[2015 RWC] Warm Up Match: France vs England (22/08/2015)

[goodNumber10]

To be fair, even when things were going horribly for France, their scrum was never that bad. It would surprise me if we had to play a better scrum thoughout the WC.

Still, it's something that needs a lot of work on...

exactly, France is all about strong scrum.. NZ & Australia won't be rubbish, but they won't be anywhere near as powerful at scrumtime as France. it seems to be the only thing PSA can't mess about with.

 

[Peat]

You're not worried about the second worst performance England have had under Lancaster, bringing up worries that we didn't know we had? Especially since it was essentially a first team we played, and we are only a month away from the World Cup?

Biggest worries:
For a long time we've talked of the set piece as a strength, and we've just seen our first choice front 5 comfortably beaten in both scrum and lineout.
Our breakdown play under Lancaster has generally been uncompetitive, but last night's performance takes us back to the Wales game.

I'm not worried.

That first half performance featured England playing with all the intensity and focus of a team doing a training drill while France looked like a team who badly wanted the win. That was the main problem and it's easily fixed. It won't happen at the World Cup and if it does, players should be invited to individual performance reviews with Rowntree, Farrell, and Mr Rubber Hose. Everyone knows England can show better physicality and skills than that.

We are probably not going to face a scrum that good throughout the entire World Cup. Coming second best to France isn't a gigantic issue and we got more out of the French scrum than we did against Wales in 2013.

We can disrupt opposition ball when playing at a good intensity. Our own ball will probably remain a little dodgy, but we get enough of it to work with as a rule.

The only things I'm worried by are the lineout, which has been consistently bad for a while, and discipline, likewise. I'm seeing people blaming the hookers for the lineout and when five hookers have problems over seven games, the hookers are far from the only issue. The calls and movement are too easy to read.


There are positives. We handed them the game on the plate, but maintained our defensive structure well enough under the pressure for most of the game - only one try and three clean breaks conceded - and once we started playing, we attacked strongly. This England team can break more or less at will. I'm not sure that's enough, but it's something. I don't think the 6N team would have defended as well, people are talking about bringing in Attwood but Launchbury and Lawes brings a huge defensive upgrade.

Ultimately I'd send out a similar team against Ireland with a "Stop The Stupidity" ultimatum ringing in their ears and then, if that doesn't work, rejuggle for Fiji.


I'm pretty angry, because I don't like England playing like crap, but since the reason is obvious and we all know they can do better, I'm not worried.

 

[TobesHodges]

I'm not worried.

That first half performance featured England playing with all the intensity and focus of a team doing a training drill while France looked like a team who badly wanted the win. That was the main problem and it's easily fixed. It won't happen at the World Cup and if it does, players should be invited to individual performance reviews with Rowntree, Farrell, and Mr Rubber Hose. Everyone knows England can show better physicality and skills than that.

We are probably not going to face a scrum that good throughout the entire World Cup. Coming second best to France isn't a gigantic issue and we got more out of the French scrum than we did against Wales in 2013.

We can disrupt opposition ball when playing at a good intensity. Our own ball will probably remain a little dodgy, but we get enough of it to work with as a rule.

The only things I'm worried by are the lineout, which has been consistently bad for a while, and discipline, likewise. I'm seeing people blaming the hookers for the lineout and when five hookers have problems over seven games, the hookers are far from the only issue. The calls and movement are too easy to read.


There are positives. We handed them the game on the plate, but maintained our defensive structure well enough under the pressure for most of the game - only one try and three clean breaks conceded - and once we started playing, we attacked strongly. This England team can break more or less at will. I'm not sure that's enough, but it's something. I don't think the 6N team would have defended as well, people are talking about bringing in Attwood but Launchbury and Lawes brings a huge defensive upgrade.

Ultimately I'd send out a similar team against Ireland with a "Stop The Stupidity" ultimatum ringing in their ears and then, if that doesn't work, rejuggle for Fiji.


I'm pretty angry, because I don't like England playing like crap, but since the reason is obvious and we all know they can do better, I'm not worried.

Agree, I was so annoyed yesterday, but in reflection, we all know that pack can play better than that..
Although I have my reservations on ford's game managment when not on the front foot, he needs another run out, probs with Farrell on the bench this week though.

I hope to see a Burgess - Joseph Midfield would be the only really change with Slade on the Bench..

