England 23

[welsh wasp]

OG: What about Saunders (is that his name?) at Exeter whose brother plays at No.10. I think he has a couple of caps and certainly looks very goods when I have seen him playing.

[RBB]

A whole heap of fundamental issues for me - players out of position, EJ thinks he is some sort of revolutionary, however he is just plain arrogant, we needed an 8 today, Hughes would have filled that gap comfortably or Dombrandt. A lock in the back row, absolute madness, however the great revolutionary seems to know better.

Playing a international novice at FB in what was always going to be a high pressure game, I am sure Furbank will come good but he was blooded in the wrong fixture, again down to EJ's arrogance.

Players past their sell by dates - Daly, Youngs, Marler and Joseph. Daly just doesn't deserve his place, rubbish under the highball and a bit part player (sound familiar) never puts in a full shift, Youngs is shot at this level, too slow, won't tackle and error strewn, a pop-off into touch was the icing on a very bad cake. Marler seems to be so predictable and lacking impact now, it is time to let him have the easier life he craved before he came back. Joseph =  bang average, best days behind him.

The EA starting contingent were all poor, George, Daly (I know mentioned twice), Farrell and Itoje (doesn't know the rules). Kruis was okay and made a difference, as did most of the replacements.

I could go on, but my BP is under control these days and I don't want to exacerbate the problem ....

In summary, EJ is a spent force (if he ever was a force), arrogant and has no future blueprint. He picks players based on favouritism and ill thought out madcap ideas of upsetting the norm. Beating the All Blacks seems to be his get out of jail card.

And finally Scotland at Murrayfield won't be easy, Scotland beat themselves yesterday, as Ireland were poor and often rattled. If Scotland can reduce their error count then they have every chance of taking that one! Gregor will be all over where England were poor and analysing Scotland's errors, EJ on the other hand will be in denial and putting together his next madcap scheme!

[wasps]

The horse has bolted now, so it's questionable whether it's worth trying to patch things together for the rest of the tournament, or take the opportunity for some more major changes.

Eddie's hands are tied slightly by the EPS, but that's of his own making - is there actually a genuine No8 in the EPS?
From what I can see, he's chosen 4 back row options (underhill, curry, Ludlum, earl) and some semi-versatile locks.

That looks like it's going to look like a very stupid idea by the end of the tournament.

I'm pretty happy with the rest of the forwards and quite frankly rin timing a dice for most positions wouldn't affect the strength much.
Unfortunately it looks like we'll have to continue making a complete hash of the back row which may well undermine everything



In the backs, there's not a lot that will be changed either unless Eddie picks the team after a few bottles of vino.
It'll be Youngs and Heinz at 9, the only possible change is that they might swap and Youngs could be on the bench
We finally have 3 scrum halves, but the other is Alex Mitchell - he won't be involved.

Eddie may well be looking for a scapegoat. The most likely candidates are called George. I suspect furbank won't have much more involvement.
Daly will be back to full back and he'll be hoping Anthony Watson is fit

If Manu is injured, it'll be JJ starting, Devoto on the bench, and the 10/12 stays the same



I really don't think we'll see a huge amount of change in the backs this tournament given how hamstrung Eddie has made himself with his EPS

[Rossm]

Cowan-Dickie should have been penalised for diving into Olivon very late when he scored France's second try. It was his act that led to the handbags after the try was scored. France should have kicked off with a penalty.

[Heathen]

Cowan-Dickie should have been penalised for diving into Olivon very late when he scored France's second try. It was his act that led to the handbags after the try was scored. France should have kicked off with a penalty.

I will be very surprised if the citing commissioner does not act on it. It was a stiff forearm to the neck. No wonder the French guys went into warp mode.

[DGP Wasp]

A whole heap of fundamental issues for me - players out of position, EJ thinks he is some sort of revolutionary, however he is just plain arrogant, we needed an 8 today, Hughes would have filled that gap comfortably or Dombrandt. A lock in the back row, absolute madness, however the great revolutionary seems to know better.

Playing a international novice at FB in what was always going to be a high pressure game, I am sure Furbank will come good but he was blooded in the wrong fixture, again down to EJ's arrogance.

Players past their sell by dates - Daly, Youngs, Marler and Joseph. Daly just doesn't deserve his place, rubbish under the highball and a bit part player (sound familiar) never puts in a full shift, Youngs is shot at this level, too slow, won't tackle and error strewn, a pop-off into touch was the icing on a very bad cake. Marler seems to be so predictable and lacking impact now, it is time to let him have the easier life he craved before he came back. Joseph =  bang average, best days behind him.

The EA starting contingent were all poor, George, Daly (I know mentioned twice), Farrell and Itoje (doesn't know the rules). Kruis was okay and made a difference, as did most of the replacements.

I could go on, but my BP is under control these days and I don't want to exacerbate the problem ....

