England Post-WC discussion

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

What was Ward saying?
Can see Wood kicking off but Ward has deleted his tweets.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/oct/15/tom-wood-england-dave-ward-twitter

 

[Maverick1987]

What was Ward saying?
Can see Wood kicking off but Ward has deleted his tweets.

Wood, Ward clash over Robshaw
http://www.skysports.com/share/10028982

At the bottom of the article . The sly dig at turning the ball over was funny

 

[j'nuh]

Having the best team and having the best prospects aren't quite the same thing in fairness. I mean, we clearly do have some tidy guys, but we can chuck out better athletes than the rest and that gives us a pretty big advantage, we're going to be fairly dominant whatever and it's easy to look good in a dominant team.

I also don't think the AP is great prep for international rugby, particularly when it comes to the breakdown, and don't think our clubs are competitive enough in Europe, although that might be changing. I also don't think they're spending enough time on skills training either, a lot of guys come out of the U20s with a shaky skill here or there and never ever fix it. Which might also point to a lack of ambition and work ethic among young prospects, why aren't scrum-halves practising their passing and box kicking all hours?

I think you're overegging our guys quite a bit tbh.

I think our clubs are up against it in Europe tbh. Ireland and Wales (through central contracts and the small number of regions) and France (through money) pool all of their best players into 2-3 teams, whereas England spread the talent over like 9 different clubs. Imagine if Sarries, Bath, Saints and Tigers were supplemented with the best English players from the remaining clubs; our clubs would win the tournament a few times I would think.

I prefer our talent being spread across many teams though, it keeps the Premiership interesting. It gives all clubs in England a reason to keep open the academies. Europe be damned.

 

[saulan]

I think our clubs are up against it in Europe tbh. Ireland and Wales (through central contracts and the small number of regions) and France (through money) pool all of their best players into 2-3 teams, whereas England spread the talent over like 9 different clubs. Imagine if Sarries, Bath, Saints and Tigers were supplemented with the best English players from the remaining clubs; our clubs would win the tournament a few times I would think.

I prefer our talent being spread across many teams though, it keeps the Premiership interesting. It gives all clubs in England a reason to keep open the academies. Europe be damned.

I don't know too much about French rugby, but I feel like that your statement on them isn't entirely correct. France do well in their league because everyone (or most from what I can see) to buy a good team to supplement position player shortages. For example, Bath has 1 Saffer, 3 Welshmen, 1 Samoan, 1 Australian,1 Fijian and 1 Argentinian with 27 Englishmen.

Montpellier have 12 Saffers, 1 Georgian, 2 New Zealanders, 4 Australians, 3 Fijians and a Cameroonian (Really?), with 16 Frenchmen. Surely when you have that large a pool of Countries to choose from, you are going to be able to make a stronger team than a team made up predominantly of one home nation?

My 2 cents.

--- Edit ---

At this point I would like to state my limited NH leagues knowledge and I may have chosen two teams that aren't fully representative of their leagues, but I am under the impression that this is not the case.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I cannot believe that people are calling for the immediate inclusion of Itoje are they?

One for the future, certainly, but he has only played in 15 games at the top level to date?

Warning: serious outbreak of sanity. Thankfully not believed to be contagious

 

[Geordie]

Warning: serious outbreak of sanity. Thankfully not believed to be contagious

BUt Itoje is a god...... When he puts on his blue suit and red underpants and cape...you'll see

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Much though I love it, I can't help thinking that the AP is half the problem here.

Ireland and Wales have both punched above their weight internationally since moving to a regional approach. The super teams also have a lesser workload with a shorter regular season and no European cup style distractions.

Net result: top players are only playing and training with and against the best, have more time to be properly coached (good coaches help!) get more opportunity to recover from injuries and are mentally fresher. They play fewer games, but at a higher intensity which seems a sensible pathway to the international game. Our elite probably don't benefit too much getting bashed up at Newcastle on a wet Thursday.

 

[ZeroTwo]

On Itoje: Junior World cup winning captain must stand for something?

No one questions Handre Pollards inclusion anymore. I think having Itoje in the squad is an excellent idea even if only for his development.

 

[Geordie]

I would suspect he'll be in the squad...cant see him starting. You never know though

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Happy global hand washing day.

I hope the RFU washes it hands of this coaching setup.

Anyone see what I did there!

 

[RedruthRFC]

Much though I love it, I can't help thinking that the AP is half the problem here.

Ireland and Wales have both punched above their weight internationally since moving to a regional approach. The super teams also have a lesser workload with a shorter regular season and no European cup style distractions.