Although I'm not a big fan of Attwood, I think we may need to Start him or Parling and use Launchbury as an Impact Sub, no detriment to Launchbury, I just think he is a better impact player. I think Kruis is out of the running after playing poorly last week, annoying since I do rate him after such a good AP.

We know this team can play well, let's hope the pull themselves together before Fiji..

 

[Peat]

Although I'm not a big fan of Attwood, I think we may need to Start him or Parling and use Launchbury as an Impact Sub, no detriment to Launchbury, I just think he is a better impact player. I think Kruis is out of the running after playing poorly last week, annoying since I do rate him after such a good AP.

Can't disagree enough there. Launchbury's work rate and accuracy are huge assets and you get more out of them, the more minutes you play him. Attwood looks far better suited to impact sub in my eyes - and maybe Lawes as well.

 

[TobesHodges]

Can't disagree enough there. Launchbury's work rate and accuracy are huge assets and you get more out of them, the more minutes you play him. Attwood looks far better suited to impact sub in my eyes - and maybe Lawes as well.

Actually you're right Lawes would be a better impact Sub.

 

[j'nuh]

I'm not worried.

That first half performance featured England playing with all the intensity and focus of a team doing a training drill while France looked like a team who badly wanted the win. That was the main problem and it's easily fixed. It won't happen at the World Cup and if it does, players should be invited to individual performance reviews with Rowntree, Farrell, and Mr Rubber Hose. Everyone knows England can show better physicality and skills than that.

Do you think, or hope that this is the case?

Because, to me, it would be utterly odd for England not to be playing at full intensity for the second-to-last game before the WC. To me, it would be odd for players to want to play anything below full intensity, given so many have a XV/23/WC spot to lose. And it's not like England haven't been comprehensively beaten before under Lancaster in an important game...

No doubt England will be better in the WC, but it feels like England have taken a step backwards on the evidence of what we have seen so far from these warm-ups.

 

[Peat]

Do you think, or hope that this is the case?

Because, to me, it would be utterly odd for England not to be playing at full intensity for the second-to-last game before the WC. To me, it would be odd for players to want to play anything below full intensity, given so many have a XV/23/WC spot to lose. And it's not like England haven't been comprehensively beaten before under Lancaster in an important game...

No doubt England will be better in the WC, but it feels like England have taken a step backwards on the evidence of what we have seen so far from these warm-ups.

I believe it because I saw it. The logic of doing so comes second to the fact that's how they played.

Personally, I find it absolutely logical that guys playing their first pre-season aren't at full intensity, and reckon very few of the starting XV were playing for their spot - but it's besides the point slightly when it happened.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I believe it because I saw it. The logic of doing so comes second to the fact that's how they played.

Ja, ja.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

You kind of illustrated my point. 2 tries a game, you are the 2nd highest scoring team. And you are comparing to other teams playing the same brand of rugby. There is no doubt that England can compete with other Euro-rugby teams most of the time. I made that explicitly clear in the orignial post as well. England will NOT compete with the speed and precision of the Southern Hemisphere rugby. This has been proven over and over. It is undeniable to anyone who chooses intellectual honesty.

Wow... Firstly 11 tries in 4 games is closer to 3 than 2. Secondly we were the highest scoring team by a long way, Wales are the only team to have more tries than us in total if you remove the French game, that is INCLUDING the Italy game the Welsh had. So basically England scored more tries in the first 4 games than anyone else did in 5 except Wales thanks to their Italy game.

As for can't compete with the Southern Hemisphere, last year we got the closest to beating New Zealand of any side in the world and had the closest overall score difference (yes better than SA and Aus). The last 2 years we have beaten Australia, 2 years ago we beat NZ... You're talking crap.

 

[j'nuh]

I believe it because I saw it. The logic of doing so comes second to the fact that's how they played.

Personally, I find it absolutely logical that guys playing their first pre-season aren't at full intensity, and reckon very few of the starting XV were playing for their spot - but it's besides the point slightly when it happened.

As was the case for our opponents. We weren't playing a well-oiled outfit on the back of a long pre-season. We are at exactly the same point in our preparations as France, and we looked significantly off the pace relative to them.

And whoever you blame (Lancaster, scheduling, or otherwise), we do find ourselves with one more game before the tournament starts, and we look not even remotely close to a finished outfit. This is not a typical pre-season; we shouldn't be rusty at this stage.

