Chat Forum
It is currently Mon May 20, 2019 3:44 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78296 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1730, 1731, 1732, 1733, 1734, 1735, 1736 ... 1958  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 9:18 pm
Posts: 2503
Yep, pulling off Isiekwe was a shit move. It should be highly embarrassing to the senior players that he and Curry were the best 2 performers in the forwards.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21076
Location: Gypsy Jack Nowell
JM2K6 wrote:
Oh, and just as importantly, Isiekwe's discipline was excellent. George was hard done by, but Robshaw and Sinckler coughed up 2 each (only one of Sinckler's was scrum I think?), Mako 3 and a yellow.

I might well watch that first half again but pulling Isiekwe to bring on a fucking flanker at second row was just asking for a beating and it's what we got.


From memory it stemmed the tide? Not sure on the score at the time?

But there’s no blame on Isiekwe, it was all fudged up by the coaches not the players. Gatland and Edwards can pick teams of virtual nobodies and at least get them playing with some shape and structure. We’re like Ossie Ardilies spurs team at the moment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33466
DragsterDriver wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
Oh, and just as importantly, Isiekwe's discipline was excellent. George was hard done by, but Robshaw and Sinckler coughed up 2 each (only one of Sinckler's was scrum I think?), Mako 3 and a yellow.

I might well watch that first half again but pulling Isiekwe to bring on a fucking flanker at second row was just asking for a beating and it's what we got.


From memory it stemmed the tide? Not sure on the score at the time?

But there’s no blame on Isiekwe, it was all fudged up by the coaches not the players. Gatland and Edwards can pick teams of virtual nobodies and at least get them playing with some shape and structure. We’re like Ossie Ardilies spurs team at the moment.


Isiekwe came off the field after 35 minutes. England were winning at that point. SA scored the try to give them the lead soon after.

The biggest impact on the game slowing down a bit was halftime - nothing to do with personnel. Ill discipline and running out of gas was a bigger theme in the second half.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 16648
Isiekwe was dire in clearing rucks, and his poor clearouts lead to two turnovers. My spreadsheet doesn't take points away from OPI for unnecessary or insufficient ruck scores, and it should. If it does, his score drops to 0.42. OK, others will drop a bit too, but not as much, since they've all got a lot more than 18 interactions to work with. The last 5 minutes he played he missed two tackles I believe (one may have generously not been counted as an attempt). He was shagged out, and he simply wasn't capable of shifting players off the ruck.

The suggestion he was one of the two best forwards in the pack is quite simply laughable. I'm fairly happy to agree with Curry being one of the best though.

I don't see why we'd have expected more from Hill to be honest, another youngster, good when supported by a strong team, but if Eddie has taken a look and decided not to risk it, then I'm not doubting him here. Shields actually impressed me more than I thought I would be, he was playing with a bit of desire that quite a few others seemed to be lacking. Our scrum was mostly solid until the boks brought on their subs, and then even with Williams on fresh, we were still going slightly backwards.

EDIT - England were winning when Isiekwe came off, but it's not as though the floodgates weren't open at that point. Shields did a hell of a lot more in the breakdown than I'd have expected from Isiekwe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21076
Location: Gypsy Jack Nowell
JM2K6 wrote:
DragsterDriver wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
Oh, and just as importantly, Isiekwe's discipline was excellent. George was hard done by, but Robshaw and Sinckler coughed up 2 each (only one of Sinckler's was scrum I think?), Mako 3 and a yellow.

I might well watch that first half again but pulling Isiekwe to bring on a fucking flanker at second row was just asking for a beating and it's what we got.


From memory it stemmed the tide? Not sure on the score at the time?

But there’s no blame on Isiekwe, it was all fudged up by the coaches not the players. Gatland and Edwards can pick teams of virtual nobodies and at least get them playing with some shape and structure. We’re like Ossie Ardilies spurs team at the moment.


Isiekwe came off the field after 35 minutes. England were winning at that point. SA scored the try to give them the lead soon after.

