It Wasn't Eddie's Fault

[Rossm]

I was painting canal side stonework for the CRT with whitewash on Sunday (I volunteer at Knowle Locks), but we ran out as two of the big tubs of whitewash were missing from our order. Now I know where they went.

 

[petros]

well all the EA players and Mark Wilson were clearly not going to be match fit yet constituted a  hair percentage of the team

[mike909]

When I suggested elsewhere that:

I merely suggesting the output from a highly paid coach and players, last season wasn't up to scratch and that probably needed some explanation. And one beyond "we'll come to that later" It's quite insulting to fans too. And the explanations provided are limp

It's as if many so called England fans are happy to "wait to see" because "Eddie has spoken" and said that attack would come later...

Which was rich, given the defence was ordinary and the front foot looked fine...in the moments when the team didn't look like they'd just met....

[Vespula Vulgaris]

Jeez.

So Eddie didn't have the right coaching team, he picked the wrong players, they weren't fit enough (despite being in his camp beforehand), they did the wrong things on the pitch, and yet it wasn't his fault.

Can someone just give him a bloody trophy so he'll piss off and then we can get back to actually playing rugby.

[Horusthewasp]

Jeez.

So Eddie didn't have the right coaching team, he picked the wrong players, they weren't fit enough (despite being in his camp beforehand), they did the wrong things on the pitch, and yet it wasn't his fault.

Can someone just give him a bloody trophy so he'll piss off and then we can get back to actually playing rugby.

Poor bloke should get a bonus and a contract extension having had to deal with all those “mitigating factors”!

[wasps]

With regards to selection, was Eddie restricted to picking the bulk of his squad from the EPS?


We don't hear a lot about the EPS these days, but a few years ago, you were only allowed to select the squad from the EPS, and could only make changes to it a couple of times per year.

Without sounding like I'm trying to defend Eddie (cos I'm really not), were his hands tied a bit on selection?

(Even though I ask the question, I still expect Eddie would have picked Farrell, George, Itoje, Daly etc even if there was no EPS)

[Rossm]

With regards to selection, was Eddie restricted to picking the bulk of his squad from the EPS?


We don't hear a lot about the EPS these days, but a few years ago, you were only allowed to select the squad from the EPS, and could only make changes to it a couple of times per year.

Without sounding like I'm trying to defend Eddie (cos I'm really not), were his hands tied a bit on selection?

(Even though I ask the question, I still expect Eddie would have picked Farrell, George, Itoje, Daly etc even if there was no EPS)

Simple question. Why did he initially stick with only 28 in his squad (bubble), one of whom he clearly had no intention of playing at all?

[Trevs Big Tackle]

Surely Saracens were already relegated before the EPS was selected. Eddie knew who wouldn't be getting top level games. The Championship fixtures were probably already delayed before he picked the EPS.

[mike909]

Reflecting and looking at the Guardian coverage, several key issues appear. Many commentators BTL on that paper suggest that Jones' record and that he's said "we'll deal with attack later" means I was being churlish, to suggest it's reasonable that being the most highly paid coach means there is rightly an expectation of results.

But specifics:
A) Selection. His squad was his choice, knowing that the EA players were not match fit
B) Selection, within a 28 man squad, a man he was never going to play, a man with 4 Prem starts and a man in Lawrence, not even given a sniff - means you had to play unfit out of form players.
C) Penalty machines - the failure to recognise how the breakdown reffing was evolving (you only had to watch some Pro 14 ffs or any SH games) is the coach's fault
D) Attitude. Losses are never great but performances like those vs Scotland, Ireland and Wales reflect upon how the squad and coach are going.....even in 2018, the team didn't give up.
E) Defence. It wasn't the attack that was the problem, but leaking points - c.f. Italy game.....

It's not too late to change...c.f South Africa.....My feeling is that Jones' tenure will leave England in a weaker position than when he took over. Lancaster's record was only (and it's a big only) blotted by the RWC and losing one game, essentially...by 3 points....and being pissed about with big Sam. But doing well on tours to NZ and SA....Jones took that squad - based in part on other people's work on the U-20's and did well enough as new coach and then, seemed to lose his way. A losing RWC final means he's as good or bad as Geoff Cooke and Brian Ashton......

But looking forwards - England have a lot of really good younger players who need to be brought through and I don't think that's likely, and unlike the other 6Ns teams, we didn't use the Autumn Cup to take a wider look and ended up reconfirming a conservative game plan and conservative selection, still with little idea of who would be next in line for the spine of the team.

I would like to be proved wrong...but without some intelligent movement, we'll just continue to be the England who can win any game, but often look clueless when matched or there is a need to move off script. 

[baldpaul101]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/56830518

Chris Jones saying on the BBC what everyone on here has said

[mike909]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/56830518

Chris Jones saying on the BBC what everyone on here has said

Can't argue with that!