England future management?

[Peat]

I don't know if the problem lies with Lancaster. It reminds me of the situation with England in 99 and they stuck with Woodward.

I personally feel Lancaster has had too many voices in his ears and has had to appease the politics of English rugby. The whole Burgess situation smells of it really.

I think you're wrong with the first line, although I can see some similarities. RR has the Woodward thing though for my money. You're right with the second line... but Sir Clive Woodward basically ignored them and went to do his own thing. I'm not sure that's the completely healthy way to do it, but its better than constantly giving in to the RFU, to Farrell, to sponsor's demands, to the media...

This has what has finally settled me to he can't be England coach and tbh it only came to me when writing a blog post and trying to be absolutely certain he will not learn from his mistakes and go forwards.

He's not strong enough. It's a very tough job and he is not mentally up to owning it. Knowledge, outlook, indecision - they could change. The bit of his mind that constantly listens to other people, that doesn't like confrontation, that maybe asks what is a guy with two years of bad head coaching experience doing running the "biggest" team in the world...? Those things change least.

Which is why I think he does genuinely have an interest in a review. His whole record speaks to a man trying to learn from everything. I don't think only a bad coach would be interested in external feedback at this point mind - but only a not-great head coach would find himself in this situation.

 

[j'nuh]

This is mind boggling how he might stay on. It is insane.

England finish the World Cup in the pool stages, 8th in the world, not a single 6 Nations win in four years. On top of him being a bad selection to begin with - what does he generally have to do to lose the job? I'm sure he's a lovely guy - but I think as a coach he doesn't have a clue how to build a successful team.

I thought the French were bad - but at least they have decided that for all their problems - their process of selecting coaches who haven't achieved notable results, wasn't working - and after four years elect to go with a coach who has achieved a huge amount (albeit not necessarily of late) success.

The RFU will never learn from their mistakes - because in their minds they never make any.

It's not necessarily the lack of ***les that bothers me. 2nd place in the Six Nations 4 years in a row? Lancaster will probably pick up a win if he stays in the role. Going out in the group stages of the WC? Unthinkable generally, but not embarrassing when its to Australia and Wales. (And tbf, it's not Lancaster's fault Robshaw had a moment on field and decided not to take the points to draw with Wales. Had he, England would be in the position to go through now.)

No doubt, from a board POV, results will play a massive factor in whether he stays or goes. But IMO, the problem isn't the lack of success, which has been one or two unfortunate turns away from England. It's the on-field performances that are holding back England.

 

[Peat]

It's not necessarily the lack of ***les that bothers me. 2nd place in the Six Nations 4 years in a row? Lancaster will probably pick up a win if he stays in the role. Going out in the group stages of the WC? Unthinkable generally, but not embarrassing when its to Australia and Wales. (And tbf, it's not Lancaster's fault Robshaw had a moment on field and decided not to take the points to draw with Wales. Had he, England would be in the position to go through now.)

No doubt, from a board POV, results will play a massive factor in whether he stays or goes. But IMO, the problem isn't the lack of success, which has been one or two unfortunate turns away from England. It's the on-field performances that are holding back England.

For someone willing to blame the coaches for a lot of things, I'm very surprised you let that slip.

Every single possible scenario in the last five minutes should have been planned for. Everyone in the team should know what the best course for the team was in those circumstances exactly in case someone has a moment, so people can go "No, remember, we know what we need to do and this isn't it."

The coaches don't even need to lead that. They just need to make sure it happens. It clearly didn't.

 

[j'nuh]

For someone willing to blame the coaches for a lot of things, I'm very surprised you let that slip.

Every single possible scenario in the last five minutes should have been planned for. Everyone in the team should know what the best course for the team was in those circumstances exactly in case someone has a moment, so people can go "No, remember, we know what we need to do and this isn't it."

The coaches don't even need to lead that. They just need to make sure it happens. It clearly didn't.

But the coaches always leave a certain amount of discretion up to the players so that players can judge whether the kick is too difficult or not. If that kick was in front of the posts, I'm almost certain the coaches would have had clear instructions to take it. But it was out by the touchline and a kick determining the outcome of the game and possibly England's WC survival. I don't think you can plan for the nerves that Farrell would have felt at the time. You also can't plan for how Farrell is kicking at the time (which happened to be 100%, which makes the decision not to take the points even more baffling), how exhausted he is, whether he's got a strain or not etc.

