Chris Jones BBC website

[Old Geezer]

He says England only won the Six Nations because of a last minute 3 points by Farrell and says it was not good that a losing team should win (my paraphrase).  He seems to be saying that it would have been better if France had won a title.  He forgets that France were undone in Edinburgh with a far worse performance than England's in Paris and with no post RWC excuse to offer.  Weird analysis IMHO.

[Shugs]

Yes, don't really understand that. On the criteria layed out before a game was played England won. Perfectly simple.

[JonnyD]

another person seemingly not overly enthralled by England’s play against Italy and also the general ethos surrounding them under Jones’ tenure.
I’m in that camp too.

[mike909]

another person seemingly not overly enthralled by England’s play against Italy and also the general ethos surrounding them under Jones’ tenure.
I’m in that camp too.

Me too, on both accounts

Edit: I knew what it reminded me of on Saturday - the early 70's and someone like Martin Cooper using all the good first phase possession to kick and Duckham never getting a pass.

And re Jones, a coach who would prefer not to do the obvious, because he always thinks he's a genius....and also provides an environment that's just not attractive and too much about Jones, and not emphasising player welfare  - beating players when their fitness is mainly club derived....etc.

[DGP Wasp]

Have to agree. If 2 teams are level on points then the first tie breaker ought to be the head to head result. Feels very hollow that England beat a team that they lost to in order to win the title.

[westwaleswasp]

Thing is England have been shafted this way before, and are not alone. If you do the head to head when level with two teams, the question must be asked, what about three teams, and then the same scenario can arise unless you split it three ways.  Bottom line is if teams are level on points you have to have breakers of some sort, and everyone knew the rules to start.
Still not fussed on Enlgand's coach, but this complaint seems a bit odd to me.

[Nigel Med]

You can't moan about the competition rules if the final result doesn't suit what you want to see. The losing bonus points were introduced to encourage teams to keep pushing for the full 80 minutes, that's what England did in Paris, don't criticise them for doing so. I agree that it feels a little hollow that we win when we were level on points with a team that we lost to but them's the rules, suck it up.

If it were decided on head to heads we were second. If you decided it on tries scored we were again second (France scored 3 more), if you decide it on tries conceded we finish first; bizarrely only Italy conceded more tries than the much lauded Shaun Edwards inspired French defence. Points difference is probably a better balanced overview as it takes into account both attack and defence and England were substantially ahead of France

If you want to change the rules for the 2021 tournament fill your boots, if you get the agreement of all six teams happy days. I don't like Eddie Jones selections, our performance against Italy was horrendous (do we actually have an attack coach???) but we are the 2020 champions- I haven't heard a single complaint from anyone in the France camp.

[wasps]

There's bigger battles to fight than this. The journalist should choose more wisely.

That being said, he's managed to generate half a dozen comments here.
That's probably job done