Just how good can this England team become?

Let's take a look at the facts that are indisputable and then discuss the opinions various individuals may have in an unbised manner.

The facts:

1. This young England team have bee together a mere 7 weeks.
2. They went away to Scotland and beat a tough, improving Scotland with a lot more exerience.
3. Won away in Italy.
4. Lost to an experienced, relatively successful Wales side having controlled the game and been denied a try at the end that would have drawn the match.
5. Gone to Paris and played the narrowly defeated RWC finalists, outscored them 3 tries to 1, and come away with a famous victoy.
6. Risen to be the top ranked NH team after a mere 7 weeks together and very few caps between them.

Okay now for some opinion:

I believe this team is running at less than 50% of its potential as is evident in the way that the team clearly aren't playing as a unit (how could they after 7 weeks and 4 matches?), which is key as 15 players together are far stronger than 15 individuals. Yet look at what they've achieverd - it's astounding! I think we should do very well in SA this summer, winning the series and finish the year in the top 3, possibly second place. From then on the sky's the limit - the front row look awsome already, second row are bossing the line out but perhaps need Lawes back to offer a little more in the loose, the back row are outstanding with an embarresment of riches but may be even better with an out and out 7, half backs world class with lots of depth on the bench, centres at last look great and a backline that can tear any team to shreds with the right pocession.

The future looks very bright indeed but other teams are bound to improve so Enland must keep SL in the job and carry on wortking hard and show no signs of complacency which I sincerely doubt they will. Thought?

Potential but long way to go - beaten 2 poor sides and a very out of sorts French side.

Also some players not delivering:

Ashton doesn't seen right in the head.
I think you are going to have to make a hard choice between Barritt and Farrell for 12.
Scrum half seems to be a problem - Dickson isn't the answer and both Youngs and Care seem to be like Ashton.
Robshaw isn't good enough for 7 - does Wood play 7.
Morgan cant make 80 mins
Botha isn't good enough
Hartley is letting the side down.

However having said all that there has been hugh improvement and the team seem to have genuine team spirit - unlike the World Cup. If I was English I would be clamouring for Lancaster to keep the job.

He has made a very good start

A young and inexperienced Wales team went on to get fourth place in the World Cup and are now first place in the Six Nations. A lot more achieved than the young England team. So I believe the real question you should ask is just how good can this Wales team become.

Morgannwg wrote:A young and inexperienced Wales team went on to get fourth place in the World Cup and are now first place in the Six Nations. A lot more achieved than the young England team. So I believe the real question you should ask is just how good can this Wales team become.

Not fourth best in the world apparently

Why do you post that in a thread named "Just how good can this England team becpme?" ? Whats the point exactly. Are you just trying to urine some people off

Morgannwg wrote:A young and inexperienced Wales team went on to get fourth place in the World Cup and are now first place in the Six Nations. A lot more achieved than the young England team. So I believe the real question you should ask is just how good can this Wales team become.

Gatland has had an many years in charge as Lancaster has had matches - therefore your comparison is totally bogus

geoff998rugby wrote:Potential but long way to go - beaten 2 poor sides and a very out of sorts French side.

Also some players not delivering:

Ashton doesn't seen right in the head.
I think you are going to have to make a hard choice between Barritt and Farrell for 12.
Scrum half seems to be a problem - Dickson isn't the answer and both Youngs and Care seem to be like Ashton.
Robshaw isn't good enough for 7 - does Wood play 7.
Morgan cant make 80 mins
Botha isn't good enough
Hartley is letting the side down.

However having said all that there has been hugh improvement and the team seem to have genuine team spirit - unlike the World Cup. If I was English I would be clamouring for Lancaster to keep the job.

He has made a very good start

Okay, Scotland are not a poor side and the French put in their best game yesterday since the RWC final.

I disagree with your player bashing as well with the possible exception of Botha who will be replaced by Lawes as soon as he is fit anyway

gowales wrote:Why do you post that in a thread named "Just how good can this England team becpme?" ? Whats the point exactly. Are you just trying to urine some people off

tell me about it, he does it everywhere and needs to be banned.

