Wiggy a Lion?

[fivepointer]

A rather surprising bit of news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union ... 0n80mlmm7o

[Danno]

What the actual fuck

[FKAS]

I think he's got the potential to be a very good coach in the future. Might not be one now but if they want a skills coach who can help develop the kicking strategy he'd be a good option.

[Captainhaircut]

Yet another way for the lions tour to kill any momentum we have.

[Banquo]

A rather surprising bit of news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union ... 0n80mlmm7o

it might aid his development but a weird call

[FKAS]

Yet another way for the lions tour to kill any momentum we have.

Or for us to hire a more dynamic attack coach. Wiggy can return as skills coach.

[Puja]

I think Wiggy gets a bad rap on here. We scored 7 tries against Ireland and France, not through forward dominance, but through genuinely good attacking play. The Scotland game was a steaming turd as a performance, but that was a tactical refusal to play, rather than any issues with our attacking game - in fact when we did play around the Freeman score, we were dangerous. And, while it's easy to say, "Oh, Wales were crap," they were the same side that caused Ireland and Scotland issues and we took them apart, putting a higher score on them (against a largely better team) than France did. And it's not just this 6N either - we have looked genuinely threatening with ball in hand since the Ireland game last year.

I think this is excellent news for England. There's no denying that he's callow as far as coaches go and this could be an incredible learning experience for him which returns him as a better coach in our setup.

Puja

[Danno]

Maybe we'll actually keep attacking in Argentina

[p/d]

What the actual fuck

Indeed. Let’s hope he goes.

[p/d]

Scored 10 against Wales. I believe 3 were by backs

[Oakboy]

Scored 10 against Wales. I believe 3 were by backs

And they can grasp those stats without using their toes.

[fivepointer]

I think Wiggy gets a bad rap on here. We scored 7 tries against Ireland and France, not through forward dominance, but through genuinely good attacking play. The Scotland game was a steaming turd as a performance, but that was a tactical refusal to play, rather than any issues with our attacking game - in fact when we did play around the Freeman score, we were dangerous. And, while it's easy to say, "Oh, Wales were crap," they were the same side that caused Ireland and Scotland issues and we took them apart, putting a higher score on them (against a largely better team) than France did. And it's not just this 6N either - we have looked genuinely threatening with ball in hand since the Ireland game last year.

I think this is excellent news for England. There's no denying that he's callow as far as coaches go and this could be an incredible learning experience for him which returns him as a better coach in our setup.

Puja

This is fair. At times during the season we attacked with some effect. Not always but there were bright moments in all our games.

My surprise is that he's still a rookie and it seems an over promotion given his limited international experience. It should be very good for him personally of course.

[Captainhaircut]

Scored 10 against Wales. I believe 3 were by backs

Bit of a bizarre take to suggest the attack coach only works with the backs. Pollocks tries, CCS’s final try and Heyes try were as a result of very good attacking play.

I don’t think Wigglesworth is half as bad as people make out but also not convinced he benefits massively from this lions tour. They are playing probably as weak a test side and combo of club sides they have ever played. Different environment and other coaches possibly but I doubt he comes back as a hugely improved coach.

[Oakboy]

I think Wiggy gets a bad rap on here. We scored 7 tries against Ireland and France, not through forward dominance, but through genuinely good attacking play. The Scotland game was a steaming turd as a performance, but that was a tactical refusal to play, rather than any issues with our attacking game - in fact when we did play around the Freeman score, we were dangerous. And, while it's easy to say, "Oh, Wales were crap," they were the same side that caused Ireland and Scotland issues and we took them apart, putting a higher score on them (against a largely better team) than France did. And it's not just this 6N either - we have looked genuinely threatening with ball in hand since the Ireland game last year.

I think this is excellent news for England. There's no denying that he's callow as far as coaches go and this could be an incredible learning experience for him which returns him as a better coach in our setup.

Puja

I think his record as a player goes against him in that he was seen as just a kicking SH - i.e. the sort of tactics that got booed at Twickers. What I don't know (and have seen no direct quotes about) is how intelligent he is in rugby terms. Can a player with a very limited game become a coach with a broad approach? The Lions appointment is an indication that he has more depth as a coach than he did as a player - perhaps. The counter-argument may be that he is just what is needed with a play-by-numbers application. Somewhere in there are the doubts about how he (and the others of the coaching crew) has asked Mitchell to play in the 6N as a whole.

Time will tell.

[Mellsblue]

We do score a lot of tries but it’s seems to be a lot of forward’s tries (as with the Wales stat posted earlier) bits of individual brilliance or first phase moves that lead to a clean break and we take advantage within 1/2/3 phases. What I don’t see - and this could be blamed on M Smith who we all know is completely incapable of shaping an attack but hasn’t actually looked discernibly better, imo, with F Smith, taking into account his newbie status - is a structure that allows you to build through the phases and keep the oppo d constantly manipulated over several phases. I’d also add the incoherence in selection - and I have reliable second hand info that has been the experience of one player - showing that there probs isn’t some grand overall plan/structure/framework/skeleton/whatever you want to call it.
A lot/all of the above may be Borthwick but, as my favourite fictional Danish politician would say, I don’t comment on hypotheticals.

