Always a Wasp
General Category => Wasps Rugby Discussion => Topic started by: Rossm on February 15, 2022, 04:27:30 PM
-
Sorry to hear about Brad. Glad that it's not worse.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/harlequins-v-wasps-injury-updates-23107317 (https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/harlequins-v-wasps-injury-updates-23107317)
-
Shame about Alfie & Joe missing out for this weeks game
-
Shame about Alfie & Joe missing out for this weeks game
That isn't quite what it says. Lee is planning for them to be unavailable, but they may get released.
-
Shame about Alfie & Joe missing out for this weeks game
That isn't quite what it says. Lee is planning for them to be unavailable, but they may get released.
Think there may be some raised eyebrows from other clubs if players taken into camp(again) and then released for non game weekend. Would have been more diplomatic to go in next Monday, but guess EJ doesn’t do that.
-
Yeah, but who knows, this is mental eddie we are talking about.
-
Some good news in there. Plus we’ve not yet really seen Harris or Mills who are, I think, both available (I know Mills had a cameo v Bath). I think Gopperth needs a break for this one and with Mills available it’s a decent chance to rotate. 10/full back will be an interesting call.
-
Now confirmed that Joe and Alfie away with Eddie this weekend, also Alex Dombrandt, Marcus Smith & Joe Marchant.
-
Now confirmed that Joe and Alfie away with Eddie this weekend, also Alex Dombrandt, Marcus Smith & Joe Marchant.
Probably the biggest news from this is Quins getting Marler back given their scrum last week.
-
Not having both captains (Launchbury & Shields) available this week isn’t ideal. We need a strong character to step in … I’d like to see Stooke become skipper.
-
Quite strange that Marler has been jettisoned for the game versus Wales.
Maybe something has gone on.
Or maybe Eddie just being weird again.
As Lol alludes to on his new podcast, while Ireland and France have really grown over the past 2 years, England have gone backwards.
And the lack of continuity and a clear strategy have to be the main reasons why.
-
Really don’t understand why mental Eddie needs take Joe and Alfie, surely more game time is best for them.
Some very good players missing for this weekends game, going to make it difficult
-
Really don’t understand why mental Eddie needs take Joe and Alfie, surely more game time is best for them.
Some very good players missing for this weekends game, going to make it difficult
From the Beeb:
Number eight Sam Simmonds will not train because of a hip issue and Alfie Barbeary has been called up.
After starts in the opening-round defeat by Scotland and Sunday's victory against Italy, lock Nick Isiekwe is left out of the squad.
Fellow second row Jonny Hill is recovering from an injury to his calf bone, while Joe Launchbury is once again in the training group, having made his last England appearance over a year ago because of injury.
England forwards: Barbeary, Chessum, Cowan-Dickie, Curry, Dombrandt, Ewels, Genge, George, Itoje, Launchbury, Pearson, Rodd, Sinckler, Stuart.
Backs: Daly, Ford, Malins, Marchant, Nowell, Randall, Slade, Smith, Steward, Tuilagi, Youngs.
-
The problem is that the “fate” or even “integrity” of the GP is being decided on the whim of a crass egotist. Release Marler? Why? Maybe there is a reason. Keep two players in a training camp who’ve just got back into their stride and really need match minutes. It’s insane. The sooner we’re rid of this joker the better.
-
Plus 2
-
The problem is that the “fate” or even “integrity” of the GP is being decided on the whim of a crass egotist. Release Marler? Why? Maybe there is a reason. Keep two players in a training camp who’ve just got back into their stride and really need match minutes. It’s insane. The sooner we’re rid of this joker the better.
Herein is a big part of the problem. EJ doesn’t think he needs to communicate to fans what he’s doing and why. It’s the lack of respect, not the action itself. We may not agree with him if he told us, but at least we be able to accept his reasoning, or not.
-
I know that criticism of Eddie Jones is standard practice but I do think we sometime expect too much and if it was a head coach other than Jones then their every action and inaction wouldn't be criticised in such fine detail.