In summary, EJ is a spent force (if he ever was a force), arrogant and has no future blueprint. He picks players based on favouritism and ill thought out madcap ideas of upsetting the norm. Beating the All Blacks seems to be his get out of jail card.

And finally Scotland at Murrayfield won't be easy, Scotland beat themselves yesterday, as Ireland were poor and often rattled. If Scotland can reduce their error count then they have every chance of taking that one! Gregor will be all over where England were poor and analysing Scotland's errors, EJ on the other hand will be in denial and putting together his next madcap scheme!

Agree with this, particularly the bit about EJ's "quirky" selections.  I feel like he sets out to demonstrate that his vast experience is superior to all the received wisdom of generations of coaches who insist on conventional selections where players are deployed in their customary positions.  He's been shown up.  The biggest success of the WC was arguable the emergence of Underhill and Curry either side of Billy.  Without Billy, the solution to most would be to select another good, ball-carrying 8.  Dombrant, Hughes and Simmonds all fit that bill, but Eddie needs to show off his "creative thinking" by putting square pegs in round holes.  He's not fooling me.

[mike909]

Agree with this, particularly the bit about EJ's "quirky" selections.  I feel like he sets out to demonstrate that his vast experience is superior to all the received wisdom of generations of coaches who insist on conventional selections where players are deployed in their customary positions.  He's been shown up.  The biggest success of the WC was arguable the emergence of Underhill and Curry either side of Billy.  Without Billy, the solution to most would be to select another good, ball-carrying 8.  Dombrant, Hughes and Simmonds all fit that bill, but Eddie needs to show off his "creative thinking" by putting square pegs in round holes.  He's not fooling me.

Me too

That was game that was most likely to be won by selecting players a) in their club position and b) who are in form.....

You'd have been a disappointed prem club supporter if your team played like that and having selected players who were not fit or not in form for an important game.

[wasps]

i've been thinking about what a specialist No.8 actually brings to a team


First up, they're obviously well practiced at controlling the ball at the base of the scrum
Secondly, they're usually explosive runners, who can pick the ball up from scrum and charge forward trying to break the tackles of the covering flanker.
Separately from that explosiveness from a standing start, they're typically strong carriers of the ball in general, and the best are able to break tackles

Do our no.8's still defend in the deep when the opposition look to kick for territory? If so, that would suggest an element of positional sense and timing, along with the ball carrying ability mentioned earlier.


What else does a specialist No.8 bring to a team above and beyond anyone else in the pack?



When I think back to yesterday's game, we seemed to make progress up the field phase after phase.
We seemed to have the ball carrying that was required to continually make yards, but it wasn't enough to regularly splinter the French defence.
Would a Billy or Nathan have really changed that? - I'm not so sure it would have done.

A specialist 8 would certainly have given us more control at the scrum, and likely more explosiveness picking up from the base.
Tom Curry is an exceptional flanker, but this is not a skill that he would have practiced much.


As for dropping back for French kicks. I genuinely hope that if it's still our No.8 that does that, we didn't send Curry back to field them.
He's one of our best breakdown specialists, to have him standing in the deep waiting to return a kick that may or may not come for a few phases would definitely have hurt our breakdown work.
Given the pack we had out, I would certainly hope that Lawes was the one dropping back to field any kicks.



Eddie's idea of trying Tom Curry at 8 isn't terrible (without hindsight). It looks a worse decision based on the scrum where the ball shot straight out while he tried to control it. (it's certainly a far better idea than trying to use his brother as a scrum half). The England pack should be able to make up for any lack of ball carrying, and that's probably why Lawes was picked in the back row.
However, it's inexcusable not to have other specialist 8's in the squad if/when it proves to be a failed experiment.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

A specialist number 8 often covers sniping at the scrum and in general the 9-12 channel.

In kick defence, the 8 is often ready to take an offload from the kick receiver. Hughes does this all the time.

In all the points you mention, this facets of the game were missing.

[Nigel Med]

I'm not entirely convinced that a genuine No8 would have made all that much difference TBH. England seemed utterly clueless in attack which the stats demonstrate perfectly. The amount of possession and territory with no points to show for it points to a side with no idea how to breakdown a stubborn defence. Without two moments of individual brilliance from May we would have had 3 points to show for 80 minutes of test rugby. 

It is hard to believe that this was close to the same side that stuffed the All Blacks and made the Wold Cup Final. I totally agree with everyone who thinks that the EA scandal was affecting their players, Farrell for one seemed to be playing in the Championship already. Itoje and George just wen't their usual selves, Kruis who ironically most of us have felt in the past should have been behind Joe in the pecking order- was one of the few who looked up for it and played with the physicality that Jones was on about. Daly has now become a liability, every side is very aware of his lack of ability under a high ball and wherever you play him in the back three -Jones is never picking him at 13- he will be peppered with high balls with predictable gains for the opposition.

