Player ratings

[Puja]

Genge - 7. Good in the scrums, okay in the loose, still not as good a carrier as he thinks he is and would be better if he was less ambitious
George - 8. Armchair ride. Did what he needed to do well.
Stuart - 8. Excellent scrummaging, good in the loose. Real announcement on the international stage
Ewels/Launchbury - 6. Okay, I guess. Did what was needed.
Itoje - 6. Same as the rest of the locks
Willis - 7. One turnover, one try, generally pretty decent, but didn't get too many chances.
BillyV - 4. What has happened? Looked hesitant and too high in the carry and was often stopped still or driven backward.

Youngs - 5. Occasionally didn't kick the ball.
Farrell - 4. No ability to spark the backline at all.
Slade - 4. Looks out of place at 12 and offered nothing of any great interest.

Any other backs - Good tackling, good kick returning. Not fair to judge them on much else.

Puja

[Scrumhead]

Fair. Probably would’ve given Launch a 7 but otherwise agree on those.

[Raggs]

Thought Launch got through a mountain of work.

[fivepointer]

Props and locks were very good. Willis went just fine. Itoje is a super player but we have back rowers who could be more effective. Billy needs a rest.
Youngs so-so. Farrell was terrible. Centres anonymous. Best bit of play in the 3 quarters was Joseph in setting up a try. Then he went off! Daly not really on top of his game and May put in a lot of effort for little reward.
Bench generally OK. Robson blotted his copybook with an awful pass that ruined a position we should have scored from. Dunn at least got more than 3 minutes.

[fivepointer]

Alex Shaw has finally lost the plot.
Owen Farrell – 6
"It wasn’t a game for the back line to thrive, though Farrell didn’t quite have it ticking along as smoothly as he would have liked. As with Daly and May, it was a relatively clean performance from the fly-half, who made five of his six kicks, without being the masterful puppeteering outing that he regularly turns in"

[Oakboy]

Genge - 7. Good in the scrums, okay in the loose, still not as good a carrier as he thinks he is and would be better if he was less ambitious
George - 8. Armchair ride. Did what he needed to do well.
Stuart - 8. Excellent scrummaging, good in the loose. Real announcement on the international stage
Ewels/Launchbury - 6. Okay, I guess. Did what was needed.
Itoje - 6. Same as the rest of the locks
Willis - 7. One turnover, one try, generally pretty decent, but didn't get too many chances.
BillyV - 4. What has happened? Looked hesitant and too high in the carry and was often stopped still or driven backward.

Youngs - 5. Occasionally didn't kick the ball.
Farrell - 4. No ability to spark the backline at all.
Slade - 4. Looks out of place at 12 and offered nothing of any great interest.

Any other backs - Good tackling, good kick returning. Not fair to judge them on much else.

Puja

Disagree strongly about Slade. How can he be himself with Youngs and Farrell at 9/10? Within those restrictions, he played well, IMO.

[Scrumhead]

Youngs and Farrell aren’t the reason for him making more than one forward pass in promising situations. He played a big part in the move that lead to Daly’s try, but on the whole he was pretty inaccurate/poor.

Perhaps you could say he was under pressure, but if you can’t cope with the level of pressure Georgia bring, what happens when you play a better side?

Generally I rate Slade very highly - he’s just very hit and miss for England. I felt like he’d ‘arrived’ as a test player in 2018, but he hasn’t been much good for a while ...

[p/d]

Disagree strongly about Slade. How can he be himself with Youngs and Farrell at 9/10? Within those restrictions, he played well, IMO.

Backs were average right across the line. It was a day for the front row - all 6 of ‘em. Well 7 when you add in Dylan at half time doing a job on Mrs Logan trying to make an issue over Willis’ no try. As a collective 8 out 10.

For the rest of them nothing to report either way. Just hoping we get to face France to see where we are at

[Puja]

Genge - 7. Good in the scrums, okay in the loose, still not as good a carrier as he thinks he is and would be better if he was less ambitious
George - 8. Armchair ride. Did what he needed to do well.
Stuart - 8. Excellent scrummaging, good in the loose. Real announcement on the international stage
Ewels/Launchbury - 6. Okay, I guess. Did what was needed.
Itoje - 6. Same as the rest of the locks
Willis - 7. One turnover, one try, generally pretty decent, but didn't get too many chances.
BillyV - 4. What has happened? Looked hesitant and too high in the carry and was often stopped still or driven backward.

