rugbyunion
Latest News:

Logging in or posting queries? Look at the "How to..." button on the panel on the left.

BBC Rugby | Aviva Premiership TV | European Champions Cup | MatchDayLive Score Updates | Ultimate Rugby App

It's a DW, DW, DW world - where do DWs come from? <<<-->

*** BUY MATCH TICKETS | Join Wasps FC Amateurs ***


ENG compared to WALES
Penn Wasp (IP Logged)
04 November, 2018 17:57
Wondering who would have won had England played Wales yesterday.

I think Wales looked a good all round team with particularly good defence, so think they may well have turned England over yesterday - by 7.

Or am I being unfair to England?

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
John Tee (IP Logged)
04 November, 2018 18:41
Any decent team stands a chance against us atm, Imv.

We don't ask enough questions of teams and just try to stay in it and nick it. Only our defence isn't good enough for that.
I don't think we got in the Boks 22 all first half...and we were at home...!!!

The second half was better but that is because we kicked everything and the Boks backs...as good as they may be in open play... Can't defend that well atm.
But at least if stopped their midfield running us ragged in our half.
Had they had WLR and Faf to orchestrate, I think we'd have been beaten easily...
And we were at home...!!!

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
Old Geezer (IP Logged)
04 November, 2018 21:54
We did get into the Boks 22 in the first half. They had a defensive lineout which turned into a penalty thanks to Mr penalty Itoje, who, as I recall gave away another penalty before getting binned. That put us on the back foot from which we were lucky to escape. How Stephen Jones gave him as much as a 5 in the player ratings in the ST this morning is beyond me. But, then again, he is often beyond me!!!

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
Gaz (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 05:52
Gatlands Wales seem to be peaking at about the right time, they are on an upward trajectory, have evolved their style, and have found options and depth in squad selection, and if I recall are above England in the rankings.

South Africa are also on an upward trajectory but probably went to Erasmus a year too late so need to rush their development for the World Cup, but will probably be a threat come WC time.

England rode the crest of a wave for two years without developing or trying new players so when the wheels fell off we were unprepared. We simply hadn't evolved. Everyone was saying England had a disastrous 2018, but our 2017 was similar to the game on Saturday; poor performances and lucky results. It takes a brave coach the experiment with a winning team but others were doing it.

I think Wales would have won, as they deserved to in the 6N.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
StevieWasp (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 07:16
Gaz, is that really true, or is it just the usual cheap snipe at Eddie.

Yes we were winning, and I'll agree that the style of play may not have evolved, but we certainly brought new players into the team / squad.... Both the matchday squad and the wider team, plus those for the future.

The problem is that a lot of fans don't like Youngs, Farrell or brown and they typically weren't the ones replaced by new players, so it's easy to say that we didn't do anything for 2 years

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
Gaz (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 08:31
I firmly believe that we stagnated during 2017, when during that winning run we should have been looking at ways to push on. We rested on our laurels too much and standing still is going backwards as they say. Others have now overtaken us and we are now playing catch up, and at the moment we are at the stage of finding ways to win a single match at all costs so as not to lose all confidence and belief this close to a world cup, rather than continuing on a mapped out path of development.

One clear example of being reactive, rather than proactive, is the 3rd scrum half problem. Many on here, myself included were expressing concern that should Youngs or Care get injured, banned or lose form, where do we go. Youngs got injured last year and Jones recalled Wrigglesworth, tried Robson and at least two others. But that was a year too late in my book. When we were winning, playing the likes of Italy, Samoa, etc, we should have had options on the bench. The tour to Argentina was a wasted opportunity to try players and took 'apprentices'. Just seems that England were reluctant to look beyond a core group while they were winning. Form and injuries are now forcing selection, which less than ideal to bring in new players and combinations. He had the opportunity earlier but rejected it.

Apprentices is a nice idea but they should be selected instead of viable 3rd or 4th choice options, they should be included alongside them.

Also, tactically, we didn't adapt around the breakdown and are playing catch up in this area, and the backline didn't have a full time attack coach until this summer. New coaches now arriving, new thinking, etc could have all been done sooner.

