• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Jonny Wilkinson retires from England duty

It's a crying shame that JSD hasn't been used more - he's been injured a lot, but he should really have been first choice after Cohen left, and then been involved somewhere after Robinson/Lewsey went

Charlie Sharples is like JSD Jr., lets just hope he has more luck in the England set up
 
Well he certainly divided opinion by the sounds of it on here!

The big problem with Wilkinson is that his supposed best years were spent on the physios table. After the 2003 world cup he should have gone on to play 10 for England and take his choice of clubs but injury hampered both his performance and development over the next 4 years. I honestly believe if he had played more regularly at international level between 2003 and 2007 his game would have developed in the same way long standing 10s like Carter and Jones did. As it was he came back for the 2007 world cup having played hardly any international and guided England to a second successive final, which to me shows the mark of a rare talent. By 2011 he was not the player he had been and I dont think he was happy in that England set up but he was a great fly half. From 2000-2003 England beat every team on the planet home and away scoring some breath taking tries and putting big scores on teams like France, Wales, SA, Scotland and Ireland you dont do that with a "limited" fly half. People also forget in England at least we had got very use to gallant losers, penalty shoot outs that we always lost, a Cricket team that always lost the Ashes bravely and Tim Henman. Then all of a sudden we had a sportsman that never missed his kicks, could handle the pressure and the opposition actually were concerned about, not in the way strikers were meant to be concerned about Stuart Pearce but a genuine worry that there was an English player who could really do them damage both on the score board and in the tackle.

People have short memories but I will always remember the great England team of the early 00s and the great fly half in that team.
 
Well he certainly divided opinion by the sounds of it on here!

The big problem with Wilkinson is that his supposed best years were spent on the physios table. After the 2003 world cup he should have gone on to play 10 for England and take his choice of clubs but injury hampered both his performance and development over the next 4 years. I honestly believe if he had played more regularly at international level between 2003 and 2007 his game would have developed in the same way long standing 10s like Carter and Jones did. As it was he came back for the 2007 world cup having played hardly any international and guided England to a second successive final, which to me shows the mark of a rare talent. By 2011 he was not the player he had been and I dont think he was happy in that England set up but he was a great fly half. From 2000-2003 England beat every team on the planet home and away scoring some breath taking tries and putting big scores on teams like France, Wales, SA, Scotland and Ireland you dont do that with a "limited" fly half. People also forget in England at least we had got very use to gallant losers, penalty shoot outs that we always lost, a Cricket team that always lost the Ashes bravely and Tim Henman. Then all of a sudden we had a sportsman that never missed his kicks, could handle the pressure and the opposition actually were concerned about, not in the way strikers were meant to be concerned about Stuart Pearce but a genuine worry that there was an English player who could really do them damage both on the score board and in the tackle.

People have short memories but I will always remember the great England team of the early 00s and the great fly half in that team.



Good points. However he was back then only a single componant of what was a well oiled machine. Once Richard Hill and Will Greenwood (in particular, but everyone played a part) were gone, his star was never likely to shine as bright.
 
Well he certainly divided opinion by the sounds of it on here!

The big problem with Wilkinson is that his supposed best years were spent on the physios table. After the 2003 world cup he should have gone on to play 10 for England and take his choice of clubs but injury hampered both his performance and development over the next 4 years. I honestly believe if he had played more regularly at international level between 2003 and 2007 his game would have developed in the same way long standing 10s like Carter and Jones did. As it was he came back for the 2007 world cup having played hardly any international and guided England to a second successive final, which to me shows the mark of a rare talent. By 2011 he was not the player he had been and I dont think he was happy in that England set up but he was a great fly half. From 2000-2003 England beat every team on the planet home and away scoring some breath taking tries and putting big scores on teams like France, Wales, SA, Scotland and Ireland you dont do that with a "limited" fly half. People also forget in England at least we had got very use to gallant losers, penalty shoot outs that we always lost, a Cricket team that always lost the Ashes bravely and Tim Henman. Then all of a sudden we had a sportsman that never missed his kicks, could handle the pressure and the opposition actually were concerned about, not in the way strikers were meant to be concerned about Stuart Pearce but a genuine worry that there was an English player who could really do them damage both on the score board and in the tackle.

People have short memories but I will always remember the great England team of the early 00s and the great fly half in that team.

Best post by a mile, summs it up for me.
 
Good points. However he was back then only a single componant of what was a well oiled machine. Once Richard Hill and Will Greenwood (in particular, but everyone played a part) were gone, his star was never likely to shine as bright.

And would Dan Carter be so good without Richie Macaw? He was only part of a machine but the machine was built around his game, all the players from that team have nothing but the highest regard for him that shows he was the biggest part of it.
 
And would Dan Carter be so good without Richie Macaw? He was only part of a machine but the machine was built around his game, all the players from that team have nothing but the highest regard for him that shows he was the biggest part of it.
Without Carter, the ABs still win. Without McCaw, they don't.
 
