[2014 Mid-Year Tests] England

[goodNumber10]

Really....

Yes, really - the first thing I said was Eastmond isn't a bad tackler, but that the defensive system doesn't fit his style or size. I've said that all the way through, and from the very first issue in test 3.

That's not a criticism of Eastmond that's just how I see it, it's an informed opinion.

The point I was making is that Australia with a smaller more skillful back line is one of the best teams in the world, last year was poor but on average they are 2nd best in the world.

Australia average weight: 96.8kg
New Zealand Average Weight: 94.6kg
South Africa Average Weight: 94.3 kg

Current Southern Hemisphere backlines:

10: Foley 90 kg - Cruden 85kg - Pollard 96kg
12: Toomua - 89kg - Ma'a nonu 104kg - Serfontein 98kg
13: Kuridrani 104kg - Smith 95kg - Pietersen 101kg

14: Cummins 98kg - Savea - 108kg - Hendricks – 90kg
11: AAC 98kg - Jane – 91kg - Mvovo – 91kg
15: Folau 102kg - Smith – 85kg - Le roux 90kg


So as you can see, the sub 90kg back is not common in the modern game, importantly the teams that play a drift defence allow for less physical players – Australia, New Zealand – in the midfield. Those that play a square on don't – South Africa and England

Never said he was a destructive defender just making the point that size doesn't matter, you don't need to be 110kg + to be a good defender. In the first test Eastmond wasn't a problem and i think it was the system that failed not the players in the third, that was my original comment.

The players execute the system. The system didn't change from test one to test 3, it worked in game one, why didn't it work in game three? Because in the first test Eastmond WAS a problem, the AB's just failed to pick up on it and exploit it - they analysed his defence and in the 3rd test destroyed his reputation as a defender in less than 20 minutes.

No one is talking about 110kg, but Eastmond is small, that's just a fact, and unless he starts making those hits he is a liability in this current defensive system because it doesn't allow for momentum tackling.

That's not a criticism of the lad, it's an observation.

As i said all along, there are exceptions but Size/Weight does matter when defending, it matters in most sport i can think of.

If you throw a pebble or a brick at a wall which will do more damage?

 

[TheSaffycen]

The players execute the system. The system didn't change from test one to test 3, it worked in game one, why didn't it work in game three? Because in the first test Eastmond WAS a problem, the AB's just failed to pick up on it and exploit it - they analysed his defence and in the 3rd test destroyed his reputation as a defender in less than 20 minutes.

It didn't work in game three as no one was making tackles. Including Manu Tuilagi who normally isn't a massive problem with tackling, his positioning can be suspect but his tackling is normally on point. Eastmond is small, but his 110kg+ centre partner was hardly good himself. I don't buy that it was his size that was the problem, you can say that his positioning was a problem but how many tackles was he bounced off ? He may have tracked the wrong runner a few times then had to make the cover tackle which many players could not do. At the end of the day the blitz defence would only work if you make your tackles, no one did but the blame on Eastmond is unwarranted. His size doesn't too me come into it as Wood and Robshaw where missing tackles and they never normally do, the size issue may come up at sometime but these test did not show it too me.

If you throw a pebble or a brick at a wall which will do more damage?

Most cases the brick will, but the pebble will find its way through a gap

 

[goodNumber10]

It didn't work in game three as no one was making tackles. Including Manu Tuilagi who normally isn't a massive problem with tackling, his positioning can be suspect but his tackling is normally on point. Eastmond is small, but his 110kg+ centre partner was hardly good himself. I don't buy that it was his size that was the problem, you can say that his positioning was a problem but how many tackles was he bounced off ? He may have tracked the wrong runner a few times then had to make the cover tackle which many players could not do. At the end of the day the blitz defence would only work if you make your tackles, no one did but the blame on Eastmond is unwarranted. His size doesn't too me come into it as Wood and Robshaw where missing tackles and they never normally do, the size issue may come up at sometime but these test did not show it too me.


Most cases the brick will, but the pebble will find its way through a gap

I think you're misunderstanding what i'm saying, so just to clarify.

