England Post-WC discussion

[Peat]

Did a search back through my own posts just to be sure of what I was thinking back then. Found this:

I'd agree with most of that, I'd prefer to have a coach up until 2015 for continuity, but its not essential. But yes; sod experience, I want quality. Which Mallet may have, I'm not sure. Right now I'd probably give the job to whichever of Mallet and Lancaster comes across with the most coherent identification of where they want England to go in the next two years and how that's going to happen. My three big questions to Lancaster would be how are we going to win more turnovers, are we going to put more ball carriers in the pack, and how are we going to manufacture some space for the back three to run in. Right now those are the major failings of England for me, and I wouldn't be happy with him unless he had good answers for these, but elsewise it looks fairly good...

I'd say two out of three of those issues remained right until the end.

 

[Mattybuck]

What other ways would you suggest of seeing what works and what doesn't work in rugby at the moment? I'm not saying it's the be all and end all, but if everyone else in rugby is doing something, ignoring it doesn't make sense, and I think it falls on people to give reasons why their ideas should be working. How are you planning to create this space?

Also, I'd rather decide upon a game plan and pick the players to fit than pick the best players and hope they're work. Again, that seems to be best practice elsewhere.

You don't have to run into someone to fix and commit them. Look at JJ for instance, he will stand his man up and exploit the space created.

Ford and Slade can both act as first receiver/distributor, with the added ability to take a gap. These will keep their defenders focused on them. Both can vary their distribution to suit the attack and I have no doubt that they would pick holes for big forwards or quick backs to scamper through.

Putting a defender on their heels when a player has pace is as good as drawing then into the tackle.

Once you've created that break or half break, that it is when players with pace become especially dangerous.

Much much harder for a scramble defence to recover.

It's always good to have a big lump that can drag 2/3 players into contact and off load/recycle but at this point I don't believe we have a player of that ilk.

It may be that someone like Devo at Bath could come in and fill this role, and if he does that's great.

But you have to pick your best players and find a game plan that brings out the best in them.

We've been picking average players in many positions to fit a predetermined game plan for the last 4 years. And I think we'd all agree it's not worked too well.

I'm not saying it's definitely going to work, but I do suggest that we have a look at it.

I for one think some of the big centre pairings would not like to face a dynamic skill full back line.

Defences are set up to handle crash ball, so let's give them something different.

Anyway what do I know!

 

[TheSaffycen]

Anyone think Launchbury could be a world class 6 ? Could solve a lot of our problems playing him there.
Just evaluating the new lot of 6s that we have
Ewers-incredible carrier and offloader. Haven't noticed him over the ball, lineout isn't happening currently. Tackles like a monster. If we want a big pack based game I would have him.
Itoje- Best clearer of the ruck possibly in the country. Alright at carrying and lineouts. Age is probably the only thing stopping him at the moment.
Launchbury-Best hands, already intl quality, great over the ball. No weakness that I can see.
Robshaw-Okay not new but new for him in an England shirt . Best tackling machine we have, good link up. Competent lineout but not good. Terrible reputation after this world cup sadly. Definitely should get a 6N there to prove his worth.

 

[tsof]

I had a bit of a revelation earlier. The perfect England pack for the next Six Nations.

1. Vunipola
2. George
3. ?
4. Launchbury
5. Itoje
6. Croft (c)
7. Kvesic
8. Vunipola

How about this...

1) Vunipola
2) George
3) Brookes
4) Launchbury
5) Kitchener
6) Itoje
7) Kvesic/Fraser
8) Vunipola


Itoje's been playing a fair bit of 6 for Sarries recently, and adding in Kitch adds a bit of bulk for clearing out the rucks - and according to Kieran Reid is a smart line-out caller. (“If he was in New Zealand, he would be an All Black.")

 

[Peat]

But you have to pick your best players and find a game plan that brings out the best in them.

We've been picking average players in many positions to fit a predetermined game plan for the last 4 years. And I think we'd all agree it's not worked too well.

So, best 15 players by position, work out the game plan from there? I apologise if I'm misreading what you mean.

I think that's unhelpful an extreme as "Here's the game plan, who have we got?" Each approach is likely to lead to players doing tasks they're not suited for. I'd suggest the optimum is to build a plan around your very best players, then start picking the right players to carry out the game plan and form partnerships with them, regardless of whether they're the next best players. Ben Kay was not the second best lock in England in 2003, but he was the best lock to play next to Martin Johnson.

