Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2015
The Autopsy thread: Which England team members are for the chopping block?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RedruthRFC" data-source="post: 755754" data-attributes="member: 58362"><p>Your logical inference is flawed IMO. England chose not to take overseas based players and had a poor World Cup. There is nothing to conclusively prove that had they chosen to take overseas players, the performance would have been better. I suspect that people will say that the number of turnovers that England gave up against Australia is "proof" that the decision was the wrong one, but I don't entirely agree with this - the responsibility for clearing out the breakdown and avoiding giving up turnovers is more collective, the fault lay with many players for failing to spot the potential for one of their colleagues to be isolated and to get there in time to stop it ending in tears. I deafened half of my local shouting "help him" at the TV two seconds before an inevitable turnover more than once. Would Armitage have created turnovers for England? Debatable IMO, the English pack were coming second best in most, if not all facets of the game which would have made turnovers much harder to get and meant that Armitage wouldn't have been able to get away with playing the loose, roaming role he is accustomed to when being given a free ride by his dominant forward colleagues.</p><p></p><p>It's in journalists' nature to try to appear wise after the event and pick at controversial decisions to generate quick, unimaginative, disinteresting column inches, but picking on individual decisions that may or may not have had an impact on how things panned out glosses over the systematic failures which is what is much more interesting (and constructive) to address IMO.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RedruthRFC, post: 755754, member: 58362"] Your logical inference is flawed IMO. England chose not to take overseas based players and had a poor World Cup. There is nothing to conclusively prove that had they chosen to take overseas players, the performance would have been better. I suspect that people will say that the number of turnovers that England gave up against Australia is "proof" that the decision was the wrong one, but I don't entirely agree with this - the responsibility for clearing out the breakdown and avoiding giving up turnovers is more collective, the fault lay with many players for failing to spot the potential for one of their colleagues to be isolated and to get there in time to stop it ending in tears. I deafened half of my local shouting "help him" at the TV two seconds before an inevitable turnover more than once. Would Armitage have created turnovers for England? Debatable IMO, the English pack were coming second best in most, if not all facets of the game which would have made turnovers much harder to get and meant that Armitage wouldn't have been able to get away with playing the loose, roaming role he is accustomed to when being given a free ride by his dominant forward colleagues. It's in journalists' nature to try to appear wise after the event and pick at controversial decisions to generate quick, unimaginative, disinteresting column inches, but picking on individual decisions that may or may not have had an impact on how things panned out glosses over the systematic failures which is what is much more interesting (and constructive) to address IMO. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2015
The Autopsy thread: Which England team members are for the chopping block?
Top