[2015 RWC] Pool A: England vs. Uruguay (10/10/2015)

[ncurd]

He mostly plays 10 or 13, but clearly anyone who can play both 10 and 13 is also comfortably going to be able to play 12.

To me he seems the perfect fit there, especially given Lancaster has previously said his ideal would be a second distributor with a kicking game. He more than ticks those boxes, and he certainly my isn't weak defensively.

Your preaching to the chior on that one I've wanted the Ford/Slade/Joseph combo at least tested in the Ireland & Fiji games (I probably wouldn't have risked it for the Wales game push come to shove). My point was Slade at 13 is hardly a stupid idea, in fact it's more infuriating he didn't start against Wales there.

 

[j'nuh]

tbh, this is a dead rubber against a minnow. If Lancaster was staying, it might mean a little of something, showing how well players have adapted to his systems. But since Lancaster is probably gonna leave, I don't see this game having any kind of influence on the Six Nations selection.

If I were Lancaster, I'd just throw out anyone who hasn't had a game, along with the hardest working squad members.

 

[Absolutia]

I'm confident that we can win this and really show all those other well-established Rugby nations with their fancy quarter-final places and competence how mighty England truly are.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

tbh, this is a dead rubber against a minnow. If Lancaster was staying, it might mean a little of something, showing how well players have adapted to his systems. But since Lancaster is probably gonna leave, I don't see this game having any kind of influence on the Six Nations selection.

If I were Lancaster, I'd just throw out anyone who hasn't had a game, along with the hardest working squad members.

Lol @ Lancaster leaving he will have to be kicked, IMO the RFU will try and keep it the same, with Lancaster and Andrew.

 

[Patchey]

Doesn't Slade play 13 a fair bit for Exeter? In fact wasn't he until the Wales selection madness kicked in mainly thought of as being in the squad as cover for JJ?

Yeah he has recently. But he's also played 10 and a bit of 12 for them.

I just think that given his talent and this opportunity against a 'lesser' team it would be madness not to see him at 12.

 

[msf]

Lancaster (or Farrell) really has no idea, does he? He obviously wants to sign off well, so he thinks he can rack up lots of points by playing lots of ball players in midfield, as the press said he should have done against Wales. Unfortunately, he forgets that the other problem with the Wales midfield was it was completely one-paced (slow paced, that is) and this midfield is only slightly faster.

 

[munstermuffin]

Lancaster (or Farrell) really has no idea, does he? He obviously wants to sign off well, so he thinks he can rack up lots of points by playing lots of ball players in midfield, as the press said he should have done against Wales. Unfortunately, he forgets that the other problem with the Wales midfield was it was completely one-paced (slow paced, that is) and this midfield is only slightly faster.

Just on this. I've spoke to lads from Munster and Leinster who were on the Lions tour and rate Farrell massively as a defence coach. I don't know exactly his roll with England but for the Lions he was held in huge regard

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Just on this. I've spoke to lads from Munster and Leinster who were on the Lions tour and rate Farrell massively as a defence coach. I don't know exactly his roll with England but for the Lions he was held in huge regard

That may be the case but it seems to go beyond that, Farrell doesn't seem to see anything BUT defence. Apparently sitting there absorbing as much pressure as possible with NO ability to turn the ball over is considered a valid game plan? It relies entirely on the opposition making mistakes or giving up and going for a kick. Top teams rarely make mistakes and kicks will be contested. A strong defence game also needs a strong breakdown game and a good kicking game to clear your lines, England don't have either of the next 2 making the defence orientated game plan very stupid.

 

[Yoshimitsu]

Well said!

That may be the case but it seems to go beyond that, Farrell doesn't seem to see anything BUT defence. Apparently sitting there absorbing as much pressure as possible with NO ability to turn the ball over is considered a valid game plan? It relies entirely on the opposition making mistakes or giving up and going for a kick. Top teams rarely make mistakes and kicks will be contested. A strong defence game also needs a strong breakdown game and a good kicking game to clear your lines, England don't have either of the next 2 making the defence orientated game plan very stupid.

