2014 QBE Internationals [EOYT] England

[goodNumber10]

how have you done anything differently?

If it's that important to you then feel free to break each penalty down then in minute detail.

Right now, watch:

First thing is good chase by Serfontain, Farrell has no option but to run - why is brown ambling back. Regardless good show and go, and good pace by Farrell to get away from Sefrontain and JPP - notice how Watson is running a very straight line off Farrell, no angles no drifting. There is no poitn Farrell can kick, to kick would have meant slowing down and getting tackled by JPP.

Then Notice Farrell has actually created a 2 vs 1 against Le Roux if Watson had drifted out and held the touchline, Farrell has taken out Cotzee and Le Roux who is hankering for the intercept instead Watson cuts the angle back against the grain. If he'd held his width farrell could have let the ball go after he'd dummied Le Roux - it's Watson decision to cut not Farrell.

Also where the hell is the backrow, all just ambling back - Wood is there, then Marler and Wilson.

The one thing Farrell could have done different - other than kick it - was to keep going after he'd sold Le Roux the dummy.

 

[ratsapprentice]

The pass from Farrell to Watson (if he had hugged the touchline) is not on - too high a chance of an intercept.

If Watson cuts back any earlier than he did then he's running straight into JPP and/or Serfontein if he recieves a pass, or he makes Le Roux's decision for him and Willie only has to think about tackling Farrell if Owen keeps the ball.

Farrell did well to get out from under the posts - he then should have kicked. I disagree that there was any other realistic option.

 

[TRF_heineken]

My apologies for jumping in here. But Farrel was pathetic!! this above was just one example of how shockingly bad he is. He's a fly half, who's suppose to use his head, but he doesn't.

If you look at the above clip, you will clearly see that at any moment when Farrel has the ball, there are more South Africans than English players close to the ball. In other words, Farrel is at all times under pressure, he had ample time to kick the ball and gain an advantage, which he didn't and cause the first points for SA. He should never have kept the ball in hand, there was no opportunity to gain any attacking advantage from there. Jan Serfontein, Marcell Coetzee, Eben Etzebeth are all pretty good tacklers who don't miss a lot of tackles. Farrel didn't use his head at all.

Then what about that Up-and-under that he kicked that actually went backwards and but pressure on Mike Brown?? Which IMHO should have been a penalty for SA as nobody from England retreated 10m back...

 

[TommiG88]

My apologies for jumping in here. But Farrel was pathetic!! this above was just one example of how shockingly bad he is. He's a fly half, who's suppose to use his head, but he doesn't.

If you look at the above clip, you will clearly see that at any moment when Farrel has the ball, there are more South Africans than English players close to the ball. In other words, Farrel is at all times under pressure, he had ample time to kick the ball and gain an advantage, which he didn't and cause the first points for SA. He should never have kept the ball in hand, there was no opportunity to gain any attacking advantage from there. Jan Serfontein, Marcell Coetzee, Eben Etzebeth are all pretty good tacklers who don't miss a lot of tackles. Farrel didn't use his head at all.

Then what about that Up-and-under that he kicked that actually went backwards and but pressure on Mike Brown?? Which IMHO should have been a penalty for SA as nobody from England retreated 10m back...

But he didn't cock up often. We need to stop picking on his one or 10 errors and look at the 1 or 0 positive contributions to make this a fair argument.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Me? By arguing based on concrete examples rather than just words.
Interesting, I thought we were talking about Lawes...

This just doesn't work. Farrell has just gotten clear of Pietersen and can straighten up slightly - in fact that's what he would have had to do in order to create any space whatsoever for Watson to 'hug the touchline' as you suggest. By the end of this move, Farrell is running diagonally at 315 degrees - making it difficult to give a hypothetical pass and just as hard to receive it; think about it physically: Watson needs to have some space between him and Farrell to be able to run and to receive the pass- yet Farrell is effectively eating up his space and the most Watson can really do is copy his direction, hoping that Farrell will either straighten up to create room for a pass to the touchline, or secondly, do as he did and cut back in. Initially, Farrell has no choice but to run across, agreed, but after he's rounded Pietersen he has a choice.

