RWC: England - Scotland (01-10-2011, 20:30)

[Rhyer]

She should have been grateful. It was likely the only proposition she's ever had. Ever.

If that was any other player then I would agree, but Haskell is scum, he'd struggle to pull immigrants looking for a passport.

 

[JW.]

If that was any other player then I would agree, but Haskell is scum, he'd struggle to pull immigrants looking for a passport.

Why is Haskell scum? U know him?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Why is Haskell scum? U know him?

Agreed - I think Haskell seems like he'd great to hang out with
Markets himself as a bit of a tool, but seems like a good guy


Hopefully he makes it on the 2013 Lions tour, reckon that DVD would be quality

 

[Teh Mite]

Having a go at Haskell is always a poke in the eye.

 

[j'nuh]

Agreed - I think Haskell seems like he'd great to hang out with
Markets himself as a bit of a tool, but seems like a good guy

This. I mean, he even did a photoshoot for a gay magazine and was saying how he really appreciates his gay fans. How often is it that an athlete would be prepared to do that?

 

[Teh Mite]

This. I mean, he even did a photoshoot for a gay magazine and was saying how he really appreciates his gay fans. How often is it that an athlete would be prepared to do that?

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/78976,people,news,england-rugby-legend-ben-cohen-quits-sport-to-fight-for-gay-rights

Funnily enough, no-one likes him either.

 

[JW.]

Agreed - I think Haskell seems like he'd great to hang out with
Markets himself as a bit of a tool, but seems like a good guy


Hopefully he makes it on the 2013 Lions tour, reckon that DVD would be quality

Haha indeed, most of the stuff you get from the England camp is pretty funny anyways . All seem like pretty decent guys.

 

[j'nuh]

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/78976,people,news,england-rugby-legend-ben-cohen-quits-sport-to-fight-for-gay-rights

Funnily enough, no-one likes him either.

Yeah, I have a great deal of respect for people who tackle these kinds of issues. It isn't just helpful to other people, it's also staking your own reputation for it. It's very selfless. I came into rugby too late to have watched Cohen play, so I'm not sure why people dislike him, but I have a great deal of time for him based on what he's done since quitting rugby.

 

[slowprop]

I'd really like to see England pick Corbisiero for the France game. I've always been a fan of Stevens but as a tight head not a loose head. Props who can scrummage equally well on either side of the scrum are very rare. We've lost Sheridan so let's go with a specialist loose head - the French love a scrum. Stevens hasn't looked comfortable at loose head and to my mind Corbisiero has always held his end up well. Certainly England's scrum looked better when he came on although you can't be certain that Scotland's changes hadn't contributed.

I'd be happy with either Stevens or Cole at tight head. Cole possibly just about getting the nod.

 

[slowprop]

Ha ha, I spotted that too.

Perhaps MJ realises that Jonny is not up to it, but just can't bring himself to pick Toby Flood at 10

I really think Jonny Wilkinson is past it.

Missed straightforward penalties, no confidence at the gain line, and totally unable to spark anything in the backline.

Toby Flood comes on, gets out of the pocket and up to the gain-line, delivers a long, deadly accurate scoring pass to Ashton that Wilkinson wouldn't deliver in a month of Sundays, and then caps it off by banging over a sideline conversion on his "wrong" side to put England out of penalty/dropped goal reach.

Toby Flood is undoubtedly the best 10 in England. Why oh why does MJ persist with Wilkinson??

I agree with you. I don't think Wilko would've thrown that pass. I think Johnson will keep Wilko in the starting XV against the French though - he's their bogey man.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I'd really like to see England pick Corbisiero for the France game. I've always been a fan of Stevens but as a tight head not a loose head. Props who can scrummage equally well on either side of the scrum are very rare. We've lost Sheridan so let's go with a specialist loose head - the French love a scrum. Stevens hasn't looked comfortable at loose head and to my mind Corbisiero has always held his end up well. Certainly England's scrum looked better when he came on although you can't be certain that Scotland's changes hadn't contributed.

I'd be happy with either Stevens or Cole at tight head. Cole possibly just about getting the nod.

I agree with all of this - Stevens makes a good impact off of the bench, as well

 

[j'nuh]

I agree with you. I don't think Wilko would've thrown that pass. I think Johnson will keep Wilko in the starting XV against the French though - he's their bogey man.

I've heard this from a few people, and I'm not comfortable with it. I don't think it's wise to make selections on the basis of what's happened years ago in the past. Wilkinson may have been useful against France in the past because tight games call on good kickers to get points on the board through penalties. If this is the only thing we aim for, then based on kicking percentages in this tournament, we have to pick Flood.

