Planet Rugby Forum

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 8:10 am What happened with Jonathan Joseph. He went from so important he had to be played even if it was on the wing to dropped like a stone. Come to think about it what did nathan Hughes d that was so bad he couldn't be drafted in to play No8 when Billy wasn't fit and Jones played Curry or when Billy and his Saracens teammates hadn't played any rugby for months. We hadnt lost at home to Scotland since the early 80's but Eddie threw that out of the window

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:09 pm I'm a little surprised JJ dropped away as he did, but Slade has improved a lot in defence, and neither of them ever got the attack game going you'd like or that seemed possible for them, so that Slade is now ahead of JJ seems something of a whatever outcome. Hughes just wasn't good enough at test level, he was worth a look, but it wasn't for him.

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:09 pm I'm a little surprised JJ dropped away as he did, but Slade has improved a lot in defence, and neither of them ever got the attack game going you'd like or that seemed possible for them, so that Slade is now ahead of JJ seems something of a whatever outcome. Hughes just wasn't good enough at test level, he was worth a look, but it wasn't for him.

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:09 pm I'm a little surprised JJ dropped away as he did, but Slade has improved a lot in defence, and neither of them ever got the attack game going you'd like or that seemed possible for them, so that Slade is now ahead of JJ seems something of a whatever outcome. Hughes just wasn't good enough at test level, he was worth a look, but it wasn't for him.

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:04 pm

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:09 pm I'm a little surprised JJ dropped away as he did, but Slade has improved a lot in defence, and neither of them ever got the attack game going you'd like or that seemed possible for them, so that Slade is now ahead of JJ seems something of a whatever outcome. Hughes just wasn't good enough at test level, he was worth a look, but it wasn't for him.

I would take a match fit Nathan Hughes over a Billy who hadn't played for months and that is clearly the point I was making. Plus I'd take him over throwing Curry in at No8. If not him then someone else who was match fit. Anyone but Billy

blindcider wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:38 pm

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:09 pm I'm a little surprised JJ dropped away as he did, but Slade has improved a lot in defence, and neither of them ever got the attack game going you'd like or that seemed possible for them, so that Slade is now ahead of JJ seems something of a whatever outcome. Hughes just wasn't good enough at test level, he was worth a look, but it wasn't for him.

Two words - Owen Farrell

message #2527204 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:45 pm

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:09 pm I'm a little surprised JJ dropped away as he did, but Slade has improved a lot in defence, and neither of them ever got the attack game going you'd like or that seemed possible for them, so that Slade is now ahead of JJ seems something of a whatever outcome. Hughes just wasn't good enough at test level, he was worth a look, but it wasn't for him.

I think we won a grand slam with hughes when BV was broken

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:56 pm

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:04 pm

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:09 pm I'm a little surprised JJ dropped away as he did, but Slade has improved a lot in defence, and neither of them ever got the attack game going you'd like or that seemed possible for them, so that Slade is now ahead of JJ seems something of a whatever outcome. Hughes just wasn't good enough at test level, he was worth a look, but it wasn't for him.

I would take a match fit Nathan Hughes over a Billy who hadn't played for months and that is clearly the point I was making. Plus I'd take him over throwing Curry in at No8. If not him then someone else who was match fit. Anyone but Billy

I'd get not wanting to pick Billy went he was unfit, that said there were some specific issues around a reduced EPS squad size and pandemi. I don't get wanting to pick someone that palpably wasn't good enough. Curry at No.8 was markedly better than Hughes and even if he wasn't it's still great experience on a player who does have a future at test level

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 6:03 pm

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:56 pm

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:04 pm

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:09 pm I'm a little surprised JJ dropped away as he did, but Slade has improved a lot in defence, and neither of them ever got the attack game going you'd like or that seemed possible for them, so that Slade is now ahead of JJ seems something of a whatever outcome. Hughes just wasn't good enough at test level, he was worth a look, but it wasn't for him.

