England 6N 2016 - General Chit Chat

[Chistera]

I think Kruis is getting a lot of plaudits because he's played to a higher level than previously. When a lot of the forwards, bar Billy, aren't performing that well he's bound to look even better.

All the best then, especially if he keeps Lawes on the bench against France.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I think it's pretty unanimous that Kruis is rapidly improving. But isn't the point about him that he's consistently quite good at everything which, over a period, I think is of more value to a team than someone who is occasionally world class in one or two aspects and weak in others.

Lawes, for instance, may have a higher ceiling but he's also got a lower floor. Very easy to get seduced by short cameos, but where a player delivers erratic performances or has obvious short comings e.g Ford's defence, they will never fully lock down a position, leading to chopping and changing. Look at the ABs; yes, they're smart about introducing new players, but fundamentally they identify a team, invest in those players and stick with them. They're in it for the long haul and don't really do flavours of the month.

 

[TommyVercetti]

Kruis has definitely been one of our better players and good rather than outstanding. I think in general he's handled the line-out well and he's hit rucks and put himself about, great engine and you can see why Lancaster was perhaps enamored with his numbers.

I'd be happy for him to start long-term as long as he's consistently playing as well as he is now, if Launchbury can get back up to the levels he's capable of reaching then I'd be happy to lock those two in (pun fully intended) as long-term starters.

Obviously Itoje comes in to the question but I think I'd prefer him at 6, would really help those two to have another jumper aswell. Kvesic at 7 for what it's worth for a proper jackal and Clifford can come off the bench maybe. Not sure where that leaves Ewers though. A pleasant problem to have though trying to fit all those in to one side!

 

[Maverick1987]

Pretty solid is fair, maybe a little understated bar for the lineout (which is indeed a bit short on jumpers), but that's probably fair for Launch and Lawes too. I don't think there's much between them in terms of performance.

I probably shouldn't have concentrated so much on the negatives but hey, I agreed with the positives but thought the negatives were missing.

When you look at the locks' performances, and then at the back rows' performances, the case for Itoje in the back row grows imo - not least because the extra jumper helps the lineout. Even if its just a short term expedient.

Yeh. On the highlights program Victor Matfield pointed out the problem with having the current back row as far as the line out is concerned . With Itoje in it makes us far more dangerous on opposition throw too as we saw when he jumped as high as Parisse was lifted !!!

 

[Crapspray]

The majority of lineout losses, as I remember them, haven't been clear steals though. Only the scrappiness could be laid at the door of two jumpers and a lot of that I feel is poor handling from England rather than pressure.

Against Scotland it was a Hartley underthrow to Kruis that was picked off; if he'd thrown at the correct height it would have gone over Gray and into Kruis' hands.

Against Italy I remember two which basically weren't jumped for, which is either a calling issue or the hooker/jumper completely screwing their timing up. It could be lifters, I suppose, but with five of them you'd think that wouldn't be a problem. Another one was a handling error from Kruis which, looking at it, was because Hartley overthrew. The final one I remember was a simple not straight.

Add to all of that the laughable maul five yards out in the second half that ended in a penalty for obstruction and I'd be happy to say the lineout issues stem mainly from inaccurate play rather than competition. And Borthwick really needs to earn his anorak in the next five weeks. Or change players.

So while adding Itoje would obviously help, I think the coaches/players haven't got anywhere near the best-case with two primary jumpers. I suppose Toner will confirm the theory next weekend.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

The majority of lineout losses, as I remember them, haven't been clear steals though. Only the scrappiness could be laid at the door of two jumpers and a lot of that I feel is poor handling from England rather than pressure.

Against Scotland it was a Hartley underthrow to Kruis that was picked off; if he'd thrown at the correct height it would have gone over Gray and into Kruis' hands.

