The Autopsy thread: Which England team members are for the chopping block?

[Colombia]

I can't fault much, if any, of what you say here.

I have a couple of comments though about the way England has been trying to play

1. I think what the RFU and to a certain extent SL and his backroom staff have failed to do here is to understand what it takes to play this type of game. You have to commit to it fully; not just in how you play on the field, but in training, and attitude and selection policies too. You also need players that have great ball skills all across the park as well being good at their core jobs. Can any England fans imagine Jamie George or Luke Cowan or Dylan Hartley scoring the kinds of tries or having the ball skills that Dane Coles does? Are there any locks or loose forwards in this England team with the ball handling skills of Whitelock, or Retallick or Keiran Read or Michael Hooper. Playing the way the All Blacks and the Wallabies play is risky, and we come unstuck doing it sometimes, but its no good hedging your bets and trying to play this way in a half-arsed fashion; you either commit to it, or stick to what you know. IMO, Australia out-skilled England on the weekend... they simply do not have the skills to play the game they were trying to play at this level. Perhaps they should have gone to Plan B and played the territory game. They might not have won, but IMO they may have had a better chance.

3. It may well be that any serious attempt to get England consistently playing the type of rugby we play, AND being successful at it, is doomed to failure because you simply don't have the domestic structure in place or the grounding in that type of rugby from the bottom of the game up. It is going to be very difficult to change the style at the top level when the players don't play that way at other times. The attitude to wanting to play that style begins from the first day that kids pick up an odd-shaped ball, and in progresses up through minis and Ripper Rugby into the college schoolboy game and on upwards Anyone watching Landrover 1stXV Rugby for the past few seasons in New Zealand will be amazed at the sheer skills of these schoolboy players.

That is just my ten cents worth anyway...

Yep, tired of this "I want us to play like the All Blacks" mentality some England fans have, it's just not realistic, it's a completely different rugby culture. Unfortunately Lancaster himself was one these people.

 

[Peat]

I don't think it was a terrible decision four years ago in fact apart that Dark day in Cardiff 2 years ago England were pretty much on an upward curve. The problem is we've stagnated since beating the AB'S and some cases gona backwards. As noted in this or probably another thread we were basically forced into our exciting 6 nations selection this year and at the first sign of panic we reverted to our shells against a limping Wales side.

Just one of the hynesight things Lancaster really did look like the right guy for the job 4 years ago.

Maybe to you, but not to me. From day 1, I didn't believe in Lancaster - I didn't think he had the experience for the job and thought he'd been really lucky to get the 6N results he did to get the job. Things might have been very different if Scotland had been rewarded the try I believe they'd scored in his very first match. I also believed - and probably believe even more now - that part of the reason for his employment was that he was a RFU man who understood what the RFU wanted i.e. no more scandals scaring sponsors.

I briefly felt a convert's vigour after the Ireland game in the 6N - we seemed to have a real mental strength about us, and seemed to have found a way to add attack to our defence over the games preceding (obviously not in that game, rained like Noah's days) - but that was as much because it's not enjoyable to think you've got the wrong man as your national coach as anything. Obviously the Wales game wiped that away and I've remained mostly sceptical ever since. The 2014 6N was impressive, although lost partially by his belief that Goode is an acceptable backs sub, but he then washed most of that away with the 2014 tour to NZ. He tinkered us from level(ish) pegging to single-half whuppings that window and in the process jettisoned the single best centre partnership he put together. Ever since then, I've been of the opinion that he should probably be gone.

Anyway, I've enjoyed this thread, it's been interesting to see some thoughts from those outside the normal English circles - we probably are guilty of groupthink at times.

 

[nickdnz]

I agree that I was never sold on Lancaster.

If we can assume that coaching one of the top 8 international teams in the world is the ambition of almost every coach - the you would have to think Lancaster was one of the top eight or so most qualified coach in the world in order to get the England job. At no point, ever, did I think that was the case. I thought he was a selection out of complacency - after being promoted from the Saxons to be caretaker of the England team.

 

[tonydav58]

Hartley and Tuilagi have both let England down,,,they are a disgrace and should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[Peat]

As for what went wrong...

