• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

England Post-WC discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ford's still not proving he can hack the pressure - the opposite, in fact.
Farrell's shown enough attack for me to be happy with him at 10, especially with the other backs we have.
I wouldn't want him playing with Barritt and Burrell outside him, for example, but would feel 100% happier with him there than Ford.

Ford gets criticised for not performing behind a misfiring pack and Farrell gets bigged up despite his pack being on top in basically every single club game he plays... Only Toulon have a pack that can be more dominant in Europe. What you need to look at is how they perform for England. With Farrell at 10 we had a 6 nations with the least tries scored in ages. With Ford at 10 we had one of the highest number of tries in a 6N for England in years and way beyond any other team.
 
Ford gets criticised for not performing behind a misfiring pack and Farrell gets bigged up despite his pack being on top in basically every single club game he plays... Only Toulon have a pack that can be more dominant in Europe. What you need to look at is how they perform for England. With Farrell at 10 we had a 6 nations with the least tries scored in ages. With Ford at 10 we had one of the highest number of tries in a 6N for England in years and way beyond any other team.

Don't forget that Ford had Burrell JJ May Watson and Brown . At times Farrell had Barritt Goode Ashton Tuilagi and Brown on the wing . I'm not advocating Farrell being first choice 10 but you need to bear this in mind
 
I'd only have Daly ahead of Nowell at 13.

I think Nowell is the better athlete by a distance - the only thing Daly really has over him in that regard is top speed.
Nowell is stronger, more powerful and more agile for me.

You've hit the nail on the head. It's something that you don't necessarily pick up on watching TV, but when you see him play live, you realise what great feet Nowell has. I'd be really interested to see him get a sustained run at 15, his attributes make him ideally suited to kick returns IMO, whether his kicking and fielding of a high ball is up to it remains to be seen.

I've had the rant here before, that there's a number of fringe England players, Nowell being a case in point who international claim is being set back by their clubs moving them around to suit their needs. I'd like to see Jones decide where he thinks Nowell's future lies and tell him to play in that position for his club if he wants an international future. Harsh I know, but the carrot of England caps is quite a powerful one to dangle.

With regard to Nowell's pace, there have been a couple of occasions this season when he has been run down by players who you wouldn't expect to be all that quick. IIRC both were over a fairly long distance, I imagine he stacks up better against the opposition over shorter distances which is arguably more important.
 
I reckon it's a move by Bristol to take the RFU for as much as they can.
If Borthwick really wants to leave Bristol then there's little point employing someone who's heart won't be in it, but by saying they're not letting him leave it'll make the RFU say "You know that offer we made? We'll double it!"
 
Wish Bristol could be more like the Stormers, we got Jones at way below what people expected.
 
Can anyone enlighten me as to why the RFU would need to ask for Bristol's permission to pursue Borthwick?

As long as he had an exit clause, can't see what Bris can do other than stamp their feet?
 
I reckon it's a move by Bristol to take the RFU for as much as they can.
If Borthwick really wants to leave Bristol then there's little point employing someone who's heart won't be in it, but by saying they're not letting him leave it'll make the RFU say "You know that offer we made? We'll double it!"

I'm a cynic too! +1.

Saying that, I'm surprised that Borthwick signed a contract without a release clause.
 
Does seem weird that he'd sign without a get out (If that's the case).
All I can think is that he signed for them a while ago, when Eddie was going to Stormers and Lancs was still in charge. He must have thought that he was nowhere near an England chance, and I imagine a contract without a get out clause nets you a few K extra.
 
All I can think is that he signed for them a while ago, when Eddie was going to Stormers and Lancs was still in charge. He must have thought that he was nowhere near an England chance, and I imagine a contract without a get out clause nets you a few K extra.

I seem to recollect that he was announced by Bristol prior to the RWC and would have been happy to get that job with Jones leaving Japan!

Never thought he was a man with vision so why would he even consider an escape clause at that stage.....only after a win over SA and the English debacle maybe!!
 
Some twitter updates via Chris Jones (won't use the, frankly, **** embed system):

Jim Mallinder on Alex King: "I understand that Alex is probably looking to meet Eddie sometime this week to have an informal chat."
Mallinder: "There's no official contact from the RFU...[but] If Alex wants to go and work for England I don't think club will prevent him."
Understand Borthwick today handed in his resignation letter to Bristol. Won't be returning to the club.
Safe to say negotiations throughout the Borthwick to England process have been antagonistic to say the very least.
 
According to the Torygraph, Bristol wanted £500,000 for Borthwick.

So five times the amount it took to get an experienced international coach from a much bigger Super Rugby team? Yeah, good luck lads.

And Borthwick has resigned, so that's any money down the drain. Good. There's nothing I hate more in life than money-grubbing, grasping ******s.
 
I still wonder how we got Jones so cheap from Stormers, weren't ballpark figures up at 700-800k?
 
I still wonder how we got Jones so cheap from Stormers, weren't ballpark figures up at 700-800k?

Almost certainly length-of-contract value, rather than length-of-notice buy outs, let alone any break clauses if an international team came calling.

I can see Borthers not having the latter built into a contract; but he'd certainly have a notice period built it. Not to mention that not accepting the resignation simply isn't an option for Bristol. What do they propose to do when Borthers calls in "sick" - fire him?
 
Almost certainly length-of-contract value, rather than length-of-notice buy outs, let alone any break clauses if an international team came calling.

I can see Borthers not having the latter built into a contract; but he'd certainly have a notice period built it. Not to mention that not accepting the resignation simply isn't an option for Bristol. What do they propose to do when Borthers calls in "sick" - fire him?

I do believe that most contracts for a set period are just that and any notice period clauses would only be applicable in the event of an envisaged extension.

Bath can sue him for non performance of the duties that he was contracted to supply. I would suggest the value of that would be set at the amount he was due to be paid.

Contracts are, unbelievably, two way things and both sides have and should have rights under them! If he was fired he would expect to be paid the balance so only right he should pay if he walks out!

But I am not a lawyer.........
 
According to the Torygraph, Bristol wanted £500,000 for Borthwick.

So five times the amount it took to get an experienced international coach from a much bigger Super Rugby team? Yeah, good luck lads.

And Borthwick has resigned, so that's any money down the drain. Good. There's nothing I hate more in life than money-grubbing, grasping ******s.
Preach.

Undermining the national setup in order to keep a coach against their will is cynical. Have lost respect for Bristol for this. Glad it is backfiring for them.
 
I do believe that most contracts for a set period are just that and any notice period clauses would only be applicable in the event of an envisaged extension.

Bath can sue him for non performance of the duties that he was contracted to supply. I would suggest the value of that would be set at the amount he was due to be paid.

Contracts are, unbelievably, two way things and both sides have and should have rights under them! If he was fired he would expect to be paid the balance so only right he should pay if he walks out!

But I am not a lawyer.........

Ahem
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top