[2014 EOYT] England v Samoa

[goodNumber10]

Eastmond is injured, you know he's on RTP protocols for concussion right?


also this just came up in my stream:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Ford &amp; Farrell execute a wrap-around for England U16 v Millfield School in 2008. Months later they were with the U18s <a href="http://t.co/ouoKNdB1i6">http://t.co/ouoKNdB1i6</a></p>&mdash; Charlie Morgan (@CharlieFelix) <a href="https://twitter.com/CharlieFelix/status/535399366232928256">November 20, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


and:

http://www.rugbyworld.com/countries/england-countries/george-ford-owen-farrell-story-far/

 

[Crapspray]

Clearly favouritism as there is nothing barritt and Farrell can do that eastmond and JJ can't do better.

In all seriousness, defence.

I don't think it's favouritism for specific players, but a type of player and gameplan. I don't think Lancaster specifically likes Clark (though the cliché, "I know him from my time at Leeds." came up), but more because he has a penchant for 6.5s with good engines. See: Wood, Robshaw, and Johnson. Same with big-ish defensive centres and steady fly-halves.

The problem I see is the disconnect between where England were going, an expanded game, and continuing to select those types of players. Lancaster's current failing, for me, is not one of nepotism, but rather clinging to selection policy for a gameplan that was dropped after the Cardiff thrashing.

That's what's been most disappointing about the last two losses. They've been collective and coaching failures. To fix them will require far more radical changes throughout the team than just dropping a couple of supposed "favourites".

---

As for this weekend's test, I think England by about 20. Mainly due to organisation/time in camp. Something like the Argentina test last autumn: start well, score a few, and then a dull slogging match for the next forty. An incomplete performance that addresses none of the serious problems, nor answers major questions. Kvesic, Joseph, and Slade should have played a part.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Anthony Watson running through a schools team.

 

[TheSaffycen]

In all seriousness, defence.

I don't think it's favouritism for specific players, but a type of player and gameplan. I don't think Lancaster specifically likes Clark (though the cliché, "I know him from my time at Leeds." came up), but more because he has a penchant for 6.5s with good engines. See: Wood, Robshaw, and Johnson. Same with big-ish defensive centres and steady fly-halves.

The problem I see is the disconnect between where England were going, an expanded game, and continuing to select those types of players. Lancaster's current failing, for me, is not one of nepotism, but rather clinging to selection policy for a gameplan that was dropped after the Cardiff thrashing.



---

As for this weekend's test, I think England by about 20. Mainly due to organisation/time in camp. Something like the Argentina test last autumn: start well, score a few, and then a dull slogging match for the next forty. An incomplete performance that addresses none of the serious problems, nor answers major questions. Kvesic, Joseph, and Slade should have played a part.

I agree with all that. Clark (though I hate the ****) is exactly what Lancaster wants in his back row- big, strong and jack of all trades. When he started he kind of had the Saracens backs (with Manu), with the Saints pack and used the Sarries system. Now we have players like Eastmond, Brown, Rokoduguni who don't fit into that style of play but are what we our trying to move to. Players like Robshaw and Wood have to either change their game or players like Fearns/Ewers and Kvesic/Fraser have to come in.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I agree with all that. Clark (though I hate the ****) is exactly what Lancaster wants in his back row- big, strong and jack of all trades. When he started he kind of had the Saracens backs (with Manu), with the Saints pack and used the Sarries system. Now we have players like Eastmond, Brown, Rokoduguni who don't fit into that style of play but are what we our trying to move to. Players like Robshaw and Wood have to either change their game or players like Fearns/Ewers and Kvesic/Fraser have to come in.

Imbalance in our pack has relaly been a problem. Teams need to be atheletic but when you look at us from 4-7, all of them are athletic workhorses yet none are truely powerful players. At 8 we have 2 powerful players but one of them (Vunipola) is one dimensional and as he is our only powerful player, he is easily targeted and contained. We need another option at 6 or 7 to bash the ball up and compete at the rucks. Tuilagi in midfield offers another crashball player but suffers from the same problems as Vunipola. Seriously don't understand when you have people clearly that strong why they are determined to run through players and not into space...

So the players are all good, but they all do the same job and thus the breakdown work has been completely neglected. Our tackling rate is fine and we can afford to suffer a slight bit there if it means better performance at the breakdown and another carrying option.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Haskell will make a difference in the carrying and breakdown on his own. At 4 we have Attwood now and maybe we could use Ewers at 6/8 to give more power to the pack. What a lot of people don't know is that England could possibly put out the biggest pack in the world but Lancaster doesn't like that kind of player.