I don't think his size was the issue last week, i think it was just poor defending by him and i do think he was predominantly to blame in that he didn't trust his inside defenders. sorry to post it again but everything i think on last weeks defense is here: http://www.thedeadballarea.com/new-zealand-vs-england-focus-englands-defensive-woes/

I do think his size is an issue going forward if England stick with the current defensive structure, as he conceeds ground too easily in the tackle (he's also got a bad rep for going high), and that allows opposition attacks to get over the gain line, that is an issue if he doesn't get off the line and make a tackle way behind the gain line.

 

[Peat]

Size and strength have a bearing on defensive skills. Of course they do. Those things help determine the momentum of both attacker and defender. If the defender's momentum outweighs the attacker's, then the attacker isn't going towards the tryline. And vice versa. This is the raw science of the art, how on earth can there be a debate?

Now, you can be seriously strong despite being small, and courage and technique also have a huge bearing on things as well. It doesn't automatically hold that all smaller players are poor defenders, or even the majority are. But if anyone is seriously trying to tell me that size and strength don't come into it at all, that's like telling me that the speed and weight of a car is irrelevant to my chances of survival if hit by it. Come on here people.

Is size and strength the problem that Kyle Eastmond has? I don't know tbh. What is certain is that he is strong, brave and a good technical tackler. He's proven that in enough one on ones. It's hard to discern how much of the positioning problems were Eastmond trying to protect himself from getting in a position where he can get bumped or brushed off - or standing in a position where Farrell thinks he's protected - or just straight out reading the game wrong - or standing in a position to protect Burns, who's not a fantastic defender - or is being sold down the river by Tuilagi's positioning - or is being let down by Burns not drifting out fast enough - or Burns is being let down by the guys inside. I think you'd need to do more defensive analysis than either GN10 or Kinsella has done tbh. Everything went wrong and it would be very harsh to judge one area of his defensive competence based on that.

The worry is real though and will stay that way until he shows that he will reliably handle Nonu, De Villiers, Roberts et all time after time. He hasn't proven he definitely has the ability to do it either. Maybe the issue is his reading of the game. However, if you look at the first try in the third test, his size looks like a liability there. Nonu runs a relatively straight forwards line. Eastmond hits him, but even hitting him about as high as Eastmond can, Nonu still has his arms free and can offload. It's a pretty poor one, but even so five seconds later the All Blacks have scored. Twelvetrees or Barritt hit him, no offload. That simple. Now, that might be a one off, or it may not. It may be something he can use better positioning to compensate for. It may be something we learn to live with if his attacking output ends up high enough.

But, regardless of any of that, there is evidence that Kyle Eastmond's stature might be a defensive liability for England. Please let us not pretend otherwise. It's happened. I'm not making any definitive judgements on the data available but pretending there's no potential problem or weakness is nearly as dumb as categorically writing him off because of said potential problem.

 

[ratsapprentice]

or is being let down by Burns not drifting out fast enough - or Burns is being let down by the guys inside.

That certainly seemed to be the case on the second try - In Kyles opinion anyway - He was clearly gesticulating to Burns to drift out way before the ball was distributed but Freddie clearly didn't notice or chose to ignore it.

Eastmond hits him, but even hitting him about as high as Eastmond can, Nonu still has his arms free and can offload. It's a pretty poor one, but even so five seconds later the All Blacks have scored. Twelvetrees or Barritt hit him, no offload. That simple.

2013 Autumn international - Nonu did the same thing vs Morgan and Lawes.

No denying that his defense would be better if he was 4" taller - but I don't accept we've really seen it be a major issue so far.

 

[Peat]

Big difference. Nonu's on a pretty straight forwards crash line at Eastmond as opposed to hitting the gap between Morgan and Lawes pretty much perfectly. Morgan has to go low just to reach him (arguably Lawes shouldn't have bit in...), Eastmond goes for the high collision and simply can't pull it off.

I think I've gone out of my way to indicate I am not arguing for it being a proven major issue.

