Tom Fordyce: The hard evidence

---

No

No.

They remind me of Why Don't You - turn off my TV set and do something less boring instead!

---

ADOPTED PLAYER 2010/2011 - BIG BAD DUNC!!!

I'd have to say no too

---

Bonjour Jacques, my adopteee 2010/ 2011
Pic to follow

no





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 18/03/2010 07:48 by NattyCap.

England and improve in the same phrase- NO I DON@T THINK SO and nor does the majority of the watching public and people I have spoken to over the last few days!

No

Let's decide after this forthcoming potential debacle eh?
(Tired and puffed out after a hard domestic season, many first choices not available.........any other early excuses that can be trotted out??)

---

No way and the longer the players spend in the England set-up the worse they seem to play.

National form also seems very different to club - witness JW at Toulon under Umaga v England under MJ.

---

Matt Banahan 2010-11 adoptee
Focusing on the backs after 3 years of successful front row adoption

Non

---

Not even slightly.

What was Wells on about when he says "a lot of the tries we've created have come from good driving pressure close to the fringes"?

A lot? We haven't scored a lot. How about 'one or two of the few tries that we've scored'.

A few nails caught square on the head

---

This is what Stuart Barnes thinks - and I suspect a nation agrees with him:

"A narrow defeat based upon a nervy home team and a deliberately destructive visiting side would be worse news for England than an absolute hammering. Someone has to get the message across that Johnson is the emperor with no clothes and nobody close to the man is going to tell him. He doesn’t hear much but the sound of his own thinking. Shock therapy might be the only treatment to work for England. France, at their best, could do us all a favour."

SB is spot on here I'm afraid.

---

Matt Banahan 2010-11 adoptee
Focusing on the backs after 3 years of successful front row adoption

Johnson was unhappier with performances earlier in the 6N yet didn't change the team. After the Murrayfield Zzzz match he was sure we are making progress so makes 5 (now 6) changes.

Logic avoids him. France by 20-30 hopefully.

No.....

.....dim, ní hea, non, nein, nee, jo, hayir, nao, nie, nei, ninguno, hapana, pa, tidak, nej, không, ei.

Just in case anybody in HQ doesn't understand the word 'no'.

---

Bring on 2010/2011
__________________________________________________________________________
There are 10 types of people in this world - those who understand binary, and those who don't.

Cheers!

Wow that'ds impressive Beer Belly.

How on earth do you know all of those, it could n't be that you have met a lot of ladies from those countries..........................

---

Bring on 2010/2011
__________________________________________________________________________
There are 10 types of people in this world - those who understand binary, and those who don't.

Cheers!

Honestly, how can you take Wells seriously when his primary evidence of progress is essentially "we've capped more props than normal".

and Squeaky's evidence is that there are two quite promising 20 year olds as a result of the systems that he's put in place. Wow.....we've never had promising 20-year olds before. That IS what I call progress.

No,they lost again - apparently they decided to use their hands a bit more (new rugby option if the interview with Lurch is to be taken at face value), and got beaten by a team that knew how to kick for territory - how dim.

---

Wonder who's bright idea it was to replace Tins?
And who coaches the scrums? Rowntree presumably?
Past his sell by, like some of the others.
Ref or no ref, that was a shambles - what do they do to them at Pennyhill? Mearsy, think your name on the full teamsheet is written in biro now!

---

Nick Abendanon - another outstanding homegrown talent.
Very proud to be his adoptive supporter for 2010/11:

A little in attitude and effort certainly but not in skill.

Ashton wasred his chance and cost us a try by not drawing the full back!

Foden was magnificent and how the England management did not see that before is beyond me.

But our scrum fell apart because Payne could not take the pressure from Mas and nor could hartley which resulted all the weight falling on Cole who got pinged. Payne was split from his hooker many times and the ref let Mas get away with not pushing straight. WE HAVE GOT TO FIND A LOOSE HEAD.

It was an improvement in that it confirmed what we all know; we have the players to make a winning team its the coaches that are the problem. The try showed we have the skills to compete with the best its just a shame it was the first game for so many who helped create it.