Well they are both professional coaches so I don't see how it is. Actually you could argue it is bogus seeing as Wales were more inexperienced going into the World Cup warm-ups. So I repeat, the question is how good can this Wales team become. But as usual it is all about England even though they are a joint fourth best team in the championship.

I think if England want to look towards a much much brighter future they have to look at their strength and depth issues.

The front five are the worst England have had in thirty years, that is only measured by how outstandingly good they have been throughout my entire my lifetime.

The backrow are not great but they do show promise.

The halfbacks are very strong, with care to come back, Youngs to hit form, Dickson proving his worth, then Flood and Farrell with youngsters like Burns and Ford to come through soon.

Centres have a bit of promise, Barritt and Tuilagi are very good though in-experienced, there are a few lads coming through like Jonny May.

Back three have a few good players too. Sharples needs another run out, Strettle has done well, Foden is finding his feet again, Brown is classy as is Wade lets hope he recovers from injury soon.

But they need more players to support the lads mentioned above... More young players pushing to get in and less players like Ashton, Lawes, Hartley and to a degree Corbisero surviving on past promise when they are not playing well.

Coach wise, I really don't think Lancaster is due the credit he is getting. I do think Farrell and Rowntree are though. So who ever is head coach if he can hold on to those two lads in any capacity England will do well.

Initially I would have been thought the RFU would gain most by getting a big Premiership coach as the head honcho. With two good men like Farrell and Rowntree around him things might start happening quickly. Maybe Lancaster could step down to a different role and learn from a more qualified man...?

nathan wrote:

gowales wrote:Why do you post that in a thread named "Just how good can this England team becpme?" ? Whats the point exactly. Are you just trying to urine some people off

tell me about it, he does it everywhere and needs to be banned.

Accusations like that will get you into trouble. No need to act a spoilt child about it.

Morgannwg wrote:Well they are both professional coaches so I don't see how it is. Actually you could argue it is bogus seeing as Wales were more inexperienced going into the World Cup warm-ups. So I repeat, the question is how good can this Wales team become. But as usual it is all about England even though they are a joint fourth best team in the championship.

in a thread called "Just how good can this England team becpme?", what were you expecting it to be about?


Personally i think they have a lot of building to do, but they are showing progress. The real test is when we start playing the SH teams.

Morgannwg wrote:Well they are both professional coaches so I don't see how it is. Actually you could argue it is bogus seeing as Wales were more inexperienced going into the World Cup warm-ups. So I repeat, the question is how good can this Wales team become. But as usual it is all about England even though they are a joint fourth best team in the championship.

Why don't you make your own bloody thread then.

This is a thread about england, so yes it is about england.

Has Farrell made any mention of whether he'd be open to an approach to join permanently? Even if he didn't join full time, the RFU could still go for him in a Shaun Edwards club + country role.

Not just this particular thread. The entire forum, the media, up and down the country! England got a lucky win over a poor France and all of a suddent they are a top 4 team, in spite of the Welsh being told just last week that fourth spot was worthless. What is wrong in pointing out the delusion and just how hypocritical this is?

Just to answer the question and not get into the malay of bickering....

How good can this young England team become..... Very Good.

Just need a coach that will not take any of the tom foolery that the old England team got up to.

Only one change I would make... Ashton. He's a one trick pony. Had a great year last year, but is pedestrian this year and I think the one who is most likely to disrupt the team from within. Get shot of him now.... It will send a signal to the others to knuckle down.

With the right pool drawers and a bit of luck, we may see the first all NH RWC final in 2015, between the young guns of England v the young dragons of Wales.

What an encounter that would be...... WOW !!!!

nathan wrote:

gowales wrote:Why do you post that in a thread named "Just how good can this England team becpme?" ? Whats the point exactly. Are you just trying to urine some people off

tell me about it, he does it everywhere and needs to be banned.

