• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

The Autopsy thread: Which England team members are for the chopping block?

Isengard said:
Is anyone at all prepared to defend the inclusion of Brad Barrit in the England team? Just wondered. He is a trier and gives his all but an international standard player? I know the other centres have not always performed but is Barrit actually better than any other currently available England 12? I cannot fathom his inclusion, except that SL is a coach who is suffocatingly defensive and values tackling power and solidity above every other skillset. I mean what is the point of having two decent wingers and a strong 13 in Joseph if the ball gets as far as 12 and gets carried, head down into contact about 50cm upfield and probably not over the gain line??
Click to expand...

That selection was probably more down to Farrell given the Saracens connection but 12 has been a problem position for England since the days of Catt & Greenwood.
 
Colombia said:
That selection was probably more down to Farrell given the Saracens connection but 12 has been a problem position for England since the days of Catt & Greenwood.
Click to expand...

I agree but surely there is someone better than Barrit? I mean he is so obviously not up to the standard of international rugby. Yes he's strong and tackles well but in an attacking sense he offers zero. An axis of Farrell and Barrit is strong in defence yes, but in attack? I'll happily admit I'm not up to speed on all the younger players across the country but I absolutely cannot believe that there is no 12 with a bit more about them, big and strong yes but with some kind of ability to set up plays, offload sensibly, is a step too much to ask for? Lancaster had the Lions, did he not see something better there?
 
Isengard said:
I agree but surely there is someone better than Barrit? I mean he is so obviously not up to the standard of international rugby. Yes he's strong and tackles well but in an attacking sense he offers zero. An axis of Farrell and Barrit is strong in defence yes, but in attack? I'll happily admit I'm not up to speed on all the younger players across the country but I absolutely cannot believe that there is no 12 with a bit more about them, big and strong yes but with some kind of ability to set up plays, offload sensibly, is a step too much to ask for? Lancaster had the Lions, did he not see something better there?
Click to expand...

There is Twelvetrees, a playmaker, but he is inconsistent, hit and miss. Many people were also advocating Kyle Eastmond, the Bath Rugby League convert. Not sure who else there is, not up to speed on the domestic game right now myself.
 
Players I would definitely ditch:

Farrell (not because I don't think he has merits but because Ford is so superior as an international 10)

Wood (to allow Robshaw to go to 6, if not then Robshaw has to go to make way for a competitive 7)

Barrit

I think there are others around who have been picked for the wrong reasons, they offered something SL wanted but not their core function: Tom Youngs, a hooker whose lineout is so suspect is not a sensible pick, send him away till he can hit 99% of the time, Mako Vunipola who is a poor scrummager.
 
Isengard said:
I agree but surely there is someone better than Barrit? I mean he is so obviously not up to the standard of international rugby. Yes he's strong and tackles well but in an attacking sense he offers zero. An axis of Farrell and Barrit is strong in defence yes, but in attack? I'll happily admit I'm not up to speed on all the younger players across the country but I absolutely cannot believe that there is no 12 with a bit more about them, big and strong yes but with some kind of ability to set up plays, offload sensibly, is a step too much to ask for? Lancaster had the Lions, did he not see something better there?
Click to expand...

That would be Henry Slade, the most frustrated England squad player.
Admittedly he has been playing 10/13 for Exeter recently, but he really would be a perfect fit in the England 12 conundrum.

The other possible and tried options are:
- Kyle Eastmond (considered too small , but a talented playmaker and attacking threat)
- Billy Twelvetrees (as stated many times previously on this forum, very hit and miss, but should be better)
- Luther Burrell (strong straight attacker, sometimes defensively off)
- Manu Tuilagi (obvious qualities, but needs to prove a distribution game if used at 12)

Young talent to be tried: Devoto, Hill, Stephenson... And more probably

My preference would be to see Slade there, with Tuilagi tried and developed there too, and focus on the likes of Devoto to be the next talent developed.
 
Mako a poor scrummager? Say that 2 years ago and it would have been correct but now he is no worse than Marler whilst offering much more in the loose. Also there are rumours going around about major splits in the England camp before the big games, with apparently Farrell dictating what would happen including the Burgess-Barritt midfield and the inclusion of his son as the starting 10. He has apparently been itching to remove JJ from the 13 shirt and Ford from 10 to fill our centre with all his completely biased choices:
10 - Son
12 - A fellow RL convert that he has made a point to big up
13 - Sarries player

Apparently he influenced Lancaster heavily and Catt just walked out of the room when it was decided. If true then the man is toxic and it was with his encouragement that England changed everything at the last second to a gameplan that Farrell wanted. He also played a role in ensuring Slade never got a chance because of "inexperience" but that Burgess would get a chance at a position he had played 2 times ever...