I can't understand why people are saying he shouldn't be criticised.

No one is beyond reproach, not JFK, not Mother Teresa, not Nelson Mandela and most certainly not Wilkinson.

He was a very good player, a true pro who worked very hard to get back to fitness after countless injuries, but that doesn't mean that poor performances or deficiencies in his game can't be picked upon.

Burn the heretic.

Besides, from 2000-2003, Wilko to my mind was a complete fly-half. I can't be arsed to argue it with those who disagree, and will agree due to a massively weaker pack/bizarre coaching/constant injury he didn't replicate it for England as well as we'd like from there on (watching him for Toulon is both a great joy and yet slightly sad) but there were few deficiencies in his game at its peak.

When ever I see this try, I think "Ok, it was a pretty good chip, but how has James Simpson-Daniel been so neglected by England". Some of the most beautiful slight of hands I've ever seen from any player. He did a similar thing against the Barbarians foolling Jonah Lomu and went around him to score in the corner with Christian Cullen almost pushing him out. It was magic.

In fairness, JSD broke when put near an England shirt. He suffered a lot of injuries - and a lot of illness as well.

We still should have picked him more anyway. Like Wilko, he should have been "Fit? Use him."
 
Is it too late to use JSD? He's 29, so he'll be 33 come the next WC, which is old but then look at Shane Williams...

That said, we have a ridiculously healthy pool of wingers so he's going to have his work cut out just to be selected for the 2012 six nations.
 
No old boy, I've been using this board for far too long to feel a requirement to pander towards humourless, know it all dicks such az yourself. Credit when due, I have indeed complimented performances of his when they're deserved. Much the same as I have also done for even Henson, Ellis and even O'Gara. Please, feel free to check the archives and look the posts up for yourself. They date back all the way to 2005.

Wilkinson has not been a "test standard" player since the France semi final in 2003. He has However lived and made a career off reputation based upon media hyperbole since being seen as "rugbys Beckham".

I challenge you to name a since game since that France semi to tell me when he's been anything other then obsolite. Good luck.

Maybe you need to calm down a bit.
 
Wilkinson has not been a "test standard" player since the France semi final in 2003. He has However lived and made a career off reputation based upon media hyperbole since being seen as "rugbys Beckham".

I challenge you to name a since game since that France semi to tell me when he's been anything other then obsolite. Good luck.

England v Scotland 2007
England v France 2007 World Cup
England v Wales 2011 World Cup warm up match
 
England v Scotland 2007
The 'grand return. A game famous for the biggest farce in TMO ****-Ups and a match so dire even Harry Ellis looked like he deserved a shirt. MOTM no less.

England v France 2007 World Cup
the forwards and Josh Lewsey may have differing opinions on who did what that day. Any other 10 wouldhave done the job (don't feed me ******** how "only 1 person would land a drop goal like that")


England v Wales 2011 World Cup warm up match

:lol: whatever
 
And would Dan Carter be so good without Richie Macaw? He was only part of a machine but the machine was built around his game, all the players from that team have nothing but the highest regard for him that shows he was the biggest part of it.

We'll I think he can be just as talented player without McCaw as with him, however any team suffers with out McCaw. The thing is, Carter tests defenses more than Wilkinson. Wilkinson needed a lot of go forward ball as on the back foot, he lacks the creative part of his game react accordingly, so he goes deeper in the pocket and kicks (which is what we saw from 2003-2011). Daniel Carter has been good with out a dominant pack (although the All Blacks have consistantly dominant forwards) but he has a variety to his game that allows him to adapt, which includes a very good running game (something which Wilkinson has never had, regardless of what some people try to tell me), and the ability to set up his players outside him when the opposition employ a rush defense (which Wilkinson rarely does).

Carter is a much better rounded player inmho.
 
Wish he tried out a season of Super Rugby. I reckon he wouldve been a success down here.
 
We'll I think he can be just as talented player without McCaw as with him, however any team suffers with out McCaw. The thing is, Carter tests defenses more than Wilkinson. Wilkinson needed a lot of go forward ball as on the back foot, he lacks the creative part of his game react accordingly, so he goes deeper in the pocket and kicks (which is what we saw from 2003-2011). Daniel Carter has been good with out a dominant pack (although the All Blacks have consistantly dominant forwards) but he has a variety to his game that allows him to adapt, which includes a very good running game (something which Wilkinson has never had, regardless of what some people try to tell me), and the ability to set up his players outside him when the opposition employ a rush defense (which Wilkinson rarely does).

Carter is a much better rounded player inmho.

OK did you read what I said? Wilkinsons game missed out on 4 years development because of his injuries. Carter didnt become a great player over night it took time to develop his all round game, he has less injuries which helped greatly. Yet Wilkinson without that development he still managed to guide a limited team to a world cup final in 2007 (something Dan Carter has never done). As for lacking a creative part to his game I suggest you look at some of the tries England scored at the time off him in particular you might want to look at a try against New Zealand in 2002.........
 
