England's 6N post-mortem

First topic message reminder :

Firstly, well done Wales, fantastic final result and worthy winners. I don't want you to think this post is about simply saying England lost rather than Wales won, it isn't intended to. However, i do want to ask people's opinions on England's 6Ns.

Has it been an improvement on last year? How would you rate the coaches' performance in terms of selection, tactics etc. Where have we improved or gone backwards?

For me, our results have flattered us. Much has been made of the improved attitude/culture within the squad, but I don't see it translated into performances particularly. Yes, the players seem less cocky, and?...

The scrum and lineout have gone backwards, the rucking after the Scotland game has been poor, and the attack non-existent. Our defence has been better generally, but was finally exposed by a team powerful enough to suck in players through close drives.

The selections ultimately didn't pay off either, and I think SL deserves criticism for the Croft, Wood, Robshaw back-row...it was easily outclassed, out-thought and out muscled. Some of this you can say is misfortune - having Morgan and Corbisiero out has clearly not helped, but it doesn't explain the selection of a collection of willowy lineout forwards.

I'm obviously frustrated at the result, and possibly i'll see some of this differently after a little more reflection, but I doubt it. What do the rest of you think?

I don't think garvey will get a chance,mostly playing at 6 lately.ed slater,tom savage and George kruis with maybe attwood will all be looked at before him.kitchenor may overtake lawes by next year.

People need stop picking reasons why England lost, Ashton is the same player you called one of the best in the world, the scrum was the same that people built up through the tournament and SL is still the same coach people said he was before the game. Nobody has accepted that Lancaster picked what he thought was the right team for the day, if england had won none of this would be said but because they lost your all finding reasons for why you lost just like the football pundits do. Have any of you thought that england players were out of their depth over performing in the new Zealand, Scotland, ireland and then came back down to earth against france and Italy.

Although England had a few chances they did seem devoid of creativity for much of this year's 6N. Must be time now to have a look at giving players like Burns and May a go/another go (I'm sure there are others - don't know too much about the likes of Wade). Probably no need for wholesale panic though, the team has been developing quite nicely up until yesterday's drubbing. When is Corbisiero back - I think things looked much better with him involved.

People are saying about corbs and Morgan they wouldn't have made up for 27 points they wouldn't have made up for even 20 points the thing is Wales new what to expect from England cut the penalties and you cut Englands points, England needed someone like Toby flood been there done it they put all their expectations on Farrell, he's a young kid still learning his trade. If your going do anything change your whole team because they were beat badly from 1-15. People going say wum but the fact is England are a good side not brilliant

I'm coming at this from the point of view of making England better in the future. Nothing to be done about yesterday now - properly beaten. Just need to kick on and learn from the experience.

I think that SL needs to stop playing people out of position. A great player is supposedly one who play just as well in positions they are not as familiar with.

Just about everyone on here agrees that Tom Wood is not a international Number 8, yet he plays him there, in conjunction with a backrow player at 6 who has played at 8 with some success. Defies logic. Brown is the best full back we have but he's shunted onto the wing. It's no surprise there are a couple of questions surrounding his defence.

It's pretty obvious there was something wrong with the overall attitude of the team. Something was missing; nobody was confident. I simply thing a number of key player buckled under the pressure of potentially winning the first GS in 10 years. The Millennium Stadium is a very difficult place for the English to win, and without their usual bravado they fell apart. I am putting this down to inexperience.

Ben Youngs needs to be told to get the ball into the scrum as quickly as possible. At least twice he was pinged for waiting too long. He's a far better player than that, but he REALLY needs to stop being so beligerant.

We missed having a proper ball-carrying 8; Ashton was ineffective and played angry - we must change him asap; leave him out of the EPS for the summer tour. Brown must not be played at 11 - start him at 15! And let's have some wingers. Goode was average, nothing more but this was only one game. Too much is made of Tuilagi's smashing abilities, yet he doesn't seem aware of who is inside or outside him. Teach him to look and he'd be VERY effective (I for one would like to see a centre pairing of Twelvetrees & Joseph but that's not relevent here).

