RWC Quarter Final: England - France (08-10-2011, 20:30)

[j-dawg]

So you posted 2/4 then scoff.

Nice one.

Your saying these players shouldn't have come to the world cup. Im saying they shouldn't go to another one. The fact that you didn't mention Deacon makes me want to vomit.

 

[Saintjay]

Tindall - Barritt, Allen, Hipkiss, Bell
Wilkinson - Farrell, Myler, Goode (don't scoff, his trophy cabinet is much bigger then Wilko). Hodgson.
Moody - Wood, Robshaw, Skinner, Seymour, Dowson, Fourie
Thompson - The only problem position. Wally should never have been starting choice however.

Tindall, was the best of not many good options and it is a problem for England to see where a decent replacement will come from.
Wilkinson the same. It might be Farells chance now.
Moody, yeah agree with Wood.
Thompson has always been wonk eyed with his throwing even before 2003, but he has had a decent season. Still I would have still gone with Hartley.
Stevens played out of position and was exposed badly.

You can't pick a player on the size of his trophy cabinet or belly when it comes to Goode.

 

[JW.]

I recognise you're something of a fan of his. But really?

REALLY?

No, he was pretty average. At best. Outshone by Contepomi a fair amount too.

Yes I am a fan of his, think he's an inspiring person and decent guy. And I'm bitterly dissapointed how his carreer has been blighted by injury.

But he played very well for Toulon as most of the regular top.14 watchers have acknowledged.

 

[Teh Mite]

your saying these players shouldn't have come to the world cup. Im saying they shouldn't go to another one. the fact that you didn't mention deacon makes me want to vomit.

...

it is constructive actually. England's problem is relying on these perceived "good" players because the media say so due to ancient history. Wilkinson, thompson & tindall were on tour because of 2003 folklaw. Deacon was selected because of the club they ply trade for. Croft and cole have been ****/injured for the past 12 months but on the starting sheet for no apparent other reason then their names are croft and cole. Those are just some examples (don't get me started on hape & banahans inclusions).

Think of all the good players who didn't get a sniff. It's rotten from the coe but there are too many idiot nay do wells who will harp on about 2003 the instant you say a bad thing about "sir jonny". Because they only started watching rugby in 2003 or since mostly.

kuatb

 

[j-dawg]

Mention how Deacon needs to go Teh Mite or by God I will vomit all over the computer.

 

[dullonien]

Ok, so first off well done France, and congratulations to all the french fans on here, elgringoborracho, zefrenchy, aout, Mr cyclopede, enjoy the feeling! A world cup semi-final is nothing to be sniffed at, and I do think France have what it takes to cause problems for any team.

Now, England. Gingergenius I'm surprised you were not more critical of our performance. I think Johnson is in trouble. Not because, he makes insane selections, but just his stubborn rejections of common sense. How many times do we have to see that Corbisiero is a better loosehead than Stevens before we do something about it!? I don't care if Easter plies his trade at 8 and can control the ball off the back of the scrum, if he can't do anything else then he shouldn't be there. Haskell has been our best backrow forward for ages, offering some new power and go forward ball from the back, yet he gets dropped? I don't care if Moody is ferocious and throws himself about like a 'crazy horse'. We need a 7. I think we would have had a better world cup campaign with a backrow of Croft, Fourie and Haskell, not because thats the best we can do but because thats a better balance. Is Moody really our answer to Warburton, mccaw, pocock, brussow etc? Deacon played ok against Scotland but why did Shaw not get any gametime at all? Palmer always deserved to start, and lawes is great but if hes not quite hitting the mark, why resort to Deacon.

Hooker is a problematic position. I think Hartley offers a much better all-round game, as long as he has any semblance of form. I don't know where to begin with the backline. People will start announcing that wilko's england days are over but I don't see what happened today that we didint already know before. He is still failing to do the basics well, whilst Flood is attacking the opposition line and showing a way forward. The thing that exasperates me is how long mj has persevered with hape, only to lose confidence at him in precisely the worst moment. He played one of his best ever games against georgia, and didint play a single world cup minute after that. He is a 12! If you are going to use him to take up a precious spot in the 30 man squad, ****ing use him! You can't just shove other people around out of usual position. By ignoring the problem that has been wilkinson at 10 you shift the problem elsewhere and make things worse. I just cant believe that hape took up a place and then wasnt used when he was most needed(sad as it is). if you are going to try flood and wilkinson together at 12 and 10 why wait until the quarters? what was wrong with 10) flood 12) hape 13)tuilagi?

I don't know about scrum half, I still think youngs is a great hope but if he keeps spazzing about then why ignore simpson.Wigglesworth is, as teh mite would probably say, a club "journeyman" at best and not an international. ultimately you have to be picked on merit and recent eprformances and simpson was great last season for wasps.

