• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

England XV vs France XV - 21/06/25

Geordie said:
Didn't see the game in the end ..but the reviews don't really read top great.

If correct, then im glad Atkinson had a good game, and Dan needs to go. And yes Hill has probably played his last England game...that's a horror show of stats for an international 6.
Click to expand...
As with other luxury giraffes - it depends what he's being asked to do.
If his task is to hang out on the wing, giving the inside backs confidence to go wide knowing they've got a pacey backrower out there to support them and pull their arses out of the fire if they misjudge slightly, you can't then drop him for not hanging around midfield or close to every ruck.
The question becomes how to balance the back5 to free him up to do that work, and if it's worth the sacrifice.
I can confidently say that Hill (and Croft before him) is perfectly capable of playing like an orthodox BSF - when (consistently) given that role

It's exactly the same criticism fans had of Tom Croft. We've got a player with a different USP, so we task him to do different things, and then judge him on the things he's been asked not to do.
The problem is the 25% success rate, not the pure number - and even then there's always nuance that needs to be looked at.


Delighted for Seb Atkinson - England's MotM
 
SB said Carpenter came off with a tight hamstring and they're not anticipating it being "serious"

Kinda don't believe them considering how much of a reshuffle it required, and them saying similar about players in the past which ended up requiring a month or two off

Hopefully it is the case, though, as I think he was one of a very select few to increase their stock yesterday
Would be a big ask to overtake Steward and Furbank, but if Furbank were to not make it back, and we went back to a 5:3 bench (unlikely) then Beard covering centre/wing and Slade apparently covering 10 from the pitch (or even Spencer covering 10) could leave the door open for Carpenter in the 23 shirt
 
Fair play to the French in that for 3/4 of the game they were on the back foot and lived off English mistakes.
For all the criticism Galthie etc el this is the type of game where they would of historically shipped 40+ points.
I thought Atkinson looked good, Slade was again poor apart from two nice touch finders. Baxter seems to have gone backwards a bit but is still a baby in prop terms. Hill looked tired, so possibly not a fair reflection on him.
 
Bit of a weird stat bur according to RP 3/4 of our turnovers came from the bench with Slade the only starter to get one and none were by the starting back row.

I did think it look like we didn't compete well at the breakdown.
 
Everyday EggChaser said:
Bit of a weird stat bur according to RP 3/4 of our turnovers came from the bench with Slade the only starter to get one and none were by the starting back row.

I did think it look like we didn't compete well at the breakdown.
Click to expand...
The breakdown was an absolute mess all game. Concepts like 'the gate', 'sealing off' and 'off feet' seemed to have been teleported to another dimension
 
TRF_Olyy said:
This has been upgraded to 6 made and 2 missed, which is better but still less than Rodd, Davison and Dombrandt, off the bench, Pepper, who played half an hour less, and half as many as Coles

Be interesting to see if he makes the test side over the summer, just feels like that's very much not a SB 6 performance

Wouldn't be surprised to see Coles at 6 and Ewels start
Click to expand...
The balance of back row, like all parts of the team needs to work.
Willis doing the hard yards, Pepper the rucks, leaving Hill to work out wide is great, but only if the ball is getting wide, where the forward can make good yards in contact.
The game plan needs to be clear and then pick a team to suit.
The issue with SB is that no one likes his game plan and so he picks players by media selection and then tries to fit them to his game plan.
If he want to keep it tight, then pick a big pack, Ford at 10, a big 12, and 2 big wingers to punch holes and to compete aerially.
 
higgik said:
The balance of back row, like all parts of the team needs to work.
Willis doing the hard yards, Pepper the rucks, leaving Hill to work out wide is great, but only if the ball is getting wide, where the forward can make good yards in contact.
The game plan needs to be clear and then pick a team to suit.
The issue with SB is that no one likes his game plan and so he picks players by media selection and then tries to fit them to his game plan.
If he want to keep it tight, then pick a big pack, Ford at 10, a big 12, and 2 big wingers to punch holes and to compete aerially.
Click to expand...
Part of the issue is we don't know the gameplan. However, either players aren't sticking to it or it doesn't make sense. Either Ford had a mare and decided to kick too much or he was told to kick off any slow ball. However, that then doesn't make sense with picking a dynamic 6 like Hill who you want on the ball. I can't think of one game where SB has got his selections spot on. Occasionally the team has been good, but the bench and how's it's been used is overall very poor.
 
It does often feel like england win in spite of borthwick. The game plan rarely fits selection and selection rarely has and concsistent logic. I mean it results in atleast a 50% win percentage on aggregate most of the time because england do have a lot of talent to overcome it, especially when the wheels come of and players have to drop the game plan to chase a game. With the player pool england have, it makes little sense to go tight and kicking rugby, but here we are, years on, seelcting players who dont suit it still trying to force the style.

This is going to be an argentina tour where we dont go young as well, slade is going to be starting every game, so its not as if the player pool is goign to be expanded to fit that style more, its just continued round pegs.
 
As expected, but IMO lucky.
Low severity entry point is 6 weeks, down to 3 for good behaviour and 2 with tackle school.

I'm not convinced that a flying clothesline is low severity.
 
Which Tyler said:
As with other luxury giraffes - it depends what he's being asked to do.
If his task is to hang out on the wing, giving the inside backs confidence to go wide knowing they've got a pacey backrower out there to support them and pull their arses out of the fire if they misjudge slightly, you can't then drop him for not hanging around midfield or close to every ruck.
The question becomes how to balance the back5 to free him up to do that work, and if it's worth the sacrifice.
I can confidently say that Hill (and Croft before him) is perfectly capable of playing like an orthodox BSF - when (consistently) given that role

It's exactly the same criticism fans had of Tom Croft. We've got a player with a different USP, so we task him to do different things, and then judge him on the things he's been asked not to do.
The problem is the 25% success rate, not the pure number - and even then there's always nuance that needs to be looked at.


Delighted for Seb Atkinson - England's MotM
Click to expand...

Tom Croft did a hell of a lot of grunt. Leicester in that time don't tend to do luxury forwards hence why Waldrom left.
Croft was also a genuinely world class line out option.
 

Similar threads

Pieter Steph du Teague
Argentina vs England - 12/07/25
17 18 19
Replies
360
Views
5K
saulan
saulan
Bada-Bing!
All Blacks vs France - 05/07/25
2
Replies
39
Views
828
BPM
BPM
TRF_Olyy
England vs Argentina - 05/07/25
22 23 24
Replies
464
Views
9K
IT157
IT157
Which Tyler
  • Sticky
USA v England - 19/07/25
Replies
8
Views
202
Reiser99
R
BPM
England 24/25 Depth Chart
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
3K
AngloScotsHybrid
A

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Top