That said, big changes are unnecessary at this time: 8, wingers, Brown to fullback. We have the basis of a good team with strength in depth. They just don't believe in themselves enough yet.

PS Wales played exceptionally well - England did not. Well done to the boys in red.

England at the moment remind me of AUS post 01.... a decent team with good players but their pack is just to weak to compete and allow their strike players to be as potent as they can be.

The front five was torn apart yesterday.... everyone gives Tipuric and Warburton credit... bull... that match was won by Adam Jones and Ian Evans. They were massive.
The backrow had so much room that they were bound to look flash.

The England tight-five are pretty lightweight at the moment... they gave away 30kg of muscle to the Welsh pack who are not abnormal in size. Its not all about weight but in things like the scrum it was like watching a schools U16 team play the 1st XV, it was men against boys.

The days of locks like Ian Jones, Mark Andrews are long gone. Guys like Courtney Lawes have huge potential but they need to do their core skills first and prioritise scrummaging and lineouts... it lost the game.

It made the life of their backrow that much harder, had they been on an equal footing there is no doubt they would have had a better game.

The Mike Brown experiment is over though. His positioning for both tries was terrible. His job as a winger is to mark Cuthbert and Cuthbert only. Unless he had the pace of Habana he can't afford to give him that much space.
He looked unsure in the position as he swayed between marking the centre passing and Cuthbert... gving Cuthbert just enough room to break free. A standard winger would know this.

I think England have a lot of problems, both wings are crap and the full back is no threat what so ever, based on what I have seen this 6N. The best FB England have had over the last 4 years is Armitage he is not perfect but a dangerous runner.

The next problem is the front 5, it must make the 2003 England forwards wonder what is going on when a Wales team out powers an England team allowing the Wales lightweight back row to run riot. Wales always used to try to move the bigger England packs of old around but they don't need to do that with this team.

The England back row using three 6's only works if the front 5 are on top, England needs a proper 7 and move Robshaw to 6 and get a ball carrying 8 like Ben Morgan. The classic back row will work best for all situations then use a sub to change the game if required.

I also think England will be better with 12Trees at centre replacing one of the two donkeys, there is very little creativity in the current team as shown but the try count this 6N.

The main positive is the defence is good except on the wings.

The posts above are all much the same says it all, the media build up England to such a high level only to be put in their place, the writing was on the wall against France and Italy.

welshboii15 wrote:People are saying about corbs and Morgan they wouldn't have made up for 27 points they wouldn't have made up for even 20 points the thing is Wales new what to expect from England cut the penalties and you cut Englands points, England needed someone like Toby flood been there done it they put all their expectations on Farrell, he's a young kid still learning his trade. If your going do anything change your whole team because they were beat badly from 1-15. People going say wum but the fact is England are a good side not brilliant

I don't think it's a wind up and sort of agree. I stated my reservations before the game, and [shock horror] stick with them.

Where I disagree is your assertion that if you're going to change anything you change the whole team. England cannot simply try and have a better player than Wales from 1-15 - it just doesn't work like that. We have to focus on getting the best out of the players we have available. At the minute we aren't doing that, but probably could with a tweak here and there and a tactical shift. Whether or not getting the best out of our team would have been enough to beat Wales (who were on cracking form) is another question.

The balance in a number of locations isn't quite right, and has been clearly not right for some time (realistically should have been identified in the autumn, could even argue that the New Zealand win has done some long term damage). Despite Lancaster's willingness to clear out on arrival he seems unwilling to be so brutal now he's developed favourites of his own and is insisting on a game plan that just isn't working (and is arguably non-existant when it comes to scoring on our own merit). I am increasingly of the view that his biggest talent is PR - had MJ was still running the show the press would have been ripping into him and the squad for the turgid performances in rounds 2,3 and 4.

Youngs did as much as can be expected really when you're forwards aren't producing the goods for you. Care picked up the tempo and brought more dynamism but by that time we'd already well lost.

Agree that Parling was good, he made more breaks then our centres, also I think he did pretty well screwing with the Welsh lineout at times.