At the angle Farrell is running at, any attempted pass would not work because Watson simply cannot put enough space between himself and Farrell without running right into touch and attempting to straighten up last minute, but also because receiving the ball at this angle would kill his momentum. Pietersen, still tracking, has not lost any momentum as he doesn't need to wait for the pass, and smashes Watson into touch.

In additional, I don't think Le Roux is hankering for the intercept so much as hankering for a hit - with the sort of running angle available to Watson, he will not be able to avoid a bit hit from Le roux if Farrell gives that pass. To say that this a 2 on 1 is also pretty disingenuous bearing in mind the space to operate in and the number of defenders. Pietersen has tracked all the way, Coetzee who you mention is there too, and Etzebeth is also there or thereabouts.

Remember also that Watson, a new player in the squad, will be taking his cues from what other guys do. When Farrell keeps running that angle, Watson probably reads Fazlet as asking him to cut back inside. Either way, Farrells angle is the problem

 

[TRF_heineken]

But he didn't cock up often. We need to stop picking on his one or 10 errors and look at the 1 or 0 positive contributions to make this a fair argument.

Dude, I'm not an England fan. I'm a Saffa, and I'm telling you now, Farrel cost you guys the game. Those 2 examples are just off the top of my head. And to be honest, what did he do well in the game??

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Dude, I'm not an England fan. I'm a Saffa, and I'm telling you now, Farrel cost you guys the game. Those 2 examples are just off the top of my head. And to be honest, what did he do well in the game??

Think he agrees with you dude; I suspect Irony

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

GN10, I believe you are incapable of looking at Farrell objectively now. He was absolutely crap. In that clip the show and go wasn't good at all. He should have popped it to Brown who would have been running in the opposite direction to the SA players and into space but he keeps the ball, he then continues going towards the touchline and giving no indication to Watson that he is going to pass (it is HIS responsibility to inform the player of his intentions both as the 10 and the ball carrier). He clearly does neither and just confuses Watson who is expecting a kick that he can chase.

Comparing Ford's kick to Farrells is laughable. Farrell kicked it out on the full from a restart. Find ANYONE who says that is an acceptable mistake. Ford kicked it out on the full under pressure during gameplay, a very different situation. Farrell soon after then did a kick that went backwards/sideways. This isn't a case of following concensus, this is a case of you defending the indefensible. Everyone except you says Farrell was crap and you are blaming every other player for Farrells mistakes.

 

[goodNumber10]

The pass from Farrell to Watson (if he had hugged the touchline) is not on - too high a chance of an intercept.

if Watson cuts back any earlier than he did then he's running straight into JPP and/or Serfontein if he recieves a pass, or he makes Le Roux's decision for him and Willie only has to think about tackling Farrell if Owen keeps the ball.

Farrell did well to get out from under the posts - he then should have kicked. I disagree that there was any other realistic option.

If he'd tried to kick he would have had to slow down and he'd have been tackled - if he'd kicked running at that speed he'd have topped the kick and it'd be lucky to reach touch.

If Watson had held the touchline line he could have come around Le Roux, or cleared out when Farrell gets smashed. If he had cut a lot earlier he would have held JP and given Farrell the kick option or possibly even been able to break the tackle as there was less secondary traffic.

You may not think it's a realistic option but the cut was Watsons call, and you only have to watch the St Andre's try from decades ago to see how to work in that space by holding the outside line.

 

[goodNumber10]

GN10, I believe you are incapable of looking at Farrell objectively now. He was absolutely crap.

Yep, a perfect example of objectivity.

In that clip the show and go wasn't good at all. He should have popped it to Brown who would have been running in the opposite direction to the SA players and into space but he keeps the ball,

No, as Brown would have been caught by Serfontain

he then continues going towards the touchline and giving no indication to Watson that he is going to pass (it is HIS responsibility to inform the player of his intentions both as the 10 and the ball carrier). He clearly does neither and just confuses Watson who is expecting a kick that he can chase.

