England 2023/24

[Vieux Talonneur]

We don't typically seem to be able to hold on to coaches who aren't English.

I suspect that it's easier to keep the Englishmen because there is a kind of loyalty/pride attached to representing your country.

Perhaps if we had secured Forshaw and Blackett they would still be in post.

An obvious risk if home is another country and you've perhaps left your family behind.

Exception, Jones E.

Names have come and gone from home and overseas. A few are missed, but too many simply didn't have the right experience…..Ryles, Siebold, Amor, Gleeson, Sinfield etc……

The hires of the likes of Mitchell, F Jones, and Walters suggests that the England jobs still have a pull. The problem seems to be what they find when they get there which for me is 100% down to the culture set the by the head coaches.

 

[Jimbo]

It does feel like we are constantly reinventing the wheel...

What's actually being reinvented here though, I keep hearing about this revolutionary defence, rush D is pretty damn common and has been for a while, I get that there are subtle nuances to some of it but for the most part there's no real invention, just comes across as excuses and buying time for results to come at times.

 

[BPM]

An obvious risk if home is another country and you've perhaps left your family behind.

Exception, Jones E.

Names have come and gone from home and overseas. A few are missed, but too many simply didn't have the right experience…..Ryles, Siebold, Amor, Gleeson, Sinfield etc……

The hires of the likes of Mitchell, F Jones, and Walters suggests that the England jobs still have a pull. The problem seems to be what they find when they get there which for me is 100% down to the culture set the by the head coaches.

This is the biggest thing for me. Amor and Gleeson were not at the level required. Same goes for Siebold.

Arguably, Sinfield and Wigglesworth are not experienced enough for the level of responsibility they were given.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

What's actually being reinvented here though, I keep hearing about this revolutionary defence, rush D is pretty damn common and has been for a while, I get that there are subtle nuances to some of it but for the most part there's no real invention, just comes across as excuses and buying time for results to come at times.

Agree. Just wonder if some players don't have great rugby IQ and struggled too much.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

What's actually being reinvented here though, I keep hearing about this revolutionary defence, rush D is pretty damn common and has been for a while, I get that there are subtle nuances to some of it but for the most part there's no real invention, just comes across as excuses and buying time for results to come at times.

The principles are fine but the devil's always in the detail. That, and communication styles, will differ between coaches. At this level small mistakes get exposed, and it takes a very long time for something - anything - to become properly instinctive. That's why continuity of coaching and selection matters.

And don't forget that the players spend most of their time with their clubs where they're hearing different voices and possibly using a different system entirely.

 

[Reiser99]

Yeah, the hardest part is getting everyone on the same page, knowing what to do and trusting each other. Attack can be a bit of individual brilliance to score, but conceding is almost always because the defence didn't work correctly.