England v South Africa - 16/11/2024 (17.40)

[Geordie]

Bring back Farrell?

We possibly would have won those games with him in there you know...and I'm far from a Farrell fan...

 

[BPM]

Really? What gives you that impression. Maybe if he took on the role Ford was supposed to have had in closing he first couple of games out or was simply there to lead in the last quarter. Otherwise, no. I'm not sure we score most of the tries we scored with the exception of the ones from the lineout (Itoje vs. Australia and Underhill yesterday) where the 10 wasn't even involved.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Why move him at all?

I'll take this one because it's my favourite debate in world rugby right now, watching 10s is what I love most as a fan of this game. It's elite rugby, his team are losing and he has a jersey ahead of another class player. I think Fin Smith has potential to be one of the best 10s of the pro era, Carter seems a bit untouchable but I think he can play to the level of Wilkinson and Sexton, the way he can run a game at such a young age and seemlessly and be an on field tactician while also having such elite passing and passing skills and being a threat in his own right is like nothing I've ever seen. He's the type of player a team can build around and be a top 2-4 team constantly throughout his career. Marcus is class, he'd be my starting Lions 10 based off this year but I just don't see him as that type of player. There have been top class and successful gamebreaking 10s who play like him, Cooper comes to mind, Beauden too and I'd put Russell in there even though his skillset to do so is very different. The problem with them is that they were always part of teams who, while they could beat anyone on their day (Russell aside), like the above, they also played a game that would give worse teams a chance to win where an elite controlled and front running 10 wouldn't allow it.

Sexton is the most recent example and one who wasn't in a team so far ahead that it's not worth comparing like Carter. He played in some great Ireland teams and also in some pretty **** ones but with the exception of a loss at home to Scotland in his first season of international rugby he only ever lost to NZ, Australia (pre-2015, excluding bench appearances for this which I will also do for M Smith), South Africa (last one being 2012), England, Wales and France. Ireland never once dropped below the level they should have been with Sexton on the rugby pitch and in the same period without him there were losses to Japan, Italy, Scotland and Argentina.

Marcus already has one L in the column of "teams England shouldn't lose to" last week. It's his first season as number one so forgiveable but until England are a team that losses to teams like Scotland and worse just don't seem like a possibility or Fin comes in and just doesn't have it (possible, running the show at club level is only an indicator, it's a different ball game internationally), I don't think this debate will go away.

I don't accept that it's everyone's fault but his own or similar that we're hearing, and specifically to last week, I don't accept Borthwick's bad subs being excuses for it because the traits I want to see are:

1. Being able to put points on the board - he has this in spades.

2. Being able to have the tactical awareness as to when expansive attack is needed or when as much pressure through territory and phase play needs to be applied - he hasn't shown this and was extremely bad in this regard from 20-40 mins last week, England got dragged into a loose attacking game and Australia punished them for it.

3. Limit the damage when his team are under pressure for long periods by controlling the controllables - weirdly enough considering he hasn't faced this yet despite the losing run. The gamebreaking ability will definitely be a great attribute here but there's also a lot of the qualities in point 2 that are needed.

If I had to bet on which of the two can consistently do all of the above to an elite level consistently, I'm putting all of it on Fin.

Marcus earned his go this autumn and he's in the positive bracket for England who do need continuity in places whilst trying to change so he has to be number 1 for the 6 nations unless Fin Smith starts doing unbelievable things with his transitioning and mediocre Saints team. But if England keep losing winnable games because their phase to phase play remains well below the standard required and their match awareness is, frankly, awful, I think it will be hard not to give Fin his chance to take over this time next year provided his quality of play also remains very high.

 

[AlRums]

Dawson in cloud cuckoo land again

Matt Dawson column: I am reluctant to criticise England but change is needed

England have lost again but they should not be criticised for their endeavour and playing style, writes Matt Dawson.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[BrokenWing]

Rugby's Lee Dixon.

Talks a load of cliched nonsense.

Him and Ashton were drivelling on last night about the crowd booing George Ford in the last game and the semi intelligent person controlling the pod pointed out "err, I don't think they were booing Ford, just booing because they thought Smith was coming off"

Dawson "well, yes"

Well it sort of undermines your rant doesn't it you moron.