The biggest impact on the game slowing down a bit was halftime - nothing to do with personnel. Ill discipline and running out of gas was a bigger theme in the second half.


That’s kind of the point- we were getting swamped


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2298
JM2K6 wrote:
Dunnikin Diver wrote:
Raggs wrote:
DragsterDriver wrote:
To clarify- who defends the 10 channel while ford takes a breather?


Farrell. It's not about a breather, it's about having a bit more bulk to prevent easy yards. I'm not a fan of Farrell's blitz in regular open play, where he just swings an arm, but here I'd hope he'd slow someone down a bit more than Ford. Even better would be replacing Farrell with a proper 12, but we don't seem to have one of those lying around.

Isiekwe was seemingly a bit off the pace with his workrate, and his clearouts at ruck time were awful, twice out of 4 proper rucks, he failed to clear out, leading to turnovers. He went up twice in the lineout in his time on the pitch, (not sure how many opportunities to be fair), Shields went up 4 times, 3 of those were competing for opposition ball. Our scrum also didn't seem to be too awful until the 2nd half, when Sinckler was knackered and Williams wasn't coping so well. Perhaps more importantly, I think Shields did a better job than Hill would have managed, and Isiekwe wasn't upto scratch.

Hill?


Johnny. Not sure how Raggs reached that conclusion, though.

Ah of course - probably best I know the current squad than be stuck in another, albeit happier, era.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33466
Raggs wrote:
Isiekwe was dire in clearing rucks, and his poor clearouts lead to two turnovers. My spreadsheet doesn't take points away from OPI for unnecessary or insufficient ruck scores, and it should. If it does, his score drops to 0.42. OK, others will drop a bit too, but not as much, since they've all got a lot more than 18 interactions to work with. The last 5 minutes he played he missed two tackles I believe (one may have generously not been counted as an attempt). He was shagged out, and he simply wasn't capable of shifting players off the ruck.

The suggestion he was one of the two best forwards in the pack is quite simply laughable. I'm fairly happy to agree with Curry being one of the best though.

I don't see why we'd have expected more from Hill to be honest, another youngster, good when supported by a strong team, but if Eddie has taken a look and decided not to risk it, then I'm not doubting him here. Shields actually impressed me more than I thought I would be, he was playing with a bit of desire that quite a few others seemed to be lacking. Our scrum was mostly solid until the boks brought on their subs, and then even with Williams on fresh, we were still going slightly backwards.

EDIT - England were winning when Isiekwe came off, but it's not as though the floodgates weren't open at that point. Shields did a hell of a lot more in the breakdown than I'd have expected from Isiekwe.


OPI? Isn't that the name of that alternative cricket rankings thing that crazy Kiwi poster came up with?

Are you comparing scores at the time Isiekwe went off?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 16648
I'm comparing per minute rates. Isiekwe is low, especially if he did in fact miss an extra tackle and i discount the poor rucks. 8 tackles is nice, but it really isn't everything.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33466
OK, I was more interested in seeing how people compared at the time he went off.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 16648
JM2K6 wrote:
OK, I was more interested in seeing how people compared at the time he went off.


Can't help with tackles but rucks and carries are there and he came off at 35.30 ish. Should be easy enough to go through the raw data and count. Then give people who played 70/80 about half their tackles.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2298
Raggs wrote:
I'm comparing per minute rates. Isiekwe is low, especially if he did in fact miss an extra tackle and i discount the poor rucks. 8 tackles is nice, but it really isn't everything.