What????? I think you'll find that the post dicusses exactly what it says on the tin. If you don't like discussing England, urine off to another board!

Well in my humble opinion the IRB rankings should be scrapped, it serves no purpose other than seeding teams at world cup.

The threads about the rankings of england and wales have been a matter of Holly Wilaboobie for tat for a few weeks now. It serves no purpose either.

Article written by someone who has clearly been watching rugby for about a month,
No one knew what Lancaster would bring to the table hence he is enjoying his honeymoon period of coaching but after one season the laptops would have sussed out what moves and structure he uses!
thats when if he stays on he must earn his money because it's inevitable in the modern game.

Lets also not forget England beating France is hardly new news,it happens an awful lot.

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:

nathan wrote:

gowales wrote:Why do you post that in a thread named "Just how good can this England team becpme?" ? Whats the point exactly. Are you just trying to urine some people off

tell me about it, he does it everywhere and needs to be banned.

What????? I think you'll find that the post dicusses exactly what it says on the tin. If you don't like discussing England, urine off to another board!

Well for once am in total agreement with you A World Cup and 3 Finals! You tell them where to go.

viewtothegym wrote:what moves and structure he uses!

what moves and structure?

Tom Croft wrote:They [the coaches] give us free rein. Our attacking shape is fairly simple and it's about playing what you see."

England are hardly difficult to work out. Dickson passes the ball to Farrell who sees someone outside him and kicks it anyway. Or he passesto The centers who run into the nearest defender.

Its only in broken play England pose any real threat, and then no amount of laptop analyisis will really make much difference.

IMO England need to keep Lancaster. He is moving in right direction.

They need to build a core team and allow them the chance to play badly at times. It will mean good players missing out (like Simpson Daniel in years gone by) but it ensures consistency.

I was trying to provide an objective assessment as an outsider and as you can see its tone was optomistic. However I do think there are playing issues that need addressing - do really thing Ashton, your scrum halves, Hartley for example are delivering ????

If England want to get to another level they need players playing better in those positions simple as that. In spite of Crofts excellent perfromance yesterday a perfect reasonable case could be made that England have the weakest back row of th 4 Home nations. Now Rees is back Hartley is the weakest of the 4 hookers.

Sorry but I can see how you can say Scotland are anything but a poor side - they are below Tonga and Somoa in the World ranking in 11th place. They have suffered 6 defeats on the trot. For 6 years in a row they will be in the bottom 2 of the 6N. That is a poor side by any rational measure.

I though France played better against both Ireland and Scotland.

As I say I think England are showing good signs but there is a long way to go.

Morgannwg wrote:Not just this particular thread. The entire forum, the media, up and down the country! England got a lucky win over a poor France and all of a suddent they are a top 4 team, in spite of the Welsh being told just last week that fourth spot was worthless. What is wrong in pointing out the delusion and just how hypocritical this is?

Up and down what country? England?

And it's only really hypocrisy if its the same people doing it. I didn't say last week that fourth spot was worthless (though I'm not sure why the Welsh would be 'told' that last week, given that they were ranked 5th), because this year 4th spot is obviously very important because of the seeding.

viewtothegym wrote:Article written by someone who has clearly been watching rugby for about a month,
No one knew what Lancaster would bring to the table hence he is enjoying his honeymoon period of coaching but after one season the laptops would have sussed out what moves and structure he uses!
thats when if he stays on he must earn his money because it's inevitable in the modern game.

Lets also not forget England beating France is hardly new news,it happens an awful lot.

Ah, that's where you're wrong. Lancaster very cleverly isn't using structure. They're just tackling as best they can and then jump on a mistake. The random and disorganised approach means they are unanalysable.

Nothing wrong with the rankings. They give a reasonable idea of placements if used properly (which does NOT include saying "we're 0.01 points better than you so we're better").

Morgannwg wrote:the question is how good can this Wales team become.

No it's not. Can't you read?

thomh wrote:
................ this year 4th spot is obviously very important because of the seeding.

