• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2022 Six Nations] France vs England (19/03/22)

12 points defeat against a supposed world beating France in Paris....for a Grand slam...isnt a kicking though. Especially with No actual 12, our 10 and 15 both playing their first 6n tournament and Steward on the wing...and clearly very strict team tactics...

Its not all doom and gloom
Case of the scoreline not telling the full story, I think - we never looked like winning the game from 0-80

We held on for a while, sure, and the scoreline reflects that - but clinging on with your fingernails doesn't mean we were any cop
 
The RFU's statement must have been issued with his blessing, which seems to be a conflict of interest.
Here are the results of the review we're about to have. It doesn't get more Sir Humphrey than that!

Steward was fine and has just banked some invaluable experience as has Smith and Randall to a lesser extent. At international level they're still very green and will need all the experience they can get between now and the RWC which is apparently all that matters. Unless there's a very strange turn of events Steward should be nailed on at 15 for the foreseeable. Would be good to see him working with a couple of decent wingers though.
 
I can't work out if Randall was objectively decent or Youngs made him look that way. Certainly faster, but so are plate tectonics.

Of the three recent Scrum Halves (Mitchell, Quirke, Randall), which do we think is the best choice to invest in? I don't feel like we've had a decent look at any of them, really
 
I can't work out if Randall was objectively decent or Youngs made him look that way. Certainly faster, but so are plate tectonics.

Of the three recent Scrum Halves (Mitchell, Quirke, Randall), which do we think is the best choice to invest in? I don't feel like we've had a decent look at any of them, really

Definitely Quirke.
 
I can't work out if Randall was objectively decent or Youngs made him look that way. Certainly faster, but so are plate tectonics.

Of the three recent Scrum Halves (Mitchell, Quirke, Randall), which do we think is the best choice to invest in? I don't feel like we've had a decent look at any of them, really
Randall was an upgrade from current Youngs, I don't think he set my world on fire like a vintage Youngs or Care and I don't think I really saw that potential.

I don't think the tactics help or the center pairings and thats the same for anyone else who gets selected. I just want someone who'll add tempo without being a rabbit in the headlights who that is I have no idea.
 
Either way, bin off Youngs asap. The fact he is making as many of not more errors than the new guys whilst offering much less just shows more experience isn't always better. You should be able to rely on experienced players to keep their head, make the correct decisions and execute them well, Young's doesn't. Wouldn't even keep him around for "support".
 
I'd go into the summer with Randall, Quirke and Youngs as the scrumhalves but with Randall the starter and Quirke bench, Youngs there solely for the training pitch
Can say what you want about his onfield performances but having someone with his experience to bounce ideas off of/learn from will be invaluable

I like Mitchell but he does blow hot and cold - I would've had it as him vs Randall for the not-quite-a-nipper 9, which obv Randall has won the race for
If we were to bin off Youngs entirely, and if we continue to ignore Spencer, then he'd probably be my third choice - Urine, from Bristol, is more consistent, and a fine player in his own right, but doesn't have the ceiling of the others and I just can't see him as an international
 
This is the huge issue with 9. We should have a 30-50 cap player who should be taking over from Youngs ready to go and then Quirke can come onto the bench and start gaining experience off the bench. But Jones has butchered the whole situation with his selections. Not even like Youngs was any good when he kept giving him caps either.
 
Some players have made solid progress imo
Genge, Marchant and Steward being 2 obvious ones.

I didn't feel v France like we missed Kruis or Hill which is the first time in a while I felt like that with Kruis.

Our Forwards generally performed well compared to last year I think Cockers has done well in that regard.

But overall I don't see any real team progress espcially the backs as a unit.

Missed Wisemantel
They will not get rid of EJ but surely they will look to find a new attack coach because as you said out forwards arnt really the problem, by no means perfect but fronted up against Ireland with 14 men and i havnt been dominated up front.

But a new attack coach should be designing an attacking structure where they work together with forwards and backs to the point of attack and break defences, smith would be the one to benefit most from this.