Personally I've had an issue with compartmentalised sides since the ill fated ford / wells days. Now it's worse. Rugby is a game of balance. No point in a scrum without a lineout. No point in a maul without a ruck. No point in the world's greatest defence without any attack. Farrell senior is obviously a serious operator and forceful with it. I'd expect him to be. However, it is Lancaster's job to put pieces of the puzzle together. He has failed utterly to do so. Farrell will concede the periphery. 11,14,15 but will not concede the centre hence barritt, Farrell and burgess. The sum attacking total of that combo? 4/5ths of **** all. Catt obviously doesn't carry equal weight in selection terms.

I've said before watching England defend is like watching the tide come in. Everything is about reasserting the line. Unfortunately that leads to concession of ground, then panic, then penalties, then losses. However, Lancaster persists. He's damned by his actions.

 

[ABs2011]

Quick question: Will George Ford kick goals given this starting XV?

Also, I'm a little confused about the non-selection of Burgess. To me this says he has effecitively done a deal that will see him head back to league otherwise it makes no sense. If he was a long term project for England then surely he should be playing in this type of game. Am I missing something?

 

[Willodell100]

Lol @ Lancaster leaving he will have to be kicked, IMO the RFU will try and keep it the same, with Lancaster and Andrew.

This is the real issue for me.

The RFU is, like many of our other sports associations, full of 'Blazers' that like the nothing more than the status quo. For me this has, and always will be the real barrier to achieving success at the very top.

I would argue it is more important, for this England team to become top of the pile again, that we look above this current coaching group first for change.

Only once this has been done would I look into reviewing the Head Coach and Assistant Coach(es) roles and the associated structures.

 

[Zed]

That may be the case but it seems to go beyond that, Farrell doesn't seem to see anything BUT defence. Apparently sitting there absorbing as much pressure as possible with NO ability to turn the ball over is considered a valid game plan? It relies entirely on the opposition making mistakes or giving up and going for a kick. Top teams rarely make mistakes and kicks will be contested. A strong defence game also needs a strong breakdown game and a good kicking game to clear your lines, England don't have either of the next 2 making the defence orientated game plan very stupid.

I was pretty impressed with their defence against Wales, obviously a lot of work has gone into it, but its almost as though the England coaches have become too focused on defence and neglected the most important thing - attack. You can win games with a great attack and **** defence, but much harder the other way around.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Surely if Lancaster wanted a 12 with a kicking game, good distribution and the ability to break the line, the prime choice would have been Danny Cipriani?

 

[Peat]

Just on this. I've spoke to lads from Munster and Leinster who were on the Lions tour and rate Farrell massively as a defence coach. I don't know exactly his roll with England but for the Lions he was held in huge regard

I think his official ***le for England is Backs coach - or maybe Backs and Defence coach - but there's a feeling he seems to have a bigger say than the ***le alone would suggest, like he's almost deputy head coach, or that he and Lancaster have evolved to head coach and DoR with the ***les not changing. He's certainly got more of a voice than Mike Catt.

I completely believe he knows his shizzle as a defence coach, although he doesn't really seem to have a space for jackals in his system for England, but he's taken on a lot more than that for England and does not seem competent in that role.

Yeah he has recently. But he's also played 10 and a bit of 12 for them.

I just think that given his talent and this opportunity against a 'lesser' team it would be madness not to see him at 12.

I am not aware of Henry Slade starting a game for Exeter at 12. I tried to find one and failed. He's mainly played 10 and 13 for them.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Quick question: Will George Ford kick goals given this starting XV?

Also, I'm a little confused about the non-selection of Burgess. To me this says he has effecitively done a deal that will see him head back to league otherwise it makes no sense. If he was a long term project for England then surely he should be playing in this type of game. Am I missing something?

On goal kicking there's no law that says it has to be the 10, so I'd assume it will be Farrell on the simple grounds that he's our best kicker.

On Burgess, I think all it says is that his days at centre are done and options are being looked at which might be used in future. Perversely I think he may have been selected if there had been something at stake. He'll back - as a forward.

 

[ABs2011]

On goal kicking there's no law that says it has to be the 10, so I'd assume it will be Farrell on the simple grounds that he's our best kicker.

On Burgess, I think all it says is that his days at centre are done and options are being looked at which might be used in future. Perversely I think he may have been selected if there had been something at stake. He'll back - as a forward.

Well, no. Thats why I asked So is it a given that Farrell will kick goals? I don't follow your players well enough.