Given I didnt even know the squad, I am certainly not going to argue with the stats, but plenty of folk on here must have had the joy of an SH hotshot rocking up midseason and seeing their mate pulled in their favour. I am sure there must have been times this worked, but I am willing to bet most times it didn't. There does seem to be a plausible story that EJ's management is not quite on track at the moment and, associated with lack of lock-cover, this does seem to have been a balls up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11657
Jake wrote:
45jumper wrote:
The decision to take Isiekwe off looked like lunacy to me. I personally thought he was playing well, and the Boks were beginning to win the collisions and get front foot ball – so what on earth possessed Eddie to take one of our biggest players out of the engine room and replace him with a flanker making him debut, I don’t know


You need to watch the game again. Isiekwe abdicated any form of ruck clearing. He made his first completed tackle around the 30 min mark and fell off so many it wasn't funny. He was shockingly bad and the freedom and speed of ruck SA enjoyed was embarassing- people call Launchbury and Cole plodders but by christ they clear out the rucks.


Or even 41 seconds. Stop making shit up Jake

https://youtu.be/RmUoHOKdO6s?t=70


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3340
Raggs wrote:
Isiekwe was dire in clearing rucks, and his poor clearouts lead to two turnovers. My spreadsheet doesn't take points away from OPI for unnecessary or insufficient ruck scores, and it should. If it does, his score drops to 0.42. OK, others will drop a bit too, but not as much, since they've all got a lot more than 18 interactions to work with. The last 5 minutes he played he missed two tackles I believe (one may have generously not been counted as an attempt). He was shagged out, and he simply wasn't capable of shifting players off the ruck.

The suggestion he was one of the two best forwards in the pack is quite simply laughable. I'm fairly happy to agree with Curry being one of the best though.

I don't see why we'd have expected more from Hill to be honest, another youngster, good when supported by a strong team, but if Eddie has taken a look and decided not to risk it, then I'm not doubting him here. Shields actually impressed me more than I thought I would be, he was playing with a bit of desire that quite a few others seemed to be lacking. Our scrum was mostly solid until the boks brought on their subs, and then even with Williams on fresh, we were still going slightly backwards.

EDIT - England were winning when Isiekwe came off, but it's not as though the floodgates weren't open at that point. Shields did a hell of a lot more in the breakdown than I'd have expected from Isiekwe.


That's pretty much what I felt when I watched the game - and I hadn't even put on the beer googles by that point. I know the ESPN stats etc. seem to show NI having an ok game, but it really wasn't how it felt to me. Fine, he tackled a player when someone ran at him. But if his role actually involved having to move to a ruck, I don't remember seeing much action.

Conversely, Shields was absolutely playing as a third flanker (which admittedly caused issues in some other plays) so was getting far more involved in the rucks - both offensively and defensively. If that reduces his tackle count then so be it - my issue was other players didn't seem to be picking up the slack.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33466
Isiekwe had one really poor attempt at clearing a ruck that should, regardless, have been a penalty to England. Having just skipped through the first half again, he makes some good tackles, carries into multiple players and over the gain line for the Brown try, tries to put pressure on FdK a few times (the Daly screwup wouldn't have happened if Slade had been awake and able to put more than a half hearted tackle on his opponent after Isiekwe cut off an option), missed one badly on JLDP, took a lineout (maybe 2, not really what I was paying attention to), scragged a few players when it looked like he might be beaten, and was generally in the first 2-3 people chasing any given opportunity.

On 33 minutes when beaten by JLDP he does look shattered and sort of flops on a ruck, but he's then quick on the chase for a kick off, before being taken off the pitch.

There's nothing there that screams "awful", let alone any worse than some of his colleagues like George, Itoje, Billy, etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10627
It's the tactic and has been for a while.

We surrender the breakdown, it's not just nous. It's every game as well. We choose not to compete and try to fan out, smash and force turnovers.

The issue is, we're a small side comparatively and sides are very good at retaining phase on phase now, which means that tactic is BS and we need to stop doing it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33466
Except I just watched us try and compete for the ball at several rucks so, y'know


What we don't do is target players and flood the breakdown with numbers. We target the breakdown when we think it's worthwhile but we rarely commit 3, very rarely more than 3.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 10:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9533
Wendigo7 wrote:
It's the tactic and has been for a while.

We surrender the breakdown, it's not just nous. It's every game as well. We choose not to compete and try to fan out, smash and force turnovers.