Is that true, or is it next years ranking that is used for seeding....

(sorry off topic a little with this question)

luckless_pedestrian wrote:

Morgannwg wrote:the question is how good can this Wales team become.

No it's not. Can't you read?

It's the question the real rugby people should be asking instead of asking about the joint fourth best team. Comprende?

Its the post AIs ranking, so the summer and autmn are what will really decide things....for all the diffeerence in the world it will make anyway. Qualification form the world cup group stages is all about avoiding the strong 3rd 4th pot teams as England proved in 2007.

MajorRoadWorks wrote:

thomh wrote:
................ this year 4th spot is obviously very important because of the seeding.

Is that true, or is it next years ranking that is used for seeding....

(sorry off topic a little with this question)

It's this year. Apparantly they need to know the seedings 3 years in advance to prepare.

It's the question the real rugby people should be asking instead of asking about the joint fourth best team. Comprende?

I thought this question had already been asked and answered? The answer is of course they can be the besterist in the whole world. Ever. FACT

Morgannwg wrote:

luckless_pedestrian wrote:

Morgannwg wrote:the question is how good can this Wales team become.

No it's not. Can't you read?

It's the question the real rugby people should be asking instead of asking about the joint fourth best team. Comprende?

It's really quite simple, Morgannwg: if you think that should be the question, start a thread about it.

Morgan, read the OP again, then start a new thread.

HammerofThunor wrote:
Ah, that's where you're wrong. Lancaster very cleverly isn't using structure. They're just tackling as best they can and then jump on a mistake. The random and disorganised approach means they are unanalysable.

I'd disagree. For me Lancaster has give England a mentality of working hard and playing to win.

He's brought together a group of players with a lot of new changes and with an ethos of team work, hard work and looking for the win right up until the death.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Ah, that's where you're wrong. Lancaster very cleverly isn't using structure. They're just tackling as best they can and then jump on a mistake. The random and disorganised approach means they are unanalysable.

A jokey comment but very close to the truth

geoff998rugby wrote:I was trying to provide an objective assessment as an outsider and as you can see its tone was optomistic. However I do think there are playing issues that need addressing - do really thing Ashton, your scrum halves, Hartley for example are delivering ????

If England want to get to another level they need players playing better in those positions simple as that. In spite of Crofts excellent perfromance yesterday a perfect reasonable case could be made that England have the weakest back row of th 4 Home nations. Now Rees is back Hartley is the weakest of the 4 hookers.

Sorry but I can see how you can say Scotland are anything but a poor side - they are below Tonga and Somoa in the World ranking in 11th place. They have suffered 6 defeats on the trot. For 6 years in a row they will be in the bottom 2 of the 6N. That is a poor side by any rational measure.

I though France played better against both Ireland and Scotland.

As I say I think England are showing good signs but there is a long way to go.

I appreciate that Geoff and I respect your opinions but largely disagree with them.

Anyone can see that Scotland are playing some good rugby. We have a number of very strong SH's and I think Hartley is disliked because of his past but is actually playing well both in the loose and the tight, for me the he is the stongest of an admittedly weak bunch of hookers in the home natilons. Our back row is poosibly what is giving England the edge at the moment, we're winning lots of turnover ball and defending like demons. And finally I think France defended far better yesterday and retained pocession more effectively than previously in the tournament.

Morgannwg wrote:

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:

nathan wrote:

gowales wrote:Why do you post that in a thread named "Just how good can this England team becpme?" ? Whats the point exactly. Are you just trying to urine some people off

tell me about it, he does it everywhere and needs to be banned.

What????? I think you'll find that the post dicusses exactly what it says on the tin. If you don't like discussing England, urine off to another board!

Well for once am in total agreement with you A World Cup and 3 Finals! You tell them where to go.

Nice one Morg

Also Scotland are not what you would call a good team.

Ireland ran in 4 tries against them and Wales beat them about around 15 points.