[FKAS]

We do score a lot of tries but it’s seems to be a lot of forward’s tries (as with the Wales stat posted earlier) bits of individual brilliance or first phase moves that lead to a clean break and we take advantage within 1/2/3 phases. What I don’t see - and this could be blamed on M Smith who we all know is completely incapable of shaping an attack but hasn’t actually looked discernibly better, imo, with F Smith, taking into account his newbie status - is a structure that allows you to build through the phases and keep the oppo d constantly manipulated over several phases. I’d also add the incoherence in selection - and I have reliable second hand info that has been the experience of one player - showing that there probs isn’t some grand overall plan/structure/framework/skeleton/whatever you want to call it.
A lot/all of the above may be Borthwick but, as my favourite fictional Danish politician would say, I don’t comment on hypotheticals.

Could me my memory being rubbish but I can't remember many tries from individual brilliance this 6N. Forwards tries can be from the overall attacking plan.

If we look at Pollock's tries Vs Wales, Daly's line off of Fin Smith etc they were all nice plays from within the attack structure.

I would agree we lose our shape quite quickly and once lost our attack is dead and we have to kick to reset. That is an area we definitely need to improve.

[Mikey Brown]

Could be interesting to see what comes out given Borthwick doesn’t seem to believe in multi-phase, but Farrell’s Ireland often run in to double digits.

Who knows how much Wigglesworth is a deciding factor in that, or just working within Borthwick’s remit?

[Puja]

I think his record as a player goes against him in that he was seen as just a kicking SH - i.e. the sort of tactics that got booed at Twickers. What I don't know (and have seen no direct quotes about) is how intelligent he is in rugby terms. Can a player with a very limited game become a coach with a broad approach? The Lions appointment is an indication that he has more depth as a coach than he did as a player - perhaps.

Agreed on his rep counting against him - I think he was actually capable of more than his rep as a player suggested, but he was always picked for England when they wanted someone to kick every bit of leather off the ball and we've not forgiven him for that. Add in that he took a chunk of the blame on here for our incredibly limited gameplan in the 2023 RWC, and we've got a lot of bias to work through. I personally said some very mean things about his capabilities and have been forced to eat those words while doing the m-b-ms and seeing how good our attack has been.

We do score a lot of tries but it’s seems to be a lot of forward’s tries (as with the Wales stat posted earlier) bits of individual brilliance or first phase moves that lead to a clean break and we take advantage within 1/2/3 phases. What I don’t see - and this could be blamed on M Smith who we all know is completely incapable of shaping an attack but hasn’t actually looked discernibly better, imo, with F Smith, taking into account his newbie status - is a structure that allows you to build through the phases and keep the oppo d constantly manipulated over several phases. I’d also add the incoherence in selection - and I have reliable second hand info that has been the experience of one player - showing that there probs isn’t some grand overall plan/structure/framework/skeleton/whatever you want to call it.
A lot/all of the above may be Borthwick but, as my favourite fictional Danish politician would say, I don’t comment on hypotheticals.

I'd say us scoring from the forwards is a mark in his favour! It's not like we're only scoring lineout rumbles or pick-and-goes around the corner - the majority of our forwards' tries are because they're handling and moving comfortably with the ball and are often the player in support. As an example, this try is from CCS, so looking at just the statistics, it's a try from a lock and therefore boring:



Sat down and did the sums when I posted on the Lions board - across 9 games vs Ire/Fra/NZ/SA/Aus in the last 13 months, we've scored 26 tries (basically an average of 3 per game), we've played expansive rugby, and we've just put 68 points on Wales in Cardiff. I don't get why we're still looking at our attack coach and saying, "Yeah, but he's probably shit".

Puja

[Mellsblue]

That clip isn’t really a counter to my request for an attacking shape that constant manipulates a good opposition defence. You can get to the right short term result with the wrong process…

[Puja]

That clip isn’t really a counter to my request for an attacking shape that constant manipulates a good opposition defence. You can get to the right short term result with the wrong process…

The clip was more to counter the "we score our tries through forwards" argument than the attacking shape.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

That clip isn’t really a counter to my request for an attacking shape that constant manipulates a good opposition defence. You can get to the right short term result with the wrong process…

The clip was more to counter the "we score our tries through forwards" argument than the attacking shape.

Puja

I’m not particularly hung up on that one and it’s just a gut feeling anyway, plus the Wales try stat earlier in the thread.

[FKAS]

Could be interesting to see what comes out given Borthwick doesn’t seem to believe in multi-phase, but Farrell’s Ireland often run in to double digits.

Who knows how much Wigglesworth is a deciding factor in that, or just working within Borthwick’s remit?

Wigglesworth is also supposed to be a key thinker in the kicking strategy as well as the attack. Whether it's his style by choice or an interpretation based on Borthwick's game plan I don't know. We can look decent over a few phases, perhaps up to 5. After that it does tend to slow down.