This is a philosophic point as much as anything - but, well, everyone wants a big lad to play alongside Joseph it seems. I fully agree we seem a little short of those at the moment, but even an average big lad will straighten the line better than Henry Slade.


Which is not to say it's the only way. You're right that a big back line could well be troubled by a very evasive one. The issue is creating the space - it's no good Joseph stepping one man if there's another man ready next to him. One cynical answer would simply be to kick a lot of non-turnover/set-piece ball with the intention of maximising the opportunities that arise and going for territory when it's not. The other obvious answer is to have a lot of very big men in the forwards and back three - like Bath. Could you do it another way? I guess one option is a lot of kicks in behind for the speedsters, although I'm dubious about that.

I can't lie though, I'm not comfortable with the idea. I think you underestimate just how well set up modern defences and just how much they take up once set. It's not like guys with amazing pace and feet are dead, obviously nobody's ever fully ready for that but the structures won't be caught cold. It's not that crash ball is a great way of getting through, but it is a lot less risky. Nothing's worse than trying to pass your way around them and getting caught out wide ten yards behind where you started. Say you need 3 phases to create the momentum and space to go wide - well, that's three guys carrying, ideally you want three guys at every ruck, sure some people from phase 1 will hit phase 3, but you're still probably going to need some backs in there taking on crash ball or ruck out and while technique and footwork are great, it's better to be big and strong than not.

Worth trying? If we had infinite games, obviously. Since we don't... maybe, if the whole team is rejigged. It does need rejigging, so maybe after we've selected the key men we release we need a second distributor and pace in the centres above all other things. If we start putting more ball carriers into the pack, it's more of a possibility.

Anyone think Launchbury could be a world class 6 ? Could solve a lot of our problems playing him there.
Just evaluating the new lot of 6s that we have
Ewers-incredible carrier and offloader. Haven't noticed him over the ball, lineout isn't happening currently. Tackles like a monster. If we want a big pack based game I would have him.
Itoje- Best clearer of the ruck possibly in the country. Alright at carrying and lineouts. Age is probably the only thing stopping him at the moment.
Launchbury-Best hands, already intl quality, great over the ball. No weakness that I can see.
Robshaw-Okay not new but new for him in an England shirt . Best tackling machine we have, good link up. Competent lineout but not good. Terrible reputation after this world cup sadly. Definitely should get a 6N there to prove his worth.

Possibly, but I would lack the balls to go and move one of England's few proven performers if it was my job. I'm a big fan of what Launchbury did at blindside for Wasps, I'll be the first to yell about it, but... innate conservatism strikes again!

If you think Itoje is the best clear of a ruck in the country then he's straight in for me. I think he fulfils everything I want from all I've heard and seen. 1.95m isn't quite lock height either in my book, tell the boy he's a blindside and let him get on with it. The only guy I'd possibly want in ahead of him is Tom Croft, and happily that leaves the lineout option intact either way.

I think Dave Ewers need to go to 8 for Exeter. I'm interested in what he can bring, but if we're continuing with a model where the 6 is usually a lineout jumper, he's sol. If he can control the ball at the base of a scrum, then he can play 8.

I still really like a lot about Robshaw's game but unless I'm designing a back row around him, he doesn't make it.

 

[Mattybuck]

Good job we are not the coaching staff or we'd never get a team picked!

 

[Tony Manx]

Looks like all could do with a year off from playing for England and get some rest during those International periods IMO.

First two have had plenty of injury induced rest!!

Everyone seeing Tuilagi as a shoe in should beware the words of the sky pundits in their inquest program concerning Armitage.

"His international reputation appears to be increasing every match he is not being picked to play"!!

Let us see where Tuilagi is when he has played a couple of months of club rugby after his 18 months out before seeing him as a cast iron international player again!!

There is an argument about too forward orientated under SL. I tend to believe there are two options..

- Decide the style and pick the players who can deliver that style of play omitting those that cannot, or

- Look at the available players that you feel will perform at international level and then decide the style of rugby that best suits them!

I think the second is the most logical as if the style is decided and you don't have the players, what is the point?

An all running, all handling fast game may be some peoples' idea of how England should play BUT their clubs do not play like that!! If not from the clubs then, where else are you going to get the players who can play international rugby in that style

 

[Peat]

Sure we would. Olyy would be our Northern Rugby League expert and therefore get the final vote, that's how it works.