I would take a match fit Nathan Hughes over a Billy who hadn't played for months and that is clearly the point I was making. Plus I'd take him over throwing Curry in at No8. If not him then someone else who was match fit. Anyone but Billy

I'd get not wanting to pick Billy went he was unfit, that said there were some specific issues around a reduced EPS squad size and pandemi. I don't get wanting to pick someone that palpably wasn't good enough. Curry at No.8 was markedly better than Hughes and even if he wasn't it's still great experience on a player who does have a future at test level

I think Hughes was good enough but Eddie obviously thought Billy who had not played for months was the best choice in the country alongside others who had not played for months

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 7:38 pm

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 6:03 pm
I think Hughes was good enough but Eddie obviously thought Billy who had not played for months was the best choice in the country alongside others who had not played for months

Okay it's about opinions not facts but Hughes whilst putting in a big effort to get up to speed of test rugby just couldn't translate the more positive aspects of his club game at the top level, likely floundering on there simply being less soft shoulders, and as he tried to lose weight to up his work rate he suffered on the contact front. He's not without skill as a carrier, contesting the breakdown, and he offers a lineout option and still it's all a bit Joel Tomkins, what's the bloody point. I don't think Hughes is without credit for giving it a decent whirl, I was when the clamour started for his inclusion based on his impact for Wasps concerned he was too lazy, and he showed real effort to try and improve his game. Hughes has for me found his level as a really valuable club player who's worth a lot of money to Brizzle

Whether Eddie was simply loyal to Billy come what may, or whether given the more limited EPS which was understandably the case during a pandemic and the Sarries situation he found he was rather more backed into a corner I don't know. And especially trying to carry George and Billy who both looked out of shape, and without Mako and Sincks the pack wasn't at its best. Still, it'd be worth keeping in mind there was a pandemic and they were trying to work with what they had in camp. Yes in an ideal world the EPS would be much more flexible, and there wouldn't have been a pandemic, and actually all the EPS players would have been playing in the top flight, given it wasn't an ideal world I'm less cross about there having been players who were not in the best shape being selected, less cross at Eddie, the RFU and indeed the players for turning up to 6N camp in such poor shape.

piquant wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 8:51 pm Narrow defeats aren't the same as complete cock ups.

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

ChipSpike wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:41 pm

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

When did we not pick the best eligible players? What year did we start picking islanders and non white players? You sound like you are trying to say islanders/non white players are inherently better at rugby than white players. Are you?

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

ChipSpike wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:41 pm

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

When did we not pick the best eligible players? What year did we start picking islanders and non white players? You sound like you are trying to say islanders/non white players are inherently better at rugby than white players. Are you?

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:33 pm

ChipSpike wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:41 pm

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

When did we not pick the best eligible players? What year did we start picking islanders and non white players? You sound like you are trying to say islanders/non white players are inherently better at rugby than white players. Are you?

He is just saying "here fishy fishy".

eldanielfire wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:26 pm

ChipSpike wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:41 pm

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

When did we not pick the best eligible players? What year did we start picking islanders and non white players? You sound like you are trying to say islanders/non white players are inherently better at rugby than white players. Are you?

Genetics lends itself to some aspect of Rugby Islanders will produce a bigger abundance of players in. Much with Jamaicans and sprinting, East Africans and distance running, and Koreans/east Asians and video games and table tennis. Those areas will produce those types of athletes in greater abundance.

That doesn't mean we don't get great sprinters from outside North America, great distance runners in Europe or fat nerds pwning people outside South Korea.

eldanielfire wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:26 pm

ChipSpike wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:41 pm

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

When did we not pick the best eligible players? What year did we start picking islanders and non white players? You sound like you are trying to say islanders/non white players are inherently better at rugby than white players. Are you?

Genetics lends itself to some aspect of Rugby Islanders will produce a bigger abundance of players in. Much with Jamaicans and sprinting, East Africans and distance running, and Koreans/east Asians and video games and table tennis. Those areas will produce those types of athletes in greater abundance.

That doesn't mean we don't get great sprinters from outside North America, great distance runners in Europe or fat nerds pwning people outside South Korea.