Wrong.

He goes to the touchline as that's where his support and safety is. It is Watsons call as the man behind as to when eh wants the switch and where he wants the ball, Farrell is clearly trying to create a 2 vs 1 against le roux.

Why is it Watsons call to switch? As the man with depth he has the field vision, he has the depth, he is the one who can react to the defence - he is the one who cuts.

Comparing Ford's kick to Farrells is laughable. Farrell kicked it out on the full from a restart. Find ANYONE who says that is an acceptable mistake.

I'm not comparing his restart to Fords broken play kick. Farrell kicked it out on the full in broken play as well (remember Habana getting wrongly pinged for it?)

Restart mistakes happen, got no problem pulling him up on that, but when you're dropping it on a dime they will happen, as we saw in every other game this weekend.

Ford kicked it out on the full under pressure during gameplay, a very different situation. Farrell soon after then did a kick that went backwards/sideways. This isn't a case of following concensus, this is a case of you defending the indefensible. Everyone except you says Farrell was crap and you are blaming every other player for Farrells mistakes.

Do you even read what I write or do you just whine for the sake of it?

First: I clearly said towards the end of his time on the pitch he started to make mistakes, and that he isn't fit enough to play 60-70 minutes.

Secondly: I am not blaming anyone, I'm explaining a situation and why it didn't work – the Watson incident was not all on Farrell as you all seem to think.

The kick down the throat of Le Roux that everyone moaned about in the game thread was not on Farrell as you all claim – May f*cks his options for him by carrying the ball out of the 22, so eh can't go to touch, everyone else is infront of him so he can't kick to chase and he has no option other then to wait to get smashed or putting it downtown and hope they can make something of it.

The attack is not all on him either as there are a number of other things that impact on it, notably the quality of ball he and care are getting.

****EDIT: I'll also add now i'm getting pretty f*cked off with you and the others making this personal - you don't agree with me that's fine, i'm not asking you to and have never said at anypoint everyone is wrong, i said i don't' agree and explained why.

 

[Wendigo7]

Calm down lads.

I would also say alot of people don't watch a replay of a game because often you know the score and you can analyse objectively and have the answers a little differently to what is portrayed originally.

That being said, being in the moment you can get a feel immediately of whether a player is up to it or not, a replay just can't give you that experience ultimately.

 

[goodNumber10]

either way, people are blinded by their hatred of the lad and are unwilling to discuss the situations.

rugby is a team game, there are many factors impacting on any given situation - some are on the individual (the restart out on the full) but the majority fo things are down to an accumulation of issues.

 

[Wendigo7]

either way, people are blinded by their hatred of the lad.

Maybe yes.

He has alot of good qualities, but he too often picks the wrong option and has ghastly hands for a 10. Ford might not be the next big thing we all think, but if we go by your own admission of picking the best 10, well my counter to that would be that picking an out of form 10 who hasn't produced a good game now for around a year or so, has been plagued by injuries and is prone to getting stroppy (irrelevant ultimately but it does **** people off) counters the argument in itself and what message does that send out to all the 10s (who definitely are) playing well across the country. By contrast Ford statistically is probably the best 10 in the league now for about a year and a half, he's had 10 minutes in 4 games. That's it, yes for various reasons, the injury in the summer didn't help, but it still doesn't look good.

Moves do stop dead with Farrell. He isn't the sole cause. We have a lack of ball carriers outside the 8, only 1 competent lineout thrower in our hookers, plagued with injuries and certain players living off past reputations. That and Lancaster has been a bit too loyal/choosen the wrong players to build the team around.

Don't even get me started on the tactical plays the coaches want. The players don't seem to know what to do past the 3rd phase. The forwards aren't coming from deep and offloading. We're box kicking alot and placing no emphasis on the kick chase. If people want to check that out more, see Schalk Brits on TalkSPORT last night. He felt sorry for Care and to a lesser extent Farrell. We have a decent pack, not a good one. We use the pod system well at times and dismally others.