 

[tonydav58]

I think its an absolute insult to the likes of Eastmond,Twelvetrees ,Joseph etc that Farrell is even considered at centre.He has no attacking skill or flair and it shows we are going back to our usual boring kicking style,,,can you imagine any other top nation making a decision like this,,,i like Lancaster but I really think he doesn't know his best team and how he wants the game played,,if he does want to play a very defensive style then we will never win the World Cup and we,ll back to square one,,,,still think its sad that the one person who could win us the big one again is sitting in the studio,,,,Clive Woodward...

 

[Peat]

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,3551_9570643,00.html




Forgetting OF's form for a moment, do people really believe that a guy like Stewie L is letting Andy Farrell select his son out of fatherly pride?

I get that people think there is a conflict of interests there, but Lancaster has been in rugby for something like 20 years, worked at all levels of the game, worked in the RFU set up a number of years and he's going to get swayed by AF?

I also think it's a bit disengenious to allude to that a guy like AF, who's shown nothing but the utmost professionalism in both codes, would butcher his own career, and chances of coaching his own country some day because of Nepotism.

i'd be very surprised if he was pushing OF purely for selfish reasons - he ahd no problems dropping him at Sarries if i recall right.

1) If Andy Farrell wasn't able to sway Lancaster on selection decisions, he would be fundamentally unable to perform his role as an assistant coach. Either he is able to influence the selection for whatever reason, or he shouldn't be there.

2) There are no end of examples of people acting as less than perfect professionals and endangering their career as a result, often people we would not expect - in every sport, in every profession, in every culture, in every era.

3) An awful lot of people's biases are subconscious and not things they realise.

4) The most crucial point is that perception is the most important thing here. Do I think the father-son relationship is affecting things inside the England camp? I don't have enough knowledge to answer that sensibly and believe that neither do 99pc of the people commenting on the issue, but I do know that some people will/have come to the belief that it is. It was/is inevitable, which is why I have never thought that Andy Farrell should be an England coach while his son was a likely contender for the squad. The issue would always come up and create a potential distraction/stick to beat England with and I don't think Andy Farrell's worth that.

A far bigger problem, tbh, is a preference towards certain types of players, both in skillset and temperament, which appears to be increasingly leading them to overlook more talented players with more to contribute; that, and as someone else pointed out, a system that doesn't really accommodate different types of players easily.

 

[SelimNiai]

Samoa Team:

15 Ken Pisi,
14 Alapati Leiua
13 Reynold Lee-Lo
12 Johnny Leota
11 David Lemi (c)
10 Tusi Pisi
9 Kahn Fotuali'i

1 Zak Taulafo
2 Ti'i Paulo
3 Census Johnston
4 Filo Paulo
5 Kane Thompson
6 Maurie Fa'asavalu
7 Jack Lam
8 Ofisa Treviranus

Replacements: 16 Manu Leiataua, 17 Viliamu Afatia, 18 Anthony Perenise, 19 Fa'atiga Lemalu, 20 Dan Leo, 21 TJ Ioane, 22 Pete Cowley, 23 Mike Stanley

Good luck to the Bristol trio and please lads, don't get injured.

 

[goodNumber10]

Anthony Watson running through a schools team.

god, that music, had to turn it off... he's a cracking player.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

If Farrell it Lancaster arn't biased then how does Owen Farrell end up at 12 above

Burrell, eastmond (concussion), 12trees, barritt, Sam Hill, slade, devoto

There is no way he gets into any club side at 12 so why would he be playing there for england without a biased approach?

 

[TheSaffycen]

Samoa Team:

15 Ken Pisi,
14 Alapati Leiua
13 Reynold Lee-Lo
12 Johnny Leota
11 David Lemi (c)
10 Tusi Pisi
9 Kahn Fotuali'i

1 Zak Taulafo
2 Ti'i Paulo
3 Census Johnston
4 Filo Paulo
5 Kane Thompson
6 Maurie Fa'asavalu
7 Jack Lam
8 Ofisa Treviranus

Replacements: 16 Manu Leiataua, 17 Viliamu Afatia, 18 Anthony Perenise, 19 Fa'atiga Lemalu, 20 Dan Leo, 21 TJ Ioane, 22 Pete Cowley, 23 Mike Stanley

Good luck to the Bristol trio and please lads, don't get injured.

Strong team on paper. Should try to target Ken Pisi as he can have a shocker sometimes at 15.

 

[goodNumber10]

If Farrell it Lancaster arn't biased then how does Owen Farrell end up at 12 above

Burrell, eastmond (concussion), 12trees, barritt, Sam Hill, slade, devoto

There is no way he gets into any club side at 12 so why would he be playing there for england without a biased approach?

let it go mate.... you'll live longer.