To me these decision do seem to make sense. If Simmonds is out then Alfie would be the best replacement and England have been missing Launchbury for some time. We may feel that them playing club games is best but Jones disagrees and has made this clear many times that he thinks international rugby is a different standard and would rather have time with the players in camp. Aflie and Joe have only had a couple of days so the extended time from now 'till the Wales game gives Jones and the coaches plenty of time to ensure their fitness is at the standard they require and run plays etc. Yes, it's annoying for us but it is what it is.
Re Marler, he's under no obligation to say why he has been released but Marler's mental health issues are known and he has been very open about some of them and it may be that it was felt he would benefit from some time out of the camp, alternatively he may have a slight niggle or something similar. I don't think that any coach should feel required to give full explanation for every decision they make. Look at Leicester for instance and they don't release any information on injuries etc.
Having touched on mental health I once again see that Jones is described as 'mental Eddie'. As someone who has spent their while life dealing with acute mental health issues it saddens me when I see 'mental' used as a pejorative slur. I have almost given up trying to explain how the continued normalisation of 'mental' as an insult makes an already difficult life even more challenging for those who live with various conditions as it increases the stigma, inhibits understanding and makes it more difficult to be open and honest about your condition.
I don't want to be the 'word' or 'thought' police and I have been told to 'bore off', 'it's just banter', 'stop being so 'woke'' etc enough time to know that with a lot of people it is pointless but I thought I'd say anyway.
-
Agree with most of that Jac A
-
Herein is a big part of the problem. EJ doesn’t think he needs to communicate to fans what he’s doing and why. It’s the lack of respect, not the action itself. We may not agree with him if he told us, but at least we be able to accept his reasoning, or not.
Eddie operates a mushroom strategy - feeds us shit and keeps us in the dark ;D.
The thing is, most of the time he can't communicate his reasons for strategic or other reasons. For example, part of the reason he takes players into camp sometimes is to balance the disadvantage suffered by the clubs as a result of taking away their best players. The RFU and corporate sponsors especially won't let him openly talk about this though, for the same reason the press don't talk about his constant sandbagging and experimentation in the Six Nations. The official story is that the premiership is the 'greatest domestic rugby league in the world', and the 6N is the 'world's greatest rugby championship'. The fact that the former is decimated by international tournaments every year and the latter is basically a sandpit for WC 2023 in Eddie and RFU's eyes is hardly something the sponsors want pointed out to fans, partners and potential subscribers.
Exeter for example have been decimated by England selections and their entire domestic season is compromised by it. For some teams it will be the difference between playoffs and Europe, and nothing. Clubs are obviously going to pressure the RFU and England to try and keep the playing field somewhat even.
For example, Launchbury could be a logical choice for the above reasons, plus the fact that he wants to onboard him even if he doesn't play in the short term, because he is part of England's longer term plans. There could be any number of reasons which we are just not privy to.
-
People tend to take the oversimplified and usually dogma driven narrative one gets from the press on Eddie Jones, England selections, Rugby and everything else far too seriously. Is he 'stubborn', or 'narcissistic', or a 'dictator' etc. etc? The players don't appear to think so in general, but let's just say he is for arguments sake. It doesn't change the fact that his strategy and performance is constantly monitored and reviewed by the RFU and he would be fired immediately if what he's doing now wasn't part of a coherent strategy towards WC 2023. There would also be an immediate mutiny from England's players if selections were as senseless as some make out.
The thing that some armchair analysts need to remember is that if his strategy were transparent, obvious to us even, then he probably wouldn't be doing his job right.
Art of war!
-
The problem is that the “fate” or even “integrity” of the GP is being decided on the whim of a crass egotist. Release Marler? Why? Maybe there is a reason. Keep two players in a training camp who’ve just got back into their stride and really need match minutes. It’s insane. The sooner we’re rid of this joker the better.
+3
And let alone the tactics that now appear to be in place "let's have a holding pattern of random backs until Manu is fit"....
-
It doesn't change the fact that his strategy and performance is constantly monitored and reviewed by the RFU
Califauna….where do you get this from?
Who at the RFU has been constantly monitoring and reviewing Eddie’s performance?
Or more to the point, what qualifications do these monitors have?
I’d like to know which experienced rugby expert Eddie is actually accountable to?
-
The thing that some armchair analysts need to remember is that if his strategy were transparent, obvious to us even, then he probably wouldn't be doing his job right.
