[2015 Six Nations] Wales vs England (Round 1)

[msf]

I think the really important thing we learnt from Friday night is that Ford is a true playmaker, i.e. he makes other players play by molding his game to theirs. The best example of this is the improvement in Ben Youngs' form: it can't be a coincidence that this was his best performance since he played alongside Toby Flood in 2011. The reason why they were such an attacking threat back then was that Youngs would run at the defence, drawing defenders to him, and Flood would appear on his shoulder to break the line/get over the advantage line. This did not happen for 4 years because Farrell doesn't make this kind of run. The great thing about Ford is that, even though he doesn't make this kind of run for Bath (where he plays with a passing scrum-half, Cook) he sees where the space is on the pitch and adjusts his game accordingly. Thus we saw him making this kind of run to great effect (one was the phase before Joseph scored) at least twice on Friday night. This keeps the defence honest, making Youngs more of a running threat too. This despite the fact that Ford is not as good at this as Flood, as he doesn't have Flood's size/offloading ability. The advantage that Ford has over Flood or Farrell though is that he can change his game to suit his teammates/the opposition. He showed this again in the second half when Wigglesworth, a passing scrum-half came on, and he went back to how he plays for Bath, getting the ball early, drawing the defence himself and putting Kearan Brookes through on his shoulder for what would have been a try without Easter's intervention. If anyone is still unconvinced Ford's playmaking ability, watch England's first try against Australia in the autumn - he even made Brad Barritt a running threat!

The other thing I would say is that I really hope Lancaster now realizes the importance of having players like Joseph (such as Wade and Cipriani) who can make the difference with the kind of play that other players (Barritt for one) will never be capable of.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Willkommen, msf!

 

[mstar]

I just feel with haskell at 6 gives us an extra ball carrier and physicality at the breakdown. We lack a little bally carrying ability in the past with haskell and his form its gives us great go-forward.

I also dont want to see 12T coming back to the side i like Lancaster to try JJ and Luthur for at least 3 games. I agree earlier comments Kruis and Attwood are workhorses but don't offer that X-Factor that lawes and Launchers do.

I like to see Easter have some time at 8 i just think his game intelligence could make a difference when we have VERY tight games in the World cup. As much as i like vinny i just think he lacks a little game time experience which is not his fault as he is young. As world cup time is knock-out rugby and pressure is much more then games before (6N etc)

 

[goodNumber10]

Surely that's a massive black mark against Haskell then?

If you're going to be critical of a FH not dominating a number 8 in a tackle then you have to absolutely nail a blindside flanker for not completing a tackle on a number 8 making a blindside break.
He has two jobs at that scrum, to push and to smash anyone who comes down his channel.

and he has been criticised repeatedly for it in this thread.

I don't think anyone is disputing that, or saying that losing ground in contact isn't a weakness.

But until the net result of his defensive qualities gets to the point where it cancels out or overrides his positive traits then it's completely redundant calling him out on it.

But you can't erase it from the equation, and you can't say because it didn't cost England a game that it doesn't matter - address it now and it won't cost England a game.

You know as well as i do that the analysts will be flagging this up to the attack coaches and anyone who's looking for yards will be targetting his channel.

Unless we are talking about positional or technical flaws, but we aren't, for the most part... people are just reiterating the fact that he's tiny - which unfortunately, he can't do much about.

It's both - he can coombat the size thing by leading the line up early and either going low, or hitting holding and at least causing problems ahead of the gain line.

The fact is Ford is not a big guy, so he needs to go low, and at least if he goes low and makes a tackle Robshaw et al get a chance of a jackal, if he goes high he makes their job harder, and it makes the next defensive phase harder as the line has to go backwards before it can come forward and the forwards have to go back and around before they can attack the ruck.

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't the real question when it comes to the defensive ability of backs is lack of ability in defence made up by their clear ability in attack? I would suggest the Bath backs score a lot more then they let be scored on them from their lack of ability. If the net gain is higher doesn't worry about the defence as much. After all in the end it leads to the kind rugby we all want to see (ie more tries) whilst your side still winning.

This is such a fallacious argument, there is no point in scoring three great tries if you let in four soft ones.

The simple fact is because he creates doesn't absolve him of his responsibilities in defence and while it ultimately didn't have a huge impact it will in bigger games with more switched on attack coaches.

