Eddie Jones the toast of Twickenham

I would add your whole argument centres around having watched games to formulate an opinion.To me,its not relevant. Results are the only indicator.

Yep believe what you want' Here is a few truths for you - a) NH rugby is inferior to SH rugby - results prove that' b) regardless of that,the NH has all the political/financial control of the sport c) as a consequence,all decisions are made to benefit the NH. For example,the ludicrous eligibility law which has been gleefully exploited by the northern unions to poach SH talent - mainly from SA and NZ.Look no further than WC squads for proof. d) I made the point early on that England looked ok,but then you have to measure that v the quality of the opposition. And I will enjoy the 4N.That is where NZ will lose games this year,as they are rebuilding.SA/Aus will exploit that ( possibly Argentina as well).

I'd often be first in the queue to criticise NH teams when their performance is poor. So anyone else that criticises - if they do so on a valid basis - I may well agree with them. If you choose to throw out a comment about having watched only one match of a tournament, and then proceed to give your view on the entire tournament, don't be surprised to be called on it. You then tried to squirrel out of it, by saying you'd watched clips of other matches. You now say that you were impressed with the England team, and yet say you've only watched one game. Another change of tack from your original lazy statement. Now you say that you only have to look at results and they scream mediocrity. I'm surprised that you even know which team results to look up. Your style of argument is not convincing since you seem to flip flop each time you get caught out on your own statements. I note you say that NZ will clean up on the November internationals like they do every year. That's a fair claim to make, backed up by results. At least you got that bit right. Enjoy the 4N.

Though that is the key difference between that and previous sides. They won the ones that mattered.

Anyone that dares to criticise NH rugby always gets your backup.It is almost as if it;s a personal affront to you. I have already come out saying I am impressed with the England team,and expect them to do quite well in Oz.But the rest of the teams in the 6N are a motley lot.If you can't see that,that is your problem. NZ have another EOYT this year and they will clean up,like they do every year.Why would that be?Because the NH teams are rubbish.The only team that could possibly beat NZ is England,and we aren;t playing them.The celtic teams,,France and Italy are all rubbish.If England can't beat them,then it can forget any pretensions of ever winning another RWC.Eddie Jones understands this,and I think will take the team forward. 6N has the history and all the money.But don't kid yourself that it has the standard or intensity of the 4N.It was no fluke that no NH team made the play-offs of the last RWC. And that was the whole point of my first comment which seemed to get your back up.I don't need to look at every game to know NH rugby is mediocre.I only need to look at the results,and they scream mediocrity.

I have form? Do tell.

Wrong.I have seen the highlights on the sports news.That is all I need to form am opinion.I dont have to watch every game religiously to have an opinion.Just because I am not complimentary of your precious NH rugby,you get yourself worked into a lather. You have form on that front.Just let it go.

Well you said you'd watched one match and watched You Tube highlights of Sco-Fra. Now you're saying you've watched enough snippets to form an opinion. I think what you're really saying is that you've mimicked an opinion based on what other people have said, as opposed to forming your own through actually watching matches.

I have seen enough snippets to form an opinion.And,interestingly enough,having read your own media,many there aren't impressed with the standard either.

What EJ has done for England is getting them to play whats in front of them rather than a rigid ethics "b"x based plan. Being English I can at last see the talent and depth of English rugby being unleashed. However, EJ is no genius. The talent was always there, just never harnessed since Ashton in 2007. There are going to be bumps on the road, notably the upcoming tour to AUS where the ridiculous number of domestic and European games will take injure our best players leaving "the best of the rest" to face the WB. In England club trumps national team. EJ is a top coach, but its the talent on the pitch such as Mario Otoje and Joseph freed to play heads up rugby that make the difference. One other observation: EJ's WB team in 2003 lost to us via a drop goal. CW got a nighthood and the plaudits, but both teams on that pitch were awesome. Whether you like EJ or not, he's not lost his abilities, and I look forward to November when a real yardstick can be drawn against our SH counterparts. In the mean time, Triple Crown winners, Six Nations Champions and a possible Grand Slam is a pretty good start, in comparrison to any coach we've had sice 2003 RWC winners. Oh, and who was the coach managing the side that only lost by 3pts?

Indeed, you know what I'm getting at... yet you persist in saying you personally haven't been impressed about a Rugby Championship in which you've watched only one full game out of twelve?

