View Full Version : From Englands point of view......
auchtermuchty
08-10-2007, 12:47
Does this RWC now constitute a success regardless of what happens against the cheese eaters?
I think if you had told Mr Andrew that they would make the semi's, after the build up that the team had, he would have been satisfied.
but...
If you told him they would make the semi's against the French, I dont think that the same answer applies. I think the RFU now wants the whole thing.
Personally I believe that, from an English supporters point of view, England are now in a no lose situation. If England lose saturday its an 'Oh well, they did well to get there' moment (provided they lose with a good performance!!). If they win, well Nirvana is just around the corner!
Opinions please!
As much as I am not a fan of the current England set up from top to bottom, I think that the RFU WANT the title. The shameful thing is, its now within their grasp as two of the 'Big Guns' have been silenced. The French match is winnable as long as Englands pack performs and we don't put Farrell into the midfirld again (weak defence)
Ex-Stacker
08-10-2007, 13:16
Prior to the tournament, I thought we'd probably struggle to make the QF, but we would get there.
After the USA game, I thought much the same.
After the SA game, i thought we may as well come home now!!!
But...the team has picked it's game up and showed some good skills and more importantly, mental strength on Saturday.
Yes, with the current set up & squad, the semi's are a success. Hopefully,lessons will be learnt after this tournament and we'll start building straight away for 2011.
Roll on Saturday!! A stunning victory for Sale at Castle Grim, and a right good thumping for the pesky Frogs!!
Roll on Saturday!! A stunning victory for Sale at Castle Grim
Oh you thinks so do you?? Now thats funny.
rugby then work
08-10-2007, 13:25
I agree that prior to the World Cup Ashton and Andrew would have happily accepted a place in the semi finals.
I'm sure they now believe that we have a great chance of going all the way, Saturdays results have turned the competition on it's head. As for beating the French, of course we have a chance; it will be a much harder game for England to win than the 1/4 against Australia as the French pack is considerably better than the Aussies. I can't see the French tight 5 falling apart in quite the same way as the Aussies did on Saturday, that said I still believe that the England forwards do have a slight edge over the French and need to use it if we are going to turn them over.
rugby then work
08-10-2007, 13:28
Roll on Saturday!! A stunning victory for Sale at Castle Grim, and a right good thumping for the pesky Frogs!!
Now you're living in fantasy land.
Whilst like many I believe England now have a chance and have done better than most expected by reaching the semi's. My biggest fear is that the RFU will carry on as is and not change things. Just because of what has happened, under the misguided belief that things can't be that bad because we made the last four.
rugby then work
08-10-2007, 16:58
I actually rate Brian Ashton as a coach and I think he realises that he needs to build for the next World Cup, as I've said in other threads I think he's picked this side for damage limitation and they've actually done better than expected. This years 6 nations will show what his intentions are.
I actually rate Brian Ashton as .
You mad fool. The guy doesn't know his arse from his elbow. Off to the retirement home Brian.
We need Martin Johnson
squipper
08-10-2007, 17:29
As said previously, lets see what BA brings to the table during the next 6 nations. Is he planning to play the best players on the day ala Andy Robinson or is he succession planning and will bring in new blood? Will we see Geraghty, Flood, Jones etc or will he stick with the old guard who will not see another 6 nations let alone a World Cup!! I think he has the forethought to look long term, as we can see now the longer the team are together the better they are playing as a unit. Hopefully we will see the end of the Club v Country row and Rob Andrew will support BA in his ambition.
Only time will tell!!!
auchtermuchty
08-10-2007, 17:30
You mad fool. The guy doesn't know his arse from his elbow. Off to the retirement home Brian.
We need Martin Johnson
like a hole in the head
You mad fool. The guy doesn't know his arse from his elbow. Off to the retirement home Brian.
We need Martin Johnson
Kind of difficult when he's not even a level one coach:PDT_Xtremez_42:
Lets be honest for a bit, no one reckoned we'd get this far before the tournament started so in that respect yes, it's been a success. However I can now see a situation devleoping whereby the "Old Farts", to coin a phrase, will tell the coaching set up how they will run the whole show, with the reasoning being that "It worked before therefore we and not you coaches and players know best"
I can honestly see this being catastrophic for English rugby unless the likes of Ashton and Andrew bring fresh, young blood in directly after the RWC. Not just in the players either, lets have some young coaches, players who have played in the last 5 years. Catt has the necessary qualifications and has been touted as a future England coach for a couple of seasons. Why wait? Bring him in now with a view to being BAs successor in a few years.
Lets stop pontificating about playing southern hemisphere/Welsh expansive rugby. It's never worked for England, it's just not in our mentality. Lets get back to a bit of realism and to what we do best, forward oriented rugby. Use the pack to batter, wear out and intimidate opposition, then release backs as and when it's appropriate.