Well i'm totally confused, I thought it was about winning games and not playing players out of position. Is he hoping that the other team things we not that good and not try so hard. I apricate we might not know how to do a training day but I do know you don't play Curry at 8 or Elliot Daly at full back
-
The problem is that the “fate” or even “integrity” of the GP is being decided on the whim of a crass egotist. Release Marler? Why? Maybe there is a reason. Keep two players in a training camp who’ve just got back into their stride and really need match minutes. It’s insane. The sooner we’re rid of this joker the better.
Herein is a big part of the problem. EJ doesn’t think he needs to communicate to fans what he’s doing and why. It’s the lack of respect, not the action itself. We may not agree with him if he told us, but at least we be able to accept his reasoning, or not.
If he told us, he's also telling the other nations his plans.
Why does he need to tell us?
-
The problem is that the “fate” or even “integrity” of the GP is being decided on the whim of a crass egotist. Release Marler? Why? Maybe there is a reason. Keep two players in a training camp who’ve just got back into their stride and really need match minutes. It’s insane. The sooner we’re rid of this joker the better.
Herein is a big part of the problem. EJ doesn’t think he needs to communicate to fans what he’s doing and why. It’s the lack of respect, not the action itself. We may not agree with him if he told us, but at least we be able to accept his reasoning, or not.
If he told us, he's also telling the other nations his plans.
Why does he need to tell us?
I agree, not interested about him telling us anything, I just want him to win something, why would you not take the 6 nations seriously. Especially when you haven't won the 6 Nations for 5 years. 5th last season is totally unacceptable and the likely chance this year we might finish 4th at best. Coaches are paid to win games and that's how you are judged. Highest paid coach needs to show he is good, doing something odd and still losing isn't going to do it.
-
I know the last two years have felt like a drag, but I'm pretty certain it's not been five years since England won the 2020 Six Nations.
-
I agree, not interested about him telling us anything, I just want him to win something, why would you not take the 6 nations seriously. Especially when you haven't won the 6 Nations for 5 years. 5th last season is totally unacceptable and the likely chance this year we might finish 4th at best. Coaches are paid to win games and that's how you are judged. Highest paid coach needs to show he is good, doing something odd and still losing isn't going to do it.
4th at best seems like quite a statement considering we're currently sat in 2nd. I know we've had Italy already, but there's a long way to go.
-
I know the last two years have felt like a drag, but I'm pretty certain it's not been five years since England won the 2020 Six Nations.
Sorry I meant the slam, which was in his first year
-
There’s a solution to it. Don’t play GP games when the 6N is on. Reduce that window by dropping Italy who are not good enough to be in it anyway. Everyone gets a natural week off due to only five competing. You can then insert a couple of Prem cup games for part of the 6N and either bring the season forward a week or two and extend it to fit it all in.
-
The reason Eddie keeps getting criticism is he is (a) very disrespectful, throwing verbal hand grenades and talks about other teams, including those England are not playing, in a way that many England fans find distasteful and (b) He seems to think the world cup is a 4 year (or 8 year) plan that requires England to play terribly for long term gain whilst playing multiple players out of positions and changing his assistant coaches every few months. Which might be news to South Africa, who in 2016 were literally losing to Italy and won the whole thing in 2019 by simply the changing head coaching + team once and picking their best players on a game by game basis. The world cup is a year or 18 month plan at best, nothing done in 2021 or 2020 will be impacting 2023 beyond selecting good players and sticking with them. I have heard a lot of utter garbage about over training training now for two years/eighteen months time or whatever. It is utter, utter tosh. You don't hear of the All Blacks beasting their players to death's door and their fans or management saying "it is ok, they are planing for 24 months time". You cannot overtrain now and produce long term results in two years, a simple look at the teams from two years ago will tell you that they are not the same players, will have played and missed lots of games and had lots on injuries in the intervening time and whilst there might be the odd sports scientist spouting on about bollock naked emperors two years in the future, I have, to be honest, very rarely met sports scientists spouting such twaddle. Most think in far smaller timescales. (c) He keeps failing to beat Scotland, something symbolic of the fact that he has a worse 6N record than Lancaster by some margin, especially post 2017 (d) His teams have come across as sourly, especially in defeat. Whilst some of them have acquitted themselves well, some of the post match interviews have revealed a culture that should be stamped out. (e) Eddie himself keeps having a pop and journalists in a way that makes him seem like a total arse, without a record to back it up. When a winner behaves like that, as happens in football with successful managers, at least the fans can point to their record and excuse awful behaviour with "they are a winner, it is part of who they are". Eddie does not have that excuse, and behaves in a way that makes him seem petty and thin skinned. It is a 5 team tournament, in reality, and his overall record does not suggest he should be spouting off in a way reminiscent of Jose mourhino, Arsene Wenger or Sir Alex Ferguson. A few cues from Dai Young or Rob Baxter would not go amiss.