Against Italy I remember two which basically weren't jumped for, which is either a calling issue or the hooker/jumper completely screwing their timing up. It could be lifters, I suppose, but with five of them you'd think that wouldn't be a problem. Another one was a handling error from Kruis which, looking at it, was because Hartley overthrew. The final one I remember was a simple not straight..

But when it is poor Tommy Youngs that has that problem it is def down to him it seems.

 

[Crapspray]

But when it is poor Tommy Youngs that has that problem it is def down to him it seems.

He doesn't help. And the way the coaches seemed to distort the pack to solve the lineout didn't help his case either.

Though I'll admit after the Italy match it's a lot harder for me to say Hartley is a definite improvement. If he doesn't sort it out by the end of the Six Nations then I'll happily admit I'm wrong and turn coats. I'd far rather replace the hooker than both locks and the blindside.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I suspect Hartley will be done as skip by the start of next season. I think his role was to help bring back a bit of bite & add a bit of experience while youngsters were being blooded.

Whatever you think of EJ, life was never going to be dull with him around...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...-Jones-lays-down-law-to-England-hopefuls.html

 

[JJFlash]

I believe Tom Youngs has been hard done by.
To my mind, he's consistently played to a high standard. He's quick around the field, tackles, is aggressive and hits the lineouts and carries well.
He and George would be many fans first two hookers in the squad.
I reckon Hartley's reign as skipper will be over before the summer tour to Oz.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Right after the first 2 rounds I'm going to do an /10 for the England squad.
Mako- 7/10. Nice touches, Scrum hasn't been bad either. His main positive is that he brings another good carrying option, and his weaknesses aren't so weak.
Marler- 6/10. His defence has been quite destructive. But his carrying is non-existent, 1 carry in 2 games.
Hartley- 5.5/10. Lineout is alright, so is scrum. However he does very poorly around the field. 17 tackles in 2 games ain't bad, 3 missed tackles isn't great. What stats don't show is the way he isn't dominant in collisions.
Cole- 5/10. Scrum has been good, he has got over the ball and is still good around the park. But 5 !!!!! Penalties in 2 games!!!!!!!!!
Kruis- 8.5/10. Done okay calling the lineout but he has been ***anic in defence and at the ruck. 29/34 tackles, 4 Turnovers Won, Stole 2 lineouts and taken 14. Could easily become Captain. Now Slater and Attwood will have an issue being the next enforcer.
Launchbury 7/10. First game wasn't great, looked great v Italy. 13/14 Tackles 2 turnovers won.
Lawes 6/10- THink he's been okay. Now his carrying isn't good, 14m from 9 carries. But he has started taking the ball at pace.
Haskell 7/10. 26/26 tackles this year and (apart from the penalty against McClean) they have been big, big hits. 3 pens givens away in 1 game is not good enough.
Robshaw 6/10- 20/20 Tackles, but not as dominant. Won some turnovers but 10 carries 7 meters.
BVunipola 8.5/10- 113m 41 Carries 19/22 Tackles 2TW. He has been a talisman and is Vice Captain. 23 Years Old with 23 caps already.
Care+Youngs 6/10- Might as well write the same thing. Both look great off the bench but neither fill me with confidence to control a game from minute 1.
Ford 6/10- Not really done that well but he isn't playing in a backline that suits him. Manu will help this team a lot, so would Slade I would guess. Made 8/10 tackles but god I wish I could find meters in the tackle.
Farrell 6.5/10- I think he's done okay. His passing has been good and has got 2 try assist. His pass for Fords try didn't get the credit he deserved IMO, moving one way and throwing the ball the other through a gap. The issue is this isn't his position. If he was on the pitch and 2 players go down injured, I don't have an issue him being shoved in. Hill should play but Farrell hasn't done awful. 20/25 tackles 9C 18M is in line with other 12s we've used.
Joseph 8/10- 84m 16c. A hattrick did cover over his underwhelming first game but he's still been good. 13/16 tackles, 2 TW, 2 CB, 2 DB
Nowell 7.5/10- 64m 13c. Great at everything, his defence has been stout and attack strong. 2 CB, 3 DB, 3 TW
Watson 7/10- 126m 13c. He is again great. Our 11 and 14 have been really good, making meters and defence hasn't been an issue. 6 DB 2 CB
Brown 6/10. People giving Farrell grief should look at Brown under performing in his own position. 97m 19c 2 DB 0 CB has been alright but has butter fingers. Still would have over Goode, but Pennel....
Goode 5.5/10- 40m from 2 carries looks good but he hasn't really shown anything 1 DB 1 CB.
Hill- 5.5/10- Only a small amount of game time.
George 6.5/10- He showed real promise again. Because of the captain he wont get game time this year.
Itoje 6.5/10- He done really well, gave away a pen on the line which is always dangerous. 4/5 tackles 2 TW 7M 4C Lineout Steal was Incredible
Clifford 6.5/10- 5/5 Tackles 9m 3c Looks intl' standard
Devoto 5/10- Haven't remembered anything he's done. Has he played?

