel as if we need, as a whole, a change to more heads up rugby. English rugby has seriously skilled up in recent years and we need to make use of that.

Has English rugby seriously skilled up? In what way? Is that a thing to do with the england team of general league approach?

And why do you think Jones is prescriptive? From everything I hear he is the antithesis of that but has a workforce of players who are largely coached prescriptive rugby.

From where are you hearing Jones is not prescriptive?

Fletch and Rusty.

[Epaminondas Pules]

It’s a hard one to really pin down when it comes to be skilful. Is it an individual player or collective improvement? Are the props more skilful than say Vickey and Woodman? Obviously not including Cole, Marler, Williams, Obano and a whole heap of others. But then is that any difference to who else was around with Vickery and Woodman.

[twitchy]

So, team news.

[Beasties]

Has English rugby seriously skilled up? In what way? Is that a thing to do with the england team of general league approach?

And why do you think Jones is prescriptive? From everything I hear he is the antithesis of that but has a workforce of players who are largely coached prescriptive rugby.

I remember around, maybe 2006-ish, we scored a try against France and it was through Danny Grewcock offloading out of a tackle. People raved about it being great skill from a lock. It was the only offload we did the whole game.

We certainly expect much more dynamic and skillful play from our forwards than we used to and generally we get it.

Puja

Re.Skillful play (not just by forwards) - I'm fed up listening to commentators raving about skillful play when often there is nothing especially skillful about it. There is nothing particularly skillful in delivering ( or catching) a good pass . This should be automatic for professional rugby players who have bugger all to do but practice getting it right. Likewise, tactical and touch kicking; tackling; rucking; mauling etc. These are basic tools of the trade. They should be done well routinely and not regarded as something exceptional.
Donkeys years ago I played with and against others at school level who could execute the basic skills perfectly. And yes - I do know that everything is much faster at international level. The standard of skills with international teams these days is actually quite low. Can't believe the number of head-high, or forward- or or bootlace passes in a typical game, the knock ons and the poorly directed kicks. Sloppy play abounds. (watch the Welsh team of the 1970's, for example, to see how it should be done.)
Too much gym, not enough ball practice.
My other favourite hoot is when any attacking player touching the base of the goalpost with the ball is heralded as some kind of genius of the laws of rugby, who is smart enough to have the arcane knowledge that this will result in a try, while others apparently don't have a clue about this. Total bollocks - you just have to see it once and it's embedded.
Hoping for a skillful game of rugby between England and Ireland on Sunday - but don't hold yer breath since all the tactics seem to be about physicality, brutality, size etc...

+1

[Digby]

Re.Skillful play (not just by forwards) - I'm fed up listening to commentators raving about skillful play when often there is nothing especially skillful about it. There is nothing particularly skillful in delivering ( or catching) a good pass . This should be automatic for professional rugby players who have bugger all to do but practice getting it right. Likewise, tactical and touch kicking; tackling; rucking; mauling etc. These are basic tools of the trade. They should be done well routinely and not regarded as something exceptional.
Donkeys years ago I played with and against others at school level who could execute the basic skills perfectly. And yes - I do know that everything is much faster at international level. The standard of skills with international teams these days is actually quite low. Can't believe the number of head-high, or forward- or or bootlace passes in a typical game, the knock ons and the poorly directed kicks. Sloppy play abounds. (watch the Welsh team of the 1970's, for example, to see how it should be done.).

You realise there used to be way more scrums in the game right? Reason being the skills were so much worse than they are now, which tbf you'd expect given the game is now professional.

I don't really know what to say to the idea that there's nothing skilful in a good pass. To me that is the skill of rugby, the decision making and then the execution with the right depth and weight, and to do so in the face of the blitz which imo you're not according enough respect to for the problems it creates for players, run the current Welsh or English defence against any side you'd care to champion from the 70s and the side from the 70s would at best knock on, and more likely crap themselves. Anyway, for me elusive running might be the most exciting thing to watch, but passing is where the skill is at in the game

[Stom]

It’s a hard one to really pin down when it comes to be skilful. Is it an individual player or collective improvement? Are the props more skilful than say Vickey and Woodman? Obviously not including Cole, Marler, Williams, Obano and a whole heap of others. But then is that any difference to who else was around with Vickery and Woodman.

It's always difficult to compare when there are a few absolute "best in generation" players to compare with. But while we have Billy there, whose handling and skill levels are excellent, we also have a host of other potential 8s with very high skill levels - Dombrandt, Mercer, Clifford, Simmonds - who are also extremely skillful, and I don't remember that kind of depth, skill-wise, before. We usually had 1 player who was both skillful and physically international quality, 1 player who was skillful but not quite there physically, and a host of physically imposing players who weren't really that skillful.

I would also call Marler skillful. It's different, we're not just talking ball handling, but we have an insane amount of depth of players who have the skill. At LHP there are Mako, Marler, Genge, Obano...the old school player who would have a good number of caps in the past is Moon.

Moon is a very good rugby player, but the fact we've only needed to select him in an emergency speaks volumes for the sheer depth of skill available to England.

We have George and LCD at hooker, Dunn is our traditional hooker and is currently 3rd choice.