We simply do not have a backs coach, basically. Either we do and the half backs aren't communicating and the instructions they are given in training isn't coming off on the pitch, or the coach hasn't got a clue. It will definitely be somewhere imbetween. Our decision making to know when it's not on or on is also poor.

Despite all of this, we are still only 3 pts worse off with massive injury issues to come back. It's not all bad, but yes there are tactical, technical and personnel issues across the board, there isn't 1 elephant, there are several.

 

[goodNumber10]

Maybe yes.

He has alot of good qualities, but he too often picks the wrong option and has ghastly hands for a 10. Ford might not be the next big thing we all think, but if we go by your own admission of picking the best 10, we'll my counter to that would be that picking an out of form 10 who hasn't produced a good game now for around a year or so, has been plagued by injuries and is prone to getting stroppy (irrelevant ultimately but it does **** people off) counters the argument in itself and what message does that send out to all the 10s (who definitely are) playing well across the country. By contrast Ford statistically is probably the best 10 in the league now for about a year and a half, he's had 10 minutes in 4 games. That's it, yes for various reasons, the injury in the summer didn't help, but it still doesn't look good.

Not arguing that, my point was never pick him over Ford, I've actually said pick Ford but everyone ignores that, I said that Farrell wasn't as bad as they are making out, and that seems to have baked everyones noodles.

Moves do stop dead with Farrell. He isn't the sole cause. We have a lack of ball carriers outside the 8, only 1 competent lineout thrower in our hookers, plagued with injuries and certain players living off past reputations. That and Lancaster has been a bit too loyal/choosen the wrong players to build the team around.

Perhaps, but i don't think anyone else would have done better on Saturday.

Don't even get me started on the tactical plays the coaches want. The players don't seem to know what to do past the 3rd phase. The forwards aren't coming from deep and offloading. We're box kicking alot and placing no emphasis on the kick chase. If people want to check that out more, see Schalk Brits on TalkSPORT last night. He felt sorry for Care and to a lesser extent Farrell. We have a decent pack, not a good one. We use the pod system well at times and dismally others.

Exactly! sum of parts not the parts.

We simply do not have a backs coach, basically. Either we do and the half backs aren't communicating and the instructions they are given in training isn't coming off on the pitch, or the coach hasn't got a clue. It will definitely be somewhere imbetween. Our decision making to know when it's not on or on is also poor.

Despite all of this, we are still only 3 pts worse off with massive injury issues to come back. It's not all bad, but yes there are tactical, technical and personnel issues across the board, there isn't 1 elephant, there are several.

our decision making has been a longtime problem, but that can only be fixed at club level, international coaches don't have time to work on those kind of skills exclusively, decision making is an issue endemic at all of our clubs.

 

[TommiG88]

I would like to see Jamie George given a go at hooker. He looks like a good prospect!

We are missing a big rucker in the back row who can clear a few people out or win the ball quickly. We do however have the players that aren't picked but can do this.

 

[Wendigo7]

The other thing I want to throw in is, Ford could be the next Dan Carter, but if all those England backs continue to be coached to drift and attack as a line it means for nothing.

No fly half, even if they are worth there salt could do much with a backline with so much disorganisation and lack of communication.

Take the May try against NZ for example, the realignment of the backs is very poor. There are 2 hopeful to good passes from Farrell and then Barritt. They are doing this 15 metres behind the gainline it's pathetic and poor BASIC coaching. I could coach them to do that better genuinely. You achieve nothing by standing so far behind, although there is an argument we stand so far behind because Farrell and Barritt play so deep.

Ford instinctively will want players running off him. I have a nasty nasty feeling that on saturday he will do everything he normally does which is usually to a very high international standard. What you will probably see is the players not reacting to him because they have played so deep in the first 2 games it will take them a half to get used to it and Ford will get turned over and be made to look a mug. It might not happen, but it's a genuine possibility.