Anyway feel free to rip this apart and make me feel bad and want to quit this forum.

Agree with most of that.

On JJ, I think the hat trick didn't only cover the Scotland game but Italy as well. I still didn't feel he was offering enough penetration or threat until he started scoring tries. Don't get me wrong, tryscoring is a valuable instinct in a player, but take the tries out and would we lookign at his game and saying he was back to his best? I'm not sure we would - improved maybe, but still not JJ of old.

Agree with others that, while Kruis has been good (and stood out relatively amongst some mediocrity), "***anic" is a big word. I haven't noticed him influencing the outcomes of rucks that much I don't think?

I wouldn't say that Haskell has been making big hits. I can't think of one

He doesn't help. And the way the coaches seemed to distort the pack to solve the lineout didn't help his case either.

Though I'll admit after the Italy match it's a lot harder for me to say Hartley is a definite improvement. If he doesn't sort it out by the end of the Six Nations then I'll happily admit I'm wrong and turn coats. I'd far rather replace the hooker than both locks and the blindside.

What the pro-Hartley brigade during the World Cup forgot was that the lineout was ****e with Hartley throwing last 6 Nations as well. It ain't down to whichever hooker's throwing today, there's definitely something wrong with the lineout at a fundamental level and has been for a bit. As someone mentioned above, this is where Borthwick needs to come good quickly.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Haskell has been making "big hits" in the sense that he's a 115kg+ backrower and he's hitting people as hard as he should be.
He's not making bit hits in a particularly notable way.

Is he doing anything other players couldn't do? Absolutely not.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Haskell has been making "big hits" in the sense that he's a 115kg+ backrower and he's hitting people as hard as he should be.
He's not making bit hits in a particularly notable way.

Is he doing anything other players couldn't do? Absolutely not.

He's stopped the ball carrier dead in his tracks loads of times. That's a big hit when the ball carrier has loads of momentum.

Is he doing anything other players couldn't?

Yes, robshaw can't do that, neither can Tom wood, nor kvesic.

What Haskell does, is stop the ball carrier getting over the gain line. No ones sayings he's a brilliant 7 or anything just that he has been making some brilliant tackles, re watch the game and you'll see

 

[Peat]

I don't think Haskell's driven anyone back, but he has stopped some people dead.

The majority of lineout losses, as I remember them, haven't been clear steals though. Only the scrappiness could be laid at the door of two jumpers and a lot of that I feel is poor handling from England rather than pressure.

...

So while adding Itoje would obviously help, I think the coaches/players haven't got anywhere near the best-case with two primary jumpers. I suppose Toner will confirm the theory next weekend.

If memory serves, so far Kruis has taken 14 lineouts, and everyone else has taken 4. Which I find weird and unhelpful because, to a certain point, the lineout is confidence and pressure. If a hooker knows there'll be an opposition lift, that's pressure that plays on his mind and probably makes his throwing worse (also throws that were ok and would have reached the target with no opposition become bad if there is someone). More targets = more possible points of throw = less opposition = more confidence... in theory. Throwing everything to Kruis worked out better than throwing it to different people vs Italy.