 

[BPM]

I'll take this one because it's my favourite debate in world rugby right now, watching 10s is what I love most as a fan of this game. It's elite rugby, his team are losing and he has a jersey ahead of another class player. I think Fin Smith has potential to be one of the best 10s of the pro era, Carter seems a bit untouchable but I think he can play to the level of Wilkinson and Sexton, the way he can run a game at such a young age and seemlessly and be an on field tactician while also having such elite passing and passing skills and being a threat in his own right is like nothing I've ever seen. He's the type of player a team can build around and be a top 2-4 team constantly throughout his career. Marcus is class, he'd be my starting Lions 10 based off this year but I just don't see him as that type of player. There have been top class and successful gamebreaking 10s who play like him, Cooper comes to mind, Beauden too and I'd put Russell in there even though his skillset to do so is very different. The problem with them is that they were always part of teams who, while they could beat anyone on their day (Russell aside), like the above, they also played a game that would give worse teams a chance to win where an elite controlled and front running 10 wouldn't allow it.

Sexton is the most recent example and one who wasn't in a team so far ahead that it's not worth comparing like Carter. He played in some great Ireland teams and also in some pretty **** ones but with the exception of a loss at home to Scotland in his first season of international rugby he only ever lost to NZ, Australia (pre-2015, excluding bench appearances for this which I will also do for M Smith), South Africa (last one being 2012), England, Wales and France. Ireland never once dropped below the level they should have been with Sexton on the rugby pitch and in the same period without him there were losses to Japan, Italy, Scotland and Argentina.

Marcus already has one L in the column of "teams England shouldn't lose to" last week. It's his first season as number one so forgiveable but until England are a team that losses to teams like Scotland and worse just don't seem like a possibility or Fin comes in and just doesn't have it (possible, running the show at club level is only an indicator, it's a different ball game internationally), I don't think this debate will go away.

I don't accept that it's everyone's fault but his own or similar that we're hearing, and specifically to last week, I don't accept Borthwick's bad subs being excuses for it because the traits I want to see are:

1. Being able to put points on the board - he has this in spades.

2. Being able to have the tactical awareness as to when expansive attack is needed or when as much pressure through territory and phase play needs to be applied - he hasn't shown this and was extremely bad in this regard from 20-40 mins last week, England got dragged into a loose attacking game and Australia punished them for it.

3. Limit the damage when his team are under pressure for long periods by controlling the controllables - weirdly enough considering he hasn't faced this yet despite the losing run. The gamebreaking ability will definitely be a great attribute here but there's also a lot of the qualities in point 2 that are needed.

If I had to bet on which of the two can consistently do all of the above to an elite level consistently, I'm putting all of it on Fin.

Marcus earned his go this autumn and he's in the positive bracket for England who do need continuity in places whilst trying to change so he has to be number 1 for the 6 nations unless Fin Smith starts doing unbelievable things with his transitioning and mediocre Saints team. But if England keep losing winnable games because their phase to phase play remains well below the standard required and their match awareness is, frankly, awful, I think it will be hard not to give Fin his chance to take over this time next year provided his quality of play also remains very high.

So crap phase play is all on the 10, irrespective of whether he touches the ball or not?

From watching the games, the lack of phases is mostly down to the following:

1) The scrum or lineout is creaking, Smith receives the ball behind the gainline and either has to shovel it on to Lawrence just to get back up to the gainline or kick it away.*

2) We keep it in the forwards, one forward comes ambling on to the ball, takes contact, recycles and then another forward does the exact same thing. No one makes a big dent, support for the ball carrier is poor and then we're back to point 1 (albeit without starting with a set piece) or, more likely, we get picked off and lose the ball.

I'd say these account for most of the phases we have in possession and generally, by time the 10 gets it, it's too late to do anything particularly useful. What makes you think Finn does any different with the crappy ball he'd get than Marcus does?

*The third option (which we have seen) is that Marcus creates something from nothing. I'm not sure Finn has that in his locker.

Both of these are pretty young 10s. Comparing them to Sexton is odd considering he was mostly playing second fiddle to ROG at their age. His career was so long, it feels like you're only thinking about the latter half when he was already a fair bit older than either of the Smiths.

 

[BrokenWing]

I would say most of the time they're not even ambling onto the ball, they're static.

