Are England as bad as we think??

Watched Eng play boks and must say they looked very average.How have they fallen so far behind?Is it all andys fault or is it something else?For a nation that has some many people playing rubgy how is it possible?
Or are we all being lined up for a English revival in the 6 nations and thereafter a world cup suprise?

 

Poor management, stupid selections and the Club V Country row. That's why England suck.

 

From the outside looking in, to me it looks like poor managment and coaching.
England has always had quality players, it's the plan of attack that seems to be missing.

 

Exactly! Its how you handle man management, get the correct coaching and how you have an excellent relationship between Clubs and the Country.

You can see the difference immediately between England and Scotland.

The Scots have a fraction, a mere thousandth of the manpower and financial resources that the mighty RFU have. And yet through superb man management, nurturing new talent and damn decent coaching, Scotland have progressed far further than England have in the last 12 months.

 

I understand how having the right structures in your game make all the difference but what did andy do differently from woodward?Surely he seen what clive had done had worked so why change it?How much of the blame is with the players?Are they simply not good enough?

 

I have always thought that the way we nurture our players from club rugby to international has always been wrong.

We take out these young players like Allen and Flood and as we have seen from the Autumn Internationals we don't give them the time to progress and we don't give them the pitch time they need. For exapmle in one of the tests we put Flood on for 10 minutes at fly half. Now I know he is a professional player but in no way shape or form can we expect a 19 year old to pick up the pace of the game and start running the show like you have to at 10 with 10 minutes left. Not only isit bad for the team but also its poor management because it would knock the confidence of the youngster.

What we should be doing is nurturing our players by playing them in the lesser internationals we face and giving them international gametime.

Just because they do it for their clubs, doesn't mean they can do it aat international level straight away. Its a different league of class. :bravo:

 

Look at the talent that played against SA, specifically in the backs;

Richards,
Noon,
Tait,
Cohen,
Cueto,
Lewsey.

Than with backup from Allen, Clarke, Simpson-Daniel, Van Gisbergen. There is more than enough talent in England to match or better any other sides in the world (f*** off NOW sarky kiwis), they're simply not getting the motivation or the gameplan correct nor being used effectively. This was mostlyt down to AR and his forwards based philosophy (ie, being stuck in the 1980's). Everyone said "this looks better/promising" after the New Zealand game because Ashtons influence brought the girls into the game more and made the men in white a more balenced side.

That coupled with Robinson being as motivating and charasmatic as a dead goldfish for all team talks may explain a thing or two.

 

Exactly!

 

Here`s an interesting thought- would certainly like to get some input from the English fans on this one- could the big injury-toll not have something to do with the amount of top-class rugby being played in the professional era?

I remember prof. Tim Noakes doing a study in 2004 on the numbet of top-level matches played by senior internationals in 2004- he found that the maximum no. possible, at high intensity, and without increasing the risk of serious injury, to be around the 25-30 mark. In 2004, Marius Joubert played 40 first-class( then Super 12, Currie Cup and Test) matches, and since then he`s been injured almost consistently- and when he did get onto the pitch, he was well below his form of 2004. He can`t possibly be too old for the game anymore, he`s only 26!

I`ve read somewhere that with Tests, the premier division and Heineken Cup commitments, some English players will be playing 38 top-level matches per season. Don`t know if this is actually true, but if it is I can sympathise- this is exactly the type of schedule the top Saffas have to contend with. By contrast, the AB`s play only 27- perhaps one of the reasons why they always look as fresh as daisies when they go to Europe for the Nov. internationals?

 

every international team has a bad year, the Aussies lost 7 or 8 ina row a year or so ago, the ABs full of names like Brooke/Jones/Fitspatrick lost 5 ina row, which resulted in the retirment of pretty much alot of players

 

England are suffering from The Curse of Winning a World Cup.

 

To answer your question, Yes. On the bright side, you have a load of talented players, your country just needs to pull it's head out of its ass. The whole way things are opperated over there is what screws everything up.

 

Dunno about the talented players. There didn't seem to be anybody in the last month to show a spark in midfield. Sure, Allen is young, but Tait should be up to speed by now - and it's not happening for him. The back three are good, but there's not a lot they can do if their centres are just setting up rucks or running across the pitch. The sight of Goode reduced to multiple cross-field kicks says it all about the England attack.

Joe Worsley said on TV today that 30% of Premiership players are out injured at any one time. And nobody seems hopeful of reducing the load on players any time soon. They look at the Irish set up and wish they could get something similar - but everyone keeps wandering around in the fog.

 

You saw 4 backs and a back 3 during the Autumn. If England played as a unit (which they never did under AR), you'd see a completely different team.

It was evident at Northampton this week. For monts now they've been acting as a bunch of players instead of a team and conciquently losing.

Then this week, Wayne Smith comes home for the weekend, has a word and suddenly we win the midlands derby with the best team performance I've seen all year.

 

I agree with you there.
I think England has a lot of talent and under the right management they will be good. I don't see that ebing too far off - England are always a threat, in my eyes.

I heard that the team Leicester put out was not a very good one, though.

 

Neither was ours though. No Spencer, Cohen, Lamont, Smith, Barnard etc plus all the injuries we have. Wasn't a full strength side. The guy playing 10 is a League convert with only a handful of Union games under his belt, but apparently (I wasn't there unfortunately) he pulled the strings.

 

Neither was ours though. No Spencer, Cohen, Lamont, Smith, Barnard etc plus all the injuries we have. Wasn't a full strength side. The guy playing 10 is a League convert with only a handful of Union games under his belt, but apparently (I wasn't there unfortunately) he pulled the strings.
[/b][/quote]

Fair enough. I saw the tries and there were some quality plays in there. It did look like a good performance, but i was under the influence of ScrumV that only Leicester fielded a weak team.

 

Neither was ours though. No Spencer, Cohen, Lamont, Smith, Barnard etc plus all the injuries we have. Wasn't a full strength side. The guy playing 10 is a League convert with only a handful of Union games under his belt, but apparently (I wasn't there unfortunately) he pulled the strings.
[/b][/quote]

Fair enough. I saw the tries and there were some quality plays in there. It did look like a good performance, but i was under the influence of ScrumV that only Leicester fielded a weak team. [/b][/quote]

Should never listen to ScrumV (the programme or the website) when Leicester is involved (or Wasps foir that matter). BBC is so far up their arseholes that they instantly asume neither can be dominated or totally outplayed without some form of foulplay etc.

 

I always thought ScrumV (the programme) had some credibility to it, however, ever since the Ruddockgate incident and the Gareth Thomas Vs Eddie Butler episode the programme seems to have gone nicey-nicey; fails to tackle any issues with passion; and lacks what i consider as a good analytical knowledge of the game.
Listen to Rob Howley talk about the game is like listening to one of the boys in the pub...it's just trivial facts.

I'm starting to believe you're right, Teh Mite.

 

I hear you guys (Saints) are playing against the freaking Pumas this February.
How did you land that one?
That's a great match.