The RFU don't have top coaches or a head honcho monitoring Eddie, and they don't have a succession plan. If they did, after the last world cup Eddie would have left and been thanked for two great years, two poor ones and a great world cup.
-
Califauna….where do you get this from?
He's contracted by and accountable to RFU. They are the people who decide to hire and fire him, so naturally they are going to be looking at how/what he is doing. When England came 4th in 2020 6N nations you must remember all the hubbub? RFU said independent experts would be brought in and EJ would be under constant review going forward, etc?
So, there's are a few possibilities as I see it:
1. EJ is a narcissistic, delusional, megalomaniac with totalitarian control over English Rugby and no concern for his future employment prospects, on a crusade to stick it to journalists and fans everywhere by any means possible, including shafting his own employers and their national team.
2. He is a double agent inserted by Dave Rennie so Australia win WC 2023.
3. There is a rational strategy to be found here.
I can appreciate and sympathize with those who are disillusioned with performances and the style of rugby over the last few years, as well as EJ's evasiveness in interviews, but EJs and RFU's main priority is WC2023. Until EJ came along we hadn't reached a WC final since 2007. They've been pretty clear about it.
The reality of playing winning rugby is that you show your hand to the armies of analysts and coaches of other national teams when you play your best players in their best positions playing their best style of rugby, and divulge information to journalists. As pointed out by others above, what we know, everyone else knows.
We don't quite have the players that France, SA and maybe NZ have, and the established depth in my opinion. The edge has to come from somewhere. I think the heavy rotation of players and versatility focus is logical, at least credible. It raises the overall ceiling of the players, allows us to come into tournies as underdogs, takes players out of their comfort zones, provides some legal sandbagging and hides where squad is at, disguises playing structures and shapes until WC, changes the dynamic of competition from player vs player to players vs players (less personal), and allows focusing on timing a peak for WC 2023. Also increases probability of discovering 'hidden' gems like Curry and Underhill in 2017.
Frustrating if you're looking for winning performances in the meantime though.
-
Until EJ came along we hadn't reached a WC final since 2003.
Well England were in the 2007 World Cup Final. So you you are probably talking b**ll*cks.
Coaches will obviously have things they don't want to disclose before a tournament but they need to have some idea about how to play and what personnel are required. They will definitely be trying to create a winning team and learning from defeats.
Clive Woodward famously said "Judge me at the World Cup" before 1999, where England didn't fare too well. However, he created the basis of a team that stayed together long enough to win in 2003. By that time they were actually in decline, which is why they didn't kick on from then.
Brian Ashton used player lead initiatives after the 2007 group stage didn't go so well and was unlucky not to win it in the end.
Eddie may have done ok in 2019 but it's obvious he hasn't got a core side or coherent strategy that will last until 2023 unlike SCW. And he is obviously not advocating player power.
Maybe the SA turnaround for 2019 by appointing a new coach who put together a winning strategy based on players available to him is the best historical context to work out what's needed.
-
Until EJ came along we hadn't reached a WC final since 2003.
Well England were in the 2007 World Cup Final. So you you are probably talking b**ll*cks.
2003 is indeed a load of bollocks! Have corrected this.
So what's your view on the current strategy of selecting players out of position and focusing on versatility etc.? Are you saying that in your view he's not actually playing a long term game here and is simply picking to win recent 6N, but is just making awful selections, and the result is England doing badly? Or that his strategy is indeed probably the one I alluded to, but in your opinion that strategy is a bad one?