Barritt, Goode and Ashton can all expect to lose their places, Barritt's only there for defense and missed a key tackle for the second Welsh try that broke us. Ashton has spent this whole tournament acting like a child and then wussing out of contact and Goode just doesn't do anything when he does have the ball except kick badly and run straight in to contact losing ground, I don't know what's wrong with them but Lancaster made a massive balls up sticking with them both for so long. Bring in 36 and bring in Made/Way at 11 and 14.

Need a bit more beef in the front 8, e.g. Morgan when fit, and Corbs at LH prop.
The back 3 are a mess, one winger totally out of sorts other winger not a winger, and Foden needed back at FB when fit. Wales, Scotland, Ireland all have great FBs. And we need to bring on our own young North / Cuthbert types (and Cuth is a Glaws lad, shame E the selectors missed him before Wales found him). So we need a pair of them on the wings. Shane / Robinson / Strettle types - I love them - but seem to be a thing of the past. Jonny May is a prospect, but he is relatively slender compared with the Wales examples.

Most of my observations have been mentioned before.

The forwards battled but we didn't commit enough players to the breakdown, Welsh backrow wiped the floor with us.

We've missed Ben 'ever so fragile' Morgan or someone of the same (but less injury prone) ilk since the Scotland match. What everyone more simply describes as a ball carrying 8 to give us some go forward.

Our front row were done over by a cleverer and more experienced unit, not sure its worth getting our hopes up too much about Corbs, he's been out for such a long time. Northampton must be hopeful they haven't bought a crock. Mako Vunipola looks slightly more effective than Marler who has yet to bring his 'A game' to the international arena. Don't think any of the others deserve to be dropped. I'm very interested about how Luke Cowan-Dickie (name sounds like some unappetising powdered man-milk) develops, whether into a LH prop or hooker as he looked one of our stand out players in the u20s.

Our second row, although promising has become less influential around the park with each match in the tournament. The back 5 of the scrum looks like it needs some ballast. One of the beauties of the sport is that it is a game for all sizes not that the idea that locks and backrowers should all be more less the model of a blind side wing forward. I've been impressed by Robshaw's positioning and workrate but he looked positively cumbersome next to the whippet-like Tipuric. I'd like to see Billy Vunipola or Carl Fearns at 8 and Kvesic or Wallace at 7 in the summer, you can take your pick at 6! Kitchener or Slater (who seems more abbrasive than something that'll take our skin off) to power up the engine room.

Since our defence performed only slightly better than shambolic does that mean Brad Barritt has served his useful purpose? Admittedly our half backs were well below par behind our retreating light-weight pack but to my mind Billy 12T deserves a shot now. MT needs developing as a lot of people are saying.

Back three so blunt they would be safe in a childrens play area, sad to see Mike Brown get done for pace as I felt he was one of our most consistent performers in the tournament. I liken him to Chris Latham, play him at 15 or not at all. Ashton's been out of sorts def needs to rediscover his mojo for Saracens. Alex Goode needs to make way as soon as possible for a 15 who doesn't run like someone who needs calipers. Who comes in? Wade, May, Foden (all the same names) As an aside, Anthony Watson looked extremely promising for the u20's this season, hopefully he'll breakthrough in the prem soon.

Glad I got that off my chest

markb wrote:The biggest problem for me was the approach to the breakdown. We won against NZ and Scotland by agressively flooding the breakdown. If the thought was that we needed to commit fewer players to have them elsewhere to develop our next phase attack, well that was wrong and the signs of that were in the few matches before Wales. Smash the breakdown with plenty of numbers and get quick ball for the backs or pick and gos before the defence can reset. Trying to wrestle two opensides and superior numbers at the breakdown was never going to work, and even less with Walsh.

Completely agree, the forwards Lancaster has selected over the last 6 months or so are suited to a faster paced breakdown tactic, closer support coming in fast and hard, clear out and over then move the ball on quickly, they don't have the right attributes for a static arm wrestle there. I have no idea why the approach was changed after the beginning of the 6N, particularly as the quicker paced game is more difficult to defend against and more likely to create spaces. I can't remember too many players at the breakdown having been a problem for us, but the opposite has been.