Also do people think that if 12trees is in a consistant back line with Ford inside and creativity around, he may perform better? Everyone thought May was too much like a rabbit in the headlights but his game improved a lot recently.
 
According to the DM:

Clive Woodward - doesn't want the head coach job, open to performance director role
Eddie Jones - open to an enquiry from the RFU (floated the idea of a double act between himself and Woodward, not sure how serious he sounds)
 
How would that work with the Stormers though?
Get out clause? Buy out?
They won't be keen to see him leave before even starting.
 
Yeah Eddie Jones would be a decent choice if we could nab him. What he has done with Japan is phenomenal and if England could have that degree of technical excellence, we could be onto something.

Also what do people think about the likes of brining in some old vets to help with coaching? Tutors if you will to some of the players. I'd love to see Dawson and Wilko in particular assisting our halfbacks.
 
Of course in a good way!!!

I love Eddie.

Olyy I guess RFU would have the money to buy it out any way let's face it the SA rugby teams are not rolling in it.
 
ragerancher said:
Yeah Eddie Jones would be a decent choice if we could nab him. What he has done with Japan is phenomenal and if England could have that degree of technical excellence, we could be onto something.

Also what do people think about the likes of brining in some old vets to help with coaching? Tutors if you will to some of the players. I'd love to see Dawson and Wilko in particular assisting our halfbacks.
Click to expand...

That was actually a Woodward idea from way back. Not sure about Dawson, but I think there's definitely a kicking role/flyhalf mentoring role for Wilkinson in there if he wanted it.
 
ragerancher said:
Yeah Eddie Jones would be a decent choice if we could nab him. What he has done with Japan is phenomenal and if England could have that degree of technical excellence, we could be onto something.

Also what do people think about the likes of brining in some old vets to help with coaching? Tutors if you will to some of the players. I'd love to see Dawson and Wilko in particular assisting our halfbacks.
Click to expand...

Dawson can stay the fuk away from our team!

Would rather try and poach Gregan like Aus did with Ledesma. ;)

Although we don't need to many coaches.
 
Pretty much all of the realistic candidates are going to need to be bought out of a contract.
 
There have been whispers about Wilko coming in as some sort of kicking/skills coach
 
Isengard said:
The heart of the blame lies with the RFU.

Since 2003 England have won one solitary 6N when everyone played **** and we limped over the line. No Grand Slam in 12 years and almost nothing to shout about in that time. Over the same period both Wales and France have won four 6N (Wales 3 Grand Slams and France 2), Ireland have won three 6N and one Grand Slam. Realistically I think England's current pool of players is as good as any of those nations, perhaps weaker in some areas and stronger in others. The players are there, look at the JWC successes. We produce many, many fine players. I'm sure some will disagree but I think that is not the issue.

So what's the common thread? Poor coaching. All the England coaches since the 2003 WC have been, frankly, ****. Nothing against any of them personally, all are decent, honest, hard-working men with England's best interests at heart. Tellingly none of Robinson, Ashton or MJ have gone on to prove anyone wrong with amazing success elsewhere. SL is probably the best of the bunch. I know he is highly regarded as a coach and I believe that in the right circumstances he would be a great coach at international level. However, he came in having won nothing of consequence but having impressed with how he talks and writes about the game. He has been crippled with indecision over his best selection, clearly scared to lose and only picks exciting attacking players when forced by injury, his backroom team has been utterly shown up. The issues have built up and up. I was absolutely mortified when the lessons of 2011 were not learned. The RFU had built up to that debacle with bad decision after bad decision. Picking MJ was the nadir, his regime was a shambles: dire play and awful in every way. Yet they went and did the same stupid thing again, picking an RFU inside man. It didn't work before and it didn't work this time.

Anyone defending Lancaster, and I know there are many, should consider the impact that a quality, experienced coach and back-ups can make. Take the Irish. Widely believed to be drifting under Kidney, brought in Joe Schmidt - two 6N in two seasons. Australia were in freefall a year ago, McKenzie resigned, 7 losses in 7 games. Everyone thought they were certs to go out in this pool of the WC. Chieka comes in and brings in Ledesma and bingo, wins the RC and is looking pretty good in the WC. Neither man has miraculously inherited some undiscovered new players. Both had the same pool as their predecessors and both turned things around.