 

[goodNumber10]

That certainly seemed to be the case on the second try - In Kyles opinion anyway - He was clearly gesticulating to Burns to drift out way before the ball was distributed but Freddie clearly didn't notice or chose to ignore it.

Burns line speed is not a reason for Eastmond to abandon his channel. if you're going to play man on man then hold your channel until the ball is gone, he didn't. Worse he was crabbing in.

It's a trust issue, Eastmond didn't Trust Burns to defend his channel and abandoned his own and they paid the price. This was happening in test one and NZ picked up on it.

Technically though, why would he (Burns) drift out early? He covered the ground was getting his tackles in on Nonu, was aligned correctly on Cruden and moving off once the ball had gone.

To be fair there is a ton of issue with that defence, line speed being one of them as in there was Literally none, it's not solely one persons fault but he clearly did himself no favours.

2013 Autumn international - Nonu did the same thing vs Morgan and Lawes.

No denying that his defense would be better if he was 4" taller - but I don't accept we've really seen it be a major issue so far.

He's 4 tests deep, and he's been seriously exposed, I think that's an issue. It's how he reacts to it that is important and will define him as an England player.

I don't think it's anything to do with Eastmonds height - he can be 4ft for all I care if he uses his weight and power correctly, but 80kg going high on a 104kg foot soldier is only going to end one way with Eastmond getting bounced.

 

[Peat]

For Eastmond to show no faith in Burns two tests in a row, if that was what was happening, smacks of instructions rather than personal decisions.

 

[ratsapprentice]

My mistake - the bit I was taking about is in the run up to the disallowed try.
You can see there that there isn't anything the players can do short of making a man and ball tackle to shut down that play - and because of the depth they're playing with that would be very difficult to do.

What I'm getting at is that regardless of the execution - that defensive system was well and truly worked out.

He's 4 tests deep, and he's been seriously exposed, I think that's an issue. It's how he reacts to it that is important and will define him as an England player.

I don't think it's anything to do with Eastmonds height - he can be 4ft for all I care if he uses his weight and power correctly, but 80kg going high on a 104kg foot soldier is only going to end one way with Eastmond getting bounced.

I can't agree with the gist of what you're saying there - his defense has not been an issue in any of the England games he's played in until the last test.
The experience he gained from the two tests vs Argentina bears almost no relevance to playing the AB's.
I think the system was worked out - not him.

When did Nonu bounce him? Getting an offload away =/= being bounced.

 

[goodNumber10]

My mistake - the bit I was taking about is in the run up to the disallowed try.
You can see there that there isn't anything the players can do short of making a man and ball tackle to shut down that play - and because of the depth they're playing with that would be very difficult to do.

What I'm getting at is that regardless of the execution - that defensive system was well and truly worked out.

I can't agree with the gist of what you're saying there - his defense has not been an issue in any of the England games he's played in until the last test.
The experience he gained from the two tests vs Argentina bears almost no relevance to playing the AB's.
I think the system was worked out - not him.

Maybe it was maybe it wasn't, i'm still struggling to identify the system as you can't have your 10/12 drifting and your 13/14 rushing.

To be honest i'd be inclined to agree it was the systems fault if they had held their shape continually and still got opened up, but they aligned, adjusted aligned again and adjusted again...

His defence wasn't an issue in argentina i agree, but NZ is a very different prospect and in two games they "seem" to have figured him out - at least in this system.

When did Nonu bounce him? Getting an offload away =/= being bounced.

I'll have another look when i get home, i'm pretty sure he got bounced then went for a second bite at the cherry and brought him down. Might be remembering it wrong.

I think we have to be careful here that we don't take away from what was an a excellent attacking display from New Zealand - there is a tendency here to put everything onto the defence when in fact it's just excellent attack. This was a combination of the two to be honest.

 

[j'nuh]

For his club, Eastmond has as good a tackle completion rate as any of the 12s in contention for England. Some of them he's even better than. I'm not saying that makes him as good as the others, just that he's clearly not an incompetent defender - he is making his tackles. And that's outside Ford, who isn't exactly a massive upgrade (if an upgrade at all) in defence on Burns.