That doesn't mean we drop him, it means he needs to up his defence to compliment his attack... but lets be clear defence is still a weak point.

As for Ford he's made at least one clear try saving tackle in recent weeks whilst not the best defensively I suggest he offers way more in attack than the other options.

Yes, but this is not the point in discussion.

In addition that analysis is of the first half before England really settled as a defensive unit, in the second half Wales could barely make over the gainline and were regularly driven back. If your defensive unit as a whole is capable of that it doesn't matter as much if one or two players aren't the great backline defender in the country.

pretty sure it happened throughout the game.

- - - Updated - - -

I think the really important thing we learnt from Friday night is that Ford is a true playmaker, i.e. he makes other players play by molding his game to theirs. The best example of this is the improvement in Ben Youngs' form: it can't be a coincidence that this was his best performance since he played alongside Toby Flood in 2011. The reason why they were such an attacking threat back then was that Youngs would run at the defence, drawing defenders to him, and Flood would appear on his shoulder to break the line/get over the advantage line. This did not happen for 4 years because Farrell doesn't make this kind of run.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Listen up ****wit, you are a laughing stock because of the antics of your coaching team


It is nothing to do with your rugby, but that is not too far away

Just a friendly reminder that swearing or using the stars to cover up language is not accepted on this board.

Thank You.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

It's both - he can coombat the size thing by leading the line up early and either going low, or hitting holding and at least causing problems ahead of the gain line.

I haven't really been following this so correct me if I've missed something but making these changes is very much easier said than done.

First of all, leading the line up early isn't Ford's call to make almost all of the time. England's defence coach will have set the line speed and told them how to defend in almost all scenarios they find themselves on the pitch, leading the defensive line up earlier would likely lead to more issues with the defence and make redundant the flaw in the defence that it fixed. As for going low, that is very much linked with size. If you look at the best traditional tacklers in rugby these days, guys like Dan Lydiate, they are all big men, the days when small men could make a front up tackle by going low and hitting with the shoulder on a bigger oncoming player are gone and there isn't really a 10 in rugby who does it since Jonny Wilkinson retired. If Ford was making these types of tackles against the likes of Cian Healy, Sean O'Brien, Mathieu Bastreaud etc... he'd more likely than not **** his shoulder up and leave England without an international standard 10 for the remainder of the championship.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I agree.

The safest way for Ford to defend is passively, upright allowing an assistant tackler to complete it if necessary.
It's the best mix of injury and offload prevention, sure you lose some ground, but as long as your defensive line as a whole is competent and fit it shouldn't be too difficult.

If that's unacceptable to you, that's fine.

Diving at the knees/ankles of Bastareud (anyone, actually) running straight at you is a bad thing to do.
It's straight up moronic.

As cmac says, how hard he presses is more down to the coaches than him, perhaps he isn't doing what he's been tasked with.
We don't know - let's see what he does next week.

 

[Thingimubob]

Listen up ****wit, you are a laughing stock because of the antics of your coaching team


It is nothing to do with your rugby, but that is not too far away

Haha charming

Aye the mind games are daft - pretty much everyone in Wales agrees with that.

But last I checked rugby is still about results on the pitch leading to silverware - while there's definitely a lot of improvement needed on the former (in particular vs the SH), the latter has been pretty damn good recently!

 

[Goodey]

Not too fussed about Ford's defence on that try considering

a) It's primarily Haskell's ****up. Given the situation it's hard to see many international 10s who would do much better.
b) He was probably surprised by Faletau picking the ball out of the middle of a backwards-marching scrum and running off with it given that he is not actually allowed to do that.

Pretty crazy that the ref allowed it given that (if Attwood's disallowed try in the closing stage is anything to go by) he is 100% insistent on the prior few minutes to a try being as clean as clean can be in order to award it. And this is hardly some nitpick, if you can always get out of a scrum going backwards by just grabbing the ball out at any time then the whole concept of the scrum as competitive and important ends.

 

[goodNumber10]

I haven't really been following this so correct me if I've missed something but making these changes is very much easier said than done.

