[2020 Six Nations] France vs England (02/02/20)

[bushytop]

Really hoping that meand long term option of emergancy cover. Do not want curry as an 8, worried about carrying and being in a carrying role when his skills stand at the breakdown and a carrier second.

Like dombrandt is a carrier first but can get turn overs and offloads but his main stength is his carrying and picking good line. You wouldnt line him up at 7. Without a carrier this back row is not balanced, big carrier at 8 allows you to have underhill and curry. Having curry at 8 does not allow you to have an extra linout jumper at 6.

Yup...

 

[Scotty]

Yup...

Good reply and very insightful into your agreement in my post

 

[dullonien]

Marler 5
George 6
Sinkler 6
Itoje 4
Ewels 5
Lawes 7
Underhill 6
Curry 6
Youngs 3
Ford 4
Daly 4
Farrell 4
Tuilagi (N/A)
May 9
Furbank 5

Genge 7
LCD 6
Stuart (N/A)
Kruis 7
Ludlum 7
Hienz 8
Devoto (N/A)
Joseph 6

players ratings for me. (N/A) means I didn't see enough of them to properly rate them.

will update this post with justifications later

Two fantastic finishes, but you may as well chalk one of them off for the inexcusable way he stopped playing in the run-up to France's second try. He could have nipped that in the bud not once but twice! Just let the French winger by, then didn't continue to chase back to tackle the French 7. Play the bloody whistle, regardless whether you thaink that a knock on has occurred!

So more like a 7 or 8 for me, certainly not a 9.

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

Okay, had a chance to sleep on it now and am actually much more positive than I was yesterday. Let's flip it around and say us England fans are all French. What would we be saying on this board about that French performance? That France nearly blew a 24-point lead and nearly lost the match, that the LBP conceded could cost us the ***le when it comes to the tournament's final standings, that Kruis, Itoje and Joseph were all an inch away from snatching the win from us, that our second try was a 50-50 call that could easily have gone against us, that our scrums were going backwards, that we lost too many lineouts, that we conceded more penalties than the English, that the English had 70% possession and territory and that we couldn't get out of our own half in the second half, that we would have lost the game if the English had used any of the big overlaps they created instead of just bashing it at the tryline with their forwards, that France conceded more penalties than England. We'd all be demanding changes to personnel, coaches and tactics! So all of these things should be seen as positives for England. I'm sure some other teams would have been hailed by their fans for a heroic comeback that fell just short but snatched that crucial LBP.

It's one loss and the tournament is still very winnable. In fact, it's great to see France getting so over-the-top excited about one win over England: it shows we're back among the big scalps! No team performed that well on opening day. Wales took until the 76th minute to get the 4-try bonus point against an Italy team who couldn't score a single point. Scotland were tryless and dropped a certain try over the line, Ireland started well but then got stodgy, and France, well, see the opening paragraph. England also came out flat, were beaten to the bounce of the ball by France and found themselves in a hole that they almost dug themselves out of, despite missing some of their best carriers. Which brings me onto...

I can see why we're trying Curry at 8. I don't see that England do have this huge mental problem, I sometimes feel it's just an excuse for when we play badly or get beaten by a better side. But if we do have that problem, Eddie is clearly trying to fix it by getting us to be more flexible and adaptable. Yesterday we were missing Mako, Binny, Wilson, Tuilagi and Big Joe; that's a lot of big dynamic ball carriers, so we need to learn to adapt to that problem and to play and win without them. So sure, he could call up another number 8, but what happens if they go down injured in the first half of the match and your backrow on the bench is a flanker? You need one of your flankers to be able to shift across and give a good covering performance at 8. If Eddie thinks Curry can be that guy, then great, give him some time there and see how he goes. If he isn't, then he needs to find another flanker that is. We had Wilson doing an admirable job as cover there, if we can develop Curry to play well there too, it gives us all sorts of options if injuries strike in-game.

Or am I just too positive a person?