The issue is, we're a small side comparatively and sides are very good at retaining phase on phase now, which means that tactic is BS and we need to stop doing it.


That's certainly been our MO for 18 months or so - but I thought that we competed a bit more in the 1st qtr of the game when Curry appeared to be attempting to get turnovers - after that we seemed to regress, or they started clearing us out more effectively and we just stood off.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 181
So if we surrender the breakdown - which I think is partly a tactic and partly a function of having a back-row running through treacle - and we surrender the line-out and we don't put in big hits, what exactly is the plan defensively?

We're so passive that teams need to do nothing more than fail to drop the ball to eventually score a try, so what are we gaining from this? As we are leaking like a sieve right now whilst not doing anything to make life difficult for the opposition, what is there to lose from a more aggressive defensive approach?

Somehow Gustard and Jones have created a kittenpack that must be a joy to play against. Throw in on your own ten metre line? Never mind, England won't compete. Recycled ineffectually and got an isolated one out runner? Not a problem, England won't target him for a two man choke. Late getting your pack to a ruck? Still time for a cup of tea and a fag. At no point do we make it mildly uncomfortable, much less dangerous to keep the ball.

Even though I hate this approach anyway -and especially as we're constantly exposed for pace on the blind-side- I could almost see it we had superb discipline and we were forcing teams to go through multiple phases whilst resolutely refusing to offer them a cheap three points or a chance to kick to one of those line-outs we don't jump at. Instead, whilst we won't flood a ruck, we will lie on the wrong side of one even if it is about to generate slow ball. We're not prepared to really target a weak runner, but we will hit him late just in front of the touch judge. We absolutely refuse to send two or three forwards to blast away ruck guards, but our one doomed contestant will flop all over the ruck we're about to lose.

It is impossible to watch this team right now and think that it is being coached to maximise its chances of winning test matches.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21076
Location: Gypsy Jack Nowell
Did I type that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:49 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2381
Is Englands poor form hitting them financially?
Report in Telegraph that RFU is axing a lot of jobs.

England World cup budget for next year is 30 mill :shock: :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4911
JM2K6 wrote:
Jake wrote:
45jumper wrote:
The decision to take Isiekwe off looked like lunacy to me. I personally thought he was playing well, and the Boks were beginning to win the collisions and get front foot ball – so what on earth possessed Eddie to take one of our biggest players out of the engine room and replace him with a flanker making him debut, I don’t know


You need to watch the game again. Isiekwe abdicated any form of ruck clearing. He made his first completed tackle around the 30 min mark and fell off so many it wasn't funny. He was shockingly bad and the freedom and speed of ruck SA enjoyed was embarassing- people call Launchbury and Cole plodders but by christ they clear out the rucks.


Isiekwe made as many tackles in his brief period on the pitch than most of the England pack managed for their entire time. He missed one.

Sinckler's developed a habit of missing a ton of tackles, and did so again. Robshaw barely did anything of note. Shields decided rucks were his thing but carries and tackles weren't, Curry tried his heart out, Mako took the day off.


JM, he also abdicated loads of tackles or didn't get there, and made very poor decisions regarding committing to clear, defend or cover.

Shields was sent on specifically to hit the rucks- as nobody else was. (as an aside, oh how we missed Dan Cole around the contact area but nobody will agree with me on that)

The paranoia in the England camp is palpable. Last week, EJ announced the team to the players 20 mins before the press announcement- how on earth players can work like that is a mystery.

Also, Ford was mercurial at times and gash at others. They need to focus on the good bits and work a defensive strategy out, maybe BV covering ten in defence as before- although he was blowing out of his arse like a tractor all game.

Robshaw- Faf dK targeted him, simple. The blindside defence was woeful


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21076
Location: Gypsy Jack Nowell
Jake wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
Jake wrote:
45jumper wrote:
The decision to take Isiekwe off looked like lunacy to me. I personally thought he was playing well, and the Boks were beginning to win the collisions and get front foot ball – so what on earth possessed Eddie to take one of our biggest players out of the engine room and replace him with a flanker making him debut, I don’t know


You need to watch the game again. Isiekwe abdicated any form of ruck clearing. He made his first completed tackle around the 30 min mark and fell off so many it wasn't funny. He was shockingly bad and the freedom and speed of ruck SA enjoyed was embarassing- people call Launchbury and Cole plodders but by christ they clear out the rucks.


