England 2024/25

[AngloScotsHybrid]

Im putting money on Michael Cheika being next England coach.

 

[IT157]

Im putting money on Michael Cheika being next England coach.

You're keen on losing your money?

 

[AngloScotsHybrid]

You're keen on losing your money?

Come back to me in a year's time

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I really don't see where the improvements are expected to come from in this England team. Borthwick seems to be making quite a few of the same errors over and over and if SB hasn't corrected them now when he's had ample opportunity, I'm guessing he doesn't know how.

The defence is an absolute mess and our defence coach will still be doing two jobs come the 6 nations. Why pick a system that takes so much work and time when we had a good defence beforehand and really needed to focus on our attack.

Then on attack, we've got a 10 12 13 that look like they've never met before. Then the 'generational' talent of Marcus who looks really disjointed in an England shirt. So that's either the player or the tactics.

We've also got Borthwick doing an Eddie and picking players not in form, ignoring form players and also picking players straight back from injury who then surprisingly struggle.

Just can't see anyone in the RFU nor Borthwick, intelligent enough to really see what the issues are and fix them.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

Im putting money on Michael Cheika being next England coach.

Only if those who only want an English coach are not involved in the decision. Not sure his recent ban helps either.

 

[mikebrownsauce1512]

Bit random but I think Tommy Roebuck looked good on the weekend vs Leicester. The new laws suit him chasing the high ball, I think he has got great technique in the air and uses his body well to make sure the ball goes backwards. He has a big frame and I think he would compliment a back three containing Furbank and IFW. Hope to see him get some more game time in the 6N.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Im putting money on Michael Cheika being next England coach.

Checks was already moaning about the RFU a week after his first game
No way the RFU would give him the control he would want

 

[Geordie]

Bit random but I think Tommy Roebuck looked good on the weekend vs Leicester. The new laws suit him chasing the high ball, I think he has got great technique in the air and uses his body well to make sure the ball goes backwards. He has a big frame and I think he would compliment a back three containing Furbank and IFW. Hope to see him get some more game time in the 6N.

Furbank has been very good for us in his "second" stint...but this AI hes been poor. Is that just a slump in form ala Ben Earl, or is it more to do with the set up of the backs and how much have the new laws affected him.

He'll probably be in there for the 6n so it will be interesting to see.

I think Freeman will be another interesting one. A very quiet AI in my opinion, is he better suited to FB or 13 at this level? Another one to watch how his club using him aswell.

 

[mikebrownsauce1512]

Furbank has been very good for us in his "second" stint...but this AI hes been poor. Is that just a slump in form ala Ben Earl, or is it more to do with the set up of the backs and how much have the new laws affected him.

He'll probably be in there for the 6n so it will be interesting to see.

I think Freeman will be another interesting one. A very quiet AI in my opinion, is he better suited to FB or 13 at this level? Another one to watch how his club using him aswell.

I do like Tommy Freeman but not sure he is the answer at 13. Happy for Borthwick to prove me wrong though. Would also like to see Tom Willis given a go at no8 but SB seems to have a thing for Dombrandt.

 

[Geordie]

I do like Tommy Freeman but not sure he is the answer at 13. Happy for Borthwick to prove me wrong though. Would also like to see Tom Willis given a go at no8 but SB seems to have a thing for Dombrandt.

Yeah im not sure Freeman is the answer there either, but i think its worth looking at.

Dombrandt is a good player and if he was to bring his game to this level brilliant. But his game Is not the style Borthwick wants to play and i dont think hes physical enough to play the game SB expects his 8 to play. I think CCS probably suits it more. Tom Willis didn't stand out in the A for his physical carrying either, which was disappointing.

 

[mikebrownsauce1512]

Yeah im not sure Freeman is the answer there either, but i think its worth looking at.

Dombrandt is a good player and if he was to bring his game to this level brilliant. But his game Is not the style Borthwick wants to play and i dont think hes physical enough to play the game SB expects his 8 to play. I think CCS probably suits it more. Tom Willis didn't stand out in the A for his physical carrying either, which was disappointing.

I didn't watch the A game so shame to hear that about Willis. Over the autumn I think it was Austin Healy on coms that said Dombrandt was a back trapped in a forwards body, he looks world class for quins and can read the game so well but doesn't seem to use his size very well in the international game unfortunately.

 

[Geordie]

I didn't watch the A game so shame to hear that about Willis. Over the autumn I think it was Austin Healy on coms that said Dombrandt was a back trapped in a forwards body, he looks world class for quins and can read the game so well but doesn't seem to use his size very well in the international game unfortunately.

I dont think its that he doesnt use his size....thats not his game. Hes about hitting the space between defenders and offloading. Hes an intelligent player at quins, who have built their game partially around him and Smith...

Hes also very good at the breakdown, and gets alot of turnovers.

