Billy Vunipola's Online Revelations....Stuart Lancaster Not Coaching England

First topic message reminder :

He alleged that Stuart Lancaster wasn't even picking the team and that Andy Farrell was.

He attributes this to the picking of Burgess, who he says Farrell Snr saw as a new version of himself.  He also attributes it to the picking of Farrell Jnr over George Ford.

He says Mike Catt walked out of the last selection meeting and vowed never to return on account of Andy Farrell picking the team.

He says the whole squad has been unhappy about the steamrollering of Sam Burgess into not just the squad but the starting 15.

He goes as far as to say that Stuart Lancaster does not coach the team but that Andy Farrell does.

He says Sam Burgess should never have been in the squad ahead of Luther Burrell because Burrell earned his place as opposed to Burgess just walking straight in.

He also says that none of the England players knew bonus point were on offer until after the Fiji game.

http://postimg.org/image/5cb3eur7r/

http://postimg.org/image/bnq4sgx1t/

quinsforever wrote:I'm supporting Australia for the rest of RWC. Great team, great coach, sensible policies. England should have paid particular attention to cheika changing their overseas player rule....if u hope to win world cups as a coach, u leave no stone unturned to have every weapon available.

For Australia's complete dismantling of England, and quality of their play all over the pitch, I want to see them win.

Who would you have picked from overseas then quins? Armitage? Abendanon?

Brown has been one of Englands best players, would Abendanon have brought anything different to the team?

Armitage requires other players to do the heavy lifting for him and is he not waiting to go to court over his arrest earlier this year?

marty2086 wrote:

quinsforever wrote:I'm supporting Australia for the rest of RWC. Great team, great coach, sensible policies. England should have paid particular attention to cheika changing their overseas player rule....if u hope to win world cups as a coach, u leave no stone unturned to have every weapon available.

For Australia's complete dismantling of England, and quality of their play all over the pitch, I want to see them win.

Who would you have picked from overseas then quins? Armitage? Abendanon?

Brown has been one of Englands best players, would Abendanon have brought anything different to the team?

Armitage requires other players to do the heavy lifting for him and is he not waiting to go to court over his arrest earlier this year?

When do opensides ever not require front foot ball. Even the best become non-existent without forwards dominance. its not necessarily that he would be instant first choice... its that the argument that he's not worthy is simply laughable. He was named European player of the year, unless that award was decided by his mum, I imagine its quite a honour.

Although this "story" appears to be untrue, in terms of the recent selections you can bee Farrell's big paws all over it. Things getting tight? Get my boy back at 10 because he can kick our goals and is a strong defender. Never mind that he cant run the ball or that if the pack are going backwards he will lose his cool and do something stupid. IE. shoulder charge a player without the ball.
Also what we really need is a big, hard ex-league centre, much like myself, except with a bit more pace but also with the inability to turn quickly or offload the ball in the tackle. A man who is so revered as a back of substance by his club that the coaches think 6 is best position!
Don't get me started on continuing to select Robshaw at 7 when big game after big game he goes missing in action. His stats for the Aussie game were so poor as to be almost non existent.
If Lancaster was actually responsible for selecting Farrell and Burgess for these tight matches, he should go. Obviously if Farrell was responsible then Lancaster should also go for not having the nads to stand up to him.

Abendanon should not be mentioned...Brown is quality.

Armitage well I personally feel we have 7's who should have been worked on.

Kvesic divides opinions but I think his performances this season have been hugely impressive. And only 22 I prefer to work with him.

Thus we don't need to break the "playing abroad" rule.

I could believe that Andy Farrell is Lancaster's puppet master but can't believe that Billy would say it.

Geordiefalcon completely agree. Sack the lot of them and take Ian Ritchie with them!

sensisball wrote:Although this "story" appears to be untrue, in terms of the recent selections you can bee Farrell's big paws all over it. Things getting tight? Get my boy back at 10 because he can kick our goals and is a strong defender. Never mind that he cant run the ball or that if the pack are going backwards he will lose his cool and do something stupid. IE. shoulder charge a player without the ball.
Also what we really need is a big, hard ex-league centre, much like myself, except with a bit more pace but also with the inability to turn quickly or offload the ball in the tackle. A man who is so revered as a back of substance by his club that the coaches think 6 is best position!
Don't get me started on continuing to select Robshaw at 7 when big game after big game he goes missing in action. His stats for the Aussie game were so poor as to be almost non existent.
If Lancaster was actually responsible for selecting Farrell and Burgess for these tight matches, he should go. Obviously if Farrell was responsible then Lancaster should also go for not having the nads to stand up to him.