Ford on his own is not the answer. Better coaching and some structure in the backs lies solely with Farrell.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

[h=3]England Squad[/h]Loose-head props
Joe Marler (Harlequins)
Matt Mullan (Wasps)
Tight-head props
Kieran Brookes (Newcastle Falcons)
David Wilson (Bath Rugby)
Hookers
Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints)
Rob Webber (Bath Rugby)
Locks
Dave Attwood (Bath Rugby)
George Kruis (Saracens)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints)
Back rows
Calum Clark (Northampton Saints)
James Haskell (Wasps)
Ben Morgan (Gloucester Rugby)
Chris Robshaw (Harlequins, captain)
Billy Vunipola (Saracens)
Tom Wood (Northampton Saints)
Scrum halves
Danny Care (Harlequins)
Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)
Richard Wigglesworth (Saracens)
Outside backs
Brad Barritt (Saracens)
Luther Burrell (Northampton Saints)
Kyle Eastmond (Bath Rugby)
Owen Farrell (Saracens)
George Ford (Bath Rugby)
Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester Rugby)
Back threes
Mike Brown (Harlequins)
Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby)
Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby)
Marland Yarde (Harlequins)





Main notes: Eastmond being monitored for concussion - Roko still injured.

 

[TommiG88]

Eastmond won't be risked then.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Yep, a perfect example of objectivity.

About as objective as you have been.

No, as Brown would have been caught by Serfontain

No he wouldn't, he is an elusive runner and would have been going in the opposite direction to the way all the SA players were running.

Wrong.

He goes to the touchline as that's where his support and safety is. It is Watsons call as the man behind as to when eh wants the switch and where he wants the ball, Farrell is clearly trying to create a 2 vs 1 against le roux.

Why is it Watsons call to switch? As the man with depth he has the field vision, he has the depth, he is the one who can react to the defence - he is the one who cuts.

He isn't going there because that is where his support is, he is drifting across rather than straightening up and is leaving Watson with less space. Watson had been running in the expectation of a kick because Farrell did nothing at all to hint that he was going to pass and from Watsons perspective it just looked like Farrell was going to keep running sideways and leave him no room at all. He switches back to prevent that and Farrell suddenly decides then that he will throw the pass at an awkward time. Everyone except you can see Farrell is to blame.

I'm not comparing his restart to Fords broken play kick. Farrell kicked it out on the full in broken play as well (remember Habana getting wrongly pinged for it?)

Restart mistakes happen, got no problem pulling him up on that, but when you're dropping it on a dime they will happen, as we saw in every other game this weekend.

So the fact Farrell made another mistake is an argument in his defence? That's a new one.

Do you even read what I write or do you just whine for the sake of it?

First: I clearly said towards the end of his time on the pitch he started to make mistakes, and that he isn't fit enough to play 60-70 minutes.

Secondly: I am not blaming anyone, I'm explaining a situation and why it didn't work – the Watson incident was not all on Farrell as you all seem to think.

The kick down the throat of Le Roux that everyone moaned about in the game thread was not on Farrell as you all claim – May f*cks his options for him by carrying the ball out of the 22, so eh can't go to touch, everyone else is infront of him so he can't kick to chase and he has no option other then to wait to get smashed or putting it downtown and hope they can make something of it.

The attack is not all on him either as there are a number of other things that impact on it, notably the quality of ball he and care are getting.

****EDIT: I'll also add now i'm getting pretty f*cked off with you and the others making this personal - you don't agree with me that's fine, i'm not asking you to and have never said at anypoint everyone is wrong, i said i don't' agree and explained why.

It's only personal because you are the only one defending Farrell. Before the games you were one of the few arguing about retaining the 10, you were the one constantly saying we shouldn't bother giving game time to others. You finally settled on choosing the in form Flyhalf and then when a flyhalf has 2 shocking games you defend them so your position is that they are never out of form and therefore there is never the need to use someone else. Farrell isn't in form, he is playing shocking rugby yet you keep coming on here making excuses. Let me ask you, just what does Farrell need to do for you to accept he isn't the form Flyhalf and to drop him in favour of someone else?

 

[Wendigo7]

Was Wigglesworth really added instead of Dickson?