I think one of the main reasons that Flood is kicking better is that he knows his range better than Wilkinson does. Flood feels more comfortable turning down penalties he doesn't think he can score. The penalty in the lead up to the try being scored was about the area Wilkinson was trying to kick penalties from (and missing). Flood instead knew to turn it down, knowing he wouldn't score, and instead set up an attack. Also, I'm scared that people are backing the boot of Wilkinson when it clearly isn't working, and more worryingly, there is no solution to it because even Wilkinson doesn't know the problem.

Doesn't Wigglesworth also take place-kicks? Maybe for the immediate future we can have Wigglesworth and Wilkinson both coming off the bench, with Wigglesworth taking the place-kicking duties. I think they could be good in combination as a tactical kicking duo. Dare I say, we could even then have a use for Banahan as a cross-field ball collector, or more generally as someone who can use his bulk in making big hits on players who catch the high ball?

Agreed a good 9 plays well when the forwards provide a platform which didn't happen today. A World Class 9 is world class regardless. The attacking game of the 10 starts with the service from the 9. His 'attacking game' has no bearing on the performance of the 9. In fact it is entirely on the contrary.

I disagree. If a 10 fails in attack, it makes the 9's job in the next phase more difficult. For example, the worst case scenario would be a 10 that keeps taking the ball into contact, making no ground, and doing it too slow to trouble the opposition's defense. (It results in one less receiver in midfield, the 9 having to move backwards and around the ruck which slows the delivery, and the opposition's defense has more time to organise itself and further disrupt the attack.) Static ball is easier to defend against and consequently counterruck against. I could also add that Youngs is at his best in an open game, where defenders are struggling to get back to their positions and gaps open up. Youngs has a habit of running off the back of a ruck and through one of these gaps. This isn't going to be possible if we don't have a 10 with strong attacking flair. (All in all, I don't think Wilkinson's playing style suits the way Youngs needs to be played.)

I'll give you one example during the Scotland game. At one point, Wilkinson did an up-and-under. We recovered the ball, and Youngs had it at the base of the ruck. There wasn't an English player in sight. Wilkinson should have chased his ball at the very least. Since Wilkinson wasn't anywhere near in support of Youngs, as any 10 should be after a ruck has formed, Youngs tried running the ball closer to the nearest English player (Lawes), got caught in possession and had the ball turned over. (Illegally, so we got the ball back - but nonetheless, it was a mistake that shouldn't have happened.)

Genia, who was/(is?) widely considered to be the best scrum-half in the world but Youngs showed him up last year in the AIs. Why? A good forward platform and a flowing attack, starting with a 10 that engages their backs.

Don't get me wrong, Youngs didn't have a good game. It's just that we're not going to get the most out of Youngs if we play Wilkinson at 10.

 

[JW.]

I've heard this from a few people, and I'm not comfortable with it. I don't think it's wise to make selections on the basis of what's happened years ago in the past. Wilkinson may have been useful against France in the past because tight games call on good kickers to get points on the board through penalties. If this is the only thing we aim for, then based on kicking percentages in this tournament, we have to pick Flood.

I think one of the main reasons that Flood is kicking better is that he knows his range better than Wilkinson does. Flood feels more comfortable turning down penalties he doesn't think he can score. The penalty in the lead up to the try being scored was about the area Wilkinson was trying to kick penalties from (and missing). Flood instead knew to turn it down, knowing he wouldn't score, and instead set up an attack. Also, I'm scared that people are backing the boot of Wilkinson when it clearly isn't working, and more worryingly, there is no solution to it because even Wilkinson doesn't know the problem.

Doesn't Wigglesworth also take place-kicks? Maybe for the immediate future we can have Wigglesworth and Wilkinson both coming off the bench, with Wigglesworth taking the place-kicking duties. I think they could be good in combination as a tactical kicking duo. Dare I say, we could even then have a use for Banahan as a cross-field ball collector, or more generally as someone who can use his bulk in making big hits on players who catch the high ball?

Don´t you ever say something like that again!

I honestly believe that his kicking is a temporary problem, the ability to kick doesn't just go away. But how long it's going to last is a different question all I know is we can't afford to miss so many points in the QF and further. Either Wilko has to sort his kicking out or Flood steps in, my problem with Flood though is that he isn't a big game player, history suggests he will buckle under pressure. But IMO either Flood or Wilko can do the job if they get good quality ball.

Someone suggested the recievers were standing to far away from Youngs. That is ********, he is capable of passing that far with ease and normally does so. Just had an offday.

 

[j-dawg]

Youngs had a shocker with the passing. Wilko was actually jumping to catch the freaking ball.

 

[JW.]

Youngs had a shocker with the passing. Wilko was actually jumping to catch the freaking ball.

Indeed, but I fully trust him to have a stormer against the French. Youngs that is.

Wilkinson was at fault yesterday but a flyhalf can't create any go forward if he has to stop catch the ball turn around and then attack. It is impossible. People can't just blame Wilko for the attack yesterday.