What's most disappointing is that before the tournament and in the first match players like Launchberry, Wood, Youngs x2, Farrel and Twelvetrees were in fine form and looked class. By the end of the 6N's none of them looked even a fraction of that.

It worries me that over exposure to the England camp seemed to lessen these players rather then embolden them.

Tom wood was played in an unfamiliar position so should be spared.
The rest are all fairly new to test rugby(except Ben who is still very young) and hopefully in time will gain more consistency.

Stop trying find excuses England were out played every inch of the pitch, you could have played Morgan, wade, twelvetrees, corbs, may, Wilkinson flood or both Armitage brothers and it would have only changed the score by 7 points at most. England just came up against a world class welsh side which didn't put a foot wrong. People are about to say stopping wumming but accept Wales were different class. Wales got a young side as well just gave them chances at an earlier stage. No more excuses minute living off the fact you won a world cup because that England side was world class all over the pitch, stop living off the fact you beat new Zealand because that's only going happen 1 in 10 times accept your a team going through changes its going take 4 5 years until England are close to being a top side

Yappy is right - I was surprised looking at the England players in the last 30 mins - they just didn't seem to know what to do, Robshaw aside no one was leading or bossing the game. Ive seen Youngs boss games etc but you cant from 9 on the backfoot - The longer it went on only Wales were going to score more, it was strange - 12 trees, Hartley, Care, Flood, Lawes all looked shell shocked instead of adding new energy

Robshaw was like the rest of the team second half not in the same game poor

I don't think people are trying to find excuses,most English posters have excepted that Wales were far superior.I think people are trying to figure out how to stop it from happening again rather than cheapenyour victory.
As for 4/5 years ,before the game we were 4th in the world so that remark is redundant.

But what have you done to deserve to be both nothing, did you even get through the group stage of the world cup or if so wasn't it the next round you went out, so that means there were at least 4 teams better and two second places behind Wales so do England really deserve 4th not really. Where Wales semi finalist two championships. When it comes down to games that matter England ain't proving them selves, they need to be building partnerships finding the players that are cutting it at international level so yea 4/5 years

I think you should be putting your energy into savouring your success rather than trying to goad people into confrontation.
If it bothers you that much protest to the irfu,in the meantime try and be

Well all I said was England are 4/5 years from being a top side if you can't accept peoples opinions maybe you shouldn't be on here. I gave solid opinions and I didn't say anything out of order I was simply answering your very bad un needed post of 4th in the world rankings, we know where England are but not even the English media would be able to explain what they did to be there

Its called consistency welshboii or have those 8 defeats in a row been erased from your grey matter - Yes that 8 defeats in a row and we were in the 3rd pot for the RWC groupings, 2011 semi final seems a long way away but we're back on track

I have no problem with your opinion but you do with mine,I'm not looking to argue but if you do have a problem with my posts don't read them.I agree that England are not the finished article but I thought 4/5 years was harsh so I gave my opinion.It wast a personal attack against you.

Ok I think I took things to far but 4/5 years is solid with them being given time to find their strength in depth to get the right partnerships, its not unfair I just think 4/5 years get experience, right partnerships the right players, I just think England played it safe this year with goode Ashton manu they didn't experiment they didn't come close to finding their best team that's what im pointing out, where Wales have their main side minor changes now and again that's why their more experienced and are closing out games like yesterday

I agree entirely with your last post

Lancaster said before the game " Owen is a big-game player. The bigger the occasion, the more he likes it. It’s about composure. He has what very few young players have, that big game temperament and the ability to rise to the occasion. He doesn’t seem fazed by an occasion. He has been outstanding in terms of providing leadership and direction to the team. He leads that defensive line and that defensive press very well."

Maybe his position will be in jeopardy now after spectacularly falling apart yesterday.