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Okay, had a chance to sleep on it now and am actually much more positive than I was yesterday. Let's flip it around and say us England fans are all French. What would we be saying on this board about that French performance? That France nearly blew a 24-point lead and nearly lost the match, that the LBP conceded could cost us the ***le when it comes to the tournament's final standings, that Kruis, Itoje and Joseph were all an inch away from snatching the win from us, that our second try was a 50-50 call that could easily have gone against us, that our scrums were going backwards, that we lost too many lineouts, that we conceded more penalties than the English, that the English had 70% possession and territory and that we couldn't get out of our own half in the second half, that we would have lost the game if the English had used any of the big overlaps they created instead of just bashing it at the tryline with their forwards, that France conceded more penalties than England. We'd all be demanding changes to personnel, coaches and tactics! So all of these things should be seen as positives for England. I'm sure some other teams would have been hailed by their fans for a heroic comeback that fell just short but snatched that crucial LBP.

It's one loss and the tournament is still very winnable. In fact, it's great to see France getting so over-the-top excited about one win over England: it shows we're back among the big scalps! No team performed that well on opening day. Wales took until the 76th minute to get the 4-try bonus point against an Italy team who couldn't score a single point. Scotland were tryless and dropped a certain try over the line, Ireland started well but then got stodgy, and France, well, see the opening paragraph. England also came out flat, were beaten to the bounce of the ball by France and found themselves in a hole that they almost dug themselves out of, despite missing some of their best carriers. Which brings me onto...

I can see why we're trying Curry at 8. I don't see that England do have this huge mental problem, I sometimes feel it's just an excuse for when we play badly or get beaten by a better side. But if we do have that problem, Eddie is clearly trying to fix it by getting us to be more flexible and adaptable. Yesterday we were missing Mako, Binny, Wilson, Tuilagi and Big Joe; that's a lot of big dynamic ball carriers, so we need to learn to adapt to that problem and to play and win without them. So sure, he could call up another number 8, but what happens if they go down injured in the first half of the match and your backrow on the bench is a flanker? You need one of your flankers to be able to shift across and give a good covering performance at 8. If Eddie thinks Curry can be that guy, then great, give him some time there and see how he goes. If he isn't, then he needs to find another flanker that is. We had Wilson doing an admirable job as cover there, if we can develop Curry to play well there too, it gives us all sorts of options if injuries strike in-game.

Or am I just too positive a person?

Way, way too positive.

The big difference is that France is very evidently a team in transition. We're not.

As you say, we were missing a lot of our big ball carriers. So we end up putting all our eggs in the notoriously injury prone Tuilagi basket. Always going to be a risk.

There were some screamingly obvious selection errors in both the 23 and the EPS. Jones has the chance to put some of those right.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Don't let two pieces of individual brilliance from May/**** poor defence from France distract you from what the game was actually like.

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

Way, way too positive.

The big difference is that France is very evidently a team in transition. We're not.

As you say, we were missing a lot of our big ball carriers. So we end up putting all our eggs in the notoriously injury prone Tuilagi basket. Always going to be a risk.

There were some screamingly obvious selection errors in both the 23 and the EPS. Jones has the chance to put some of those right.

Oh come on, some people were very happy with that selection and performance. Wales Online have more articles on it than they do on Wales' win over Italy. It's made their year.

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

Don't let two pieces of individual brilliance from May/**** poor defence from France distract you from what the game was actually like.

I'm disappointed, sure, but it's one bad game. It happens. And it's fixable.

 

[Amiga500]

Like dombrandt is a carrier first but can get turn overs and offloads but his main stength is his carrying and picking good line. You wouldnt line him up at 7. Without a carrier this back row is not balanced, big carrier at 8 allows you to have underhill and curry. Having curry at 8 does not allow you to have an extra linout jumper at 6.

Dunno why Dombrandt wasn't in the squad to be honest - was the obvious man for me to come in when big Billy was crocked. Young, great development potential for 2023, already playing very well at a high level... ticked all the boxes for me.

