[2015 RWC] Warm Up Match: England vs Ireland (05/09/15)

[optimuswolf]

Our scrum looked a lot stronger when George came on.

Exactly. I am worried about our scrum but its not cole I'm worried about. My mate who is a self-proclaimed scrum expert says the major problem in both warmups was marler and youngs getting split.

I will confess i've never thought youngs was solid enough in the core skills of a hooker for england, so maybe this is confirmation bias.

(But just to twist the knife, his carrying is overrated too....)

 

[Tony Manx]

Exactly. I am worried about our scrum but its not cole I'm worried about. My mate who is a self-proclaimed scrum expert says the major problem in both warmups was marler and youngs getting split.

I will confess i've never thought youngs was solid enough in the core skills of a hooker for england, so maybe this is confirmation bias.

(But just to twist the knife, his carrying is overrated too....)

I tend to agree and feel that Marler and Youngs together are an area of weakness but the options seem limited to me so maybe we have to trust them?

 

[Timbo]

There's a move to attribute greater scrum solidity to bringing George on and Youngs off, but looking at the subs it's quite interesting. Mako and Billy were subbed on 3 minutes before George, Launchbury 15 minutes before and Brookes 2 minutes after. Only 3 members of the starting pack were left to play the last 20 minutes. Every player subbed on was a heavier (and potentially, arguabally, possibly) more powerful option. The pack that played the last 20 minutes must have been a good 20-30kg's heavier overall.

6 nations we had Hartley, Attwood, Kruis, Billy and Haskell starting for most/all of the championship...again all significantly heavier than the current incumbents. Similar for the autumn where Wilson was at TH, Hartley and Attwood etc.

Now I know a good scrum is about more than just weight and power, but weve definitely downsized our pack by a fair bit coming in to this World Cup, and not just at hooker.

 

[Willodell100]

I tend to agree with a lot of that.

My initial thoughts around starting Wilson instead of Cole was not because Wilson is a better player.

I just see the pack now as a group of 13 rather than 8. I know coaches love to role out the analogy all the time but Rugby Union is more of a squad game than it ever has been. And I put the impact the bench can bring to a specific game as important as the starting XV.

A potential bench of:

Cole, George, Vunipola, Lawes, Vunipola is one hell of a bench to bring on against tired bodies and minds! Also there is quite a bit of test match experience there to really make the right decisions late in a tight game where the difference between winning and losing can be one individual decision.

 

[TobesHodges]

There's a move to attribute greater scrum solidity to bringing George on and Youngs off, but looking at the subs it's quite interesting. Mako and Billy were subbed on 3 minutes before George, Launchbury 15 minutes before and Brookes 2 minutes after. Only 3 members of the starting pack were left to play the last 20 minutes. Every player subbed on was a heavier (and potentially, arguabally, possibly) more powerful option. The pack that played the last 20 minutes must have been a good 20-30kg's heavier overall.

6 nations we had Hartley, Attwood, Kruis, Billy and Haskell starting for most/all of the championship...again all significantly heavier than the current incumbents. Similar for the autumn where Wilson was at TH, Hartley and Attwood etc.

Agree, we need some balance, why maybe Kruis should be an option, i can only see Parling ever being dropped out of Launchbury, him and Lawes, although Lawes has been playing arguably the worst of them all, he has that star potential, that really can win you games.. But then you drop Parling and and you miss a big lineout Option, Kruis is good at Lineout time, i kind of want to see him have another run out, after his Mare in the first warm-up against France, he is a good Lineout Technician and would add a bit of needed bulk into the pack, but like i said, it would mean dropping one of the 3..

 

[Maverick1987]

Agree, we need some balance, why maybe Kruis should be an option, i can only see Parling ever being dropped out of Launchbury, him and Lawes, although Lawes has been playing arguably the worst of them all, he has that star potential, that really can win you games.. But then you drop Parling and and you miss a big lineout Option, Kruis is good at Lineout time, i kind of want to see him have another run out, after his Mare in the first warm-up against France, he is a good Lineout Technician and would add a bit of needed bulk into the pack, but like i said, it would mean dropping one of the 3..

Kruis didn't have a mare in the first warm up . As a matter of fact I thought he was one of a few that came out with credit to be honest

 

[Willodell100]

Kruis didn't have a mare in the first warm up . As a matter of fact I thought he was one of a few that came out with credit to be honest

I don't think he played that well during his 40mins stint v France. Made a couple of individual errors which stuck out for me.

And, personally, I think there's a bit of gap between him and the other three (& Attwood) in terms of top level quality. I can't see him in the 23 v Fiji but at the same time I trust him to 'do a job' if called upon.

Either way there are bags of potential there and I can see a great partnership brewing at Sarries between him and Itoje over the next 5yrs.

 

[ZeroTwo]

I don't think he played that well during his 40mins stint v France. Made a couple of individual errors which stuck out for me.

And, personally, I think there's a bit of gap between him and the other three (& Attwood) in terms of top level quality. I can't see him in the 23 v Fiji but at the same time I trust him to 'do a job' if called upon.

Either way there are bags of potential there and I can see a great partnership brewing at Sarries between him and Itoje over the next 5yrs.

I think we're going to take Itoje as a flanker with Kruis partnering Hamilton or Hargreaves at Sarries. What's interesting with Itoje is his partnership with Billy Vunipola in the back row (and Will Fraser may his fragile body never break and may he play for England).

Back to Kruis: he's a Lancaster man through and through. He loves hard work, grafting, basic handling skills, decent lineout skills. Even as a one eyed Saracens fan I'm kind of surprised he's still in the squad. I reckon he must be moving some serious weights in the gym and they see him as grunt muscle to come on against opponents second half to push over a pack.

 

[msf]

I´ve just watched the game, and since I am usually critical of Lancaster, I should be fair to him for once and say that he does seem to have brought us to the world cup with a consistent game plan, unlike Johnson in the last one, where the attacking style England had been playing was jettisoned when Johnson turned to Wilkinson rather than Flood. Lancaster, however, has stuck with the attacking style that he has developed over the last 18 months or so, and I don´t see him changing now unless we lose one of the big games in the group rather badly, as we did against the Springboks in 2007.

My concerns are with the fragility of that game plan. If Ben Youngs is targeted, as Ireland have done in the past but failed to do on Saturday, we will be much less threatening in attack. As for the lineout and scrum, it seems that we have compromised this in the quest for an attacking game, demoting Attwood for fitter and more mobile locks, and backing Tom Youngs as the replacement for Hartley.