 

[Crash Hamster]

Watching Australia today, in situations where the ruck was won, Nic White was positioned so that he could pass either way.

It wasn't clear which side he was going to pass, which put pressure on the defence.

England tend to have everything set up to go one way, meaning that the defence one side of the ruck knows they have to step up while the other side know they're getting a short breather.

It's simple, it's basic, but we don't do it.

 

[jordiev]

For the argument on winning takes time, maybe, but improvement does not. Schmidt less than a year and team looks competent better drilled and improving. Rassie did the same with the boks, less than a year identity was clear and improvement obvious.

We are stuck with Steve because of money, but he hasn't done this, he has stuck with older players who have fallen of and selection leaves a lot to be desired, identity is nowhere on attack, and broken on defence, went from a developing blitz to a brain dead one.

 

[Geordie]

Really? What gives you that impression. Maybe if he took on the role Ford was supposed to have had in closing he first couple of games out or was simply there to lead in the last quarter. Otherwise, no. I'm not sure we score most of the tries we scored with the exception of the ones from the lineout (Itoje vs. Australia and Underhill yesterday) where the 10 wasn't even involved.

10 Marcus
12 Farrell

Yes...it possibly changes the results

Over
10 Marcus
12 Slade

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

In 3 matches we've conceded 95 points. Only 15 were from pens, the other 80 were from tries and conversions. There's your number one problem.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

For the argument on winning takes time, maybe, but improvement does not. Schmidt less than a year and team looks competent better drilled and improving. Rassie did the same with the boks, less than a year identity was clear and improvement obvious.

We are stuck with Steve because of money, but he hasn't done this, he has stuck with older players who have fallen of and selection leaves a lot to be desired, identity is nowhere on attack, and broken on defence, went from a developing blitz to a brain dead one.

Actually the Times has said today it will only cost the RFU six months salaries to sack Borthwick and his coaches. So not as financially challenging.

 

[Geordie]

Actually the Times has said today it will only cost the RFU six months salaries to sack Borthwick and his coaches. So not as financially challenging.

Genuinely though...who comes in?

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

So crap phase play is all on the 10, irrespective of whether he touches the ball or not?

No but the 10 is, or at least should be, involved.

From watching the games, the lack of phases is mostly down to the following:

1) The scrum or lineout is creaking, Smith receives the ball behind the gainline and either has to shovel it on to Lawrence just to get back up to the gainline or kick it away.*

I mean, that's the job sometimes. You get the ball to the right guys in the right situations to build a platform to attack or kick effectively. It's damage limitation whereas England are getting themselves in all sorts of trouble and winding up in worst case scenario a lot.

2) We keep it in the forwards, one forward comes ambling on to the ball, takes contact, recycles and then another forward does the exact same thing. No one makes a big dent, support for the ball carrier is poor and then we're back to point 1 (albeit without starting with a set piece) or, more likely, we get picked off and lose the ball.

I'd say these account for most of the phases we have in possession and generally, by time the 10 gets it, it's too late to do anything particularly useful. What makes you think Finn does any different with the crappy ball he'd get than Marcus does?

But like, he's the 10, he has control over this or at least should, the 10s the shot caller. Every pro team plays to a system and every international team has multiple ways to get into their shape under pressure. England's obviously aren't fantastic but I really don't believe that they're choosing the right options, it's not like they're being completely overran.

*The third option (which we have seen) is that Marcus creates something from nothing. I'm not sure Finn has that in his locker.

I agree but the chances to do that at the top level of the game are few and far between. He had one chance to do it yesterday, there'll be games where there's none. You want the guy effecting every phase whether he's touching the ball or not.

Both of these are pretty young 10s. Comparing them to Sexton is odd considering he was mostly playing second fiddle to ROG at their age. His career was so long, it feels like you're only thinking about the latter half when he was already a fair bit older than either of the Smiths.

Sexton was a late bloomer but at 25 he had won two heineken cup finals with one of them being arguably the best individual performance the tournament has seen as well as a magners league. He'd beaten world champion and Lions' tour winning South Africa and England in Twickenham.

His 38th international cap was (same as Smith yesterday) the 2013 New Zealand game. He'd been starting 10 on a winning Lions tour by then and had a handful of scalps with Ireland. He was Ireland's most important player and about to start achieving with them at this stage.