 

[Reiser99]

Okay, had a chance to sleep on it now and am actually much more positive than I was yesterday. Let's flip it around and say us England fans are all French. What would we be saying on this board about that French performance? That France nearly blew a 24-point lead and nearly lost the match, that the LBP conceded could cost us the ***le when it comes to the tournament's final standings, that Kruis, Itoje and Joseph were all an inch away from snatching the win from us, that our second try was a 50-50 call that could easily have gone against us, that our scrums were going backwards, that we lost too many lineouts, that we conceded more penalties than the English, that the English had 70% possession and territory and that we couldn't get out of our own half in the second half, that we would have lost the game if the English had used any of the big overlaps they created instead of just bashing it at the tryline with their forwards, that France conceded more penalties than England. We'd all be demanding changes to personnel, coaches and tactics! So all of these things should be seen as positives for England. I'm sure some other teams would have been hailed by their fans for a heroic comeback that fell just short but snatched that crucial LBP.

It's one loss and the tournament is still very winnable. In fact, it's great to see France getting so over-the-top excited about one win over England: it shows we're back among the big scalps! No team performed that well on opening day. Wales took until the 76th minute to get the 4-try bonus point against an Italy team who couldn't score a single point. Scotland were tryless and dropped a certain try over the line, Ireland started well but then got stodgy, and France, well, see the opening paragraph. England also came out flat, were beaten to the bounce of the ball by France and found themselves in a hole that they almost dug themselves out of, despite missing some of their best carriers. Which brings me onto...

I can see why we're trying Curry at 8. I don't see that England do have this huge mental problem, I sometimes feel it's just an excuse for when we play badly or get beaten by a better side. But if we do have that problem, Eddie is clearly trying to fix it by getting us to be more flexible and adaptable. Yesterday we were missing Mako, Binny, Wilson, Tuilagi and Big Joe; that's a lot of big dynamic ball carriers, so we need to learn to adapt to that problem and to play and win without them. So sure, he could call up another number 8, but what happens if they go down injured in the first half of the match and your backrow on the bench is a flanker? You need one of your flankers to be able to shift across and give a good covering performance at 8. If Eddie thinks Curry can be that guy, then great, give him some time there and see how he goes. If he isn't, then he needs to find another flanker that is. We had Wilson doing an admirable job as cover there, if we can develop Curry to play well there too, it gives us all sorts of options if injuries strike in-game.

Or am I just too positive a person?

Think that is literally the dictionary definition of clutching at straws.

France may have lost a lead, but I saw nothing that made me think England were back in that game apart from some individual skill by May. Honestly I don't think England looked like scoring as they lost all composure near the line.

Honestly it does feel like the NZ was a complete abberration and we flattered to deceive in the world cup. We have a serious lack of depth at 8 & 9 and the longer Jones persists with these insane selections the worse it will be.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I am a Eddie fanboy so anything ATM I will say will just lead to debates going in circles.

But i will say this
Let's sack everyone involved in yesterday game from the 23 to the coaches to the BOD even up to the very top the bus drivers.

Start a new.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I'm disappointed, sure, but it's one bad game. It happens. And it's fixable.

Two.

Lose to the Jocks and it's full 2018 crisis mode.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Dunno why Dombrandt wasn't in the squad to be honest - was the obvious man for me to come in when big Billy was crocked. Young, great development potential for 2023, already playing very well at a high level... ticked all the boxes for me.

And everyone else. Bar the one man whose views count.

 

[Amiga500]

Honestly it does feel like the NZ was a complete abberration and we flattered to deceive in the world cup. We have a serious lack of depth at 8 & 9 and the longer Jones persists with these insane selections the worse it will be.

If - as was said earlier in the thread - Eddie Jones is looking emotional performances - then you'll be like us under Deccie Kidney.

Capable of utter greatness and looking best in world about 1 game in 10. The rest will be a mix of listlessness and cluelessness.

 

[ncurd]

Honestly whilst it was bad its just typical of this England side I wouldn't be surprised for them to rock up at Murrayfield and give Scotland a good kicking or lose horribly.

They just run very hot and cold they are either superb or bad and nothing in between. NZ can't be a flash in the pan because that also dismisses other great performances

Also having watched the match in 50 mins with some FFwrding due to being out yesterday afternoon. Its the typical England problem at the moment there is always the sense they can turn on it on.


I didn't mind Furbank at FB but I've been on the Youngs must go bandwagon for ages now and I can't really remember the last time he was great in an England shirt and was probably our worst player in the NZ match. Get someone young who can be molded.