-
Underdogs don't tend to win World Cups. When England won in 2003 they were #1 having had a long run of victories including Australia and NZ away.
It's about timing of when you reach peak performance. You don't want to peak too early as Ireland often do. However, you need to identify the players that are good enough and build a game plan around them with enough time to create a cohesive team. You will keep some moves back but not playing style even if you have multiple styles.
It's not clear to me that Jones knows the players or style yet. He makes wildcard picks of people with no experience who disappear without trace, picks people who have loads of experience but lack form, relies on key individuals who maybe don't fit how the team is evolving and plays players out of position which nullifies their best attributes.
I get that versatility is useful in a tournament squad but the players must have experience in the positions they play and be good enough. Daly at fullback was a glaringly obvious mistake that he persisted with. He was fine on the wing but a terrible 15.
I get the impression when Eddie thinks he's right facts don't matter. He's still got time to create a side to win in 2023 but unless he moves on from picking Youngs and identifies and plays a few scrum halves that work with Smith I doubt he will.
-
Until EJ came along we hadn't reached a WC final since 2003.
Clive Woodward famously said "Judge me at the World Cup" before 1999, where England didn't fare too well.
Brian Ashton used player lead initiatives after the 2007 group stage didn't go so well and was unlucky not to win it in the end.
I'm not sure either of these examples are true?
The Woodward piece was misconstrued - He was asked whether thought Coaches were typically judged on the World Cup results to which he said yes, he thought they were. The press turned that into 'Judge me on the World Cup' - It's not quite the same thing.
I'm not sure Ashton did anything different between the Group/Knock-Out stages in 2007 (Happy to be corrected if it's definitely wrong) but I thought the difference was the players, instigated by the Senior Members of the Squad, took charge of the game plans/tactics for the KOs - So was player forced, rather than Ashton deciding to use player-led initiatives.
That being said, he's fairly well-spoken about for being an open-minded coach who's ideas were more of a framework than a gameplan.
-
Until EJ came along we hadn't reached a WC final since 2003.
Clive Woodward famously said "Judge me at the World Cup" before 1999, where England didn't fare too well.
Brian Ashton used player lead initiatives after the 2007 group stage didn't go so well and was unlucky not to win it in the end.
I'm not sure either of these examples are true?
The Woodward piece was misconstrued - He was asked whether thought Coaches were typically judged on the World Cup results to which he said yes, he thought they were. The press turned that into 'Judge me on the World Cup' - It's not quite the same thing.
I'm not sure Ashton did anything different between the Group/Knock-Out stages in 2007 (Happy to be corrected if it's definitely wrong) but I thought the difference was the players, instigated by the Senior Members of the Squad, took charge of the game plans/tactics for the KOs - So was player forced, rather than Ashton deciding to use player-led initiatives.
That being said, he's fairly well-spoken about for being an open-minded coach who's ideas were more of a framework than a gameplan.
Yeah, i remember 2007 as being a revolt against Ashton's leadership / style.
Some see that as a mega master plan from Brian Ashton to get the players to take responsibility, but I'm really not so sure that was the case
-
Eddie may have done ok in 2019 but it's obvious he hasn't got a core side or coherent strategy that will last until 2023 unlike SCW.
Assuming he stays on, what is your prediction on where England will finish in 2023 WC under Eddie Jones?
-
Eddie may have done ok in 2019 but it's obvious he hasn't got a core side or coherent strategy that will last until 2023 unlike SCW.
Assuming he stays on, what is your prediction on where England will finish in 2023 WC under Eddie Jones?
Depends on the draw but Semis at best.
-
Until EJ came along we hadn't reached a WC final since 2003.
Clive Woodward famously said "Judge me at the World Cup" before 1999, where England didn't fare too well.
Brian Ashton used player lead initiatives after the 2007 group stage didn't go so well and was unlucky not to win it in the end.
I'm not sure either of these examples are true?
The Woodward quote was. Here's an article where he mentions it. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2001/sep/17/rugbyunion.comment (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2001/sep/17/rugbyunion.comment)
I do recall in 2007 the players were supposed to have disregarded the coaches and hatched a plan based on Wasps and Leicester attributes. However, Ashton was a big advocate of heads up rugby and empowering players to make decisions. Which is what they did. Not sure about the other coaches though.