First of all, leading the line up early isn't Ford's call to make almost all of the time. England's defence coach will have set the line speed and told them how to defend in almost all scenarios they find themselves on the pitch, leading the defensive line up earlier would likely lead to more issues with the defence and make redundant the flaw in the defence that it fixed. As for going low, that is very much linked with size. If you look at the best traditional tacklers in rugby these days, guys like Dan Lydiate, they are all big men, the days when small men could make a front up tackle by going low and hitting with the shoulder on a bigger oncoming player are gone and there isn't really a 10 in rugby who does it since Jonny Wilkinson retired. If Ford was making these types of tackles against the likes of Cian Healy, Sean O'Brien, Mathieu Bastreaud etc... he'd more likely than not **** his shoulder up and leave England without an international standard 10 for the remainder of the championship.

Englands defence is ALL about line speed and making sure contact areas are behind the gain line or driving the ball carrier back to the narrow channels - that generally comes from out to in as the vision is better. Ford sat wide in a lot of the defensive channels and he was clearly one of the players setting Englands line speed.

For a small guy the wrap and roll is the most effective, and safest tackle. No one is saying he should be hit and driving but this is kids rugby, go low and roll with the tackle. If he gets off the line and rolls then his backrow get a chance at a turn over. It's exactly how Cruden defends, and he is almost the same size and build as ford and is about as effective when he goes high.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree.

The safest way for Ford to defend is passively, upright allowing an assistant tackler to complete it if necessary.
It's the best mix of injury and offload prevention, sure you lose some ground, but as long as your defensive line as a whole is competent and fit it shouldn't be too difficult.

If that's unacceptable to you, that's fine.

Diving at the knees/ankles of Bastareud (anyone, actually) running straight at you is a bad thing to do.
It's straight up moronic.

As cmac says, how hard he presses is more down to the coaches than him, perhaps he isn't doing what he's been tasked with.
We don't know - let's see what he does next week.

No one is saying dive at people knees and you've got to be a retard to do such a thing, but if you're going to be a passive tackler, and i re-iterate there is nothing wrong with that, then you have to be a low wrap and roll tackler to give your backrow a chance.

Secondly how effective was it at stopping Faletaus offload?

It's fine hiding Ford away, but you can't hide Ford AND eastmond and rageranchers point was the bath backs are fine bring em all in... you have a passive 10 and 12 and you're going backwards all day, and i'm sorry that is an issue.

Is it a reason to drop Ford? Not at all, but don't make out like all his defensive frailties are not there - which is exactly what ragerancher is doing.

- - - Updated - - -

Not too fussed about Ford's defence on that try considering

a) It's primarily Haskell's ****up. Given the situation it's hard to see many international 10s who would do much better.
b) He was probably surprised by Faletau picking the ball out of the middle of a backwards-marching scrum and running off with it given that he is not actually allowed to do that.

So it's Haskells fault for missing a tackle but Ford can be forgiven for it as Faletau picked it out of the front row - so the wide guy with vision is exempt but the guy who's in close and has A: Less time and B: less vision is at fault?

Fords reaction margins were far longer than Haskells.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Secondly how effective was it at stopping Faletaus offload?
Fords reaction margins were far longer than Haskells.

Faletau's offload was top draw, more to do with him doing well than Ford doing anything wrong.

Ford's "reaction margins" may have been longer than Haskell's, but that doesn't change the fact that it was Haskell's tackle to make.

 

[goodNumber10]

Faletau's offload was top draw, more to do with him doing well than Ford doing anything wrong.

Ford's "reaction margins" may have been longer than Haskell's, but that doesn't change the fact that it was Haskell's tackle to make.

not saying it isn't but you can't absolve one and punish the other without taking the same elements into account for both - if Ford is let off for being surprised you have to say the same for Haskell.

Regardless there was a ton of issues with that try.

For me it was a poor defensive set up, why was Ford behind the scrum - in fact the bigger issue for me was Youngs following the ball around, i'd rather he'd just stepped off the scrum and loaded our defence on the left and let Ford load right.

This defensive debate is annoying, it's detracting from what was a pretty good performance all said and done.

 

[msf]

Sorry, good no.10, I should have said that Farrell made that run once in 4 years, against Italy when they were on their try line.

- - - Updated - - -

And even then it was off Care rather than Youngs.

- - - Updated - - -

Re: Ford's defence, I think he should be given credit for being smart enough to compensate for it...at one point he conceded quite a few metres in tackling Roberts, but because he was still on his feet he was able to kick the ball out at the following ruck, and England turned the ball over soon afterwards.