If NZ had only won the RC once in 12 years and watched their bitter rivals win it over and over would they continue to select identikit coaches. A wise man once said "the definition of madness is trying the same thing again and expecting different results". The RFU are entirely at fault. Their frankly stupid method of choosing coaches is amateurish and has inflicted huge damage. It has also seen England fans endure over a decade of substandard coaching, tactics, selections and performance. They have huge financial resources and England must be a tempting job. Imagine now, any improvement would be greeted with rapture in English supporting circles. A coach who could deliver a Grand Slam would be chaired through the streets. The players are there, the resources are there, the support is there, it just needs a coach who can make it happen. Lancaster has to go, he was given a remit to prepare for the WC. You could try to argue away the butchered 6N he has presided over ("it's too soon for them", "they will learn", etc) but his task was to prepare a squad that could go deep into the WC. He has been entirely unable to deliver anything close. Nothing can excuse this shambles. I know it was the "group of death" but a man who is still unsure of his centre pairing after three years and brings in, effectively, two uncapped players at the last moment, still using the pre WC warm up games to pick his squad? That was a man who was never in control, who never had a genuine plan or process. The outcome was sadly predictable. The RFU need to take a bit of time, pay Lancaster off and this time, this time actually get it right. Identify the best available coach with genuine experience of top level rugby, at least Guinness PL and preferably across more than one country. Foreign if necessary, and it almost certainly will be. Offer him a great deal (and they can outpay any other union). Get him the best coaches, don't hobble him with inside men. I don't know who that man is but someone of the calibre and pedigree of a Gatland, even Chieka who had coached all over the world and won things everywhere. They should hire recruitment consultants or some sort of expert panel as their own processes are so flawed they cannot begin to deliver results. Lancaster cannot be continued with but if he is for some unfathomable reason then at least get shot of Farrell and Rowntree who have both also failed dismally. I don't hold out much hope, indeed the pessimist in me fears the job being given to Farrell, I genuinely wouldn't put it past them.
Click to expand...

I can't fault much, if any, of what you say here.

I have a couple of comments though about the way England has been trying to play

1. I think what the RFU and to a certain extent SL and his backroom staff have failed to do here is to understand what it takes to play this type of game. You have to commit to it fully; not just in how you play on the field, but in training, and attitude and selection policies too. You also need players that have great ball skills all across the park as well being good at their core jobs. Can any England fans imagine Jamie George or Luke Cowan or Dylan Hartley scoring the kinds of tries or having the ball skills that Dane Coles does? Are there any locks or loose forwards in this England team with the ball handling skills of Whitelock, or Retallick or Keiran Read or Michael Hooper. Playing the way the All Blacks and the Wallabies play is risky, and we come unstuck doing it sometimes, but its no good hedging your bets and trying to play this way in a half-arsed fashion; you either commit to it, or stick to what you know. IMO, Australia out-skilled England on the weekend... they simply do not have the skills to play the game they were trying to play at this level. Perhaps they should have gone to Plan B and played the territory game. They might not have won, but IMO they may have had a better chance.

2. In New Zealand and Australia, we have "buy-in" from the 10 Super Rugby franchises, partly because they are run by our respective unions, but mostly because the running game is the natural way that we want to play the game. IMO, that is a major part of the problem over there, you don't get that level of co-operation because club rugby is considered by many to be more important. You have privately owned clubs who want to be independent of the RFU, and will do their own thing. Effectively, they don't care how the national team does, just so long as they get their share of the TV money and bums on seats every weekend.

3. It may well be that any serious attempt to get England consistently playing the type of rugby we play, AND being successful at it, is doomed to failure because you simply don't have the domestic structure in place or the grounding in that type of rugby from the bottom of the game up. It is going to be very difficult to change the style at the top level when the players don't play that way at other times. The attitude to wanting to play that style begins from the first day that kids pick up an odd-shaped ball, and in progresses up through minis and Ripper Rugby into the college schoolboy game and on upwards Anyone watching Landrover 1stXV Rugby for the past few seasons in New Zealand will be amazed at the sheer skills of these schoolboy players.

That is just my ten cents worth anyway...
 
Jamie George has a decent turn of pace (not that quick but decent) 1min in I think.

[video=youtube_share;6W0NNe5fK3g]http://youtu.be/6W0NNe5fK3g[/video]

Locks
Kitchener, Itojie, Symons (obviously he is new), all have attacking game plan.
 

Similar threads

PacDuran
So then boys(and girls)...Balls on the chopping block... Ireland vs France?
2 3 4
Replies
77
Views
10K
PacDuran
PacDuran
M
Are the best International teams too fast for today's referees?
Replies
12
Views
9K
KeyboardWorrier
KeyboardWorrier
sigesige00
Argentina's kits are the best
Replies
0
Views
2K
sigesige00
sigesige00
J
The RWC CHAMPIONS gloating thread
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
29K
Shaggy
Shaggy
Fard
The best of the Anzacs (Name your team)
2
Replies
21
Views
17K
Caitlyn Jenner
Caitlyn Jenner

Latest posts

Top