Where it all breaks down in 9, who all seem to be woefully underskilled.

[Digby]

The 9s aren't under skilled they're differently skilled. Passing skills just aren't de riguer to the extent many want, decision making, kicking, defending, running from the base have all moved significantly forward in importance. Feel free not to approve, but there's no lack of skill in what they're doing

I mean how many are claiming Connor Murray is playing well at the moment? And there isn't a more skilful 9 in Europe, possibly the world given he has different positives to Smith rather than being better/worse as such.

[Danno]

Ulp, we're boned
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... ix-nations

[Scrumhead]

The 9s aren't under skilled they're differently skilled. Passing skills just aren't de riguer to the extent many want, decision making, kicking, defending, running from the base have all moved significantly forward in importance. Feel free not to approve, but there's no lack of skill in what they're doing

I mean how many are claiming Connor Murray is playing well at the moment? And there isn't a more skilful 9 in Europe, possibly the world given he has different positives to Smith rather than being better/worse as such.

Maybe 9s in world rugby aren’t under-skilled, but I think it’s fair to say that the ones available to us are definitely deficient.

When I look at the skills you mentioned, I really don’t think Youngs’ passing, decision-making or kicking is good enough. He’s all but lost his sniping game and while defence isn’t notably bad, I’d hardly call it out as a highlight. IMO, Heinz is arguably the better all rounder without being outstanding in any area.

Others like Care, Robson or Spencer all have one or two more obvious attributes while being fairly obviously deficient in others.

It’s a mess.

[Banquo]

Ulp, we're boned
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... ix-nations

Not you too!

[Banquo]

Some odd reactions here
1- Eddie is no dinosaur, in fact he sounds remarkably attuned to the latest sets of thinking in many areas both technical and from a mental preparation point of view, and keen to synthesise them into a way that suits the players base he has to work with....that said
2- he has strong bias towards using a 'country's' traditional strengths, and/or usual a 'cultural centre' to work his plans around, ie the natural biases/preferences/aptitudes/learning styles. You can clearly see that in the way he coached and prepared Japan- though intriguingly he had to break down some of the inherent and learned (since 1945) barriers with the Japanese players- deference to authority, resignation to brave defeat, (and importing overseas players); he actually broke a lot of taboos in shouting down the 'happy to lose as long as its with honour.
3- very passionate and driven about achieving goals, especially winning!
4- big on personal trust, on having leaders, communication, and people who can make their own decisions. I don't think he is especially prescriptive, but has great attention to detail.
5- getting sides mega fit isn't old school, and the methods he has adopted to do this are far from the traditional 'beasting' but scientific using the latest evidence. He did have a massive problem on fitness with the levels of the squad he took over.
6- He is very demanding, and has short shrift for those who don't share his work ethic; but this turnover of coaches stuff is a bit of a myth. He's worked with the same key guys for a long while.
7- In the discussion about skills (and extend to speed of game and thought) above, of course the levels are way higher in English rugby than pre-professionalism. His observation is based on the level he sees at English club rugby v international rugby, and relate to technical skills extending to the breakdown and decision making, and what happens when stressed.

There is a lot to admire in Eddie's approach, though can see how he ends up in rabbit holes and falling out with folks; he does praise the RFU, whereas he has had rocky relationships with other employees. Big fan of Ford, but a much bigger fan of Faz for his communication with the team and his physicality! Loves all of Curry, Underhill and Wilson, and Mako is a key player in his eyes.

[Oakboy]

Turning the clock back four years and offered the choice: Jones and Borthwick or Gatland and Edwards?

For the next four years: Jones and Mitchell or Farrell and Catt?

[Mikey Brown]

Do you think Wale have a better record in the last 4 years?

[Oakboy]

Do you think Wale have a better record in the last 4 years?

In terms of performance as a percentage of potential, probably, I'd suggest. What do you think?

[Puja]

Turning the clock back four years and offered the choice: Jones and Borthwick or Gatland and Edwards?

For the next four years: Jones and Mitchell or Farrell and Catt?

So, in a fit of pique about Jones's team not turning up in the RWC final, despite him having the highest win percentage of any England coach ever (and, you know, getting us to the RWC final!) you are seriously asking if we would rather have the Wales coach who has verged on a figure of fun for the Welsh at time and who barely scraped through the quarter finals, or the new Irish coaching setup consisting of those who failed to get us out of the pool stages in 2015?

Puja

[Mikey Brown]

Do you think Wale have a better record in the last 4 years?

In terms of performance as a percentage of potential, probably, I'd suggest. What do you think?

I think he has his issues, and we hit a real rut for about a year or so, but I'd say comfortably yes. And that's ignoring the fact Gatland/Edwards had several years coaching Wales to build them up to that point.

I've got a bunch of issues with Jones, but we absolutely fucking smashed the All Blacks and knocked them out of the RWC. I just can't ignore that. It's the only time I've ever felt generally euphoric after a game. It was ridiculous.

I know that's a one-off performance, where you could just as easily point to SA the following week (where I do think EJ was comprehensively out-thought) but that doesn't mean there is actually someone better placed to take us forwards.

I say all this knowing that he'll continue picking Ben Youngs so don't take this lightly.