Our forwards just run straight into brick walls and dont create space for our backs. We really need someone else to work on our attack.
 
I have no idea on the SH pecking order which probably tells you all you need to know (and only partly that I don't understand back play…..).

At LH Genge has established himself as first choice. There's nothing left to learn about Marler who's solid in a Jason Leonard sort of way that's probably better suited to starting. Time to get some game time into Rodd - I still have reservations about how he'll cope against the strongest scrummagers but there's plenty of potential there.

Has McGuigan decided whether he's Irish / off to Munster yet? If not we should be doing all we can to keep him. We could pretty much guarantee him a RWC squad place now.
 
I'd go into the summer with Randall, Quirke and Youngs as the scrumhalves but with Randall the starter and Quirke bench, Youngs there solely for the training pitch
Can say what you want about his onfield performances but having someone with his experience to bounce ideas off of/learn from will be invaluable

I like Mitchell but he does blow hot and cold - I would've had it as him vs Randall for the not-quite-a-nipper 9, which obv Randall has won the race for
If we were to bin off Youngs entirely, and if we continue to ignore Spencer, then he'd probably be my third choice - Urine, from Bristol, is more consistent, and a fine player in his own right, but doesn't have the ceiling of the others and I just can't see him as an international
If we do that with Quirke Randall and Youngs. I think Quirke will start, Randall bench. The reason being Randall has had some experience starting and now Quirke needs it then gets Randall experience cosing out games. That way we see what they both offer going forward at this level.
 
Has McGuigan decided whether he's Irish / off to Munster yet? If not we should be doing all we can to keep him. We could pretty much guarantee him a RWC squad place now.
Not yet and not yet - I agree, I'm a massive fan of McGuigan
There's a massive drop off from LCD/George to the next level of players, I'd feel much better with a McGuigan or a Walker in the mix than solely trusting the youth players

Also I think George is one of the few players whose stock has risen this 6N - thought he was excellent and was a real leader on the pitch and had a good rapport with the referees, always pointing out something marginal the opposition were up to, or getting clarifications, without being told to eff off because he's not the captain - a rare skill
He fell out of fashion when LCD took over the starting role but he's still got a massive amount to offer
 
Not yet and not yet - I agree, I'm a massive fan of McGuigan
There's a massive drop off from LCD/George to the next level of players, I'd feel much better with a McGuigan or a Walker in the mix than solely trusting the youth players

Also I think George is one of the few players whose stock has risen this 6N - thought he was excellent and was a real leader on the pitch and had a good rapport with the referees, always pointing out something marginal the opposition were up to, or getting clarifications, without being told to eff off because he's not the captain - a rare skill
He fell out of fashion when LCD took over the starting role but he's still got a massive amount to offer
Yep. You'd never be upset to see him in the team.

Unless, that is, you're Eddie Jones, who tried to can him in the Autumn. Or maybe he's just an under appreciated motivational genius and the kick up the jacksie worked.

George played something like 159.5 minutes v Ire and Fra which is unheard of in recent times and shows a total lack of faith in Blamire and Dolly (if he really trusted them so little, then Walker / McGuigan if willing / even Singleton would have been better choices - what if George had gone down early?).
 
Thinking about it, you can see a couple of things...

1) the players being called for years to be included (particularly on this forum) have looked average at best... Isiekwe was average, SImmonds average, Dombrandt slightly above average, Randall was decent but there is a technical deficiency in his box kick because he seems to mishit about 50% of them

2) There are genuinely some big steps forward.. I'd say Sinckler could learn some from Genge, in that he almost seems too calm these days. Genge was monstrous, i thought underhill looked up to speed immediately, Itoje magnificent, and the hooker position of George/LCD is strong

3) In fairness, Steward as a tactic on the wing did work in attack, and he showed superb skills to finish, but Furbank was atrocious

On a negative side

1) Why was Furbank preferred to Malins, who is a much silkier runner, and deserved half a chance to show his ability in that position? This doesnt make a lot of sense, particularly with two playmakers already there