Lastly we can't just keep ignoring deserving players who play well every week. You have to pick the best, most desering players first, and then choose your gameplan. Not, as MJ does, works out how he wants to play, and chooses the players according, hence tindall and hape in midfield for so long. On that point, johnson wasted so much time with hape and tindall together, only to change it at the critical moment! Unbelievably inept coaching. we cant just keep ignroing robshaw and JSD for example. Robshaw could rise to be as good as warburton has, but you have to give him a chance!

I think martin johnson is learning all the time, but he has to go basically, (and i'm usually one to despise knee-jerk reactions to poor performances). the management set-up is not right, and we cant keep ignoring it simply because we win games from time to time. we mostly have played poorly for a while now.we have a talneted team, we just need someone who knows how to use that.

P.s thank you tuialgi for being our best player yet again.and well done wales and france!

What really enrages me is how much spotlight we put on our sports teams(old news i know), and also how much time our rugby team gave the media. I hate reading bbc pieces in which flood says 'england to blitz france from the beginning'. You can spout as much **** as you want but it doesnt make you any more likely to actually do the deed. I don't want to constantly hear england players saying 'we've turned it around after a good team-meeting', until we actually see them do that. I honestly think the England team should be seen and not heard. We can blame the tabloids for being wankers as usual and kicking up shitstorms but ultimately all other media groups followed after that

Great post imo. Talks alot of sense, and I was asking myslef the same questions before the match started. It is simply crazy for Johnson to play Hape and Tindall for so long, only to cast them aside at the cruicial moment and go for a risky choice of playing Flood at 12 outside Wilko. Tuilagi has been good, but it look Johnson long enough to give him a shot.

Mite is talking sense about Wilko etc. Posters from other countries have seen how poor Wilko has been for a loong time now. He may be playing well for Toulon, but he's surrounded by class players there, he isn't for England. His passing is getting worse, and now even his kicking has been letting him down. Flood might have the odd off game, but he's a much, much better option than Wilko. As for the likes of Farrell, he's been in great form, why not give him a go, as Gatland has with some Welsh players?

 

[Teh Mite]

Please, by all means vomit. It would be a fair assessment of everything this morning.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Why has Wigglesworth been labeled as a journeyman?
Was at Sale for 8 years and is now at Saracens because he wasn't getting enough game time....

Agree with the rest of what HenryChinaski said though

 

[micko85]

Fiver on Clerc 1st try and France win 17/1 cheered me up a bit, not sure why England were big favs anyway cudnt believe France were +4 even money!

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Still as long a Sale player scored everything's ok eh?

I suggest you read...well, any of my posts on this match
We were terrible - yes I'm glad Cueto scored because he's a Sale player and one of my favourite players, why shouldn't I be glad?
Does that make the performance good? No. I'd like you to point out where I said it was, please.






On Owen Farrell: He's played more pro-rugby than Tuilagi, but no one says he's not experienced enough
Though I don't know about Farrell being the future England 10 - he's very talented, but I think I'd rather Burns/Clegg or even Ford further down the line
Farrell plays better in the centres than at 10, but I don't think he's better than Twelvetrees/Tuilagi/Barritt/Waldouck/etc.

 

[smartcooky]

Harinordoquy man of the match, no contest.

I agree with the first part but not the second. It definitely was not a case of "no contest"

Bonnaire was also outstanding, as their compartive stats would suggest...

[TABLE="width: 465, align: center"]
[TR="class: liveTblRowGry"]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]P[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColLeft"]Name[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]K/P/R[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]MR[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]DB[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]OL[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]TO[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]T/M[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]LO[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]PK[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: liveTblRowWht"]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]F[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColLeft"]Bonnaire[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]0/0/7[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]14[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]1[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]2[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]1[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]12/0[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]1/2[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: liveTblRowGry"]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]N8[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColLeft"]Harinordoquy[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]0/1/13[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]22[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]1[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]2[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]2[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]5/2[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]2/0[/TD]
[TD="class: liveTblColCtr"]1[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


P = Position
K/P/R = Kicked/Passed/Run
MR = Metres Run
DB = Defenders beaten
OL = Offloads
TO = Turnovers won
T/M = Tackles made/missed
LO = LineOuts won on throw/stolen on opposition throw
PK = Penalty kicks conceded

 

[Teh Mite]

I suggest you read...well, any of my posts on this match
We were terrible - yes I'm glad Cueto scored because he's a Sale player and one of my favourite players, why shouldn't I be glad?
Does that make the performance good? No. I'd like you to point out where I said it was, please.

On Owen Farrell: He's played more pro-rugby than Tuilagi, but no one says he's not experienced enough
Though I don't know about Farrell being the future England 10 - he's very talented, but I think I'd rather Burns/Clegg or even Ford further down the line
Farrell plays better in the centres than at 10, but I don't think he's better than Twelvetrees/Tuilagi/Barritt/Waldouck/etc.