I don't think this is a cheap snipe at personalities, but I could probably go to town on that as well to be honest.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
Old Geezer (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 11:13
I don't blame Eddie for trying out new players but I would have hoped that by now we would have completed that exercise some time ago and have a settled team. It seems Eddie is still not sure who he wants to play although for me the centre pairing in the SA game is the one I prefer and I hope he sticks with it. I am not sure about bringing Shields in so quickly was a good idea. I would have liked to see more of him for Wasps before I did that.

My real issues are his stubborn persistence with Ford when Danny was a better option and his loyalty with Brown who just does not have the speed to play on the wing. I would opt for Goode at FB and I just don't believe Daly is a FB.

I think Ben Young is the best choice for a starting 9 and Danny has come back into form so can't really argue with that but Young has one flaw which he and Eddie should have dealt with and that is his speed to get the ball away from rucks. he always takes a step which gives the defence that valuable extra time to organize.

Eddie's plans have been disrupted by injury, no doubt, and has acted quite quickly to recognise Wilson so credit there.


All in all I believe that Eddie knows better on most things than the rest of us and although he doesn't endear himself to fans we have to trust him.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
StevieWasp (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 13:50
Gaz... i definitely agree with you on the 3rd scrum half debate. However that would have made no difference for this tour because both Youngs and Care are available and Robson (who would probably have been 3rd choice) isn't.
The next option on the list is probably one of the apprentices that Jones has brought through, so getting them involved may have been a good call afterall.


I really think that most people's gripes with his squad selection is at 9, 10 and 15. And that's because as Wasps fans, we want Robson, Cipriani and as yet an unnamed replacement for Brown.

I personally would love to see what England could do with a Robson / Cipriani half back pairing, but that's really not the game plan that Jones wants. Once I've accepted that, the rest of his selections aren't so bad.


In the summer of 2016 against Australia, we were trying out the following:
Genge and Sinckler in the front row (1 cap between them before those games)
Clifford had 6 caps and Harrison had 1 cap in the back row before that tour
In the backs, Daly (3), Slade (2) and Te'o (0) had 5 caps between them
In addition, Itoje only had 4 caps, and Jamie George had 6.

So, in the Summer, in the middle of our winning streak, against Australia, we took inexperienced players in the front row, back row, centres, and Itoje at lock.
If that's not trying to find the next options in a few positions, I don't know what is.
However, as none of those were to replace Youngs, Ford, Farrell or Brown, they're often overlooked.



In the Autumn of that year, we try to find a 2nd option to , BillyV at No.8. Nathan makes his debut as does Charlie Ewels, while the likes of Te'o, Sinckler, George, Daly, Slade get more caps. Alex Goode also features.
At this point, we're also experimenting with a back row including Tom Wood and Teimana Harrison, along with Robshaw, Hughes, Billy



By the 2017 6 Nations, Itoje, Hughes, Daly, Sinckler, George, Te'o were genuine options for the matchday squad.

Cole and Haskell were still around, but the new options brought in were beginning to look like better players and they were slowly being moved out (Haskell was on the bench - albeit just back from injury (toe?) )


As a team, we were starting to look iffy, but we were still winning. With a number of new players bedding into the team at that point, it was a fair assumption that some maybe needed a bit of time. The likes of Daly, Hughes, Itoje, George, Sinckler, Te'o probably still had single digit number of caps, or close to it.
.... and then the Ireland game. March 2017 at the Aviva

Away at the Aviva is always difficult. A team of halves. Half experienced, half getting there. questionable performances leading up to it, and then the defeat.


Argentina tour, Lions year.
New players brought in who may have been genuine contenders. The Curry brothers, Tommy Taylor, Mark Wilson, Harry Williams, Nick SChonert, Don Armand, Nick Isiekwe etc etc.
but ultimately, a lot of inexperience, combined with a few experienced heads who were potentially the ones that should have missed out (Haskell, Robshaw, Care, Ford)
There were some good options taken to Argentina though... not just development players who stood no chance of playing at the World Cup.
There's a number of people around who still want Sam James, Ollie Devoto and Alex Lozowski to feature for England right now


Argentina may have been a waste because there was too much inexperience out there, but it's unfair to say that Jones didn't take some of the right players.