As for Burgess, seriously? shifting to the forwards? Wow, it seems to me they have really stuffed up his transitio nto Union then. Was there any chance a RWC squad berth was written into his contract when he signed over to Union cause none of it makes any sense to me. In terms of switching to the forwards, that will be a much tougher transition for him. That's why pretty much all league players who switch to union go into the backs... Oh well, I'll wait and see I guess, but I reckon he's signing back (if not already signed) to league!

 

[Peat]

Well, no. Thats why I asked So is it a given that Farrell will kick goals? I don't follow your players well enough.

As for Burgess, seriously? shifting to the forwards? Wow, it seems to me they have really stuffed up his transitio nto Union then. Was there any chance a RWC squad berth was written into his contract when he signed over to Union cause none of it makes any sense to me. In terms of switching to the forwards, that will be a much tougher transition for him. That's why pretty much all league players who switch to union go into the backs... Oh well, I'll wait and see I guess, but I reckon he's signing back (if not already signed) to league!

I would not be surprised if either was kicking. Ford kicked better in last season's Premiership. I personally don't think there's much to choose between them as kickers.

Burgess' transition into union is a tricky one, not least because his international coaches and his club coaches have differed on where he should be playing at what points. The England management needed a 12 (although I think they're open to him being 6 post World Cup); Bath thought he'd be better than 6. Since its their money, Bath won. He played some centre as it was judged the easiest position for him to get some gametime in, then they switched him to 6 where he actually went pretty good. He's got a definite future at as a blindside, although whether he'll meet the hype remains to be seen. I'd say his transition to union is actually going really well, he's learning quick and has earned his place in club rugby at least. What went wrong was the preparation of him as a World Cup player although really, what were we expecting? It was always a borderline impossible dream.

There are rumours that he did sign an agreement with the RFU that he'd get a World Cup place spot for sure, but they're pretty wild. I wouldn't believe them myself at the moment. We'll see if the journos can find any proof of that.

 

[ncurd]

Burgess' transition to Union wasn't paid for by the RFU of facilitated by them it was purely done by Bath rugby. So he'll have got nothing in any contract although he may have secretly got assurances from the England coaching staff(but that's purely in the conspiracy theory realms of speculation).

Bath have always seen his natural position as the back row and he's looked way more comfortable there when he's played there for us. Mike Ford said before he was selected for England essentially it's annoying that his growth in that position has been stunted throughout the summer by England's ill advised use of him at center (a position he never looked impressive at for Bath but he was playing to get him game time). At the rate he was learning I wouldn't be surprised if he was not good enough by the summer internationals (defo the autumn) as a forward but he faces stiff competition there. Provided the England management don't continue to dick him around.

Burgess is just another case of England heavy mis-management, I have no idea what Bath or England are going to get out of this folly by putting/training a player out of position for and entire summer.

 

[Willodell100]

Burgess' transition to Union wasn't paid for by the RFU of facilitated by them it was purely done by Bath rugby. So he'll have got nothing in any contract although he may have secretly got assurances from the England coaching staff(but that's purely in the conspiracy theory realms of speculation).

Bath have always seen his natural position as the back row and he's looked way more comfortable there when he's played there for us. Mike Ford said before he was selected for England essentially it's annoying that his growth in that position has been stunted throughout the summer by England's ill advised use of him at center (a position he never looked impressive at for Bath but he was playing to get him game time). At the rate he was learning I wouldn't be surprised if he was not good enough by the summer internationals (defo the autumn) as a forward but he faces stiff competition there. Provided the England management don't continue to dick him around.

Burgess is just another case of England heavy mis-management, I have no idea what Bath or England are going to get out of this folly by putting/training a player out of position for and entire summer.

Yeah I do hope the press haven't put him off Union for life. Some nasty stuff written and rumours going around around.

He has shown enough for both club and country to see there is a potentially excellent 6 in the making. No doubt this summer has halted his technical development in the back row but what he had lost he has more than gained in experience and what is required at the very top level.

Bath will look after him well and he has a great mentor in Louw. I can only see his performances getting better and better.

Whoever is England coach must not be allowed to pick him till next autumn at the very least though.

 

[81st_Minute]

Pretty sure England will win this. England 7, Uruguay 3.