It's pretty clear that Lancaster hasn't been decisive enough about what he wants the players to do, which has weakened our development. He doubled down on that with his worst moments in the World Cup itself. That's one of the big reasons I want him gone. That he hasn't learned from his own experience and that of others about the need to execute any decision, even a bad one, as well as he possibly can rather than to keep havering is another. If a guy doesn't have basic skills and shows no sign of learning, you let him go.

But I don't think that's the only reason and I think you can find another big reason if you consider why Lancaster was indecisive. People will point at his temperament or the conflicting advice from his assistant coaches and I agree that's part of it, but I think another big reason was the difficulty in finding the talent needed that would stay fit in the backs. It is insane that Lancaster went through so many centre combinations - it's also insane that none of them really deserved to stick. There's been better ones and worse ones, but even the best ones have had incipient shakiness written all over them. Maybe if he'd been brave and stuck with one they'd have sorted themselves but most of the time people were happy to keep going in the search for genuine international players. Maybe if Tuilagi had stayed fit, maybe if Ford and Joseph were that bit older so Lancaster could have built around them from the beginning, maybe if we had an international quality inside-centre... lot of maybes, but my point is Lancaster was dealt an iffy hand. He was dealt an iffy one with the forwards too and an iffier one with our leaders. Some people compare us to our 6N rivals and say we've got the players to match them. I think our lack of totemic, "World Class" players means we don't. Oh, we can beat them, but when it comes to winning tournaments and big games... it stacks the odds heavily. A better coach might overcome them - but it would have also been very easy for England to do worse than we have too.

The incoming coach will have a slightly easier time of it - we have more senior players worth spit - but only slightly easier. We still need to grow some giants. We still need to reinforce the squad - and people say the U20s will do it, nay, that we should lean on them... young players are inconsistent, and not all of them develop as you'd like. Especially not in England. Someone (I apologise for forgetting who) made the point that coaches are there to develop players. Spot on. But how much development can an international coach do when he sees the players so infrequently and has so much to deal with? How much can we reasonably ask?

I still think Lancaster is very much the main problem but, while acknowledging our potential, there's a lot of issues that have bugged Lancaster and will probably bug the next man. And, possibly paradoxically, believe there's been times Lancaster has outperformed.

 

[austingtir]

^^ This what happens when you try to copy the way another country plays the game and dont have the players (or coach) to execute it as good as said county. The most blatant part of the whole thing was when they brought Burgess in.


http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11523622

That said England seemed to have some very good capable players but half of them werent selected in the end and I have no idea why some of them werent there, as I havent been following English rugby that much.

 

[smartcooky]

The thing is, if you look at those other teams who have New Zealand coaches, NONE of them other than Fiji's coach (John McKee) have their teams playing the expansive game.

Gatland, Schmidt, Cotter, Haig and Crowley are all very smart coaches. They will get their teams playing a style that fits the skillset of the players they have.

 

[austingtir]

I think given what Lancaster was clearly trying to do he actually did have a bit of success with it. Englands back play is way ahead of where it was in the past. I just think he tried to go to far with it and the forward play that England is known for has suffered.

 

[WaterboySA]

Hope the next coach will choose french-based players.

First that has to go is the coach.

 

[Zed]

The thing is, if you look at those other teams who have New Zealand coaches, NONE of them other than Fiji's coach (John McKee) have their teams playing the expansive game.

Gatland, Schmidt, Cotter, Haig and Crowley are all very smart coaches. They will get their teams playing a style that fits the skillset of the players they have.

Exactly. A coach may try and get this current England side to play an expansive game, but it would fail. Burgess can't pass and neither him, nor Barritt have the pace to do anything "adventurous", so it's bash it up, dummy switch, off load and repeat. Having centres without pace or guile severely limits what they can do.

 

[The Jones Boy]

For England the axing of players isn't really necessary.
Older players like Easter will disappear as time has moved on for him and he's been fortunate to get back in on the scene.
I still cannot understand how an in form Danny Cipriani was left out in the cold when he looked great in the warm ups and ticks all the boxes.
The post RWC England squad should have him in the mix.
Dont 'axe' players just bring in players as their form improves and drop players out as their form dips.