Can't put it all down to Farrell he's young if England want blame anyone blame the whole pack cole youngs launchberry robshaw wood etc because the didn't step up the challenge of the welsh pack they Poopie out which meant youngs Farrell etc had nothing to play with

England are a team who have been completely rebuilt in a short time. Both players and coaches are learning. Yesterday they were well beaten by an experienced side playing very well. That's fine, we'll learn and move on. In terms of changes:

- FB: I think we've seen enough of Goode to know that, fine club player as he is, he's not got the pace to be an international FB. I'd move Brown there (I think the criticism of Brown for the tries is just plain wrong)
- Wings: The wing combo was always going to be a temporary thing. I'm not sure what's happened to Ashton, but it's time to drop him. For the Argentina tour I'd like to see May, Wade and Yarde given opportunities to prove themselves.
- Midfield: Tuilagi and Barritt just doesn't work. The midfield has to have some creativity. I don't care if Brad Barritt is our defensive captain, when he gets the ball he just looks for contact. In Argentina I'd play Twelvetrees and Tompkins (I'm assuming Tuilagi will be with the Lions)
- Backrow: England were unlucky that Morgan and Vunipola have been injured, but in Argentina I expect to see Vunipola and Guest in the 8 shirt (again I assume Morgan will be with the Lions, although this may not be the case). Options at 6 and 7 are fine, and I hope Wallace will make his debut this summer.
- Front 5: I actually think England just have to stick at it, and wait for the players to mature. In two years' time they'll be bigger and more experienced. It'll be good to see Corbs back.

Set backs are inevitable for a developing side. There will be changes made, and long-term England will be better for Saturday. England are actually fortunate in having the Argentina tour to experiment with a few new players.

Will jj be fit to tour?

I would expect so.

Next big thing last year,hasn't happened for him this year.Being played at fb at certain times hssnt helped.

This is a young England squad who have done well over the past year or so and despite Saturday's setback the team is moving in the right direction. They are still two years off a home World Cup and will get stronger.

In a strange way, the defeat against Wales may actually turn out to be a huge experience to learn from and remember, so the players don't want to have a repeat performance.

The real issue for me is the lack of creativity in the centres. Farrel hardly set the grass alight either.

I think I have to agree TJ. It's not doom and gloom. But England have essentially been able to grind out wins. They became increasingly dependent on ball retention, defence, reliable kicking and the referee. They've kicked a lot of penalties (4 games they've kicked 5 or more) and gone tryless often (4 games as well). The problem was (and is) that when they come off second best in the kickable penalties they often don't seem to be able to implement a plan B.

Twelvetrees could be the answer? Its in part about balance - Farrell, Barrrit, tuilagi are all good players but don't work together.

It wouldn't have mattered if we'd had the Holy Trinity in the midfield at the weekend, the match was lost in the forwards. I agree with some of the posters above that we need to return to greater numbers at the breakdown, blasting in and over quickly, denying a competition and serving up fast front foot ball. Much more effective than commiting fewer numbers for the sake of more forwards for the next phase when it results in slower ball, runners not hitting the ball at pace and encountering a defence that has reorganised.

This was the best aspect of the game we played against the All Blacks and the only way we are likely to beat the SH nations, straying away from that blueprint over the course of the Six Nations was foolish.

TJ wrote:Twelvetrees could be the answer?

Should tour...but won't if SL's just not picking him. I'd like to see him on that tour.

timhen wrote:It wouldn't have mattered if we'd had the Holy Trinity in the midfield at the weekend, the match was lost in the forwards. I agree with some of the posters above that we need to return to greater numbers at the breakdown, blasting in and over quickly, denying a competition and serving up fast front foot ball. Much more effective than commiting fewer numbers for the sake of more forwards for the next phase when it results in slower ball, runners not hitting the ball at pace and encountering a defence that has reorganised.

This was the best aspect of the game we played against the All Blacks and the only way we are likely to beat the SH nations, straying away from that blueprint over the course of the Six Nations was foolish.

Spot on timhen. The game was lost in the forwards yet it's the backs (mostly from one club) that get all the flack. Strange that there seems to be absolutely no criticism of Cole and Marler in particular.

Very few calls to drop any forwards when the blame rests largely on their shoulders. No criticism of the forwards coach either. I wonder why.

Why don't more sides commit more numbers at the breakdown?


Oh and Geordiefalcon I thought Ashton had a very poor 6 nations but why must all the attention rest on him? He deserves to be dropped but he's the scapegoat whereas the forwards seem to get very little blame - no calls to drop any of them is there?

