2014 QBE Internationals [EOYT] England

[TheSaffycen]

I said it sometimes happens from set play time. Nowell's try was from scrum set play.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Fair enough - his assist wasn't though - and that's the point.

 

[Peat]

We've got reasonable about using the wings from set-plays but, in open play, effective use of the wings entering the line is very low. Doesn't happen isn't true, but it happens so rarely you can be forgiven for thinking it. And it is far from uncommon to see the England team in an attacking position that is screaming for a blindside wing with such a player nowhere in sight.

 

[ratsapprentice]

When Farrell passes like he did against Argentina then it's no surprise they don't try it more often.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Fair enough - his assist wasn't though - and that's the point.

I don't know what try you are talking about ? Who scored and against who ?

 

[ratsapprentice]

Brown vs Scotland.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Nice try, good break and gave the pass a little early but still good. Doesn't happen often though.

 

[Peat]

You don't have to just be running those lines off of Farrell though. Run them off 9, run them off the offloading forward, pop up next to the opposite wing...

In general I feel support play and working off the ball is something we could improve on - but a member of the back 3 is often the ideal guy to be doing so.

 

[goodNumber10]

When Farrell passes like he did against Argentina then it's no surprise they don't try it more often.

whereas when he passes like he did against Italy.... we score tries.

We've got reasonable about using the wings from set-plays but, in open play, effective use of the wings entering the line is very low. Doesn't happen isn't true, but it happens so rarely you can be forgiven for thinking it. And it is far from uncommon to see the England team in an attacking position that is screaming for a blindside wing with such a player nowhere in sight.

that's mainly because those attacking opportunities don't come from systematic play, they are from turnovers or from someone making a break against the flow of the play.

The biggest problem in the England backline isn't wingers support running, it's decision making in midfield. 36 Drifts too much, Tuilagi doens't pass unless it's a set play, Barritt is very direct sometimes to the detriment of the flow.

Eastmond/Burrell are the two best ball players/decision makers in my opinion, neither drift and both hit the runner.

In general I feel support play and working off the ball is something we could improve on - but a member of the back 3 is often the ideal guy to be doing so.

we certainly can, look at the Care/Robshaw/Brown try against Ireland - THAT's how it should be done, and if we're going to play this counter attacking back three system then support play is essential.... but it still comes down to my point above about decision making.

 

[ratsapprentice]

You don't have to just be running those lines off of Farrell though. Run them off 9, run them off the offloading forward, pop up next to the opposite wing...

They do do that though.
I'm not saying it couldn't be improved significantly, but it does happen.

whereas when he passes like he did against Italy.... we score tries.

Yes - but the issue is how often we do it.
I'm suggesting that part of the reason we don't is because our midfield hasn't had the ability to do it well, consistently - not ever.

 

[goodNumber10]

Yes - but the issue is how often we do it.
I'm suggesting that part of the reason we don't is because our midfield hasn't had the ability to do it well, consistently - not ever.

Oh yes, i agree, but i'm not sure that sit's solely on Farrells shoulders... i really think we can get past OF's short comings if we get a good 12.

 

[ratsapprentice]

It sits on his and BB/36's shoulders - and to a lesser extent Manu's.

 

[goodNumber10]

It sits on his and BB/36's shoulders - and to a lesser extent Manu's.

Exactly, long gone are the days the 10 was the attacking playmaker/lynchpin.

It's a collective failing, get a good distributor at 12 and the pressure for farrell comes off he can worry about taking it to the line or moving the point out one.

Really you only want him making two decisions, do i have a go myself or do i pass it to 12.

 

[Peat]

Twelvetrees was in form last Six Nations and Farrell looked better for it - but it was all a bit glitchy. From both of them.

I don't think we have a good enough 12 to offset Farrell's attacking failings and perform the defensive role England want.