Also Farrell I've never been his fan but what exactly is he brining at IC? What does he do that actually warrants his selection above Ford at FH. I liked their pairing for a long time but I really want to see what Ford can do without Youngs/Farrell who for some reason are undroppable.

 

[Scotty]

As a Chiefs fan i see constantly them 5m out battering down the door, the main difference i saw from England was the speed to the break down. Then speed to pick and carry. Taking away the overlap youngs never even looked for they took an ages from getting tackled to picking and going again which allowed the french defence to reset. There were very few plsyers running from deep to crash over or least be a decoy. They need to work on that because they had multiple chances thoughout the game and just did not challenge. Now not saying defence wasnt strong by France, it really was impressive but it was never a test for them, we never tried to work a mismatch and even trying to use the post didnt work. Its disapointing to see as the outcome could have been so different.

 

[Amiga500]

Also Farrell I've never been his fan but what exactly is he brining at IC? What does he do that actually warrants his selection above Ford at FH. I liked their pairing for a long time but I really want to see what Ford can do without Youngs/Farrell who for some reason are undroppable.

Width.

If Youngs wasn't so slow, you'd be able to go the width of the pitch (SH->FH->IC->whoever) in 3 passes and about 3 seconds. With the likes of May out there - and particularly with Tuilagi sitting down the midfield defence, its something that should bring much return...

... if Youngs wasn't so slow.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Let's sack BOD.

Tigs = Public Enemy #1 in Ireland.

 

[Not Eddie Jones]

Think that is literally the dictionary definition of clutching at straws.

France may have lost a lead, but I saw nothing that made me think England were back in that game apart from some individual skill by May. Honestly I don't think England looked like scoring as they lost all composure near the line.

Honestly it does feel like the NZ was a complete abberration and we flattered to deceive in the world cup. We have a serious lack of depth at 8 & 9 and the longer Jones persists with these insane selections the worse it will be.

I don't think I'm clutching at straws, I just think there's been a huge overreaction to one bad game. We lost a game in Paris by 7 points; the sky isn't falling in. Sure, May's tries were individual brlliance, but that's often how games are won. That's why he's there. He's part of the team, not an exception from it.

Sure, Eddie tried some stuff and it didn't work, but suddenly people are calling for his head, calling his selections insane etc. The guy has an 80% win record in 4 years as England coach, the best record of any England coach ever. He's given us back to back 6N ***les, a GS, a WC final, a tour series whitewash in Oz, a first win over SA in ten years, a first away win over SA in 20 years, only our 8th ever win over NZ, our best ever run against the Wallabies, record wins over Oz, Scotland, Ireland and France. What more does he need to do to prove he knows what he's doing? He can't experiment if he's not allowed to fail. He tried something, we lost, we move on. I just don't get all the negativity.

But yes, he absolutely needs to bench Youngs.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I don't think I'm clutching at straws, I just think there's been a huge overreaction to one bad game. We lost a game in Paris by 7 points; the sky isn't falling in. Sure, May's tries were individual brlliance, but that's often how games are won. That's why he's there. He's part of the team, not an exception from it.

Sure, Eddie tried some stuff and it didn't work, but suddenly people are calling for his head, calling his selections insane etc. The guy has an 80% win record in 4 years as England coach, the best record of any England coach ever. He's given us back to back 6N ***les, a GS, a WC final, a tour series whitewash in Oz, a first win over SA in ten years, a first away win over SA in 20 years, only our 8th ever win over NZ, our best ever run against the Wallabies, record wins over Oz, Scotland, Ireland and France. What more does he need to do to prove he knows what he's doing? He can't experiment if he's not allowed to fail. He tried something, we lost, we move on. I just don't get all the negativity.

But yes, he absolutely needs to bench Youngs.

I'm all on board for trying new things, but repeatedly trying these things after they've been proven not to work is a completely different matter. The continued inclusion of Youngs despite awful form, the continued selection of Lawes at 6 despite it clearly not working, as well as stating an intent to continue to play Curry at 8 all show EJ's inability to learn from his own mistakes.