I don't think the question is whether he can defend - I think he's shown enough for Bath that he's competent enough at making his tackles. It's how much value we put on aggression in the tackle. Twelvetrees/Barritt are much likelier to knock a player back and will be more successful in rucking opposition and own ball. Eastmond won't bring that aggression, but may have the pace to do better in getting back in the scramble defence. I don't think we have learned anything new: with Eastmond, you trade-off a bit of power in the defensive game, and you hope he makes up for it in other capacities.

 

[Peat]

Premiership =/= International Rugby. Making his tackles vs. Anthony Allen and Brad Barritt isn't quite the same as Nonu.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Poor showing at our place vs Sam Tuitupou, as well, leading to a halftime sub.
Not sure how much whatever his off field issues were played into it though.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Poor showing at our place vs Sam Tuitupou, as well, leading to a halftime sub.
Not sure how much whatever his off field issues were played into it though.

Given that fans reported seeing him crying on the field, I think it's safe to assume they did.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Eh? I never saw/heard of that, though it was ****e weather from what I remember.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Eh? I never saw/heard of that, though it was ****e weather from what I remember.

Visibly upset according to a number of people on the Bath board.

 

[goodNumber10]

Visibly upset according to a number of people on the Bath board.

Do we know what the issues were?

Just curious, read he went home upset and had a clear the air with bath afterwards...

 

[ratsapprentice]

He was having some private issues - the week previously he played in the first 80mins in his life in which he literally did not touch the ball and in this game it wasn't much better.
He was substituted at half time - at which point he showered, got into his car and went to visit his family (possibly including his son) seeing as though he was in Salford.

That's about it. He then apologised to his teammates - but it was never a "walkout" as such, as was suggested by the more nefarious corners of the media.

 

[goodNumber10]

ah, that's about as much as i knew as well.

right, anyway... back to the defence. I've watched it again, and i'm wrong on a couple of things - he doesn't get bumped but on the first he pretty much makes no attempt to tackle Nonu, it's more like a touch rugby two hander.

The second thing is Burns, he doesn't get across nearly quick enough, so Eastmond is clearly waiting for him to make the low so he can go high and swallow the ball. (this is on try one).

Neither of them particularly shower themselves with glory, but to be fair to Eastmond he makes a couple of lovely tackles through the course of that first half just not in the first line of support where they will be noticed and really matter - lovely hit on Cruden with nice hit and keeps his leg drive going on the contact. He does seem a bit headless though - that might be because he's trying to make amends or whatever - he doesn't deserve a 2 that's for certain. He's probably a 5 all in all - lets not forget he got 0 ball in that half afaicr!

Everytime i look at that first 20 minutes or so i find something new and appalling from different players. It really was a shocking effort collectivley, it's not fair to hang one man out...

 

[j'nuh]

Premiership =/= International Rugby. Making his tackles vs. Anthony Allen and Brad Barritt isn't quite the same as Nonu.

But collectively, all of the 12s will find it more difficult against international opposition. I don't necessarily think that Eastmond will hold his own in defence on the international stage, I just don't think there's enough evidence to discount Eastmond presently. He has shown himself to be perfectly adequate at Premiership level - we should not overturn months of evidence that he is a competent defender on the basis of one match in a losing team. Especially just by quoting weights. When he comes back to form, I'd like to see another run out for him.

I am still in favour of Twelvetrees overall, although I am very open at this stage to many players - Eastmond, Barritt, Burrell, Allen, Hill, Devoto etc.

I think there's also a case for bludgeon/rapier by moving Tuilagi inwards. We may have to accept that England do not have the distributing/playmking skills to make any use of a distributor/playmaker axis at 10-12. Fofana finds plenty of gaps from 12. Perhaps Tuilagi can hit the same gaps (except with more power), and we can use pace out wide (which we certainly do have). I'm just not sure who the rapier would be. I thought Joseph would be it for a long time; it's a shame he has gone a whole load of nowhere.