-
Depends on the draw but Semis at best.
Looking at the draw, which is the most likely outcome for you - not making it out of the group stages, losing in the quarters, or losing in the semis?
-
Depends on the draw but Semis at best.
Looking at the draw, which is the most likely outcome for you - not making it out of the group stages, losing in the quarters, or losing in the semis?
Would expect to beat Wales or Australia in a quarter final , but lose to NZ or France in semis
-
Teams that win tournaments are teams that are usually good the majority of the time.
This idea of pretending to be rubbish so that you can launch a master plan at they big tournaments is like an old school Disney TV script.
I just don't believe that it happens in the real world at elite levels.
Not only that, but I'm not sure that Eddie has history of that approach either.
He shocked some teams when he was with Japan, but not because he'd lulled them into a false sense of security.
If you're a team capable of beating everyone, then do it.
Live off the confidence that it brings, see the confidence drain from your opponents when you beat them every time you play them......
And then, at the world cup, ride that wave to the trophy.
In reality, I believe Eddie wants a team where all the players are interchangeable. He's been trying to win a world cup that way for years, and he's still trying.
-
Teams that win tournaments are teams that are usually good the majority of the time.
This idea of pretending to be rubbish so that you can launch a master plan at they big tournaments is like an old school Disney TV script.
I just don't believe that it happens in the real world at elite levels.
In reality, I believe Eddie wants a team where all the players are interchangeable. He's been trying to win a world cup that way for years, and he's still trying.
Agree with that. The "hiding our best moves" strategy sounds a lot like a new excuse for playing badly/in a limited way/in a confused style.
It may well be that I am too inward looking - but players needs roles on the pitch and in the team. That usually coincides with their shirt number and their club position. There are areas where players interchange more often, but that's probably 10/12 and wing/FB in the backline and maybe 6 and SR in the pack. But to keep on trying to use 13's at 12 (I really feel for Lawrence) and Manu and Slade are both mainly/always club 13's.
The place a player like Daly is most useful is on the bench, covering so many shirts......The fantasy hybrid team wasn't possible years ago with the Aussie team from 2003, and really isn't now. We see a bit more flex at club level, but it's not common.
-
The problem with Eddie is that he’s an obsessive style of person.
Truly obsessive.
He’s in his head all day, all night…and I don’t think he sleeps that long either.
I’m sure he’s got great intentions.
The problem is…he’s literally got a hundred-thousand ideas flying around his head.
He’s obsessively scoured all sports for answers and insights.
Yet, at the end of it all, he can’t decide on one particular style of play.
He’s got too much going on up top (which is very common for an obsessive/highly controlling personality).
It also means he doesn’t delegate very well, as he doesn’t trust anyone else to do as good as a job as himself.
He’s so consumed by his own pride/ego/narrative that failure is way too much of a big deal for him.
So much so, that he wants to control every aspect of every play.
You’ll get another England head coach come in next…and hopefully they’ll simply have 20 ideas that they’ll try to put into place.
They may not be quite so obsessed about losing a game in the same way Eddie is, which will allow them empower the players more to make their own decisions and lead on the field.
Forget fear of failure, but play to excite, excel and win.
From there you can build a system, an identity, a way of playing and stick to it.
Eddie’s not a bad guy. He’s just the wrong person to be coaching England right now.
His obsessive approach can work for a year or two.
But then everyone gets exhausted by it…and there’s little fun or enjoyment in the process.
-
“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”
Formula 1 is where it gets talked about most, but sandbagging is a part of all elite level sports. Perhaps some to a greater degree than others. Art of war!
It's not necessary to pretend to be rubbish if you adopt the right strategy. Focusing on versatility and selecting on that basis will naturally negatively affect performance levels in the short-term, but have a number of advantages in the long term. So will picking on a basis of depth development.
I agree that he's trying to get an edge through versatility.
-
Eddie’s not a bad guy. He’s just the wrong person to be coaching England right now.
How far do you think England will get in WC 2023?
-
Eddie’s not a bad guy. He’s just the wrong person to be coaching England right now.