Isiekwe made as many tackles in his brief period on the pitch than most of the England pack managed for their entire time. He missed one.

Sinckler's developed a habit of missing a ton of tackles, and did so again. Robshaw barely did anything of note. Shields decided rucks were his thing but carries and tackles weren't, Curry tried his heart out, Mako took the day off.


JM, he also abdicated loads of tackles or didn't get there, and made very poor decisions regarding committing to clear, defend or cover.

Shields was sent on specifically to hit the rucks- as nobody else was. (as an aside, oh how we missed Dan Cole around the contact area but nobody will agree with me on that)

The paranoia in the England camp is palpable. Last week, EJ announced the team to the players 20 mins before the press announcement- how on earth players can work like that is a mystery.

Also, Ford was mercurial at times and gash at others. They need to focus on the good bits and work a defensive strategy out, maybe BV covering ten in defence as before- although he was blowing out of his arse like a tractor all game.

Robshaw- Faf dK targeted him, simple. The blindside defence was woeful


Billy isn't fit. You can't play a test with 14 1/2 players- especially with Robshaw also walking in the back row.

How does Gustard fit into this Jake? Our structure and defence is embarrassing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 16648
Jake wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
Jake wrote:
45jumper wrote:
The decision to take Isiekwe off looked like lunacy to me. I personally thought he was playing well, and the Boks were beginning to win the collisions and get front foot ball – so what on earth possessed Eddie to take one of our biggest players out of the engine room and replace him with a flanker making him debut, I don’t know


You need to watch the game again. Isiekwe abdicated any form of ruck clearing. He made his first completed tackle around the 30 min mark and fell off so many it wasn't funny. He was shockingly bad and the freedom and speed of ruck SA enjoyed was embarassing- people call Launchbury and Cole plodders but by christ they clear out the rucks.


Isiekwe made as many tackles in his brief period on the pitch than most of the England pack managed for their entire time. He missed one.

Sinckler's developed a habit of missing a ton of tackles, and did so again. Robshaw barely did anything of note. Shields decided rucks were his thing but carries and tackles weren't, Curry tried his heart out, Mako took the day off.


JM, he also abdicated loads of tackles or didn't get there, and made very poor decisions regarding committing to clear, defend or cover.

Shields was sent on specifically to hit the rucks- as nobody else was. (as an aside, oh how we missed Dan Cole around the contact area but nobody will agree with me on that)

The paranoia in the England camp is palpable. Last week, EJ announced the team to the players 20 mins before the press announcement- how on earth players can work like that is a mystery.

Also, Ford was mercurial at times and gash at others. They need to focus on the good bits and work a defensive strategy out, maybe BV covering ten in defence as before- although he was blowing out of his arse like a tractor all game.

Robshaw- Faf dK targeted him, simple. The blindside defence was woeful


Other people were hitting rucks, but we can't afford a passenger like Isiekwe there.

Cole really doesn't do that much in the contact area. He's rarely first man to the ruck, does little more than guard them for the most part, without smacking people. Maybe he'd do more if not beasted in training (he certainly looked more lively for Leicester after the 6N), but Sinckler looks more physical.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4911
Gustard; I am not sure but I'm getting the impression he's demob happy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1015
Jake wrote:
45jumper wrote:
The decision to take Isiekwe off looked like lunacy to me. I personally thought he was playing well, and the Boks were beginning to win the collisions and get front foot ball – so what on earth possessed Eddie to take one of our biggest players out of the engine room and replace him with a flanker making him debut, I don’t know


You need to watch the game again. Isiekwe abdicated any form of ruck clearing. He made his first completed tackle around the 30 min mark and fell off so many it wasn't funny. He was shockingly bad and the freedom and speed of ruck SA enjoyed was embarassing- people call Launchbury and Cole plodders but by christ they clear out the rucks.