What summed things up about the nature of the England set-up was Lurch's post match bleating at the Ref - it stinks!
He should apply for a position with the FA.

---

Johnson talks about a "Core" but then drops Wilkinson and makes a dropped player skipper.

Which England player is certain to start our first WC group match? There are question marks against almost everyone.

---

exactly my view blocks, aptley demonstrated with wilco at 10, with 8 mins left and needing to get into the scoring zone what does he do but twice hoof it back to the french to run the clock down in our half. clueless

Quote:

Bod
What summed things up about the nature of the England set-up was Lurch's post match bleating at the Ref - it stinks!
He should apply for a position with the FA.

Doesn't stop him being right though, the ref was a clueless jerk, can't think why.

Quote:

Doesn't stop him being right though, the ref was a clueless jerk, can't think why.

Where was he from.....?

---

Whether he's right or wrong is not the point, the fact that you both seem to support his actions is very disappointing.

---

What actions? he went and spoke to him. No crime in that.

---

Stuart

--------------------------
I'm listening to:

Blimey Bod, who pi$$ed in your Rat last night!! I saw nothing wrong in his actions seeking clarification from the plonker of a ref. You of all people are ready to slam anyone in authority and now you slam Johnson for mildly questioning some of the decisions. Disappointed and surprised by your double standards!

---

Clarification is one thing CC, acting like a petulant oaf in front of the world media is another - it's the captain's function to communicate with the referee during a match and MJ should know this. If he wishes clarification during a game he should channel this enquiry through his captain.

---

Where do I say I support his actions?

Gotcha Blocks!
MJs inspiration no doubt

Of course England's dismal results are all due to the referees!

---

my view ! for what it's worth !
the ref was poor and seemed to notice small stuff and miss major stuff , he " seemed" to award a LOT of pens to france and not many to england , he also seemed to WARN the french he was GOING TO penalise them , whereas he just penalised england ,
did all this make any difference to the result NO imho it di not even with all of the above eng were unable to penetrate french defence in 2nd half despite overwhelming positional and posessional superiority ,

---

COME ON YOU BATH
!!!!!!!
BATH, BATH, WHEREVER WE MAY BE WE ARE THE BOYS FROM THE WEST COUNTRY , AND WE'LL BEAT YOU ALL WHOEVER YOU MAY BE , BEAT YOU ALL FOR THE WEST COUNTRY !

I kind of share Bod's view. It is a slippery slope from publicly questioning a ref after the match, to slagging him off like a football manager. To me, it's just "not rugby". keep it to behind closed doors, even if the ref did have a stinker.

Going to the original question, despite a robust showing on Saturday night, I can't see much has come of our 6N.

We still do not have a credible front row: I am not convinced by Wilson or Cole; Hartley is grossly inconsistent, and Payne has not, is not, and never will be an international loosehead.

Our second row is blighted by the fact we have to carry the captain. Shaw's time must be up, and the selection of Deacon ahead of Kennedy or Lawes is bewildering, compounded by the addition of Palmer at the weekend, who, to his credit played very well indeed.

Easter looks like a plodder; Haskell and Moody cost too many penalties, whilst Worsley is one dimensional, albeit very good at that dimension.

Care just doesn't float my boat. I'd rather see either of the Youngs play, Ben or Mickey.

Stand off remains a glaring problem, but then this is part and parcel with the forwards dominating their opposite numbers.

The centre pairing has looked powder puff until Tinds came back, but Flutey looks tired and out of sorts.

The only plus point is the back three. Ashton will score a lot of tries, as will Foden. They might cost a few in the process, but I think they will score many more than that. Cueto reminds me of Emile Heskey - he doesn't do what he is meant to do in scoring points, but certainly makes them for others.

Overall, I think we missed a huge oppotunity to blook a number of young up and comings, and remain pretty much in the same place as where we started, especially if Borthers is reinstated.

On Jonno talking to the ref, it was the manner of his discussion and the contemptuous shrug as he walked away that I felt very uncomfortable with.

Quote:

Bathovalballer
A little in attitude and effort certainly but not in skill.
Ashton wasred his chance and cost us a try by not drawing the full back!