What I think I'm trying to say is that Jones has tried out lots of options in different positions. Some were good selections, other probably less so.
However, I hear the same thing being said about him not giving anyone a shot outside of his favoured 23 players.
That's just not true. What is true is that he hasn't given many people the option to remove Youngs, Ford/Farrell or Brown (until recently), and I feel that's what people are really complaining about. On here especially, there's some that just want Robson and Cipriani and won't be happy with anything else

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
InbetweenWasp (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 14:05
Wales may have evolved their style and squad. But almost entirely by accident, with them forced to pick an almost scratch backline due to injury. They picked on form (largely Scarletís players) and surprise surprise, it paid off.

Itís as much an accident as anything.

That being said. Iíd have Gatland in a heartbeat as a successor to Eddie. Heís shown with Wasps he can play an attacking game and not just Warrenball. Iím sure he could do good stuff with England.

If not Gats, then Deano would be my second choice.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
05 November, 2018 14:11
That's a fair analysis. For all the talk of bringing in new players, it does seem that England are mainly concerned with replacing/getting rid of Youngs/Farrell or Ford/Brown.

I still think that Eddie could have tried a few more people in full back position, even if he took the security measure of having Brown on the bench. He stuck with him for so long that when he did try to change thing (Watson in 6N, Daly now) it comes off as more of a gamble as those players are not in their regular position.



If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score? - Vince Lombardi

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
westwaleswasp (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 14:24
Scarlets play rugby and have an exciting backline reminiscent at times of us last year. It may be forced on Gatland but he responded.
When in Argentina England were depleted but he failed to pick either Robson or Cipriani, and we mucked around with players never likely to be near the team abd generated zero competition. This made sense if he was planning on going to the WC with Brown et al. Only they let him down by beiing pants for a year and eventually it hit the results. Eddie could select flawlessly now and it would make no difference, mistakes have been made that can't be rectified.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
StevieWasp (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 14:44
Quote:
westwaleswasp
Scarlets play rugby and have an exciting backline reminiscent at times of us last year. It may be forced on Gatland but he responded.
When in Argentina England were depleted but he failed to pick either Robson or Cipriani, and we mucked around with players never likely to be near the team abd generated zero competition. This made sense if he was planning on going to the WC with Brown et al. Only they let him down by beiing pants for a year and eventually it hit the results. Eddie could select flawlessly now and it would make no difference, mistakes have been made that can't be rectified.

Have you actually looked back to see who played in those games against Argentina?
The inexperienced ones were Mark Wilson, Nathan Hughes, Harry Williams, Charlie Ewels, Tom Curry, Ellis Genge, Henry Slade, Don Armand.

They are all players who are now involved, or who we would like to be involved.

I will agree that maybe Collier, Isiekwe, Maunder, Francis weren't great selections and haven't really become an option for the England 1st team at the moment, but we are now using the a lot of the inexperienced players that toured Argentina.


So, I still feel that the problem most people have with Eddie's selections (i won't comment on his personality) is that he isn't replacing a select few that some fans don't like

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
John Tee (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 15:04
I see Daly out of form atm...so I'm undecided whether to flog that dead horse at FB in the hope that he will become familiar there... But if he has the form he has atm, I'm not sure that is a good thing. Brown still in the frame atm.

Young gets me screaming and if he doesn't threaten the line with a break, then you may as well have a box kicker and play percentages...
That way your 10 doesn't need to create much and Farrells strengths come into play.

As I said before, this is what Jones will do because the alternative has run out of time now.

Jones wants a pragmatic plodding team because they are the players he picks mostly. Imo.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
StevieWasp (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 16:15
Jamie George, Mako Vunipola, Kyle Sinckler, Maro Itoje, Tom Curry, BillyV
George Ford, Jonny May, Henry Slade, Elliott Daly, Jack Nowell

Not many of those that would come under the category of pragmatic plodders

What you're talking about, again, is Youngs, Farrell, Brown because you don't like the style that they bring to a team.

and for all this "it's too late to do anything about it now" stuff, Jones tried Watson and Goode at fullback before going for Daly.
Watson is obviously long term injured otherwise he may have been playing fullback now.
I don't know what Jones has against Goode, however, a number of posters don't like Brown's lack of pace at 15, but he's probably faster than Goode, so that may have been the problem there.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
John Tee (IP Logged)
05 November, 2018 17:27
I'd play Brown but can see why Jones wants an alternative. It is shame that Daly doesn't seem to be in the kind of form to take advantage though.
I don't blame Jones for those choices. As much as I'd like a more dynamic fb, we don't have one.
The one we deem slow, often beats the first man. He does pass poorly but again, Daly isn't making his case atm.