How far do you think England will get in WC 2023?
Why keep asking the same question?
-
Eddie’s not a bad guy. He’s just the wrong person to be coaching England right now.
How far do you think England will get in WC 2023?
I have no idea, but then again I’m not one of these people solely focused on the World Cup. The whole tournament has 2-3 games of real significance. It happens every four years.
I’d much prefer to have a consistent philosophy by a far more composed and cohesive head coach, with a better culture and environment for the players.
I’d like us to being playing inspiring rugby at every possible opportunity, not once every 4 years.
-
Talking about 2023 is bull.
I am sorry, knock out rugby is knock out rugby.
New Zealand won in 87, then next won in 2011, despite being top of the rankings for much of the intervening time, and that was by a point with a truely terrible and one sided reffing performance by Joubert. Were NZ better than Australia in 2003? Yes. Were they better than France in 99? Yes. Did they lose to both? Yes. Were England better than Australia and France in 2007? No. Did they beat both? Yes. We could be here all day. There are bucketsful of examples.
Planning to win WC is like planning to win penalty shootouts. You don't screw around for two years for a tournament that can be ruined by a red in the first five minutes of the quarters. You win the events you are in,experiment in the easier matches, and build momentum.
No team that wins WC indulges in this masterplan stuff.
-
I sometimes ask people what their predictions are as it perfectly distills their idea of how good the coach and squad are and will be.
Curiously I often find that people who slam EJ end up giving me a prediction that England will reach the semis or final, whilst simultaneously claiming that England's raw material in terms of players/talent/depth isn't all that great. Seems like a bit of a contradiction.
-
I’d like us to being playing inspiring rugby at every possible opportunity, not once every 4 years.
Fair enough. RFU and EJ clearly have different priorities though. 2023 and 2027.
-
Talking about 2023 is bull.
I am sorry, knock out rugby is knock out rugby.
New Zealand won in 87, then next won in 2011, despite being top of the rankings for much of the intervening time, and that was by a point with a truely terrible and one sided reffing performance by Joubert. Were NZ better than Australia in 2003? Yes. Were they better than France in 99? Yes. Did they lose to both? Yes. Were England better than Australia and France in 2007? No. Did they beat both? Yes. We could be here all day. There are bucketsful of examples.
Planning to win WC is like planning to win penalty shootouts. You don't screw around for two years for a tournament that can be ruined by a red in the first five minutes of the quarters. You win the events you are in,experiment in the easier matches, and build momentum.
No team that wins WC indulges in this masterplan stuff.
Good points, very well made.
-
Talking about 2023 is bull.
...
You win the events you are in,experiment in the easier matches, and build momentum.
Why only experiment in 'easy' matches?
Why are we assuming that there is no plan to build momentum in 2023? Seems like enough time to me personally. Is it really necessary to win all that much 18 months out? SA weren't. England could win or challenge for 6N 2023, win the WC warm ups. That up to 8/9 matches on the bounce.
-
I understand and appreciate the idea of hiding your secret weapons.
But you're not meant to lose games in the meantime.
You're meant to scrape through, not playing your best and not showing your hand, but still win.
As for where I think we'll get to in a world cup, we're currently 3rd in the rankings (I believe)
Therefore, if the cup was tomorrow, anything short of a semi final would be a failure, and a final would be a success
-
As for where I think we'll get to in a world cup, we're currently 3rd in the rankings (I believe)
Therefore, if the cup was tomorrow, anything short of a semi final would be a failure, and a final would be a success
Again, sounds like an endorsement to me. It's in no small part due to EJ that England are 3rd best team in the world isn't it?
What's your prediction for 2023?
You're meant to scrape through, not playing your best and not showing your hand, but still win.
Why? And why will it always even be possible to win every match WITHOUT showing your hand? Beating Ireland and France surely requires precisely this - bringing your A-game?
-
Now confirmed that Joe and Alfie away with Eddie this weekend, also Alex Dombrandt, Marcus Smith & Joe Marchant.
Probably the biggest news from this is Quins getting Marler back given their scrum last week.