I still cannot understand picking Youngs, he was completely embarrassed by Faf De Klerk in the WC Final and again yesterday by Dupont. He can't pass, is too slow, has little vision and his decision making is abysmal. There were several occasions where a scrum or maul was making ground with a strong possibility of a penalty to come and rather than wait to see if it grinds to a halt, Youngs flings the ball out so England can go through numerous phases making a net gain of around -25 metres before being turned over. Don't know who should be there but I'd rather loose a few matches blooding a few younger players to build for the next World Cup. Didn't seem to hurt France!

Fair play to France, they have been a sleeping giant for a long time, they've always had talented players but for a decade or so have played like 15 individuals. Unbelievable turn around in their defence, Shaun was worked miracles in a very short period of time. If they can maintain that standard for the tournament they'll be very hard to beat.

[Willie]

OG: What about Saunders (is that his name?) at Exeter whose brother plays at No.10. I think he has a couple of caps and certainly looks very goods when I have seen him playing.

You’re thinking of Sam Simmonds. And I agree, he would have made a great replacement for Billy, with Curry and Underhill either side.

Eddie's idea of trying Tom Curry at 8 isn't terrible (without hindsight).

Curry wasn’t terrible at 8, but it was a terrible idea to not play him as the world class flanker that he is.

[westwaleswasp]

There is a huge amount in this thread that I agree with.

Firstly the "Eddie as reinventor' issue. It reminds me of Tom Baker's captain in Blackadder when asked about hif having a crew is necessary. 'Opinions are divided on the matter, all the other captains say it is, I say it isn't'. He gets away with 'Eddie selections' for a game or two, but by and large those selections highlighted by the media catch him up. We watched the game on TV, I left at half time, and my wife said that the half time pundits just repeated what we had been discussing about the unbalanced back row and ball carrying options looking slim. You don't need to have played test rugby to look at that team and wonder  if it will struggle without an 8 with a back row of two near 7s and a lock at 6. We all have Ph.D.s in hindsight but there was a near unanimity before the match that this selection was dodgy. I get that he likes to keep players on their toes, but the suspicion remains that some of the selections are aimed at showing the media who is boss.
Secondly, the EA scandal. No blame here at Eddie's door but it must have had an effect.

Thirdly, England seem perennially prone to losing their head. They don't pull teams in, they either run hot and stay hot from the get go, or they run hot then cold and blow it. When the going gets tough, we don't get going, we go into discombobulated chicken mode.
This was as close to a great comeback as we have seen, and it was largely down to Jonny May's moments of brilliance, and was still a fair bit short of a great comeback.  We had some territory and forced a few second half pens, but Wales won the corresponding match last year after a horrendous start. We lack their mental toughness. Did anyone expect us to nab it after the first half?

[DGP Wasp]

Did anyone expect us to nab it after the first half?

Not me.

Watching Eddie's England is in many ways less stressful than at other times.  First and foremost, regardless of coach, selection, what clubs players come from etc, I want England to succeed.  However, when they put in a poor performance like yesterday, or the 2nd half v Scotland last year, there is some sense of relief that Eddie's eccentricity and arrogance are being shown up.

[wasps]

Is it specifically an Eddie Jones thing, or a general Australian rugby thing?
They regularly seem to try to get their best players on the pitch regardless of their shirt numbers.... Admittedly, usually in the backs.

The French have a history of it too - how many different positions did Michalak play for them?




For me, the problem isn't the experimentation, it's the lack of plan B.
There are no 8's in the training squad or EPS, so if/when he decides to change that it'll be someone new to the squad who is not familiar with any of the plays to date.

That strikes me as poor management.

[mike909]

Someone I was conversing with on the Grauniad, suggested that the regime meant that players have to do its Jones' way or its the highway. And players so want to play for England that they would almost prefer to keep going with what they are told than use some initiative, or look to vary the plan

You could (least imo) see that vs Scotland last season, 31-0 up, Scotland score a try minutes either side of HT and instead of kicking it into the stand and slowing the pace, you carry on giving Scotland hope by running it wide and loose.....Ditto the SA Tour in 2018, losing from 24-0 up after 18 mins and concede 6 tries....and lose.

It was suggested that perhaps Jones and England as a group have peaked? Happens to everyone, Geech with us after three trophies over 3 seasons.

But whilst you might (you might..) think you need Daly on the pitch, somewhere, you really need to be sure you firstly cover the basics and that you're not losing focus on the reality of picking players in form, mostly in their club positions and not carrying injuries as a minimum starting point. When you've got that - then you can think about varying selection. Especially, if like the Aussies, you have fewer players to select from. Hell, I'd want Beale on the pitch, but he's a good FB and good centre.

It just feels a bit out of control - and too controlled - if it can be at the same time!