England are in trouble. If you were watching the game on Sky Sports then you would’ve agreed with Stuart Barnes’ description of the game: the scoreline flattered England immensely.
They were under pressure before this weekend’s game against the Springboks, but now questions have to be asked whether the right selections and strategies have been put in place before the World Cup.
The South Africans have by far the worst backline out of the big three (South Africa, Australia and New Zealand), but even they make the English backs look average.
There’s just no spark in England’s ranks. It’s so disappointing – the English promise so much but seem to produce very little. When playing England, you get the feel that you are up against 15 forwards. They seem to have no clue how to penetrate the opposition’s defence in general play, relying on well-rehearsed rolling mauls, bulk and power to get over the gain line.
The English fans deserve better. Years of losses against the world’s top teams is just not good enough. Sure, applied pressure and playing the percentages may have worked well for them in the early 2000s, but that was a long time ago.
I happened to be standing next to two 15-year-old English fans during the game, they were as passionate as you can imagine, but it’s shocking to think they were only 4 when their country became the first northern hemisphere side to lift the William Web Ellis trophy.
Before their second half ‘comeback’, sparked by a Dave Wilson score after a questionable lineout call against Bryan Habana, the English were well beaten.
Player for player, they just don’t front up. Owen Farrell is nowhere near the class of other northern hemisphere flyhalves like Jonathan Sexton. Farrell’s substitution in the 64th minute, was long overdue.
The English forwards are gifted with a lot of power and technical prowess but lack the ability to disrupt the breakdown like their Irish counterparts.
Another issue is coaching. They really need something there. Crabbing from one side of the field to the other is not an expansive game plan. Condensing the defence only to let a big, slow forward take the gap defeats the point of the strategy altogether.
I just wonder when England will swallow their pride and employ a rugby ‘brain’ from the southern hemisphere? Until that happens, their fans can look forward to pain.
With the world’s biggest player base, a wealth of coaching infrastructure and world-class training facilities, there is something really off with this team.
It’s time to start pointing fingers, digging deep, and deciding that being the fifth, possibly the sixth-best team in the world is just not good enough.
Zingar
Guest
You must have some weird definition of "consistently", too (yes I'm a SB supporter too)
Colin N
Guest
Wayne Smith may have been considered by the RFU before Lancaster was appointed, along with the likes of Nick Mallett etc, but it was Lancaster who actually sought out Smith himself once the Cumbrian was appointed full-time. Lancaster met with Smith and asked him whether he wanted to be a part of the England coaching staff, but he declined.
Loftus
Guest
BB, funny how you say "we" were not street smart and "we" didn't kick our penalties, when in actual fact it was our "captain" making those mistakes. Stop your tirade against Matfield and start focusing on De Villiers for a change please. The real weak link in the team.
That's going to be a challenge, I garble a lot, and there aren't that many facts out there, even video evidence seems short of, well.. evidence. :lol:
Rugby Tragic
Guest
Haha!.... sure, ...after all these years, the penny finally dropped BB !! ... Get back into your box ... 'no opinions' from you thanks only articles that can be verified with fact! LOL
Firstxv
Guest
possession and territory are not a sign of the stronger eam. The USA Eagles had more than 50% of both and los 74-6. The ABs 'usually' lose that stat every test.
Apparantly my opinion is rubbish ;)
Rugby Tragic
Guest
So Nathan you disagree with his opinion .. Whats the big deal? ... Is he not entitled to an opinion?
Charl
Guest
Decieved? Really? That's a word?
Shane D
Roar Rookie
Agree Brendan, my point is not that England have players missing but rather that I can't see that situation changing next year. The workload that they are expected to handle is going to mean that it will be a miracle if they have no players in the casualty ward for the RWC.
You are just precious, aren't you?
Nathan Sanders
Guest
No. It is not reality that I refuse to acknowledge. It is your opinion that I refuse to agree with. Get over yourself.