Youngs - 5. Occasionally didn't kick the ball.
Farrell - 4. No ability to spark the backline at all.
Slade - 4. Looks out of place at 12 and offered nothing of any great interest.

Any other backs - Good tackling, good kick returning. Not fair to judge them on much else.

Puja

Disagree strongly about Slade. How can he be himself with Youngs and Farrell at 9/10? Within those restrictions, he played well, IMO.

He overran the ball twice, made a horrendous forward pass in a good situation, passed to Lawrence's toes, and offered the square root of f-all when he stepped in at first receiver (which you absolutely cannot blame Farrell for). Yes, he was outside Farrell, which slowed down the ball he got, but he was also up against Georgia and so hardly under significant pressure at an international level.

To me, he looks out of position and not an international 12. If he had a mixed game against high opposition, then I'd be sympathetic, but this was poor against Georgia (after being pretty poor against Italy). He's not a 12.

Puja

[Scrumhead]

Glad I’m not the only one who thought so ... at times it feels like people are watching a different game.

[FKAS]

I know the done thing is to berate Youngs after every performance and being a Tigers fan I'm well versed in complaining about his performances. However, he actually played pretty well. His kicks were on the money and caused problems for the Georgia back three, he got to the breakdown at a decent pace (which is normally his main fault) and his passing was in point. Our backs got decent ball to play with but repeatedly wasted it.

For the backline I'd go:

Youngs - 7
Farrell - 3 - his lack of invention kills the attack.
May - 4
Slade - 3
Lawrence - 6
Joseph - 6
Daly - 4

[Scrumhead]

A bit harsh on May. I’m not sure he had much of an opportunity to do more than he did.

[Danno]

I feel that's a bit harsh on all of the backs outside Farrell (other than Daly perhaps, and definitely Slade). Most of them only saw the ball when they were looking for it to come down from the sky

[Peej]

A bit harsh on May. I’m not sure he had much of an opportunity to do more than he did.

I thought he was lucky not to get a yellow to be honest, despite his willingness to get stuck into the physical stuff.

I thought Launchbury was a 7

[Mikey Brown]

Youngs and Farrell aren’t the reason for him making more than one forward pass in promising situations. He played a big part in the move that lead to Daly’s try, but on the whole he was pretty inaccurate/poor.

Perhaps you could say he was under pressure, but if you can’t cope with the level of pressure Georgia bring, what happens when you play a better side?

Generally I rate Slade very highly - he’s just very hit and miss for England. I felt like he’d ‘arrived’ as a test player in 2018, but he hasn’t been much good for a while ...

I felt like he’s turned a corner and really cut out the errors in the last couple of seasons. Shifting him at this point just seems totally pointless, even though I was a massive advocate of trying him at 12 about 5 years ago.

Turned the game off at half time today and can’t even be bothered to look at the score. Watching too many of the England rugby media bits and pieces with Eddie Jones is turning me off them as a team.

[Adam_P]

A bit harsh on May. I’m not sure he had much of an opportunity to do more than he did.

I thought he was lucky not to get a yellow to be honest, despite his willingness to get stuck into the physical stuff.

I thought Launchbury was a 7

I've been a bit underwhelmed by May for England recently. I really hope Thorley gets a good run in this tournament, feel like he could easily be our best winger with his pace and relative power.

[Puja]

A bit harsh on May. I’m not sure he had much of an opportunity to do more than he did.

I thought he was lucky not to get a yellow to be honest, despite his willingness to get stuck into the physical stuff.

I thought Launchbury was a 7

I've been a bit underwhelmed by May for England recently. I really hope Thorley gets a good run in this tournament, feel like he could easily be our best winger with his pace and relative power.

Should never've left Leicester.

Puja

[FKAS]

A bit harsh on May. I’m not sure he had much of an opportunity to do more than he did.