Having watched the first 30 mins again, you're spot on, completely missed it first time around :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21076
Location: Gypsy Jack Nowell
Jake wrote:
Gustard; I am not sure but I'm getting the impression he's demob happy.


I think with all the Wolfpack bollocks the players are supposed to buy into with the wolf hat and the chocolate bars It’ll be difficult to make it work on tour. We leak tries like a sieve.

The concern is that Edwards and gatland can get a wales second string with inferior players at least playing with shape and structure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 16648
Jake, do you know if the training sessions are still blasting the players, or has Jones gone a bit easier?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19454
Jake wrote:
Gustard; I am not sure but I'm getting the impression he's demob happy.


I'M WONDERING HOW GOOd a coach he really is. I don't doubt he has good rugby insights and knowledge. But at the end of the day the RFU have once again not chosen a coach with recent club or tier one success. They never have in the professional era. Eddie Jones got the job based on 1 single result with Japan. Let us not forget he was having ups and downs with their development as well. He last managed a tier one nation successfully over a decade ago and hasn't had top class success as head coach since.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4911
Raggs wrote:
Jake, do you know if the training sessions are still blasting the players, or has Jones gone a bit easier?


The only inside track I have is from a former England god of war who will remain nameless who visited PHP during the build up and suggested the atmosphere was like a morgue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 16648
Jake wrote:
Raggs wrote:
Jake, do you know if the training sessions are still blasting the players, or has Jones gone a bit easier?


The only inside track I have is from a former England god of war who will remain nameless who visited PHP during the build up and suggested the atmosphere was like a morgue.


Wanted to know more about the training in SA, and whether or not fatigue could be an excuse for drop off in performance (on top of altitude).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4911
@raggs

I so disagree re Cole. He is very disruptive at rucktime, incredibly strong and slows slows slows things down to his own sloth-like pace.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1147
Location: Somewhere in poachland
Be interesting to see if Eddie has 'lost the dressing room' especially without Hartley around, seems like the Sarries core don't seem to be performing as well for England either.
Regardless of building for the World Cup, we have to stop this losing streak and I think selection will tell a lot. A sensible couple of changes and we have a chance to win and stay in the series.

Mako, George, Williams (prefer Sinks as impact player)
Itoje, Launch
Shields, Curry, Billy
Youngs, Ford
Farrell, Slade
May, Daley(wing), Brown

Genge, LCD, Sinks - all to come on together just after half time
Isiekwe - must have 2nd row cover
Simmonds
Robson
Cips
Lozowski

The selected squad gives real problems as players like Earl and Earle are never going to play and not having a 3rd hooker again rears its head.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 16648
Jake wrote:
@raggs

I so disagree re Cole. He is very disruptive at rucktime, incredibly strong and slows slows slows things down to his own sloth-like pace.


He used to be disruptive at ruck time, the win against the ABs in 2012, and all around that time, he was fantastic in that role, but recently? Against France he was involved in 3 defensive ruck, and didn't do anything significant in any of them. Against Scotland he was more active, but only had any real effect on 3 of them (no turnovers). He did nothing coming off the bench against Scotland. Not sure if I did them against Wales or Italy, but I can see against Aus in the autumn he did nothing significant either.

Sorry, but he used to be very disruptive at ruck time for England, but in the last season at least, he really hasn't been.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3728
Madness wrote:
Be interesting to see if Eddie has 'lost the dressing room' especially without Hartley around, seems like the Sarries core don't seem to be performing as well for England either.
Regardless of building for the World Cup, we have to stop this losing streak and I think selection will tell a lot. A sensible couple of changes and we have a chance to win and stay in the series.