(On another level, we should be ahead of France in our preparations. France have a fairly comfortable ride into the knockouts and can use the pools as an almost extended warm-up. England have a decent chance of going out in the pool stage and need to be at their best in advance of the pool stage.)

 

[Peat]

To point out the hyper-obvious, some teams treat pre-season with more ferocity than others. We saw that yesterday. No one should be surprised either way.

 

[goodNumber10]

As was the case for our opponents. We weren't playing a well-oiled outfit on the back of a long pre-season. We are at exactly the same point in our preparations as France, and we looked significantly off the pace relative to them.

And whoever you blame (Lancaster, scheduling, or otherwise), we do find ourselves with one more game before the tournament starts, and we look not even remotely close to a finished outfit. This is not a typical pre-season; we shouldn't be rusty at this stage.

(On another level, we should be ahead of France in our preparations. France have a fairly comfortable ride into the knockouts and can use the pools as an almost extended warm-up. England have a decent chance of going out in the pool stage and need to be at their best in advance of the pool stage.)

Are we at the same point in our preparation?

Were on the same schedule that doesn't mean our prep has to be the same.

France looked happier yesterday because I felt the game was looser and we were less cohesive than previously, it suited their natural playing style, that wasn't a game plan that was just guys playing.

There was almost no ferocity in the contact, almost no passion, from either side, but we looked miles fitter than them, so maybe were only now heading into strategy and game plan, but France wont make up that fitness level.

 

[j'nuh]

That's the point I'm making; if it is a case of England being lackadaisical about pre-season, then that's a big mistake. A WC isn't a slow burn like a Premiership season. We don't have the time to be going through a slow build-up. Consider how many games it takes for the Lions to come up with a kind of fluidity.

But I don't think that is the case because I don't think Lancaster is daft. I think England are going for it in pre-season but got completely outplayed and didn't know how to answer France, partly because a few of our players had shockers, partly because the tactics were wrong, partly because of Lancaster's limitations as a coach and selector.

 

[Peat]

The Lions is a brand new team and not comparable. England are, at least in theory, already a fluid team and it's just a matter of getting back into harness.

And a lackadaisical performance in a friendly =/= slow build up. We might be on a slow build up, I've no real way to tell, but it doesn't necessarily mean that.

Really, my main worry, would be that this long build up and much hyped fitness sessions have taken too much out of the players prior to the tournament. Some of the stuff I read about Ireland 2007 comes creeping into my mind. But no way of telling that at the moment.

 

[j'nuh]

The Lions is a brand new team and not comparable. England are, at least in theory, already a fluid team and it's just a matter of getting back into harness.

And a lackadaisical performance in a friendly =/= slow build up. We might be on a slow build up, I've no real way to tell, but it doesn't necessarily mean that.

Really, my main worry, would be that this long build up and much hyped fitness sessions have taken too much out of the players prior to the tournament. Some of the stuff I read about Ireland 2007 comes creeping into my mind. But no way of telling that at the moment.

It didn't show yesterday... :/

Anyway, I suppose Ireland will be a better indicator. Another poor performance there will be significantly more worrying.

 

[TobesHodges]

Also Jamie George needs to start, better at the set piece, big, strong with a touch of pace.
What stood out like a sore thumb was leader ship and people putting there hands up, maybe another reason for Burgess to start 12.
Also Billy does annoy me when he runs into contact, does he know he weights 20 odd stone of power, stop trying to sidestep the collision and lose the pace and power generated..

 

[McTallshort]

Watching the lowlights now

 

[martinspoonboy1]

Watching the lowlights now

Actually slightly better watching it this time round. Think Guscott was harsh to say Mike Brown was the only player who played with enthusiastic. I thought Nowell was England's best player.

 

[McTallshort]

You couldn't judge any of the backs given the **** the forwards were supplying them. Who plays in the centre's who should be in the back 3 who should start at 10 is all a bloody irrelevance because the set piece and break down are a sack of crap

 

[martinspoonboy1]

You couldn't judge any of the backs given the **** the forwards were supplying them. Who plays in the centre's who should be in the back 3 who should start at 10 is all a bloody irrelevance because the set piece and break down are a sack of crap

Agreed. Apart from 12T ofcourse