It is just that they gee themselves up for the Calcutta Cup. Scotland were poor but they smelt blood and England were inexperienced.

Probably the most important match of Englands tournament and they did very well to win it.

Thanks for the considered reply but Hartley really.

I think our hookers are pretty strong actually but Hartley is the exception .

We really are watching different games

Morgannwg wrote:Well they are both professional coaches so I don't see how it is. Actually you could argue it is bogus seeing as Wales were more inexperienced going into the World Cup warm-ups. So I repeat, the question is how good can this Wales team become. But as usual it is all about England even though they are a joint fourth best team in the championship.

Title: Just how good can England become.

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:I was trying to provide an objective assessment as an outsider and as you can see its tone was optomistic. However I do think there are playing issues that need addressing - do really thing Ashton, your scrum halves, Hartley for example are delivering ????

If England want to get to another level they need players playing better in those positions simple as that. In spite of Crofts excellent perfromance yesterday a perfect reasonable case could be made that England have the weakest back row of th 4 Home nations. Now Rees is back Hartley is the weakest of the 4 hookers.

Sorry but I can see how you can say Scotland are anything but a poor side - they are below Tonga and Somoa in the World ranking in 11th place. They have suffered 6 defeats on the trot. For 6 years in a row they will be in the bottom 2 of the 6N. That is a poor side by any rational measure.

I though France played better against both Ireland and Scotland.

As I say I think England are showing good signs but there is a long way to go.

I appreciate that Geoff and I respect your opinions but largely disagree with them.

Anyone can see that Scotland are playing some good rugby. We have a number of very strong SH's and I think Hartley is disliked because of his past but is actually playing well both in the loose and the tight, for me the he is the stongest of an admittedly weak bunch of hookers in the home natilons. Our back row is poosibly what is giving England the edge at the moment, we're winning lots of turnover ball and defending like demons. And finally I think France defended far better yesterday and retained pocession more effectively than previously in the tournament.

I forgot to mention Ashton. Yeah he's not setting the 6N alight this year but I think that he is a classy player going through the classic second season syndrome, given time I'm sure he'll come good - class will out!

All depends. Will the RFU give SL the job or offer it to Mallett? Then will he bring his own staff in? Either way, if we retain the current ethos of playing youngsters and players who deserve a place, play with discipline and kick on where the team are now. The future looks quite rosey.

Btw..those who go on about this team being overated. STOP getting suckered in by the English media

Cheers for coming back onto topic folks, and please lay off the bickering

On a personal note, normally I'd regard 4th in the rankings as nothing to write home about. Especially given how close Argentina, England, France, Ireland and Wales have been in the rankings over the past couple of years.

But 4th place at the end of 2012 really does matter, with RWC rankings at stake. For England or Wales to manage it they're probably going to have to win some matches away in SA and Australia respectively in June which will be pretty tough for either side, as in both cases they're facing teams with similar styles to themselves, but better execution. Meanwhile one of France and Argentina will be laying down markers while they play each other in June (Argentina also have the advantage of 3 home tests in the 4 Nations to pick up some ranking points). Interesting.

Speaking as a New Zealander, I'd love it if someone could keep France out of 4th spot, we'd much rather play them in our RWC pool and be guaranteed to not meet them in a quarter or semi.

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:

nathan wrote:

gowales wrote:Why do you post that in a thread named "Just how good can this England team becpme?" ? Whats the point exactly. Are you just trying to urine some people off

tell me about it, he does it everywhere and needs to be banned.

What????? I think you'll find that the post dicusses exactly what it says on the tin. If you don't like discussing England, urine off to another board!

I think you misunderstand. He's talking about Morg going off on a tangent about Wales on an England thread.

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:I was trying to provide an objective assessment as an outsider and as you can see its tone was optomistic. However I do think there are playing issues that need addressing - do really thing Ashton, your scrum halves, Hartley for example are delivering ????