Trostan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:39 pm

Mmmmm
This year an Irish team with almost exclusively Irish players beat England in Twickenham.
Probably based on our world dominance in Gaelic football and hurling

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 5:21 pm

Trostan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:39 pm

Mmmmm
This year an Irish team with almost exclusively Irish players beat England in Twickenham.
Probably based on our world dominance in Gaelic football and hurling

The match was in Ireland and there were two players in your starting 15 not born in Ireland and there were 2 players in the England starting 15 not born in England. Do carry on though

blindcider wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:04 pm

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 5:21 pm

Trostan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:39 pm

Mmmmm
This year an Irish team with almost exclusively Irish players beat England in Twickenham.
Probably based on our world dominance in Gaelic football and hurling

The match was in Ireland and there were two players in your starting 15 not born in Ireland and there were 2 players in the England starting 15 not born in England. Do carry on though

Even the other Irish ignore this senile clown and they will talk shit with anyone about anything

blindcider wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:04 pm

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 5:21 pm

Trostan wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:39 pm

Mmmmm
This year an Irish team with almost exclusively Irish players beat England in Twickenham.
Probably based on our world dominance in Gaelic football and hurling

The match was in Ireland and there were two players in your starting 15 not born in Ireland and there were 2 players in the England starting 15 not born in England. Do carry on though

Even the other Irish ignore this senile clown and they will talk shit with anyone about anything

eldanielfire wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 6:20 pm

SaintK wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:55 pm

Dobbin wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 6:54 pm I see Eddie Jones has lost yet another coach - John Mitchell leaving to become Wasps attack coach, which is odd in a number of ways.

Hardly surprising with his hectoring and agressive man management. Sounds like Mitchell hasd just had enough...........of Jones
Proudfoot is back in S Africa and rumour has it won't be coming back. So that would be another one bites the dust

Weird mentality. Jones has seen many, many coaching styles and seen many coaches more successful in the big prize then him. He's got a brilliant and informed mind, but you'd think he would have learned by now that there is a balance in management and treatment of your staff to get the best out of them. And that less can be more, working everyone to the bone constantly makes you lose out in the long term.

SaintK wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:31 am .......and then there were none! Joe Lewis, Head Analyst has resigned this week citing " personal reasons"!!! How long untill the next RWC?
Oh and according to the Telegraph Jones has had a face to face meeting with Cockerill to discuss possible opportunities!!!

Rugby2023 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:20 am

eldanielfire wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 6:20 pm

SaintK wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:55 pm

Dobbin wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 6:54 pm I see Eddie Jones has lost yet another coach - John Mitchell leaving to become Wasps attack coach, which is odd in a number of ways.

Hardly surprising with his hectoring and agressive man management. Sounds like Mitchell hasd just had enough...........of Jones
Proudfoot is back in S Africa and rumour has it won't be coming back. So that would be another one bites the dust

Weird mentality. Jones has seen many, many coaching styles and seen many coaches more successful in the big prize then him. He's got a brilliant and informed mind, but you'd think he would have learned by now that there is a balance in management and treatment of your staff to get the best out of them. And that less can be more, working everyone to the bone constantly makes you lose out in the long term.

Maybe hectoring and keeping the pressure on is the only way he can be successful ?

Note too that as much as they learn from other people, every coach can only work within their own personality parameters and coaching philosophy.

Mitchell could be a loss it has to be said, until this year's Six Nations, England did very well during his period within the coaching team.

Cockerill would be an interesting addition, not convinced he'd last but any for young coach hoping to coach England after the next World Cup, now might be a good time to get in.

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:30 pm

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

DragsterDriver wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:59 am I think coaches learn from Jones (maybe not Gustard) and find their own limits. It’s like a crash course finishing school.

Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:33 pm

ChipSpike wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:41 pm

Tuivasa wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:21 pm England's rugby has really got better since they started picking islanders and other non -white players. They used to be so easy to predict before they started picking more non white players.

I know theres huge discussions going here- but most if is about nothing.
Stop being politically correct. Or are you just all on purpose too embarrassed to face up to facts.

Like in real life every rugby fan from any country says "damn england look strong now that they have islanders and Africans." That is the main difference, not some coach or pointless manager.


But ya this forum won't say It.

Even the first test win was because Englands islanders were the bomb.

Like everyone in real life knows you don't win big games with players like sam whitlock or Sam cane . They are journeymen that will win you meaningless matches at low levels.

When did we not pick the best eligible players? What year did we start picking islanders and non white players? You sound like you are trying to say islanders/non white players are inherently better at rugby than white players. Are you?

He is just saying "here fishy fishy".

fatcat wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 8:24 pm Sounds more like an IRA bomber than a rugby coach.

fatcat wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 8:24 pm Sounds more like an IRA bomber than a rugby coach.