I get sick to the back teeth of people going on and on about how rugby should be played in England. It comes down to the simple equation of what do you want to see, England trying and failing to play a style of rugby that doesn't suit them and losing, or playing in a manner that we know and in a way that can beat any team on a given day? The answer is simple for me, I'd rather see England play 10 man rugby and releasing the backs when appropriate and winning.
I Look Like Kevin Costner
08-10-2007, 19:19
WGAF is right. On Saturday, England played to their strengths.
In 1991, we played an expansive game against Austrailia after getting to the final playing mainly 10 man rugby. We lost.
After the RWC, hopefully the central contracts settlement will be used wisely.
Dave-exfairy
08-10-2007, 19:41
WGAF is right. On Saturday, England played to their strengths.
In 1991, we played an expansive game against Austrailia after getting to the final playing mainly 10 man rugby. We lost.
After the RWC, hopefully the central contracts settlement will be used wisely.
Yeah, Jonny Wilkinson, let's face it, if England didn't have Wilko you'd have, in all probablility, lost. All the points were scored by him and all were kicks.
Australia scored the only try, and yes I know International Rugby is all about winning no matter what, but it is a boring as hell watching a kicking game.
rugby then work
08-10-2007, 20:01
Yeah, Jonny Wilkinson, let's face it, if England didn't have Wilko you'd have, in all probablility, lost. All the points were scored by him and all were kicks.
Australia scored the only try, and yes I know International Rugby is all about winning no matter what, but it is a boring as hell watching a kicking game.
Whilst a kicking game can be boring, just because the game is relatively low scoring and only 1 try try was scored doeasn't make it a bad game.
I thought it was a great contest, Englands speed to the breakdown and the power they applied at the set piece stopped the Aussies scoring more tries, in turn the Aussies defended very well and were very difficult to break down. I'm as happy watching a game like that as watching a side put 50 points on the opposition (more so a lot of the time).
Yeah, Jonny Wilkinson, let's face it, if England didn't have Wilko you'd have, in all probablility, lost. All the points were scored by him and all were kicks.
Australia scored the only try, and yes I know International Rugby is all about winning no matter what, but it is a boring as hell watching a kicking game.
Games will always go that way whilst all the top sides play rigid defensive patterns. It's come across from league, the defensive systems are so complex and well drilled these days that the vast majority of 1st class games are low scoring. You've just said it yourself, international rugby is all about winning, especially when you get to the knock out stages of the world cup, to believe otherwise is naive and harks back to the days of the amatuer.
I'd suggest watching the game again, it was anything but boring and there was some great rugby played by both sides.
penfold93
08-10-2007, 23:35
Yeah, Jonny Wilkinson, let's face it, if England didn't have Wilko you'd have, in all probablility, lost. All the points were scored by him and all were kicks.
Australia scored the only try, and yes I know International Rugby is all about winning no matter what, but it is a boring as hell watching a kicking game.
However, he did mis a few of the harder ones and if it hadnt been for a massive display from the forwards getting England into a scoring position and Australia forced into making mistakes then Wilko or not we wouldnt be in the semis. The kicks he did put over after the forwards had gained the position were close enough for even Mickey Skinner too have kicked them:PDT_Xtremez_28:
Agree with wgaf lets focus on what we do best not the fancy sh1te that looks good but loses games.
auchtermuchty
08-10-2007, 23:42
Not wishing to tempt fate but I'm going to....
last weeks IRB rankings
Australia 2nd
England 6th
this weeks IRB rankings
France 2nd
England 6th
Am I looking for an omen that isn't there?
NotAnIDOYet
09-10-2007, 01:23
Not wishing to tempt fate but I'm going to....
last weeks IRB rankings
Australia 2nd
England 6th
this weeks IRB rankings
France 2nd
England 6th
Am I looking for an omen that isn't there?
Anything can happen next week, Fabulous Freddie has had two great games (or parts of) so he is due a stinker. Will Laporte start with him or use him as a super sub again and have we got anything to stop him if he plays well?
Chabal is just a bruiser who plays route 1 rugby. Albeit he is bloody good at it but it is easy to counter by getting the ball away from him. Jonny knows all about Betson so I can imagine him standing a little deeper at the set piece, which may actually let us get our backs into the game. Players like Tait and Sakey need space in which to work if they are to be devastating, playing the French might give them it.
The big pick for me would be Stevens ahead of Vickery. If we pick on form then young Matt shades it for me every time recently but do you leave your captain on the bench?
rugby then work
09-10-2007, 09:23
Betson was out cold after smashing his head off Nallets knee so shouldn't actually be playing for the next 3 weeks.
Stevens deserves to start but I think he will have to settle for the bench.
You mad fool. The guy doesn't know his arse from his elbow. Off to the retirement home Brian.
We need Martin Johnson
I disagree, I think BA is a supurb coach, I just don't rate him as a manager or a selector.
England need to look at the youngsters out there, bring them in straight after the world cup (even if we lose 10 games on the trot) and get them playing International Rugby.
As for the RWC being a success? Hell yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree england has done well but brian ashton has less personality than Gordon Brown. His post match interviews are dull and he looks like hes lost and doesnt know where he is!