Foden was magnificent and how the England management did not see that before is beyond me.

But our scrum fell apart because Payne could not take the pressure from Mas and nor could hartley which resulted all the weight falling on Cole who got pinged. Payne was split from his hooker many times and the ref let Mas get away with not pushing straight. WE HAVE GOT TO FIND A LOOSE HEAD.

Agree with all comments, however, re Ashton, yes he had a rush of blood and wasted the best chanceof the day. However, it was his first international when it should have been his 4th or 5th. This is exactly the reason why players need experience and need to be given the experience at the right time.

the emphasis on the reffing from MJ and in the commentary made me feel very uncomfortable. Moore clearly has an issue with the guy. I personally felt he did ok..... i certainly thought that if one team was struggling at scrum time then it was england. his other option was to constantly allow collapsed scrums which isnt very palatable either. as moody said it wasnt the ref that lost us the game.

from a playing perspective i dont think payne and deacon are up to it (why do they take the ball stood still every time) and hartley is running out of chances. apart from that i think we have a decent squad who need to be allowed to play.

agree with all that RCC. I don't think you could name a single player who is a nailed on certainty to start our first World Cup match next year. After Saturday, Tindall is probably the closest - but the chances of him staying consistently fit for the next 18 months are pretty slim.

Johnson could argue that he is developing a pool of 35 players ready for International rugby - but i'd much rather have a situation where just about everyone in the country would pick about 12 of the starting XV, and argue over 3 plus the subs bench.

The World Cup isn't going to be won by the squad - it isn't even that arduous when you look at it - 4 pool matches, of which 2 ought to be winnable by an England 4th XV, and a maximum 7 in total over the course of 6 weeks. It's going to be won by having a settled spine, and a team that is very comfortable with its gameplan.

RCC - Kennedy has been injured for the whole 6Ns

What a load of bollox, Bod. It is the function of the coach to get clarification at half time in order that he can properly organise his charges at the half time talk. The referee should be able to standby his decisions and the coach and the team should then be able to reassess their tactics.

---

Not so CC. apparently it is not the done thing to talk to the ref at half time.

From the Telegraph:

Johnson, meanwhile, is not expected to be subject to a disciplinary investigation into his half-time and full-time comments to match referee Bryce Lawrence.

Johnson, who said he was seeking clarification after England tighthead prop Dan Cole was penalised three times in the first half for collapsing the scrum, could be seen talking to Lawrence and touch judge Alain Rolland as they walked off the pitch at half-time and was engaged in another conversation with the referee just after the final whistle.

"The way Bryce refs, he will be very quick on scrums," Johnson said. "I said 'that's fine if we are wrong' but I thought maybe we had them once or twice and we didn't get the penalty. That's what I said to him at half-time.

"They [France] had a very good scrum and they had us under pressure quite a few times. Our guys battled away and I just thought if we got them under pressure we should get the penalty too."

Normal protocol in Test matches is for coaches not to talk directly to referees at half-time, while in the Guinness Premiership, coaches must write any issues they have on a card, which is then handed to the fourth official, who shows it to the referee.

I read that but wondered on the "normal protocol" bit gives me the impression that there are exceptions to the rule!

Brian Moore:

Quote:

Of course, any point made in defeat is characterised as a whinge, but those who make that accusation should answer this – can they name another elite official whose performance in three successive Test matches, as referee or as an assistant referee, have been a major talking point (the others being the first and second Lions Tests in 2009)?
Differences of opinion on a referee's performance will always be there but they do not end up being a legitimate cause for debate, yet this is so with Lawrence and any referee should not be a major talking point after a single game, let alone three.

IMO in this day and age when people's jobs rely on incompetent refs they have a right to get clarification.

---

Brian Moore - I used to like his interjections during a match but now hard to take him seriously. He made a fool of himself during commentary on more than one occasion on Saturday. At one point still banged on about a decision even though replays proved him wrong.

And then apologised iirc

Have England improved? Yes, they've given a number of borderline players an extended run to try and seal their position. Unfortunately most of those players have failed to do that. So at least we should know who not to select in future. Or have I got that wrong?

OBinExile