Now if you want a dynamic team then the place for that dynamism is at 9 and 10.
I think Ford is done...Jones doesn't but he plays Farrell there atm. I don't think it is any surprise that he isn't a creative 10. That is why he plays 12 which is a better place for the qualities he does bring.
Youngs hasn't got a great or quick pass but he had a break in him. If he does break anymore.
Tigers fans will likely suggest they haven't seen it lately so Wigglesworth does what Young is currently doing, better.

Now, if that isn't the definition of a plodding team, then...?

Coles has only just lost his place...
I like Genge, ditto Sinkler but he hadn't cemented his place as yet.

Again, if that is the best hand we've got then we are stuck with it. But I expected more from Jones than spending the long build up to the RWC basically tweaking the same game plan and style we've played for eons.

And where are we now....at best forth or fifth in the world and capable of losing right down to Scotland who rubbished us last time round, iirc.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
Penn Wasp (IP Logged)
06 November, 2018 08:44
I am not sure it as much about the players as the style of play that we have which for me is disappointing.
EJ wanted a consistentcy in the spine if the team and so 9, 10, 12, 15 represented that.

We have a game plan that was limited but not evolved and that is where I see our weakness.

'Even" Sorries, Wallabies and Wales have been examples of play with a core approach but has evolved into having more of an attacking edge.
England to me do not have the game plan or style of play to challenge for the REC and with our considerable resources this cannot be acceptable...

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
westwaleswasp (IP Logged)
06 November, 2018 09:30
Quote:
StevieWasp

Have you actually looked back to see who played in those games against Argentina?
The inexperienced ones were Mark Wilson, Nathan Hughes, Harry Williams, Charlie Ewels, Tom Curry, Ellis Genge, Henry Slade, Don Armand.

They are all players who are now involved, or who we would like to be involved.

I will agree that maybe Collier, Isiekwe, Maunder, Francis weren't great selections and haven't really become an option for the England 1st team at the moment, but we are now using the a lot of the inexperienced players that toured Argentina.


So, I still feel that the problem most people have with Eddie's selections (i won't comment on his personality) is that he isn't replacing a select few that some fans don't like

I specifically talked of Robson, Cipriani because I was talking about the backs, the main area of Eddie's failings. Your list is full of forwards. By and large, with the exception of mixing back and second rows, Eddie's forward selections have not been awful.

Denny S, Mallinder, Maunder (anyone want to swap for Robson?), Cokanasiga, Earle, Francis, Marchant, James. Pretty dodgy list and full of very young players. But no Roko, Robson, Cips, who were the next in line surely? They were form players. Wade too.
Slade was a good pick, sure and players like Yarde were dabatable and could be envisaged as test players. Devoto too was much heralded. But overall the Saxons team to SA looks more like a test team in the backs than that list above.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2018 09:31 by westwaleswasp.

 
Re: ENG compared to WALES
John Tee (IP Logged)
06 November, 2018 10:35
I'd stick with Joe C as he has everything Imo, after seeing a couple of finishes this season that only the very best could pull off. He has the build and speed for the modern winger so I would say he is a definitely a bolter for the rwc.

Unfortunately, him being on the scene might have doomed Wade, tbh.

OT, but watching the NFL of late, I think that is well worth a shot for Wade.
I see a play being made by their backs and I can quite easily see him pulling those off.

Back to England backs, this season, I think Farrell calls the shots to quite a degree and I think Jones follows it.
I'm sure Jones would make the final call if need be but accommodates Farrell a lot and so therfore the backs performance is on him in that he has the position to direct how we approach the game.
I don't think those shots are the best we can do though but that is why we have the 9 and 10 we have.

Jones wants Farrell on the field cone what may and tbf, that is the right call for the majority of games.
I woukd argue, not all, but Jones first name on the team sheet is Farrell, I'm sure.


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?