2) There is a lot of talk about a free flowing, heads up style attack after first few phases after set piece, but the biggest issue we've seen so far in this is the players have almost no idea who is carrying, where the ruck will be or how they're planning to play the game, ie touchline to touchline, set up middle of pitch and split the field, they're almost missing that focal point of the attack that you go to to get the momentum in your attack. I cant remember anyone bar Marchant straightening and attacking the line with the ball. But the biggest issue is if players dont know where ruck is or who's hitting said ruck, if they're running support lines, drifting wide, that ruck will regularly be under-resourced. Its a great idea in theory but im unsure if this free form attack will work even with more cohesion

3) Big need for a dominant back row. Dombrandt could develop into this with experience, he did run some really intelligent lines and could see him getting more game time, but Id think they really need the likes of a Barbeary in there, someone who's a real nuisance to bring down and draws defenders in. I'd also wondering if Cunderhill/ JWillis are about, would you put Lawes back in the row, not because i think its his best position but because you're trying to get the most dynamic players into the game to make an impact

4) Quirke from what I've seen is like Randall but with less glaring weaknesses, and seems to be smarter about how the team plays. Hoping to see him play in summer, Australia tour is usually a very good opportunity to work on attack because they usually play so fast and loose
 
Thinking about it, you can see a couple of things...

1) the players being called for years to be included (particularly on this forum) have looked average at best... Isiekwe was average, SImmonds average, Dombrandt slightly above average, Randall was decent but there is a technical deficiency in his box kick because he seems to mishit about 50% of them
But Isiekwe was better than Ewels, Dombrant was better than a curry at 8, Simmonds played better than most thought he would (although still not sure on him) and Randell clearly played better than Youngs who looks more like a 2 cap SH than a 115 cap one.

Average is good for England right now.
 
But Isiekwe was better than Ewels, Dombrant was better than a curry at 8, Simmonds played better than most thought he would (although still not sure on him) and Randell clearly played better than Youngs who looks more like a 2 cap SH than a 115 cap one.

Average is good for England right now.
I'm fully aware that this won't be a popular opinion but I'm not convinced that this is entirely true. Thought we looked far better with Curry at 8 during the AIs than we ever did with Dombrandt (or Simmonds) at 8 this tournament.

Personally I think that Curry, Underhill and Lawes are all significantly better international players than either Dombrandt or Simmonds, and the cost of playing Curry out of position is outweighed by having all 3 of those top players on the pitch. I do still want to have a look at Barbeary and a rejuvenated Binny though.
 
1) the players being called for years to be included (particularly on this forum) have looked average at best... Isiekwe was average, SImmonds average, Dombrandt slightly above average, Randall was decent but there is a technical deficiency in his box kick because he seems to mishit about 50% of them
That's the whole point. What do you reckon they'd be like with another 15 or 20 caps experience?

Very few players take to the international game like ducks to water. It takes time to learn and they need to be integrated into a team that is at least stable in personnel and ideally successful or with a clear identity at any rate. Continual evolution not cliff edge. Being continually worried about selection for the next game never helps either (nor does sinecures).
 
I'm fully aware that this won't be a popular opinion but I'm not convinced that this is entirely true. Thought we looked far better with Curry at 8 during the AIs than we ever did with Dombrandt (or Simmonds) at 8 this tournament.

Personally I think that Curry, Underhill and Lawes are all significantly better international players than either Dombrandt or Simmonds, and the cost of playing Curry out of position is outweighed by having all 3 of those top players on the pitch. I do still want to have a look at Barbeary and a rejuvenated Binny though.
You can't compare Dombrandt with Curry on the grounds of experience alone. Curry is totally used to the speed, rhythms and higher demands of international rugby and has started virtually every game he's played. Dombrandt isn't and hasn't. Irrespective of player calibre that's a massive difference.

Of the 5 you mention I'd discount Curry as he's a 7 and Barbeary until he sorts out his D.

I'd add T Willis but then that's 6 names in the mix which kind of sums things up.

FWIW my £5 is on Binny being our 8 in France.
 

Latest posts

Top