But i dont think thats the type of 8 SB wants...he wants a more direct hard carrying 8...a unit. And that might turn out to be CCS.

 

[BPM]

I really don't see where the improvements are expected to come from in this England team. Borthwick seems to be making quite a few of the same errors over and over and if SB hasn't corrected them now when he's had ample opportunity, I'm guessing he doesn't know how.

The defence is an absolute mess and our defence coach will still be doing two jobs come the 6 nations. Why pick a system that takes so much work and time when we had a good defence beforehand and really needed to focus on our attack.

Then on attack, we've got a 10 12 13 that look like they've never met before. Then the 'generational' talent of Marcus who looks really disjointed in an England shirt. So that's either the player or the tactics.

We've also got Borthwick doing an Eddie and picking players not in form, ignoring form players and also picking players straight back from injury who then surprisingly struggle.

Just can't see anyone in the RFU nor Borthwick, intelligent enough to really see what the issues are and fix them.

When does 'beforehand' refer to? If it's pre-Felix Jones, then I see where you're coming from. Our defence was good enough back then without being anything special. The problem is that Jones was starting to turn England's defence from simply being 'good' to it being a real weapon so I don't blame Borthwick for wanting to see if El Abd could continue with it.

From El Abd's POV, he had no real time to implement something new. I wouldn't altogether abandon a blitz either as I think a big part of the issue was Slade's lack of game time and fitness compromising his role leading the rush. I get why he was selected but he didn't look fit enough, sharp enough or well enough connected with his team-mates for it to work and that banjaxed the whole system. The rest of the horror show in defence came from some really poor fringe defence which I'd regard as individual errors rather than system failure. Genge, Martin, George and CCS were all notably culpable here.

Attack is plain weird. In the summer it looked good, in the Autumn it was mostly bad which is hard to explain given it was more or less the same back division. What was equally strange is how we do stuff that works and then abruptly stop doing it. Against NZ, we started well and were causing them problems by playing really flat to the line. It was working, giving us field position, kickable penalties and even caused them to pick up a yellow. Then it seemed like we just kind of forgot about it? I know defences adapt etc. but as I recall, they had most of the ball in the third quarter and come the 4th, we had the ball back but not the composure to play like we did in the first half. It was similar against Australia.

On the form picks who should have been in? Personally I'd have had Willis instead of Dombrandt but honestly, that's about it.

 

[mikebrownsauce1512]

When does 'beforehand' refer to? If it's pre-Felix Jones, then I see where you're coming from. Our defence was good enough back then without being anything special. The problem is that Jones was starting to turn England's defence from simply being 'good' to it being a real weapon so I don't blame Borthwick for wanting to see if El Abd could continue with it.

From El Abd's POV, he had no real time to implement something new. I wouldn't altogether abandon a blitz either as I think a big part of the issue was Slade's lack of game time and fitness compromising his role leading the rush. I get why he was selected but he didn't look fit enough, sharp enough or well enough connected with his team-mates for it to work and that banjaxed the whole system. The rest of the horror show in defence came from some really poor fringe defence which I'd regard as individual errors rather than system failure. Genge, Martin, George and CCS were all notably culpable here.

Attack is plain weird. In the summer it looked good, in the Autumn it was mostly bad which is hard to explain given it was more or less the same back division. What was equally strange is how we do stuff that works and then abruptly stop doing it. Against NZ, we started well and were causing them problems by playing really flat to the line. It was working, giving us field position, kickable penalties and even caused them to pick up a yellow. Then it seemed like we just kind of forgot about it? I know defences adapt etc. but as I recall, they had most of the ball in the third quarter and come the 4th, we had the ball back but not the composure to play like we did in the first half. It was similar against Australia.

On the form picks who should have been in? Personally I'd have had Willis instead of Dombrandt but honestly, that's about it.

I understand what your saying but one player cant lead a rush on his own it takes 14 other players buying in to complete the defensive system, I also don't think not being "fit enough" is a viable excuse to blame a whole failing defensive system on.

 

[BPM]

It is when it only takes one or two to be slightly off to create massive doglegs.

The blitz is arguably the most physically taxing system so not being fit enough to execute it is a major issue. It's a reason not an 'excuse'. Moreover, Slade was picked to lead it but he clearly wasn't sharp enough due to a lack of match practice. Not really his fault, but it defeated the whole object of rushing him back too soon.

Also, as I said earlier, we had as many problems from sloppy work around the ruck than we did around systemic issues with the blitz. We know it can work so I don't want to abandon it completely without understanding which bits are failing.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Our old defensive system got us to a WC semi and using it we nearly won that game. If we had a decent attack we would have. I want that system back, seems easier to learn and we know it works.

This blitz is taking too long already and we are going to have these issues every time we bring new players in. It's just not worth it.