 

[TheSaffycen]

The thing is if Farrell wants to be the starting 10 then he has to be able to create things by himslef. It wasn't a problem when he was just starting because he had no competition, but now someone like Cipriani is in the form of his life and can control the game creatively. Now i'm not saying we should drop Farrell or anything but he needs to keep progressing his attacking game, he can't rely on just being the best kicker and defender as Myler has been playing his best rugby for the last couple of years and Slade doesn't seem to have a weakness. Then you have the 2 guys who have actually been given a chance by Lancaster Ford and Burns, Ford being the form 10 this year.

 

[goodNumber10]

The thing is if Farrell wants to be the starting 10 then he has to be able to create things by himslef.

I really don't think he does, running the ship, and making the right decisions when to and when not to attack is more important. A fly half trying to create things on his own leads to a disjointed attack.

Now i'm not saying we should drop Farrell or anything but he needs to keep progressing his attacking game, he can't rely on just being the best kicker and defender

which he has, imho, since the Lions we've seen him bringing the ball to the line and his masked passes have really opened defences - he has his off days, but so does everyone... and sometimes he can be "today i'm going to give a %'s masterclass.

In the AB's game we didn't attack well because Twelvetrees had a shocker... not because Farrell couldn't pass/run.

I think 6 nations is a better indication of his abilities right now, and when he came on for Sarries start of the season he showed some lovely subtle touches - so I've got no concerns there.

My biggest fear is that his body is breaking down after 4 seasons of abuse.

Slade doesn't seem to have a weakness. Then you have the 2 guys who have actually been given a chance by Lancaster Ford and Burns, Ford being the form 10 this year.

We've not seen Slade play under any sort of pressure as of yet, so yes he's going well behind a monster pack that's getting go forward, but lets see what happens as the season wears on and I think his future is at 12 anyway.

Ford is excellent, no complaints if he starts, Burns needs to be able to demonstrate he can perform behind a beaten pack - and really is probably behind Cip's right now.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I still maintain that a Ford-Eastmond partnership would give England so much go forwards and won't sacrifice as much in defence as people think. Also Joseph did some nice accurate long passes to Roko in the last Bath game (pity it followed on from some absolutely astonishing stupidity from Bath earlier). He can run, tackle and I don't think I've ever seen Tuilagi distribute that well. Not saying he should replace Tuilagi but could be an alternative for a different play style.

The thing about Farrell is I feel he is good and that is all he will ever be. He has been improving but I don't get a sense of excitement when he has the ball. I think realistically it should be between Cipriani and Ford in the centre with Ford edging it if there is a large Bath presence in the backs due to the team chemistry. I just really hope Lancaster doesn't make the mistake last time of throwing away chances to test other players when you have them and then when you decide you are going to test them they are injured or otherwise unavailable. Ultimately I don't think we should use Farrell or 12trees, what more can we learn from them? They may actually be our best but we don't know until others have had a proper chance. I would be worried if Farrell and 12trees were the best we could get...

 

[goodNumber10]

i don't think we should be picking players to "try them out" we should be picking players to win games.

 

[Peat]

There's a very strong argument that someone like Ford or Cipriani will help us win more games than Farrell but it is incredibly theoretical due to lack of time on the international stage for Cips&Ford. I'd like to see us take a few chances against Australia and rotate for Samoa.

edit: This is made in the belief that the status quo simply won't win us enough of the big games that matter.

 

[goodNumber10]

There's a very strong argument that someone like Ford or Cipriani will help us win more games than Farrell

It's Rob Andrew vs Stuart Barnes all over again... there is nothing to say that really.

Farrell has won a Premiership ***le for Sarries, Ford is yet to win anything of note (Farrell was Goal Kicker for the U20's if i recall), and the couple of games ford played with any real meaning Ford came under genuine pressure and neither he or Bath stepped up to the plate.

but it is incredibly theoretical due to lack of time on the international stage for Cips&Ford. I'd like to see us take a few chances against Australia and rotate for Samoa.

I can accept against Samoa, but Australia will not be a weak side come November and we absolutely MUST put them away and play with some confidence in dispatching them.

We should be putting out what is our strongest team, and making sure it wins no matter what... i understand prepping for the WC next year but consistent winning and building confidence is as valuable as creating depth.

Do people think NZ would have continued with blooding new players if their results had been in question?