OK did you read what I said? Wilkinsons game missed out on 4 years development because of his injuries. Carter didnt become a great player over night it took time to develop his all round game, he has less injuries which helped greatly. Yet Wilkinson without that development he still managed to guide a limited team to a world cup final in 2007 (something Dan Carter has never done). As for lacking a creative part to his game I suggest you look at some of the tries England scored at the time off him in particular you might want to look at a try against New Zealand in 2002.........
you say th like he was not playing at all in the mean time. What exactly were Newcastle paying a salary for?
 
OK did you read what I said? Wilkinsons game missed out on 4 years development because of his injuries. Carter didnt become a great player over night it took time to develop his all round game, he has less injuries which helped greatly. Yet Wilkinson without that development he still managed to guide a limited team to a world cup final in 2007 (something Dan Carter has never done). As for lacking a creative part to his game I suggest you look at some of the tries England scored at the time off him in particular you might want to look at a try against New Zealand in 2002.........

I can assure you I've watched every game the All Blacks have played in the last decade, and that little chip and kick hardly shows a real flair, especially considering it's still being made a big deal of. The truth being that his attacking play has been so boring and methodical, that when people mention him showing any flare at all as in a career of nearly 100 test caps, that's the only example they immediately go back to. It was more poor positioning by the All Blacks than outstanding by Wilkinson. Wilkinson is not especially creative. Most tries in which England showed any creative flare from 2002-2003 was either a Jason Robinson solo effort, or set up by Dawson and Greenwood (two outstanding players) unleashing Cohen, JSD and Lewsey. Your point about "Had he had four years to develop he'd have been as good as Carter", well if I had wheels I'd be a wagon. Point is he didn't develop. His careers was not helped by injuries and he was unfortunate in that regard, but it still doesn't change my opinion of him.

Not sure what your point about a RWC Final was? Carter would have lead NZ to the final had he not been injured. As it was, our 4th choice 1st 5/8th was called on in the final and we still won. No one doubts we would not have won by a less tight margin had Carter been on the feild. I believe Carter still has as many RWC winners medals as Wilkinson, and has only lost a single RWC match (2007 QF) which he was substituted and the All Blacks were winning at that point (in 3 World Cup campaigns). Wilkinson has lost 3 times at a RWC, so I guess it's a bit unfair to claim Wilkinson's record at RWC is so much better than Carter's.
 
Last edited:
I can assure you I've watched every game the All Blacks have played in the last decade, and that little chip and kick hardly shows a real flair, especially considering it's still being made a big deal of. The truth being that his attacking play has been so boring and methodical, that when people mention him showing any flare at all as in a career of nearly 100 test caps, that's the only example they immediately go back to. It was more poor positioning by the All Blacks than outstanding by Wilkinson. Wilkinson is not especially creative. Most tries in which England showed any creative flare from 2002-2003 was either a Jason Robinson solo effort, or set up by Dawson and Greenwood (two outstanding players) unleashing Cohen, JSD and Lewsey. Your point about "Had he had four years to develop he'd have been as good as Carter", well if I had wheels I'd be a wagon. Point is he didn't develop. His careers was not helped by injuries and he was unfortunate in that regard, but it still doesn't change my opinion of him.

Not sure what your point about a RWC Final was? Carter would have lead NZ to the final had he not been injured. As it was, our 4th choice 1st 5/8th was called on in the final and we still won. No one doubts we would not have won by a less tight margin had Carter been on the feild. I believe Carter still has as many RWC winners medals as Wilkinson, and has only lost a single RWC match (2007 QF) which he was substituted and the All Blacks were winning at that point (in 3 World Cup campaigns). Wilkinson has lost 3 times at a RWC, so I guess it's a bit unfair to claim Wilkinson's record at RWC is so much better than Carter's.

Cannot be bothered anymore. You obviously worship at the shrine that is Dan Carter and you are entitled to it. Good bye
 
The 'grand return. A game famous for the biggest farce in TMO ****-Ups and a match so dire even Harry Ellis looked like he deserved a shirt. MOTM no less.

the forwards and Josh Lewsey may have differing opinions on who did what that day. Any other 10 wouldhave done the job (don't feed me ******** how "only 1 person would land a drop goal like that")




:lol: whatever

Wilkinson has been poor for England since 2008, nobody denies that, but he was at least a test standard player during the 2007 RWC, made a big difference to that side which had just played dreadfully against USA and South Africa (even worse than RWC 2011 performances)

in regards to "any other 10 would have done the job" see below

Wales-prop-Adam-Jones-consoles-Rhys-Priestlan_2649718.jpg
417039.jpg
_55572503_parks_woe_get.jpg


also I believe Stephen Jones ran away from a drop goal v France in the SF, and New Zealand did too in the 2007 QF
 
Don't forget Myler bottling the dropgoal in the Aviva playoffs (think it was last season?)

Edit: Year before vs Saracens
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top