I disagree, I think BA is a supurb coach, I just don't rate him as a manager or a selector.
The problem is - manager and selector are major parts of his job. You need someone there who can do all three. Don't even suggest getting three poeple in to do those three areas it'll never work.
Maybe its time England bit the bullet and looked overseas for a new coach.
Don't even suggest 'The gent of the north' to me - he's absolutly bonkers in the nut to David Icke standards.
auchtermuchty
09-10-2007, 11:41
I disagree
Management isnt part of his role, man management within a coaching environment is. Management of the teams affairs isnt, i.e. its not up to him to book the hotel. He should be asked for an opinion but the work isnt his.
Selection policy - I've bitched and moaned about some of it and other bits were forced upon him. Hasnt the fact we are now talking about going to the semi's, with half a team due to injury, justified his selection policy? Yes we should be talking about winning the whole thing but who realistically thought it possible when they saw our injury list? As was proved on another thread team selection is a subjective thing and will NEVER be agreed upon.
On this note my apologies to Paul Sackey - apparently you arent a complete waste of DNA. I still wouldnt have picked you though:PDT_Xtremez_28:
Coaching - well it seems when he has a settled team, he can in fact draw up a gameplan that works. Has anyone noticed we have a settled squad to pick from for the semi's?
Jim_P_Pulfrew
09-10-2007, 12:03
Kind of difficult when he's not even a level one coach:PDT_Xtremez_42:Catt has the necessary qualifications and has been touted as a future England coach for a couple of seasons. Why wait? Bring him in now with a view to being BAs successor in a few years.
Leave Catty where he is. He is going to be player coach under arguably one of the best coaches in the world, in Brian Smith down here at the Madejski. He will learn far more and when he takes over as fulltime coach of a premiership club, proves his mettle and then moves to the national job, he will turn a fantastic playing career into a fantastic coaching career. All for the greater Long Term good of English rugby as a whole.
Lets not descend into the folly of short term thinking yet again, where in the 70's we had three coaches in four years because there was no direction. If they are hell bent on finishing Ashton at the end of his so called stopgap time, look to somebody like Gatland, or dare I say Dean Richards.
Mike Catt is long term investment and to chuck him to the lions after a RWC where we are seeing some of our best players retire mirrors Andy Robinsons fate and is madness beyond belief.
I disagree
Selection policy - I've bitched and moaned about some of it and other bits were forced upon him. Hasnt the fact we are now talking about going to the semi's, with half a team due to injury, justified his selection policy?
I am not sure it has justified his selection policy, it has certainly justified his coaching skills though. As you pointed out we will not agree on selection, I just would like to see some development work done within the team.
As to an earlier comment of playing to Englands strengths cos we can only play 10 man rugby, I would disagree totally. We have some outstanding young players coming through in the backs who, if given the exposure to International rugby, will be good for the next world cup or 2 and still be under 30. I am more concerned with the next batch of forwards coming through.
rugby then work
09-10-2007, 14:33
I am not sure it has justified his selection policy, it has certainly justified his coaching skills though. As you pointed out we will not agree on selection, I just would like to see some development work done within the team.
As to an earlier comment of playing to Englands strengths cos we can only play 10 man rugby, I would disagree totally. We have some outstanding young players coming through in the backs who, if given the exposure to International rugby, will be good for the next world cup or 2 and still be under 30. I am more concerned with the next batch of forwards coming through.
I agree that there are plenty of young backs coming through who are capable of playing an expansive game, I also agree with much of what wgaf says about playing to our strengths. The answer lies in a mix of the 2, I know I'm biased here but I honestly believe that Dean Ryans template on how to play the game should be the way forward for England. Gloucesters pack is capable of destroying anything put in front of them, while the backs are some of the most exciting runners in the game. Gloucester make sure that the set piece is working, that the forwards are going forward and then look to spread the ball (easy enough to say I know, but Glaws are managing it).
I do believe that there are plenty of talented forwards on their way through to international rugby, look here for a few (http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9481).
I agree that there are plenty of young backs coming through who are capable of playing an expansive game, I also agree with much of what wgaf says about playing to our strengths. The answer lies in a mix of the 2, I know I'm biased here but I honestly believe that Dean Ryans template on how to play the game should be the way forward for England. Gloucesters pack is capable of destroying anything put in front of them, while the backs are some of the most exciting runners in the game. Gloucester make sure that the set piece is working, that the forwards are going forward and then look to spread the ball (easy enough to say I know, but Glaws are managing it).
I do believe that there are plenty of talented forwards on their way through to international rugby, look here for a few (http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=9481).
As much as i hate to admit it Dean Ryan is doing an outstanding job for Glaws (erg I feel sick now lol)
I looked at the lists again and we all missed out Toby Flood??!!!! I am a little suprised at that (mainly cos I forgot him too)
rugby then work
09-10-2007, 15:16
You and auchtermuchty picked him on the bench, at 20 and 21 respectively.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.