*pause* That probably didn't add anything much to the conversation. Still, whatever the reason is, it is going wrong.

Lawes, for instance, may have a higher ceiling but he's also got a lower floor. Very easy to get seduced by short cameos, but where a player delivers erratic performances or has obvious short comings e.g Ford's defence, they will never fully lock down a position, leading to chopping and changing. Look at the ABs; yes, they're smart about introducing new players, but fundamentally they identify a team, invest in those players and stick with them. They're in it for the long haul and don't really do flavours of the month.

I can't remember a bad game from Lawes when he wasn't clearly unfit.

Agree with most of that.

On JJ, I think the hat trick didn't only cover the Scotland game but Italy as well. I still didn't feel he was offering enough penetration or threat until he started scoring tries. Don't get me wrong, tryscoring is a valuable instinct in a player, but take the tries out and would we lookign at his game and saying he was back to his best? I'm not sure we would - improved maybe, but still not JJ of old.

The outside backs are getting close to nothing from the inside backs and pack imo and that's obviously effecting them.

 

[Crapspray]

If memory serves, so far Kruis has taken 14 lineouts, and everyone else has taken 4. Which I find weird and unhelpful because, to a certain point, the lineout is confidence and pressure. If a hooker knows there'll be an opposition lift, that's pressure that plays on his mind and probably makes his throwing worse (also throws that were ok and would have reached the target with no opposition become bad if there is someone). More targets = more possible points of throw = less opposition = more confidence... in theory. Throwing everything to Kruis worked out better than throwing it to different people vs Italy.

*pause* That probably didn't add anything much to the conversation. Still, whatever the reason is, it is going wrong.

It could lay the blame more at the coaches' doors. If things were kept simple against Scotland, and went okay, but then as soon they tried something more advanced the wheels came off it doesn't look particularly good for their method/instruction -- or perhaps for the players' ability to learn.

It could also be that Scotland had no clue what England were going to do with a new coach and caller, whereas Italy had the Scotland test to watch.

 

[Peat]

It could lay the blame more at the coaches' doors. If things were kept simple against Scotland, and went okay, but then as soon they tried something more advanced the wheels came off it doesn't look particularly good for their method/instruction -- or perhaps for the players' ability to learn.

It could also be that Scotland had no clue what England were going to do with a new coach and caller, whereas Italy had the Scotland test to watch.

All possible. Only point I'd demur is that with 4 jumpers being used against Italy vs 1 or maybe 2 against Scotland, Italy shouldn't have learned that much.

 

[ratsapprentice]

https://twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status/700380551560110080

Again showcasing the massive shift in "vibe" among the coaching staff - at least outwardly speaking.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

https://twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status/700380551560110080

Again showcasing the massive shift in "vibe" among the coaching staff - at least outwardly speaking.

Lol Marler holding all the bibs

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Those Canterbury Uglies tops are.......ugly.

 

[McTallshort]

Haskell has been making "big hits" in the sense that he's a 115kg+ backrower and he's hitting people as hard as he should be.
He's not making bit hits in a particularly notable way.

Is he doing anything other players couldn't do? Absolutely not.

This.

He will make a hit while wearing his bright scrum cap so everyone seems him and takes notice but otherwise what else does he offer? Good at the breakdown? High tackle count? good line out option? or average at best?

Reminds me of Mickey Skinner talking in an interview once, England were playing Austraila and he wanted to be selected a head of Mike Teague for the next game against New Zealand I think. His plan was not to tackle more, or carry more its was simply to chase Michael Lynagh around the pitch so every time the camera was on the Aussie playmaker it was also on him.

 

[Peat]

Haskell's tackle count has been huge iirc.