Net result: top players are only playing and training with and against the best, have more time to be properly coached (good coaches help!) get more opportunity to recover from injuries and are mentally fresher. They play fewer games, but at a higher intensity which seems a sensible pathway to the international game. Our elite probably don't benefit too much getting bashed up at Newcastle on a wet Thursday.

Is the Pro12 really that high a standard? Genuine question - I watch very little of it. My impression is that there are poor teams and that the top teams aren't always at full strength. It's only really Munster and Leinster who have used the league as a springboard to being highly competitive in Europe for a sustained period.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Cheers for the links,

I would honestly just drop Wood out of the EPS completely. The more I hear about him recently, the more toxic he seems - way way way too big for his boots considering the kind of performances he's been putting in over the last....well, ****ing ages really.

 

[Tony Manx]

Much though I love it, I can't help thinking that the AP is half the problem here.

Ireland and Wales have both punched above their weight internationally since moving to a regional approach. The super teams also have a lesser workload with a shorter regular season and no European cup style distractions.

Net result: top players are only playing and training with and against the best, have more time to be properly coached (good coaches help!) get more opportunity to recover from injuries and are mentally fresher. They play fewer games, but at a higher intensity which seems a sensible pathway to the international game. Our elite probably don't benefit too much getting bashed up at Newcastle on a wet Thursday.

They are the whole problem if you want international success but not if you want healthy league competition!!

The reality is that the RFU were too slow into the professional game leaving individuals the chance to gain control of the clubs and consequently the players.

Hence the players contracted and paid by the clubs with the RFU only gaining some power over them by virtue of the club's agreement that they have with the RFU - supposedly engineered by Andrew.

So they are the whole problem but are only so because the RFU did not grab control at the outset!

Good thing or bad thing? Judging by the inadequacy in management at the RFU, English club rugby had a lucky escape!!

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

TBH when we have had the right coach we have done well.

But really how many English management set ups have been world class?

The problem is the club or the players IMO.

It is the RFU have its inability to expand past its jobs in Blazers for the old boys.

 

[Peat]

I don't think the RFU could have simply brought up the clubs really. They could have tried instituting a regional system from the off, or they could have tried centrally contracting all the players, but not buy up all the clubs.

I do it's an issue that we're having elite rugby in this country being run by two different entities. One guiding hand would be ideal - but it would have to be a competent one, and there is the rub.

I don't think the Premiership being an inferior proving ground is solely to do with it being a club competition. Promotion and relegation flat up doesn't help and I would cancel that tomorrow. I think it's more an issue of style and there's no reason that can't be changed. There's no reason the RFU and PRL can't get close and work to provide a league that is closer to an international style; attracting more fans due to the better standard of play, gaining more success in Europe and internationals alike because our players are more ready for it, each feeding off the higher profile the other gains. Right now Tony is right that people who want a thriving club competition and a thriving international game are somewhat at odds - although I would argue about the word thriving; I and large numbers of the country don't have a professional club within an hour's travel of me. That shouldn't be the case.

The answer is a more stringently enforced breakdown; more skills sessions; less playing players into the ground by both bodies; RFU-backed minimum spends on academies to prevent clubs slashing them to the bone in hard times. Maybe the RFU should share all video analysis on foreign players? Maybe the RFU should be hiring specialist coaches who visit all the academies to get the best standards in specialist skills? Matching each other's funding on youth coaches and CDOs? edit: Higher standard of professional coaching development.

The RFU and PRL should both want the highest possible levels of player standards and should be working towards them together. I think they are improving on that score to be fair but there is a way to go.

I also think that the end game here is to see the two bodies merging.

p.s. Having thought about it over the course of this post, I must pick more of a bone about the club game thriving.

I've heard a fair few complaints from guys who are involved in the bigger junior clubs about the Premiership clubs making it difficult by constantly picking and dropping players from their academies, turning many guys off of rugby. The Premiership have become a cartel, their demands for minimum acceptable standards for grounds beyond the reach of most of the Championship without significant contortions. Most of the clubs in that league don't have a hope of getting promoted and staying there - how can that be thriving? France have a thriving club game. We have a weird hybrid, in which historical advantage has turned a group of about 14 clubs into our version of the regions, except they still look like the clubs they once were, and not all of them in the top league so the weaker ones keep getting hit by relegation. Do Fylde or Rotherham or Ealing or Mosely thrive? No.

 

[Geordie]

Regardless of the set up etc...if we actually pick the right tactics and select a team round those...we would still be in the WC.

Something like:
1 Marler
2 Hartley / George
3 Cole
4 Launchbury
5 Kitchener
6 Wood / Robshaw
7 Kvesic
8 Billy V

Big solid core with several carriers, specialists skills at hooker, and 7...strong defence and strong lineout. Kitchener adds real bulk to the scrum supporting Cole and Marler and is also the lineout caller. EASY!