The key point is though there are plenty of youngsters out there who've missed out to accommodate the old guard.

 

[Saintjay]

If the AB's, Wales or any other rugby mad team went on the lash even if it was over reported the local press and fans would have gone mad. That was another poor decision by Jono and his players also let him down. There is no excuse to being abusive to hotel staff no matter who the hell you are.

It would not have been so bad if they had been playing well, they are coming home like a vets team in a plate competition. Great tour and photos and a few good nights on the ale.

The Wales team as far as I know went tee-total, and have been team building like mad. Gatland has prepared this team, I don't think Jono can say the same or hand on heart if he knew his best team.

The problem that we can all see is that players he was picking were not playing the best in there position. If you read stuff by Clive Woodward he say's the Captain needs to be the best player in his posistion, and you need at least five leaders on the team. England lacked all of this, and in the end the selections are the managers alone.

 

[Wanderer]

Ladrokes have Johnson 3/1 to resign http://www.bettingpro.com/category/Rugby-Union/Martin-Johnson-quit-odds-2011100800171/

 

[Sam Owen]

I jumped off the fence and got behind England only because I knew Manu Tuilagi was playing.

 

[j'nuh]

On Owen Farrell: He's played more pro-rugby than Tuilagi, but no one says he's not experienced enough
Though I don't know about Farrell being the future England 10 - he's very talented, but I think I'd rather Burns/Clegg or even Ford further down the line
Farrell plays better in the centres than at 10, but I don't think he's better than Twelvetrees/Tuilagi/Barritt/Waldouck/etc.

Why not try all of these, depending on form, instead of putting all our eggs in one basket? Pick the form 10s going into the six nations and develop them. If it doesn't work, continue trying until one fits in well. (Eg, how for Wales, they went through Biggar, Jones, Hook and eventually settled with Priestland.)

I can imagine a Flood, Hodgson, Farrell set of 10s going into the six nations. Or maybe Clegg, Burns or Ford has an outstanding season and puts themselves up for selection. (We just need to make sure to pick on form and potential, rather than reputation and past success.)

 

[Nobblynick]

I suggest you read...well, any of my posts on this match
We were terrible - yes I'm glad Cueto scored because he's a Sale player and one of my favourite players, why shouldn't I be glad?
Does that make the performance good? No. I'd like you to point out where I said it was, please.

Thanks for your suggestion that I re-read your posts, but I have no issue with the comprehension of them.

I can't really attempt reasonable debate with someone who branded me a 'joke', but I'll try.

I didn't state that Cueto scoring improved your perception of the performance. I was just surprised that you had something to be glad of.

Personally, if I had a Rugby hero and he had scored I would still have nothing to be glad about today. I don't see how it's relevant. The TEAM lost.

Reminds me of junior rugby when the kids that score tries are happy as Larry regardless of the fact that their team got stuffed.

I hope that answers your query.

 

[donmcdazzle]

Wow, I hoped France would show up, and they duly did.

English are really struggling for backline talent. Flood is so hopeless, he's about the only thing makes me feel better about having Slade in the AB's. Tuilagi could be good, he isn't all that flash now though, he is kind of like a slower version of Robbie Fruean.

Well played France, I'd like to see another performance like that in the semi.

 

[j'nuh]

Our performance was bad, but there were silver linings. I thought we looked much better after substitutions had been made, for example. (12-3 in the second half...) And the real comfort is that the problems England have don't seem to be based on a lack of ability, but rather the more easily solvable, bad selections and wrong tactics. We're not going to have to wait a generation for a new set of players to come through - we just need to reform the way the English management approaches the game.

And if this all leads to a shake-up in the English management that means we can move England forward, this could all be a blessing in disguise. I'd rather go out in the quarters and reform for the future, than stumble to the final and let that disguise the problems that need solving.

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

It's interesting that missing out on the World Cup is no different in England than it is in New Zealand (and we may well yet dip out). The "blame game" team along with the "I knew it all along" brigade are all out in force.

As much as I both like Teh Mite as a bloke and am sometimes grossly annoyed by him as a poster, he has been making his selection points for a long time and isn't just blindly sticking the knife in. I have to agree with him in many ways.

In English rugby the clubs are so passionately followed that allegiances form pretty quickly and that distorts the true picture of who's going well over there. I can't help think that once a player achieves some form of international success (Wilkinson and look how huge that was) that it's harder to get out of the team than it was to get in. Good players aren't tested in smaller fixtures like they should and aren't granted the opportunity to grow organically in the international environment. Reputations seem to outdo the efforts of newer guys who get introduced and they seem to get benched before they can grow.

I say all that because New Zealand are a little bit down that road with some players, but we do seem to grant opportunities a little more often and I'm sure it'd benefit England too.

Some players look great at every level up until test level and then fail and others look decent but excel at tests. The right guys need the breaks.