Mako, George, Williams (prefer Sinks as impact player)
Itoje, Launch
Shields, Curry, Billy
Youngs, Ford
Farrell, Slade
May, Daley(wing), Brown

Genge, LCD, Sinks - all to come on together just after half time
Isiekwe - must have 2nd row cover
Simmonds
Robson
Cips
Lozowski

The selected squad gives real problems as players like Earl and Earle are never going to play and not having a 3rd hooker again rears its head.


Just hope Launch is fit. And Singleton has been shipped out as a 3rd hooker

Don't think Cips and Loz makes sense on the bench. We lose a winger and Brown would have to go to wing.
Would be tempted to play Daly at 13 and 2 regular wingers as I was unimpressed with Slade


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1984
England have gone through countless options at 6 in the last 18 months, Wilson has still been the best in the brief opportunities he's been granted imo. Now Shields seems likely to get a go ahead of him...

The selection is so muddled, but it baffling that the analyst/stats guys etc. cant piece a team that compliments each other with players in their specialist positions. We finished the last test with 2 x no.8s 2x no.6s and a second row (who played no.6 throughout the 6nations) as our back-5 how is that in any way considered or progressive selection...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 16648
polyallstar wrote:
England have gone through countless options at 6 in the last 18 months, Wilson has still been the best in the brief opportunities he's been granted imo. Now Shields seems likely to get a go ahead of him...

The selection is so muddled, but it baffling that the analyst/stats guys etc. cant piece a team that compliments each other with players in their specialist positions. We finished the last test with 2 x no.8s 2x no.6s and a second row (who played no.6 throughout the 6nations) as our back-5 how is that in any way considered or progressive selection...


Itoje didn't play 6 though the 6n.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14719
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
Launchbury likely to miss the game this weekend too, according to Hatley

Jonny Hill to debut? Recall for Isiekwe? Or an out of position start for Shields?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9533
openclashXX wrote:
Launchbury likely to miss the game this weekend too, according to Hatley

Jonny Hill to debut? Recall for Isiekwe? Or an out of position start for Shields?


It would be most unlike EJ to play all the players in their natural positions - maybe he'll surprise us.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1243
Suspect Launchbury was always going to miss all three games but they're drip feeding it so as not to add fuel to the training ground fire


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33466
Jake wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
Jake wrote:
45jumper wrote:
The decision to take Isiekwe off looked like lunacy to me. I personally thought he was playing well, and the Boks were beginning to win the collisions and get front foot ball – so what on earth possessed Eddie to take one of our biggest players out of the engine room and replace him with a flanker making him debut, I don’t know


You need to watch the game again. Isiekwe abdicated any form of ruck clearing. He made his first completed tackle around the 30 min mark and fell off so many it wasn't funny. He was shockingly bad and the freedom and speed of ruck SA enjoyed was embarassing- people call Launchbury and Cole plodders but by christ they clear out the rucks.


Isiekwe made as many tackles in his brief period on the pitch than most of the England pack managed for their entire time. He missed one.

Sinckler's developed a habit of missing a ton of tackles, and did so again. Robshaw barely did anything of note. Shields decided rucks were his thing but carries and tackles weren't, Curry tried his heart out, Mako took the day off.


JM, he also abdicated loads of tackles or didn't get there, and made very poor decisions regarding committing to clear, defend or cover.


He did not abdicate loads of tackles. That's crazy talk and completely at odds with what I rewatched last night.

Quote:
Robshaw- Faf dK targeted him, simple. The blindside defence was woeful


That's possibly true, but our openside defence saw us get outflanked off largely static ball, what, 3 times for tries?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78296 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1730, 1731, 1732, 1733, 1734, 1735, 1736 ... 1958  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Beaver_Shark, Bing [Bot], BokJock, Boobs not Moobs, CarrotGawks, danny_fitz, DragonKhan, earl the beaver, Edinburgh01, frillage, Glaston, Google Adsense [Bot], Hawaiian_shirts_rule, Mullet 2, penguin, Podge, Rinkals, ruckinhell, saffer13, sewa, shereblue, Toulon's Not Toulouse, unseenwork and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group