Samoa Team:

15 Ken Pisi,
14 Alapati Leiua
13 Reynold Lee-Lo
12 Johnny Leota
11 David Lemi (c)
10 Tusi Pisi
9 Kahn Fotuali'i

1 Zak Taulafo
2 Ti'i Paulo
3 Census Johnston
4 Filo Paulo
5 Kane Thompson
6 Maurie Fa'asavalu
7 Jack Lam
8 Ofisa Treviranus

Replacements: 16 Manu Leiataua, 17 Viliamu Afatia, 18 Anthony Perenise, 19 Fa'atiga Lemalu, 20 Dan Leo, 21 TJ Ioane, 22 Pete Cowley, 23 Mike Stanley

Good luck to the Bristol trio and please lads, don't get injured.

exciting team, i really hope it is a good open game.

 

[TommiG88]

I think I will laugh if they beat us. Farrell throwing 20 intercept passes for tries. GN10 will still have in the starting line up, maybe hooker next?

 

[goodNumber10]

I haven't picked him yet, so why would next week be different?

 

[TheSaffycen]

I haven't picked him yet, so why would next week be different?

What are you on about ? You said that Farrell should be captain, play every single minute of every single game, he is the best fly half on current form, would walk into the All Blacks and that his tears can be used as a cure for ebola and swine flu. Don't back track now boy !

 

[j'nuh]

Forgetting OF's form for a moment, do people really believe that a guy like Stewie L is letting Andy Farrell select his son out of fatherly pride?

I get that people think there is a conflict of interests there, but Lancaster has been in rugby for something like 20 years, worked at all levels of the game, worked in the RFU set up a number of years and he's going to get swayed by AF?

I also think it's a bit disengenious to allude to that a guy like AF, who's shown nothing but the utmost professionalism in both codes, would butcher his own career, and chances of coaching his own country some day because of Nepotism.

i'd be very surprised if he was pushing OF purely for selfish reasons - he ahd no problems dropping him at Sarries if i recall right.

I don't think it's a case of cynically pushing Farrell to the front of the queue purely because of nepotism.

It's that you cannot trust parents to be completely objective about their children. They may not consciously come to the conclusion that their child is better, it's more a process of remembering the quality points to your child's game compared to any other player. I bet Farrell snr. knows his son's game inside-out compared to any other player in the team, and I think that comes with a bias towards his son. It's not a criticism at all and I think it's healthy for any parent to do this.

Heck, I suspect I do this with players that I like, never mind the parent-child dynamic. When a non-Gloucester player does something good for England, I'll cheer. If a Gloucester player does the equivalent, I will cheer a lot harder. I try my best to think about the players more objectively when posting, but I recognise a bias towards Glos players.

This isn't just a criticism of Farrell either. I think that Martin Johnson had a bias towards the older players in the squad, the players I suspect he was friendlier with/had a lot of playing time with. Some examples towards the end - Moody vs Wood, Wilko vs Flood, Tindall vs Tuilagi, Easter vs Waldrom.

I would argue that it's not enough of a reason to get rid of Farrell snr. It's good enough for me if the head coach comes to his own conclusions about who should start at 10, independent of Farrell's involvement in the decision. I also think that our defence has been one of our better aspects of our play, and he deserves a lot of credit for that. My criticism of Farrell snr. is more that although our defence has been one of our better points, our attack has been by far and away our worst. England should separate the two roles with a new attack coach, and then I'm happy with Farrell to continue in the squad in a defence capacity alone.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

If Wilson is to prove he's worth his spot even with a fully fit Cole, he needs to really go after Taulafo who is a pretty poor scrummager and WILL concede penalties.

Also is Dan Leo really Samoa's next best flanker?

 

[goodNumber10]

What are you on about ? You said that Farrell should be captain, play every single minute of every single game, he is the best fly half on current form, would walk into the All Blacks and that his tears can be used as a cure for ebola and swine flu. Don't back track now boy !

no, what i said was......

 

[j'nuh]

If Wilson is to prove he's worth his spot even with a fully fit Cole, he needs to really go after Taulafo who is a pretty poor scrummager and WILL concede penalties.

Also is Dan Leo really Samoa's next best flanker?

Meh, I think Wilson is already ahead of Cole anyway now and it's for Cole to prove a point. In theory, Cole would be a fantastic option to bring on 50 minutes or so into the game.

1. Corbisiero 2. Webber 3. Wilson
16. Hartley 17. Marler 18. Cole
+ Mullan/Vunipola, Youngs/LCD/George/Paice/Ward/Taylor/Gray (quite a lot of options, open to any of these as third-choice), Brookes/Sinckler

dat depth