He was more accomplished and showing the ability to take control of and run games at both junctures and Ireland were a pretty flawed team for both. It's not a mad comparison and I can't see Smith's game lasting too long into his 30s let alone his late 30s like Sexton's.

Smith's great, no doubt about it but I think you have one 10 who has potential to be one of the best to ever play the game and it's not him even though he could / should reach the next bracket down.

If Fin Smith didn't exist there wouldn't be a conversation to be had here but he does, he's a prem champion and has had multiple elite level performances in Europe. England would be mad not to give him his run of games unless everything is going pretty damn well. I think Smith deserves the 6 nations to try to get there but if it's not Fin needs his go.

 

[Geordie]

If Fin Smith didn't exist there wouldn't be a conversation to be had here but he does, he's a prem champion and has had multiple elite level performances in Europe.

Whilst I get what your saying, Marcus is a prem champion and has played big games in Europe as well.

I'd be looking to continue with Marcus and have a fin off the bench to develop as well.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Smith's great, no doubt about it but I think you have one 10 who has potential to be one of the best to ever play the game and it's not him even though he could / should reach the next bracket down.

Genuinely have not seen anything from F Smith that suggests to me he is that good. Ford level, fine, but beyond that I'm not sure.

Talking about him being that level really makes me feel like I'm watching a totally different player

 

[Jimbo]

No but the 10 is, or at least should be, involved.

I mean, that's the job sometimes. You get the ball to the right guys in the right situations to build a platform to attack or kick effectively. It's damage limitation whereas England are getting themselves in all sorts of trouble and winding up in worst case scenario a lot.

But like, he's the 10, he has control over this or at least should, the 10s the shot caller. Every pro team plays to a system and every international team has multiple ways to get into their shape under pressure. England's obviously aren't fantastic but I really don't believe that they're choosing the right options, it's not like they're being completely overran.


I agree but the chances to do that at the top level of the game are few and far between. He had one chance to do it yesterday, there'll be games where there's none. You want the guy effecting every phase whether he's touching the ball or not.

Sexton was a late bloomer but at 25 he had won two heineken cup finals with one of them being arguably the best individual performance the tournament has seen as well as a magners league. He'd beaten world champion and Lions' tour winning South Africa and England in Twickenham.

His 38th international cap was (same as Smith yesterday) the 2013 New Zealand game. He'd been starting 10 on a winning Lions tour by then and had a handful of scalps with Ireland. He was Ireland's most important player and about to start achieving with them at this stage.

He was more accomplished and showing the ability to take control of and run games at both junctures and Ireland were a pretty flawed team for both. It's not a mad comparison and I can't see Smith's game lasting too long into his 30s let alone his late 30s like Sexton's.

Smith's great, no doubt about it but I think you have one 10 who has potential to be one of the best to ever play the game and it's not him even though he could / should reach the next bracket down.

If Fin Smith didn't exist there wouldn't be a conversation to be had here but he does, he's a prem champion and has had multiple elite level performances in Europe. England would be mad not to give him his run of games unless everything is going pretty damn well. I think Smith deserves the 6 nations to try to get there but if it's not Fin needs his go.

I can see your point on most of this but yesterday Smith was getting dog **** ball off JVP a hell of a lot, any of the greats of the past would struggle massively under those conditions, at-least he's capable of making things happen at times even with poor service, I don't think it's a shoot out between Smiths currently, IMO Fords recent caps should have gone to Finn, build F Smith slowly, I don't want to see a player of his calibre rushed into a struggling setup ideally but can also see that he could be an introduction that turns the tied so something of a necessity. On an unrelated note I really don't understand why we continue with Slade, outside of international experience and a descent left boot I don't see what he bring over Alex lozowski who has a bit more pace about him, neither are particularly long term options.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Genuinely have not seen anything from F Smith that suggests to me he is that good. Ford level, fine, but beyond that I'm not sure.

Talking about him being that level really makes me feel like I'm watching a totally different player

I mean you say Ford level like he's not a prem winning, RWC final 10?


God Marcus Smith is good but some people need to get their noses out his bum because he's a "game changer".
Give me a game controller over a game changer at 10 any day.


McKenzie is a word class game changer but I'll take Mo'unga every day as my starter