 

[sharkfan]

Coach must go, captain must go and rule preventing English players not playing rugby in the UK from being selected, should go as well.

 

[ncurd]

I think given what Lancaster was clearly trying to do he actually did have a bit of success with it. Englands back play is way ahead of where it was in the past. I just think he tried to go to far with it and the forward play that England is known for has suffered.

The thing is we actually have the back players capable of doing it Ford, Joseph, May, Watson, Brown out of those who played but we actually have a bunch of others too. No idea what's gone in the forward pack since the 6 nations and I've not seen anyone explain it in anyway shape or form. The real problem is the Wales game where we ran away from the expansive game and everything we'd done well in the previous 6-9 months.

 

[Peat]

The exclusion of foreign based players almost definitely won't end. It's policy from above.

Nor does it need to end. Its not that players aren't picked because they're in France; it's players are in France because they're not picked. I am confident a new coach could coax home anyone he actually wanted.

The thing is we actually have the back players capable of doing it Ford, Joseph, May, Watson, Brown out of those who played but we actually have a bunch of others too. No idea what's gone in the forward pack since the 6 nations and I've not seen anyone explain it in anyway shape or form. The real problem is the Wales game where we ran away from the expansive game and everything we'd done well in the previous 6-9 months.

I think you're being overly optimistic there. We have a lot of great quick evasive strike runners but NZ's back line is an awful lot more than that. We don't have the distributing skills they do, we don't have the power they do, and we don't have the depth they do. Any style of play based on one player staying fit and in form (i.e. Ford) is inherently flawed. Maybe Cipriani could have backed him up but we will never know.

Tbh, there's a lot of talk of England imitating this style or that style. I don't think England ever went full bore on imitating any. We tried to patch pieces together from here and there and fell between multiple stools. If we could find the right centres, I think we could get closer to an open running style than many might think. Probably not NZ-esque though.

 

[ncurd]

All I meant was we have the players in attack to do more than shove up your jumper and bosh style of play. Which a few people seem to be suggesting we do.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I really don't get the obsession with France based players.
There are 4(? Delon, Steffon, Flood, Bendy) who could be in with a shout but only one of those is clearly better than the incumbent, but then we've players that, if they keep progressing, will surpass them.
It's not worth the damage it would do to the English club system, and the inevitable clashing of heads with the French moneymen.

 

[richd87a]

Entertaining thread this. The reason Lancaster hasn't worked, put simply, is that England lost on Saturday. If England had won, you guys would be crowing and everything in the garden would be rosy. The welsh fans are exactly the same. After a couple of bad results last autumn, there were idiots in West Wales suggesting that Gatland should get the sack just because he wasn't selecting Liam Williams at fullback.

England should keep faith. I think they need a re-jig, some fresh impetus in the backroom staff. Farrell and Rowntree have never impressed me (baulchy, knee-jerk reactionaries) but Catt is a decent coach. Lancaster has the core of the squad in place for 2019. This was no worse than England performed in '99. Give him another shot.

whatithinksite.wordpress.com/thats-all-folks

This is my take on the game.

 

[GoTheNaki]

Is there anyone from your JWC teams that I should start worrying about in the near future? Can anyone name drop? Or is it rare in the UK rugby teams to promote young talent into bigger roles quite early? I'm after some backline talent, or well... 7 to 15. Because obviously you guys have done really well at the JWCs, so, surely there is players that are pure talent and ambition?

 

[ncurd]

Flood aside did any of the other three impressed when playing for England as well? I remember Stefan getting a huge bigging up before his debut and he did nothing of real note.

Bendy has come out saying the rules are criminal but knows full well he wasn't even on anyone radar 12 months ago.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I don't know about "worried", but some of the notable guys coming through now and in the next two years...

Maro Itoje
Matt Kvesic
Jack Clifford
Kyle Sinckler
Paul Hill
Luke Cowan-Dickie
Dave Ewers

George Robson
Henry Slade
Christian Wade
Nathan Earle