If it was entirely a coaching decision, then Robshaw could have simply looked over to Catt (who has consulted with Lancaster) to see what he should do.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Farrell said after the game that he told Robshaw he could kick it.

 

[Peat]

But the coaches always leave a certain amount of discretion up to the players so that players can judge whether the kick is too difficult or not. If that kick was in front of the posts, I'm almost certain the coaches would have had clear instructions to take it. But it was out by the touchline and a kick determining the outcome of the game and possibly England's WC survival. I don't think you can plan for the nerves that Farrell would have felt at the time.

If it was entirely a coaching decision, then Robshaw could have simply looked over to Catt (who has consulted with Lancaster) to see what he should do.

Nope.

It should have gone like this:

Lancaster: "Scenario. You are 3 points behind Wales with 2 minutes to go. You are awarded a penalty 40 yards out to the right about 15 from the try line. What do you do?"

And the players work it out then. Work out whether they want the draw or would risk all for the win. Work out whether they're confident the three would go over anyway. Not like Farrell hasn't kicked in matches of similar magnitude, probably from similar positions, he knows what's up. Or the coaches can tell them. Maybe the coaches take part in the discussion. It doesn't matter. It's not about whether this is a coach's decision, a player's decision, Tony Blair's decision, you name it. It's about being prepared and taking the decision ahead of time.

As long as the scenario has been considered and worked out ahead of time, the decision is already made and they just need to execute. If they didn't do this, it's so Lancaster's fault.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Yep even if it wasn't on the exact situation, Robshaw should of been told by Lancaster that England should take the draw over going for the win. IF that was Lancasters feelings.

 

[nealn]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...700/Lancaster-defends-his-England-record.html

Looks like Lancaster gearing up to stay. Not sure how being the second most experienced coach is a defence. You could say that he has been given the second most time and experience but achieved little with it.

"We haven’t played South Africa that often"

Ermmmm... the 45 matches we've played in the SL era can be broken down as follows:

France - 6
New Zealand - 6
South Africa - 5
Wales - 5
Ireland - 5
Italy - 4
Scotland - 4
Australia - 4
Argentina - 3
Fiji - 2
Samoa - 1

So the only teams we've played more are NZ and France... It's hardly like we've only played them once and happened to be on the end of one bad result. Delusional indeed.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Austin Healy in some paper or other saying Steve Diamond should be England coach, with Clive Woodward top dog


Think he's mental (though do think Dimes is a decent coach and getting better - got Russia into the RWC, who then imploded after he left, and turned us from relegation fodder into a solid mid-table side in not that long. Did well in his first stint at Sale, too), but do see where he's coming from - Lancaster is a yes man, simple as. Need someone with a bit more dog about them, not going to take any **** and wants to go out and win, and not go out and not lose.

 

[McTallshort]

Austin Healy in some paper or other saying Steve Diamond should be England coach, with Clive Woodward top dog


Think he's mental (though do think Dimes is a decent coach and getting better - got Russia into the RWC, who then imploded after he left, and turned us from relegation fodder into a solid mid-table side in not that long. Did well in his first stint at Sale, too), but do see where he's coming from - Lancaster is a yes man, simple as. Need someone with a bit more dog about them, not going to take any **** and wants to go out and win, and not go out and not lose.

I wouldn't be to unhappy to see that. Clive is a fixer and great organiser people forget what part he played in team GB and the winter Olympics team.
Diamond coach the team with a few specialists, might even see cipriani in an England shirt again

 

[Mattybuck]

Sir Clive specialises in creating environments which allow people to achieve.

Min doing that he would allow Jones or whoever to focus solely on team development.

I think anybody else but them is selling the team and supporters short!

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Matt O'Connor

 

[McTallshort]

Des o'Connor

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Des Lynam

 

[McTallshort]

Grew from Des picable me. Team of minions

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Everyone is a comedian.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Everybody loves Raymond.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Everybody hates Lund.

 

[McTallshort]

Lund on calling

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Lund an' Seymour: Medal winners