9 Youngs / Care
10 Ford
11 May
12 Burgess (he wasn't actually bad) or Slade
13 Joseph
14 Watson
15 Brown

 

[Peat]

The issue wasn't selection outside maybe the midfield.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Is the Pro12 really that high a standard? Genuine question - I watch very little of it. My impression is that there are poor teams and that the top teams aren't always at full strength. It's only really Munster and Leinster who have used the league as a springboard to being highly competitive in Europe for a sustained period.

I don't either! I think the point is that the Irish provinces have been very selective on when they play their top men thereby ensuring fresh players for the Euro adventures, which by design or default benefits the national side.

 

[j'nuh]

I don't buy it being a club issue. Wales manage just fine despite having fewer teams, each of them playing a different identity of rugby, and only one of them being even remotely competitive in Europe (and by that I mean that the Ospreys kind of challenge their pool, but in reality never get out of it).

Wales are a good case study actually. Lydiate, Warburton, Faletau, Tipuric all came into the Wales structure around ~22 years old, at the same time, replacing Wales giants like Ryan Jones and Martyn Williams. All of them got their Wales chances when young and it hasn't exactly backfired.

More eye-opening is scrum-half. Welsh fans debated long about the merits and weaknesses of Rhys Webb. Many fans rejected him out-of-hand, and they probably have egg on their faces right now. Meanwhile, it took Gareth Davies all of one month to prove his credentials on the international stage. What was an apparent area of weakness for Wales (I have never rated Phillips) is now an area of strength, because players got their chances on the international scene and responded well, improving because of it. I would argue both Webb and Davies, playing as they are, are Lions contenders. Contrast to England, where we have similarly debated over whether Simpson, a similar player to Webb and Davies, is good enough, but he's never actually been given a chance to prove us right or wrong. England would still be playing Phillips in the same situation.

A small number of "brave selections" could transform England. IMO.

 

[Tony Manx]

I don't think the RFU could have simply brought up the clubs really. They could have tried instituting a regional system from the off, or they could have tried centrally contracting all the players, but not buy up all the clubs.

I do it's an issue that we're having elite rugby in this country being run by two different entities. One guiding hand would be ideal - but it would have to be a competent one, and there is the rub.

I don't think the Premiership being an inferior proving ground is solely to do with it being a club competition. Promotion and relegation flat up doesn't help and I would cancel that tomorrow. I think it's more an issue of style and there's no reason that can't be changed. There's no reason the RFU and PRL can't get close and work to provide a league that is closer to an international style; attracting more fans due to the better standard of play, gaining more success in Europe and internationals alike because our players are more ready for it, each feeding off the higher profile the other gains. Right now Tony is right that people who want a thriving club competition and a thriving international game are somewhat at odds - although I would argue about the word thriving; I and large numbers of the country don't have a professional club within an hour's travel of me. That shouldn't be the case.

The answer is a more stringently enforced breakdown; more skills sessions; less playing players into the ground by both bodies; RFU-backed minimum spends on academies to prevent clubs slashing them to the bone in hard times. Maybe the RFU should share all video analysis on foreign players? Maybe the RFU should be hiring specialist coaches who visit all the academies to get the best standards in specialist skills? Matching each other's funding on youth coaches and CDOs? edit: Higher standard of professional coaching development.

The RFU and PRL should both want the highest possible levels of player standards and should be working towards them together. I think they are improving on that score to be fair but there is a way to go.

I also think that the end game here is to see the two bodies merging.

p.s. Having thought about it over the course of this post, I must pick more of a bone about the club game thriving.

I've heard a fair few complaints from guys who are involved in the bigger junior clubs about the Premiership clubs making it difficult by constantly picking and dropping players from their academies, turning many guys off of rugby. The Premiership have become a cartel, their demands for minimum acceptable standards for grounds beyond the reach of most of the Championship without significant contortions. Most of the clubs in that league don't have a hope of getting promoted and staying there - how can that be thriving? France have a thriving club game. We have a weird hybrid, in which historical advantage has turned a group of about 14 clubs into our version of the regions, except they still look like the clubs they once were, and not all of them in the top league so the weaker ones keep getting hit by relegation. Do Fylde or Rotherham or Ealing or Mosely thrive? No.

Just to be clear @peat.... I agree they could not have bought the clubs! They could have contracted the players and brought in rules to that effect!

They could then have subcontracted to either regional franchises or clubs.

However, thank goodness that they sift as there would be no clubs now !!