 

[Maverick1987]

First two have had plenty of injury induced rest!!

Everyone seeing Tuilagi as a shoe in should beware the words of the sky pundits in their inquest program concerning Armitage.

"His international reputation appears to be increasing every match he is not being picked to play"!!

Let us see where Tuilagi is when he has played a couple of months of club rugby after his 18 months out before seeing him as a cast iron international player again!!

There is an argument about too forward orientated under SL. I tend to believe there are two options..

- Decide the style and pick the players who can deliver that style of play omitting those that cannot, or

- Look at the available players that you feel will perform at international level and then decide the style of rugby that best suits them!

I think the second is the most logical as if the style is decided and you don't have the players, what is the point?

An all running, all handling fast game may be some peoples' idea of how England should play BUT their clubs do not play like that!! If not from the clubs then, where else are you going to get the players who can play international rugby in that style

We have quite a few clubs in the premiership plays fast attacking rugby . I'd say Bath, Exeter, Northampton, Sale and Gloucester do and Newcastle were doing a lot of it last year too . But to be honest I think the first thing we need to do is sort out this scrum and get some carriers back in

 

[j'nuh]

Pulling together a team to execute a game plan is fine. Better yet, I'd like to see a fairly basic game plan that is easily adaptable dependent on the form of players and the team we are against. I don't want to see us go down the path of making ourselves dependent on particular players. Out of form players shouldn't be kept in the squad because they do a task others can't. We should be able to adapt to any player's form.

Lancaster's main problem, imo, was building a team around fairly mediocre players - Wood, Robshaw, Farrell, Barritt.

 

[Peat]

First two have had plenty of injury induced rest!!

Everyone seeing Tuilagi as a shoe in should beware the words of the sky pundits in their inquest program concerning Armitage.

"His international reputation appears to be increasing every match he is not being picked to play"!!

Let us see where Tuilagi is when he has played a couple of months of club rugby after his 18 months out before seeing him as a cast iron international player again!!

There is an argument about too forward orientated under SL. I tend to believe there are two options..

- Decide the style and pick the players who can deliver that style of play omitting those that cannot, or

- Look at the available players that you feel will perform at international level and then decide the style of rugby that best suits them!

I think the second is the most logical as if the style is decided and you don't have the players, what is the point?

An all running, all handling fast game may be some peoples' idea of how England should play BUT their clubs do not play like that!! If not from the clubs then, where else are you going to get the players who can play international rugby in that style

First off, it's a good point abut Tuilagi. At his best he is capable of traumatising defences like very few others but whether we'll see his best again - and whether he'll stay fit long enough anyway - are live questions. I think he comes back anywhere like he was he'll play a big part, but I'd hate to be planning around that. I've learned that much from the life and times of Alex Corbisiero at least.

As for your second point - the issue with the second is that we have so many available players, and so many different approaches to the game in our 12 clubs, we can give most styles a real go. We could play 10 men pressure rugby, we could play Gatball although it would be a real change of personnel, we could definitely play a game based on width and pace - I think we could even give a high offloading game a go, in the same way Quins do at their best, although I think that would be one of the harder for us to pull off.

This is why I believe at some point someone needs to point at a handful of players and say "These are our best, this is the style that fits them, everyone else can fit in or eff off". A mix of both if you will.

Not that I have any clue who I'd build around other than Joe Launchbury mind.

 

[Tony Manx]

First off, it's a good point abut Tuilagi. At his best he is capable of traumatising defences like very few others but whether we'll see his best again - and whether he'll stay fit long enough anyway - are live questions. I think he comes back anywhere like he was he'll play a big part, but I'd hate to be planning around that. I've learned that much from the life and times of Alex Corbisiero at least.

As for your second point - the issue with the second is that we have so many available players, and so many different approaches to the game in our 12 clubs, we can give most styles a real go. We could play 10 men pressure rugby, we could play Gatball although it would be a real change of personnel, we could definitely play a game based on width and pace - I think we could even give a high offloading game a go, in the same way Quins do at their best, although I think that would be one of the harder for us to pull off.

This is why I believe at some point someone needs to point at a handful of players and say "These are our best, this is the style that fits them, everyone else can fit in or eff off". A mix of both if you will.

Not that I have any clue who I'd build around other than Joe Launchbury mind.

I would like to think that this is correct because if it is, and if England has the right coaching staff, and if they pick the right players to play the winning game plan, then England will become world champions!!