[Spiffy]

I think his record as a player goes against him in that he was seen as just a kicking SH - i.e. the sort of tactics that got booed at Twickers. What I don't know (and have seen no direct quotes about) is how intelligent he is in rugby terms. Can a player with a very limited game become a coach with a broad approach? The Lions appointment is an indication that he has more depth as a coach than he did as a player - perhaps.

Agreed on his rep counting against him - I think he was actually capable of more than his rep as a player suggested, but he was always picked for England when they wanted someone to kick every bit of leather off the ball and we've not forgiven him for that. Add in that he took a chunk of the blame on here for our incredibly limited gameplan in the 2023 RWC, and we've got a lot of bias to work through. I personally said some very mean things about his capabilities and have been forced to eat those words while doing the m-b-ms and seeing how good our attack has been.

We do score a lot of tries but it’s seems to be a lot of forward’s tries (as with the Wales stat posted earlier) bits of individual brilliance or first phase moves that lead to a clean break and we take advantage within 1/2/3 phases. What I don’t see - and this could be blamed on M Smith who we all know is completely incapable of shaping an attack but hasn’t actually looked discernibly better, imo, with F Smith, taking into account his newbie status - is a structure that allows you to build through the phases and keep the oppo d constantly manipulated over several phases. I’d also add the incoherence in selection - and I have reliable second hand info that has been the experience of one player - showing that there probs isn’t some grand overall plan/structure/framework/skeleton/whatever you want to call it.
A lot/all of the above may be Borthwick but, as my favourite fictional Danish politician would say, I don’t comment on hypotheticals.

I'd say us scoring from the forwards is a mark in his favour! It's not like we're only scoring lineout rumbles or pick-and-goes around the corner - the majority of our forwards' tries are because they're handling and moving comfortably with the ball and are often the player in support. As an example, this try is from CCS, so looking at just the statistics, it's a try from a lock and therefore boring:



Sat down and did the sums when I posted on the Lions board - across 9 games vs Ire/Fra/NZ/SA/Aus in the last 13 months, we've scored 26 tries (basically an average of 3 per game), we've played expansive rugby, and we've just put 68 points on Wales in Cardiff. I don't get why we're still looking at our attack coach and saying, "Yeah, but he's probably shit".

Puja

The overall stats are heavily skewed by the 10 try/68 point Wales game against terribly weak opposition. Without that match, the try average is down to 2 per game.

[Which Tyler]

Which of Fra/NZ/SA/Aus is Wales again?

[Spiffy]

I think his record as a player goes against him in that he was seen as just a kicking SH - i.e. the sort of tactics that got booed at Twickers. What I don't know (and have seen no direct quotes about) is how intelligent he is in rugby terms. Can a player with a very limited game become a coach with a broad approach? The Lions appointment is an indication that he has more depth as a coach than he did as a player - perhaps.

Agreed on his rep counting against him - I think he was actually capable of more than his rep as a player suggested, but he was always picked for England when they wanted someone to kick every bit of leather off the ball and we've not forgiven him for that. Add in that he took a chunk of the blame on here for our incredibly limited gameplan in the 2023 RWC, and we've got a lot of bias to work through. I personally said some very mean things about his capabilities and have been forced to eat those words while doing the m-b-ms and seeing how good our attack has been.

We do score a lot of tries but it’s seems to be a lot of forward’s tries (as with the Wales stat posted earlier) bits of individual brilliance or first phase moves that lead to a clean break and we take advantage within 1/2/3 phases. What I don’t see - and this could be blamed on M Smith who we all know is completely incapable of shaping an attack but hasn’t actually looked discernibly better, imo, with F Smith, taking into account his newbie status - is a structure that allows you to build through the phases and keep the oppo d constantly manipulated over several phases. I’d also add the incoherence in selection - and I have reliable second hand info that has been the experience of one player - showing that there probs isn’t some grand overall plan/structure/framework/skeleton/whatever you want to call it.
A lot/all of the above may be Borthwick but, as my favourite fictional Danish politician would say, I don’t comment on hypotheticals.

I'd say us scoring from the forwards is a mark in his favour! It's not like we're only scoring lineout rumbles or pick-and-goes around the corner - the majority of our forwards' tries are because they're handling and moving comfortably with the ball and are often the player in support. As an example, this try is from CCS, so looking at just the statistics, it's a try from a lock and therefore boring:



Sat down and did the sums when I posted on the Lions board - across 9 games vs Ire/Fra/NZ/SA/Aus in the last 13 months, we've scored 26 tries (basically an average of 3 per game), we've played expansive rugby, and we've just put 68 points on Wales in Cardiff. I don't get why we're still looking at our attack coach and saying, "Yeah, but he's probably shit".

Puja

The overall stats are heavily skewed by the 10 try/68 point Wales game against terribly weak opposition. Without that match, the try average is down to 2 per game.

Woops : disregard response. My bad. Sloppy reading.