Reported that Marler requested to be released to play against Wasps …
https://www.ruck.co.uk/requested-release-joe-marler-asks-out-from-latest-england-squad/
-
;D
-
As for where I think we'll get to in a world cup, we're currently 3rd in the rankings (I believe)
Therefore, if the cup was tomorrow, anything short of a semi final would be a failure, and a final would be a success
Again, sounds like an endorsement to me. It's in no small part due to EJ that England are 3rd best team in the world isn't it?
What's your prediction for 2023?
You're meant to scrape through, not playing your best and not showing your hand, but still win.
Why? And why will it always even be possible to win every match WITHOUT showing your hand? Beating Ireland and France surely requires precisely this - bringing your A-game?
I too think England will reach the semifinals in 2023 , purely because of the draw.
However For me the 6n is a much better measure of performance as it comes round once a year and has , normally, the same amount of meaningful matches to be champions. It should have the same focus to win .
-
Worth noting that England made the quarters in 87, final in 91, quarters 95, 99, won it 03, final 07, quarters 11, group 15, final 19.
So in 30 years 91 -19, 1 win, 3 runners up, 3 quarters, 1 blank.
So predicting a semi is entirely in keeping with England's mean average over 30 years, literally just business as usual, and not a contradiction for those with a low opinion of Eddie.
You have to remember all this talk of England having a large pool of poor players is, just that, talk. It simply is not true. It is fair to say we are not taking from the top of the athlete pool unlike NZ, but the game has plenty of cash and a rich audience to fund the game. France and Australia also have other competing sports that dwarf rugby union, and have made 3 and 4 finals each.
England's win pc vs NZ is historically poor, about 20%, but they are 50 pc vs Australia and high thirties vs the springboks. And before anyone says 'Eddie has contributed to that vs Australia' he has indeed, and if you stop the SA clock with Andy Robinson we had a 50 win ratio vs the SA, it does happen as things are cyclical to an extent. Eddie gets full credit for beating Australia, even if everyone else is.
We are historically up vs the NH teams, albeit not by much vs Wales, who have a dismal record vs all three SH teams compared to us. Constantly making a semi in soccer is an unreasonable expectation for England's fans and press. Making one in rugby is a fair expectation given our historical record. England have spent most of 90s and first half of the 00s being top table in world rugby terms, and the rest of the time close to it, even if we had some rough periods, the overall performance is if a top 4 team. So Eddie's England ranking in the top 4 is about par for the historical course over 30 years. Not something to criticise about, nor to praise. Where the criticism comes is the 6n 2018 till now.
I don't want to waste years worrying about if we fail, which could could simply be losing a tight one in the quarters against a good team from a pool of death or hitting a better team having been in a pool of death ourselves) or succeed (beat an OK to dangerous team and a good team) to make the final, or maybe two good teams.
-
Talking about 2023 is bull.
I am sorry, knock out rugby is knock out rugby.
New Zealand won in 87, then next won in 2011, despite being top of the rankings for much of the intervening time, and that was by a point with a truely terrible and one sided reffing performance by Joubert. Were NZ better than Australia in 2003? Yes. Were they better than France in 99? Yes. Did they lose to both? Yes. Were England better than Australia and France in 2007? No. Did they beat both? Yes. We could be here all day. There are bucketsful of examples.
Planning to win WC is like planning to win penalty shootouts. You don't screw around for two years for a tournament that can be ruined by a red in the first five minutes of the quarters. You win the events you are in,experiment in the easier matches, and build momentum.
No team that wins WC indulges in this masterplan stuff.
Good points, very well made.
Thank you. I think most people feel that way.
-
Plus 1
-
Plus 2
I expect England to be one of the top 4 teams in world rugby. But I really don't expect the RWC to be the be all of our ambitions. Having been to a WC, even back in 87, it was easy to see just how knife edged wins are, especially in the knock out phase. My only expectation is that given the resource devoted to international rugby by England, that we have a coherent plan and way of playing, year to year. And we play the best we can. This means being competitive in the 6Ns and on tours. The 6Ns is the annual highlight and matters to this fan at least.
I'm no fan of Jones, but finishing 5th, twice, ought to provoke some questions about what our priorities are and how we're going about it. Sure, none of us can know what's going on at England level - but last season in the 6Ns ought to have been a heads up...