If England want to get to another level they need players playing better in those positions simple as that. In spite of Crofts excellent perfromance yesterday a perfect reasonable case could be made that England have the weakest back row of th 4 Home nations. Now Rees is back Hartley is the weakest of the 4 hookers.

Sorry but I can see how you can say Scotland are anything but a poor side - they are below Tonga and Somoa in the World ranking in 11th place. They have suffered 6 defeats on the trot. For 6 years in a row they will be in the bottom 2 of the 6N. That is a poor side by any rational measure.

I though France played better against both Ireland and Scotland.

As I say I think England are showing good signs but there is a long way to go.

I appreciate that Geoff and I respect your opinions but largely disagree with them.

Anyone can see that Scotland are playing some good rugby. We have a number of very strong SH's and I think Hartley is disliked because of his past but is actually playing well both in the loose and the tight, for me the he is the stongest of an admittedly weak bunch of hookers in the home natilons. Our back row is poosibly what is giving England the edge at the moment, we're winning lots of turnover ball and defending like demons. And finally I think France defended far better yesterday and retained pocession more effectively than previously in the tournament.

They werent against England, but still played them off teh park. How England came out of that game witha win is still amystery, but fair play.

Hartley is goign through a bad run at the minute, theres a lot of dislike for his previous on field behaviour ...since hes toned that down the fire seems to have gone out of his game. Rolland decided to use the "invisible law" that says popping up in the scrum is illegal in the France game, maybe he should watch the video Joubert made on that subject. But on the whole the scrum has held and the lineouts been acceptable with him directing. Not spectacular but not a major cause for concern Id say.
Backrow has beena bit up and down,. Crofts really come back strong the last two games, whereas Robshaws faded a little. Morganas a monster runner, what england have desperatly lacked the last few years...but his fitness is a problem. That can improve though, theres also Wood to come back and who knows maybe HAskeell finaly will turn into a good player.

Im far more optimistic about the england side as it is than I was 2 games ago. Theres room for improvement, but they are improvements that can be made with these players ( as you said like Ashton), and arguably with some players who exist coming in. The worry in the past has been we are looking for imaginary players with super human abilities to step in.

Luckless; do you really think I should start my own topic on how good Wales can become?

I agree geoff. The hooker list is not weak when you have players like Best and Ford in the home nations. THere's two Lions right there. The third? Could be Rees, or Owens. Personally, I would go for somebody young, so either Hartley or Owens. And IMO, Hartley isn't even the best hooker in England.

Kiwireddevil wrote:
Speaking as a New Zealander, I'd love it if someone could keep France out of 4th spot, we'd much rather play them in our RWC pool and be guaranteed to not meet them in a quarter or semi.

I think the team under Lancaster, has achieved more than (MOST) people/fans or other wise was expecting to be honest.

But they do have a lot more to do before they could even call them selves a great team, i do think that Lancaster has done well enough to be given the job full time. But who will be his coaches? If Farrel and Rowntree stay on then England could do alot better in the future than they have done( in the last 6/7 weeks)

Lets wait and see how the game against Ireland goes, if they win and then go on to the summer tour and pull off wins against the SH teams, then England could well be looking at a World Cup Winning team in 2015.

But first and foremost lets keep our feet firmly on the ground, and take it one game at a time.

gowales wrote:

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:

nathan wrote:

gowales wrote:Why do you post that in a thread named "Just how good can this England team becpme?" ? Whats the point exactly. Are you just trying to urine some people off

tell me about it, he does it everywhere and needs to be banned.

What????? I think you'll find that the post dicusses exactly what it says on the tin. If you don't like discussing England, urine off to another board!

I think you misunderstand. He's talking about Morg going off on a tangent about Wales on an England thread.

If I'm mistsken I apologise to all who were wronged. Sometimes it's difficult to follow when so many quotes are overlaid Sorry!

PSW

Morgan will be playing a lot more games with Gloucester than he currently does, so hopefully his fitness will take care of itself to some extent, and having him and Tuilagi back seems to have had a big impact on England. We were a bit short on ball carriers until then.