Rob Gordon
Roar Rookie
I think England's biggest issue is that the rugby community has a form of group-think that comes from a basics first approach. SLs management typifies this. Commentators, supporters and coaches value players who play high percentage rugby to a very good standard, and seem to put this as the ultimate criteria for selection. You can hear symptoms of it in the way Stuart Barnes and Miles Harrison get incredibly excited when England players perform basic functions in the game to a good standard. (A big hit, a good clear out, a hard run into contact) There is nothing wrong with that per se, it's just that I think in other countries, especially SH, the list of basic functions is much longer. A good example being that the ability to offload in the tackle is a core capability of a loose forward in the modern game. I honestly cant remember or find any examples of Robshaw offloading in an England shirt. There are a few for Quins, but this 'highlights' video speaks volumes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3Qv53_V3yg Constantly taking it into contact without even thinking about an offload when he has options. The praise he gets in the English press, and the MOMs tells you what is valued most highly. We keep hearing England are trying to develop a more expansive style of rugby, but none of the players shows the ability to improvise under pressure. If players use improvisational skills on a regular basis, they recognise the opportunities to use them in the split second they have to make a decision. SL keeps selecting players based on his philosophy of basics, but that's just not going to cut it at international level against the top teams who all do the simple stuff equally well. SL has stated in the past that he wanted to build around 'core' values, and then add the more expansive stuff later.I think the basic stuff and the improvising and creative play have to develop alongside each other, not sequentially. England are now reaping the consequences of that staggered approach. You can't just play one way for 3 years, and then 1 year out from the world cup add in the bits of skill that create opportunities. The SH teams seem to do it the other way, playing expansive attacking rugby up till the WC year, and then reigning things in when it comes to the crunch games, (but still with the ability to use a bit of improvisation when needed) The RFU probably felt they had to follow the SL approach because of the state the team was in when he took over, but again, that's just another example of limited long term vision. Lancaster said after the game “You cannot fault the players for honesty, but we needed to be smarter." Unfortunately all he has asked for from his players up to this point has been honesty, and not intelligence.
Crackle
Guest
Yes, good point. I've heard the same rumours about Smith joining the AB's team, but can't find any substance to it. I always wondered why Fossie was there in the first place as CV wasn't that flash tbh. However the coaching team seem a tight unit and results speak for themselves, so I'm happy to have been proved a 'doubting Thomas'
connor33
Guest
Agreed. Excellent research. Thank you.
etienne marais
Guest
sure, but rankings change slowly over time: aus currently fourth again (after ireland) and could well drop to fifth after this coming weekend i am not attacking the point that you make, simply pointing out that the margins are currently much tighter than the long-term averages
Brendan Hope
Roar Guru
I agree on those wholeheartedly. England would be a much different team with those injured players returning. I must admit though, just looking at South Africa, they're missing Jaque Fourie, Peter-Steph du Toit, Willem Alberts and Francois Louw. There's enough talent there to blow away any injured English player!
Nathan, if you believe SBW is a one trick pony and Conrad SMith is over the hill then there is no point debating these issues with you any further. It is not about putting anyone on a pedestal, it is a reality you refuse to acknowledge.
I sometimes wonder whether this term "as good as" is not overly complicated. I think these days being smart is more applicable to be honest. We lost to Ireland because we weren't streetsmart enough to make the correct decision, or adapt to the match situation, the exact same thing happened to England in their two matches against SA and NZ. I sincerely doubt whether they are not good enough, I just think they must become smarter. Same as us.
Nathan Sanders
Guest
The Wallaby center pairing in particular does not strike any fear into anyone. Kurindrani has been in great form, but mostly been down to individual efforts. Toomua and Lealifano are very pedestrian. Conrad Smith is ancient and now misses tackles where in the past he didn't and SBW is a one trick pony that has been figured out. His "impact" against Scotland was laughable. Habana, le Roux and either Pietersen or Hendricks is a fine back 3. You suffer from wanting something you can't have. If the Boks had the NZ back three, you would want the Bok back three. Can never be happy. I notice you don't mention Dagg? Who has been incredibly poor for a couple of years now and is a huge liability in defense for the All Blacks... with too many examples to name but ones that stick out at the moment include the English wing burning him last week for the try, Habana knocking him off in the lead up to Pollard's try (Pollard also ran through him) So no, stop putting these Anzac sides up on pedestals, they really aren't all that. The game is now even tigher than ever before because of the extended super rugby season, that is why these SH sides cannot thrash the NH (when the NH actually select their proper sides). Things are closer now than ever before and it is finally a fair contest.