Well said Timbo, and yes I and others should apoligise as Gustard and Borhwick do not get enough credit for their input to the team improvement. Also agreed that additions to this squad over the next few years will increase its potential. Saw some video of Slade playing in early 2015 and yes, he certainly looks really good. Scary what you wrote in the end, C.Laws as lock and M.Itoje at #6 is nightmarish stuff to any wanna-be lineout king of the SH before thinking of the extra speed and defence of the English pack.

Not that I am being cheeky and stirring the pot, but did anyone else notice that the four semi-finalists in the 7's Tournament in Vancouver ALL came from the SH? Shades of the RWC2015. At least the USA stopped the rot in Vegas. :)

David, can I firstly say how good it is to see you respond to some comments... It's good to have your feedback. I'm not sure where this England team is compared to the 2015 RWC England team, in that this years competition has been pretty poor - Ireland have lost some big names (I feel for the circumstances over O'Connell's retirement) and are probably in a 12-month post RWC limbo, Wales are putting in their level best (I really love what they bring to the 6N), Scotland are on the up, but from a low base, France are going through some massive changes and are simply not clicking at all, and Italy are well... Italy, and getting worse. The quality of the games has been poor, I think it was in the 2nd round, the Ireland vs France game was probably THE most boring game of rugby ever. As for England, aside from Jones, the inclusion of Itoje and firming up of the 9 and centre combo, there's not much difference between this side and them in Sep-2015... so what I'm saying is; are the 2015 England side relatively static, and are the rest around them just a bit poor at the moment? And I think the answer is a yes. So I think far too much is being made of these performances. By no means am I suggesting England fans shouldn't be happy, it could have been worse so they have every right to cheer and get a collective smile back on their faces but they, lead by their hysterical media, just need to cool it a bit, because we've seen this situation time and time again. I'm keen to see what Jones ads with a bit more time and to implement what he wants, but I still don't think they'll know where they are after June, the 2016 Wallabies will be a significantly different side to the 2015 RWC Wallabies. However, as you point out, the Cheika vs. Jones head-to-head will be a good battle within a battle,

Randwick did win the 2nd grade GF 27-3 against Uni

Thugby, Thank you for your kind advice. As you are quite new to Roar you will not be aware that I have been commenting on Roar for many years and have never been one to chip anyone. Until just recently I got chipped by Neil a couple of times who also seems to have chipped a number of others who had an opinion different than his. Look above at his comments to David and on Spiro. Now all this is rather a pity as Neil was and I'm sure still is quite a hero to a number of rugby fans. For many years he was not selected for England when he should have been because some people didn't think he was big enough. Which turned out to be a fallacy as when he was finally selected he turned out to be one of the greats and had a long career. But if he chips people he will get chipped back. What I would like to hear from him are his thoughts on rugby both from his own days and on the current game. That would be very interesting. And his thoughts on, for example, England's defense against the ABs in 2003 when down to 13 players, which was a period which IMO gave England the belief that they could win the RWC in 2003. As his career as a player is now over he no longer needs to compete and he could comment from the position of being one of the greats and not so aggressively take on people with a different view. You will notice Thugby that I happen to stand by my comments by using my real name (like Neil Back) and don't hide behind a non de plume.

Wales have always been fitter. England did the work early on to ensure their win despite the big comeback. Last years side would have lost that...and they did then anyway.

Yes that's largely true re the Scot position but if they'd had won they would have done it from scoring a couple of every opportunist tries where Oz put together theirs in clinical fashion, and had a couple of others missed. I agree they would have won and probably should have but it would have been massively against the run of play if they did. The Wallabies were a far better side on the day, but made stupid mistakes and that gulf really is there if you're talking about Scotland, who when looking at this and last years 6N results had that one pretty freaky near result in that match. They were far from the better side, but oddly, should have won.

2013 was the last time. Gatland was on a sabbatical, so Howley was in charge.

I think that is definitely how teams get around potential issues off 1st phase. It's more difficult in open play though. Many teams have coped well with an inside centre with a perceived defensive weakness, but it is a factor in the set-up of a team. Would it also relate to the 'pooper' debate about the make-up of the WB back row? I know there's a global ongoing debate about inside centre (basher or playmaker). I don't think there's any 'right' answer, but whichever you go for has a knock-on effect to the make-up of the side. Beale at IC; Pocock and Hooper in the backrow; Foley and Phipps at half back looks very fluid - but it's an invitation to send big ball carriers at you all day long. It mostly worked at the RWC with Giteau, but the extent to which it's a risk going forward, I'm not sure.