It would have helped if England had picked their loosehead from Toulon as well as Wales!

'World class' Welsh side? Hardly. More like a highly motivated, good Wales side who finally clicked played out of their skin and deservedly beat us. We're not making excuses either. Highly critical of some of the performances of players and lamenting the ones who have been missed or not selected. SL will obviously learn from this

hugehandoff wrote:It would have helped if England had picked their loosehead from Toulon as well as Wales!

Yes, also S.Armitage

I don't think England need to panic, most level headed fans saw where we might be weak going into this game, for once I think Lancaster made several mistakes.

No1 - Roof open - With the game plan we had it had to be open, ok we might not have won but Wales would have found it hard to run away with it if it rained (which it did)

No2 - He was too loyal to some of the players who where clearly out of form or not up to the job, just because they beat the All Blacks shouldn't have meant they were selected against Wales. Goode & Barritt try hard and defence is ok but we can do better, Wood isn't an International No8 but he should be No6, Ashton has to be dropped, Brown wasn't too bad but he is a full back. Croft needs more games and shouldn't have been selected for this game too much too soon.

But hey you live and learn, as long as both Coaches and players learn from this awful experiance it won't be a total waste of time.

Spot on victor,it was plain to all certain players were out of form.
MJ had the same problem.

sickofwendy wrote:Spot on victor,it was plain to all certain players were out of form.
MJ had the same problem.

Which players do you think were in form vs Wales? Which players would you say had a good game?

Robshaw was consistent, compared to the other English forwards but apart from that nobody.

I wouldn't say anyone had a good game.brown always puts in the effort,robshaw tried hard as didcthe locks.The point I was trying to make is that the back 3 and back row were unbalanced and he stuck with it throughout the tournament even though it wasn't working.

Beshocked,

No im not just blaming Ashton...the pack has to hold its hands up and say hey...they were royally humped. Ive also said i think we need some bulk in there. Its good having mobility and athleticism...but you need some mass and power aswell, just to balance. I'd like to see some added...but who is there? Most of the youngsters coming through are this new Mobile mould.

Also for all they were smashed they will be seriously hurting...and as said above they should learn from this. They are a new young team...so whilst many of us (myself included) were hurting...we shouldnt jump to huge changes.

Possible changes for Argentina:

Twelvetrees at 12 over Barritt
Brown to FB over Goode.
Morgan or Vunipola at 8 with Wood to 6

By bringing Twelvetrees and maybe even Burns in, we bring far more creativity to this side...which may allow us to use Ashtons offensive skills which are considerable. So he could keep his place.
But currently the style isnt suited to him...

beshocked wrote:I thought Ashton had a very poor 6 nations but why must all the attention rest on him? He deserves to be dropped but he's the scapegoat whereas the forwards seem to get very little blame - no calls to drop any of them is there?

I don't think Ashton has been made a scapegoat, he's been in terrible form since the AIs and should be dropped. Whilst the forwards were woeful on Saturday, they hadn't been performing that badly up until that point so i don't feel you can compare Ashton's ongoing performance to the pack's one-off performance. Furthermore, there hasn't been any calls for forwards to be dropped as quite frankly that was probably the best we could put out at the time (whereas on the wing there are various alternative options). Personally I would have kept Mako at 1 after his Italy performance and kept Haskell at 6, but hindsight is a wonderful thing.

On the positive side – don’t panic, it’s a youngish developing test-inexperienced side and losses will obviously happen. I do want to hear some honesty from SL about what went wrong and exactly how he plans to sort it. Just as we’re not 17 points better than the ABs, we’re not 27 points worse than Wales – both games were atypical.

On the negative side, although the occasional thrashing over the last few years is not rare (SA, Ireland..) to only score 3 points in 80 minutes is simply unacceptable and has to be analyzed properly. An unbalanced BR and back 3, and an 80 minute purple patch for Wales, clearly can’t account for that. And I don't want to hear that "England didn't turn up" - a cleverly shaved monkey in a suit could come up with better than that. And anyway I'm pretty saw I saw an England side getting off the coach.

I’m listening Stu.