Ah that small in letters but huge in meaning word IF..........

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

If I had the power, I would refuse to hire any coach who thought Brad Barritt was worth a place. I might even make them sign a contract agreeing that they can be dismissed immediately without compensation if they picked him. Henry, if you were disappointed by him, what were you expecting?

I'd add we've just recorded our worst World Cup performance and the worst ever by a host. It's one of the more staggering pieces of underachieving in all sporting history. If only one person was less than 5/10, then I don't understand the scoring being used.

As someone said on the other thread, I'm not convinced that many players 'disgraced' themselves'... We came close against Wales and were comprehensively out thought and outplayed against Oz.But I'd also argue that we had lost that game before we began in the way we sleepwalked into a contest against two opensides, as well as our poorly chosen bench.

There were still glimpses of something on an individual level but as many columnists have pointed out it was the combinations and sum of parts where we fell down massively. And Planning... Everything fell a little short in execution.

It would seem a bit childish to give everyone a 2 or 3 just because Australia were such a better team in thought and deed..

As for Barritt, he did a job at 13 against Oz last time with some nice crash ball on top of his defensive work. Obviously, I wanted more of that!

 

[Mattybuck]

I believe even more Prem clubs will start playing a more attacking format. Pitches are improving especially with synthetic ones now being used.

We shouldn't overreact with the players, as stated a lot have played well as part of what I believe to be limited coaching talent, poor tactic and even poorer selection.

We do have some key players that have under performed, not just in this tournament but for a longer term.

Whoever has the job post RWC needs to be prepared to look at other young as yet untried players.

 

[Peat]

As someone said on the other thread, I'm not convinced that many players 'disgraced' themselves'... We came close against Wales and were comprehensively out thought and outplayed against Oz.But I'd also argue that we had lost that game before we began in the way we sleepwalked into a contest against two opensides, as well as our poorly chosen bench.

There were still glimpses of something on an individual level but as many columnists have pointed out it was the combinations and sum of parts where we fell down massively. And Planning... Everything fell a little short in execution.

It would seem a bit childish to give everyone a 2 or 3 just because Australia were such a better team in thought and deed..

As for Barritt, he did a job at 13 against Oz last time with some nice crash ball on top of his defensive work. Obviously, I wanted more of that!

Maybe you're right on the scoring. I shall ponder this.

I think you might be misremembering the Oz game though as Brad Barritt only carried the ball twice against them last year. No metres made recorded (gods I hate the new ESPN site). He's had some decent attacking games in that role, but that was not one of them.

Tony - Aye, very big 'If'.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I just can't wait till we get a desso pitch.

 

[Every Time Ref]

I just can't wait till we get a desso pitch.

Are you going to have the mud shipped in specially every week to make that strip of quagmire down the one touchline ... ?

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Maybe you're right on the scoring. I shall ponder this.

I think you might be misremembering the Oz game though as Brad Barritt only carried the ball twice against them last year. No metres made recorded (gods I hate the new ESPN site). He's had some decent attacking games in that role, but that was not one of them.

Tony - Aye, very big 'If'.

Example (probably not many others) of him carrying it up that game.
http://i.giflike.com/mg2Hwn1.gif
Don't see how he could have made 0 metres but yep, thats what ESPN seems to be saying...

 

[j'nuh]

In all the doom and gloom, there is a silver lining. England won't be particularly hit by retirements over the next 4 years:
New Zealand face losing Nonu, Conrad Smith, McCaw, Carter, Woodcock, Mealamu, Kaino, Messam, Ben Franks, SBW, Crockett and possibly Read and Ben Smith.
Australia face losing AAC, Moore, Giteau, Mitchell, Mumm, Fardy and maybe Kepu. Okay, not too bad.
South Africa face losing Matfield, Habana, Pienaar, Burger, du Plessis (x2), Beast, FdP, Pieterson, Strauss, Louw, Alberts, Steyn.
Ireland face losing POC, Best, Heaslip, Reddan, Bowe, Sexton, Ross, Ryan, Henry and maybe Cronin, Kearney, Payne, Strauss, Toner.
And us... Wilson, Parling, Haskell, Wigglesworth, Brown, Easter.

I mean, not everyone here will retire; these are just some of the older players. But I can really see us closing that experience gap in the next WC. If we focus our squad in the right way, we might even come out at the end of this cycle as one of the most experienced teams.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Nah Lancaster will somehow cock it up.