 

[The Jones Boy]

England showed a new leaf when they closed Wales out of the game with 10 minutes to go.
This is the first time in a long time that i have seen England perform in this kind of clinical manner at crunch time.
It was well done.
This is a very real sign that England are growing and maturing.

 

[ratsapprentice]

After watching the game again, I'm left with a good feeling.

It was a very composed, quietly confident performance.
One of the most pleasing for a long time.

 

[Tony Manx]

After watching the game again, I'm left with a good feeling.

It was a very composed, quietly confident performance.
One of the most pleasing for a long time.

Must admit that I very much agree and thought that about their second half performance whilst watching............would get bored watching again though!!

 

[goodNumber10]

Sorry, good no.10, I should have said that Farrell made that run once in 4 years, against Italy when they were on their try line.

He did it all the time, but much like Fords defence people only focus on the negatives of Farrells attacking game (even when they are wrong about specific elements of it).

And even then it was off Care rather than Youngs.

Care had been the form 9 for the last two years, so it's unlikely to see how he could have done it off Youngs.

Re: Ford's defence, I think he should be given credit for being smart enough to compensate for it...at one point he conceded quite a few metres in tackling Roberts, but because he was still on his feet he was able to kick the ball out at the following ruck, and England turned the ball over soon afterwards.

54 minutes, roberts takes him back 4-5 metres, he stands up and puts his foot on the ball trying to kick it out of the ruck and fails , Webb picks it up with little problem and spins it left the next ruck results in a turn over due to a welshman being isolated on the ground.

Not sure you can credit that to Fords brilliant intelligent defence.

- - - Updated - - -

After watching the game again, I'm left with a good feeling.

It was a very composed, quietly confident performance.
One of the most pleasing for a long time.

completely agree, it was a very rounded performance, especially considering how many front line and bench players are missing.

I wonder if like 2014 we have a poor AI and then head into the 6nations and tear it up a bit.

 

[msf]

The reason that Care was the form scrum-half was because Youngs had lost form, and one of the reasons for this was that Farrell wasn't making him look good with this kind of run. You won't be able to find another example of it, and you definitely won't find a match where he did it twice (as Ford did on Friday). Re: Ford kicking the ball in the ruck, you obviously don't know much about rugby if you don't see how this can be effective even when it doesn't cause an instant turnover. This is something that Farrell does do well, so I'm surprised that you don't seem to appreciate it (although perhaps you do when Farrell does it). Btw, I think it's fine to point out that Ford's game has flaws, as long as you aren't calling for Farrell to be picked ahead of him. If you are, you really need to watch some games from 2000-2003 and compare Farrell's passing to Catt, Greenwood or Wilkinson's.

 

[goodNumber10]

Lol!

The reason that Care was the form scrum-half was because Youngs had lost form, and one of the reasons for this was that Farrell wasn't making him look good with this kind of run.

Right so Youngs loss of Form was down to Owen Farrell not running short lines off him everytime he had a dart?

ridicolous!

You won't be able to find another example of it, and you definitely won't find a match where he did it twice (as Ford did on Friday).

Hang on while i just trawl back thorugh 26 matches to prove you wrong.... :/

Re: Ford kicking the ball in the ruck, you obviously don't know much about rugby if you don't see how this can be effective even when it doesn't cause an instant turnover. This is something that Farrell does do well, so I'm surprised that you don't seem to appreciate it (although perhaps you do when Farrell does it).

I understand rugby just fine, well enough to know that A: Ford didn't kick the ball out of the ruck as you claim and B: that he had no effect on the next breakdown.

What you're describing never happened, he tried to kick it and had virtually no effect.

Btw, I think it's fine to point out that Ford's game has flaws, as long as you aren't calling for Farrell to be picked ahead of him. If you are, you really need to watch some games from 2000-2003 and compare Farrell's passing to Catt, Greenwood or Wilkinson's.

*Sigh*

 

[msf]

I feel like your moniker is a joke, so perhaps I shouldn't rise to this, but to respond to your points (I'm being generous) quickly: 1.) I watched most of those games and never saw it, whilst I saw it when Ford and Flood played. 2.) The player kicking the ball either slows the ball down or makes the opposition commit more players to the ruck. 3.) Yes, Farrell's passing makes me sigh too.