He had a couple of runs one on one with opposite number in admittedly limited space. Both times just tried to sprint past him and both times got tackled fairly easily into touch. I'd have liked to see more footwork or imagination than just simply turning the ball over.

[Scrumhead]

Youngs and Farrell aren’t the reason for him making more than one forward pass in promising situations. He played a big part in the move that lead to Daly’s try, but on the whole he was pretty inaccurate/poor.

Perhaps you could say he was under pressure, but if you can’t cope with the level of pressure Georgia bring, what happens when you play a better side?

Generally I rate Slade very highly - he’s just very hit and miss for England. I felt like he’d ‘arrived’ as a test player in 2018, but he hasn’t been much good for a while ...

I felt like he’s turned a corner and really cut out the errors in the last couple of seasons. Shifting him at this point just seems totally pointless, even though I was a massive advocate of trying him at 12 about 5 years ago.

Turned the game off at half time today and can’t even be bothered to look at the score. Watching too many of the England rugby media bits and pieces with Eddie Jones is turning me off them as a team.

Yeah - that’s what I meant when I said I felt like he’d arrived, but his last few performances have been pretty poor and not a patch on his Exeter form.

On paper he’s better suited to 12, but in reality, he’s never convinced playing there. That said, I understand why we’re doing it when we have very few experienced 12s that are up to standard. I would have preferred to see Joe Simmonds get a chance at 10 with Farrell shifted to 12, but given that the only real alternative from the squad selected was to ask Lawrence to play out of position, it made sense. As it happens, I think Lawrence would have done a better job. He’s done well so far. No errors that I can recall and hasn’t looked overawed.

[Digby]

'tis a fair point Slade hasn't looked settled at 12, though in fairness he's not tended to rip up trees from 13 either. he looks some talent, but also one yet to stamp much authority on the test scene, and so we get advocates for him playing 10, 12, 13 and 15 because people want him involved but no one can prove their case.

[Mellsblue]

Jones did say that the stats show that 12 rarely passes to 13 in the modern international game and, in light of this, Eng would change gameplan accordingly. I just didn’t realise that the new gameplan would be for 12 to pass the ball forwards or to 13’s feet.

[p/d]

He is a 13. End of. If he ain’t the best available then make use of his presumed versatility from the bench.

Mind you Geech’s reckons he is ‘pivotal’ to England.. though he had wasted much press space banging the same drum for Robot

[Digby]

I think he's a midfielder, and a very good one. I just don't know if I'd pick him if I had the option to pick Ford, Manu and JJ. If like now and Manu was out I'd probably be keen on picking Slade at 12, but I wouldn't mind if we saw Lawrence at 12 either, and then if we had Lawrence at 12 I wouldn't be especially bothered if we had Slade or JJ at 13.

[p/d]

I haven’t seen an individual back develop into a better player under Jones/playing alongside Farrell.

Currently don’t see JJ offering anything more than Slade at 13. Lawrence needs a run of games (should have been moved to 12 for that last quarter rather than yanked), to see if he can offer a Manu point of attack.

Mind you if Nowell was fit I’d happily bung him into the mix

[Oakboy]

He is a 13. End of. If he ain’t the best available then make use of his presumed versatility from the bench.

Mind you Geech’s reckons he is ‘pivotal’ to England.. though he had wasted much press space banging the same drum for Robot

Geech's full quote:

"I found the role of Slade particularly interesting. As a former fly-half his kicking game is very sound, and England's use of him as a second five-eighth in the traditional Kiwi style gives England so many options. So, too, does the fact that because he can play 12 or 13 he gives England incredible continuity and depth. It is difficult to overstate how important he is to this England side. It is how Lawrence is best brought into the game which needs more clarity.

That ability for England to play off the second pass, rather than straight off Farrell, opened Georgia up at Twickenham. I loved England's third try, which was a perfect example of what playing off 12 can bring. The ball came off the lineout to Farrell, then onto Slade, and when Lawrence came on a sharp angle to fix the defenders, Slade was able to put Jonathan Joseph through the hole left by Lawrence's run. It was simple, but genius. England have missed someone to take on that second playmaker role which Slade played so well against Georgia."

I usually don't agree with much that he writes!