 

[j'nuh]

my problem with Flood though is that he isn't a big game player, history suggests he will buckle under pressure. But IMO either Flood or Wilko can do the job if they get good quality ball.

Flood's first half of the six nations (MotM against Wales, great against Italy), and his AIs, would have put him amongst the best players in Europe at the time. He was certainly on course to win the player of the six nations at the beginning. So I'm not sure it's fair to say he's not a big game player. He went through a lack of form (as have a lot of players) and I'm hoping he's rediscovering it.

 

[j-dawg]

Flood's first half of the six nations (MotM against Wales, great against Italy), and his AIs, would have put him amongst the best players in Europe at the time. He was certainly on course to win the player of the six nations at the beginning. So I'm not sure it's fair to say he's not a big game player. He went through a lack of form (as have a lot of players) and I'm hoping he's rediscovering it.

Yeah I mean its not as if two wins against Australia are big or anything.

 

[LittleGuy]

Are you saying it was the rest of the teams fault that we lost?

Every player played out of their skins, however everyone in this game must equally shoulder some of the blame, here's why I say so:
the forwards were asleep and allowed yet another restart to be reclaimed by the opposition straight after we scored, from which they scored from.
Paterson missed a tackle on Foden in the English after a great chase that would have put us in a fantastic position.
Danielli tried one chip kick too many, when it wasn't on.
Nick de Luca with that rather embarrasing attempt at picking up the ball to dot it down, also gave away 3 penalties, one of which resulted in the English try.
Ross Ford gave away the same penalty twice when we had all the momentum.
Mike Blair took too many quicktaps and ran away from his support, lost the ball.
Andy Robinson brought on Dickinson for Jacobsen, every scrummed after that we were either shoved backwards or penalised.
Dan Parks continuously regifted the English possesion in one period in the first half, the period when Wilkinson missed those kicks, with kicks that never found touch, kicked a grubber when there was a wall in front of him, turned over, last but not least, the stupid decision to go for the up and under, whilst we were just outside their 22. WTF? When has that ever worked?

All in all, whilst I am disappointed with the results, I came into this tournament expecting only that our players give their all, and apart from the forwards in the Romania game, I was not disappointed. I am proud of our team being able to compete with the best in the world despite minimal player resources, they played as hard as they could, not as well as they could but the passion was evident. Some players, like Hines, Jacobsen, Parks, Danielli and Paterson have probably played their last games, and I wish them the best of luck for all their effort and tears of the years, especially Parks whom I have given a lot of grief over the years. In Ross Ford, Richie Gray, Johnnie Beattie, Ross Rennie, Rudriah Jackson/ Duncan Weir, Mark Bennet and Joe Ansbro we have a solid spine and foundation to build around towards the next World Cup in England.

We may have gone out in the group stages now, and it may sound ironic, but at the pace we are improving, and with the All Blacks possibly not competing in 2015 , I will live in my dreamland thinking that we could actually be contenders...

I think my comments were too general LordHope, everyone did play their hearts out.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Wilkinson's arm isn't broken

The report I read says both him and Tindall will take a few more days to know the extent of their injuries/whether they're eligible for the France match

Who would get called up if Tindall had to go home? It won't happen as at best we're here for another 3 games, one of which the new player couldn't play due to jetlag/travel etc. and they'd be new to all the calls etc.etc. so they probably wouldn't bother and just use Hape and Banahan....blech

Flutey is injured atm, so would it be Barritt?
That'd be class.

 

[gingergenius]

Whether Wilko is the French bogeyman or not, Flood still has to start. Flood, we all know, is a better front-foot fly half, simply because he stands flatter and has better vision. The longstanding plus for Wilkinson have been his attributes as a 'tight 10' - outstanding goalkicking, good kicking out of hand, outstanding defence, cool head, and ability to drop goals.

Comparing Flood - his goalkicking, even before the RWC, had a higher percentage. His out of hand kicking is better. His defence is good. So the question marks remain over his cool head and 'scoreboard tickoverability'. But besides his poor run of form at the back end of last season, Flood has always had a cool head - Leicester don't do flaky players.

And as for drop-goals. If England play on the front foot with a 10 who allows us to score tries and a 10 who kicks his goals, we don't need drop-goals. If it's tight and we do need them, then Wilkinson's always there on the bench.

But going into matches with the attitude that we want to play 10-man Jonny-style rugby means that it will always be tight, even against sides like Scotland and Argentina who we are clearly better than. Going in with confidence in a backline that boasts a lot of pace and talent, means we can try and play our own game and then tighten it up later if that's necessary. That method involves a plan B, our current method doesn't - since when have we ever seen a team in an arm-wrestle succeed by chucking the ball about in the latter stages?