I agree with a lot of what you say, but think its unfair to say Robshaw goes missing in big games, he's usually at the top of every single metric

Sadly he wasn't good enough against Pocock and Hooper

If you have 40 people in a room... even in victorious circumstances, there will be people who don't get on.

When big defeats come, daggers are drawn. Its natural.

I'm sure some players do indeed disagree with coaching methods of some.

fa0019 wrote:
When do opensides ever not require front foot ball. Even the best become non-existent without forwards dominance. its not necessarily that he would be instant first choice... its that the argument that he's not worthy is simply laughable. He was named European player of the year, unless that award was decided by his mum, I imagine its quite a honour.

Noone ever said he wasn't worthy but when you have guys like Fernandez Lobbe, Smith and Masoe beside it makes life that bit easier. Don't forget that Armitage signed on with Toulon knowing his England chances were going out the window, the same when he signed his new contract.

The foreign rule is there to give the coaches greater access and control, Cheika changed the rules because when he came in the Wallabies were a shambles from the top of the ARU and right through the team and needed a quick fix

majesticimperialman wrote:I find that hard to believe to be honest.

If SL is not coaching the England players. What is he doing?

Is he just a media man?

SCW never coached the team while he was in charge either.

He did select the team though.

Andy Robinson done the coaching under Clive i believe?

Regardless of what is true and what isn't, it seems questionable that an assistant coach should be the father of one of the players in consideration for a starting berth.

Be as professional or unbiased as you like, but there is always going to be a conflict of interest. And when things go wrong - as they have - you leave yourself open to accusations whether they are groundless or not.

In the last 8 years the hierarchy at HQ have employed a Mountain of a past player who never coached a team and then replaced him with a chap who had 1 season with Leeds and won 2 and lost 20. Alongside him they put another chap who has never coached a rugby union side and spent 98% of his rugby career in Rugby League. This is not rocket science is it. Do the RFU employ the same recruitment agency as Newcastle Utd?

I think in Graham Rowntree and Mike Catt you have two fairly experienced Union players.

RubyGuby wrote:In the last 8 years the hierarchy at HQ have employed a Mountain of a past player who never coached a team and then replaced him with a chap who had 1 season with Leeds and won 2 and lost 20. Alongside him they put another chap who has never coached a rugby union side and spent 98% of his rugby career in Rugby League. This is not rocket science is it. Do the RFU employ the same recruitment agency as Newcastle Utd?

Come on Ruby, experience is sooo overrated. It's no subsitute for character, discipline and towing the line.

If that's the case offload then Brendon Rodgers is a shoe in for the job?

Driver wrote:If that's the case offload then Brendon Rodgers is a shoe in for the job?

The RFU have already been on to him

I'm just putting these highlights on to show what i was talkiing about with the different style of rugby we played in Argie under Baxter , Gustrad and Catt

Driver wrote:I think in Graham Rowntree and Mike Catt you have two fairly experienced Union players.

I couldn't agree more and Catt is a wily operator, yet these 2 IMO wield very little influence

I remember hearing somewhere that Catt took the backs in the 07 world cup

Forgot about the SA tour in 2012 too we played some great rugby there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDT-01EjdDI

Driver wrote:I'm just putting these highlights on to show what i was talkiing about with the different style of rugby we played in Argie under Baxter , Gustrad and Catt

Honestly, there isn't much difference there to how we play now other than the fact the 9 actually got quick ball

Some developments, the BBC are now reporting it as well. Farrell denies having "undue influence" over selection.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34449404

They just reference an ESPN article, which itself don't have any quotes or even 'insiders'. Just 'the press association understands'. Could have read it on here.

HammerofThunor wrote:They just reference an ESPN article, which itself don't have any quotes or even 'insiders'. Just 'the press association understands'. Could have read it on here.

I would hope they read it here. Where else would anyone go for thier sources?

The plot thickens....

Farrell and Rowntree breaching WC regulations....

http://en.espn.co.uk/scrum/rugby/story/277945.html

ESPN reports that England players are turning on each other....

http://en.espn.co.uk/2015-rugby-world-cup/rugby/story/277779.html?ex_cid=espnFB_scrum

how does alter the plot? Everyone already knew about the first story and the second one is a complete non story

and it's not even suggesting England players are turning on each other. But hey, you keep stirring that pot if that's how you get off.

nathan wrote:how does alter the plot? Everyone already knew about the first story and the second one is a complete non story

Doesn't say anything, if one reads past the sensationalist headline.

I don't get the Blame Burgess stuff. He didn't force Lancaster to pick him.

Watching England rugby dissemble before our eyes since the loss to Wales has been one of the worst examples of how hubris always catches up with you.

England's delusions were manifold, but never has style over substance been more evident in the history of English rugby than under Lancaster.

His piece in the independent says it all. Sod the culture, results are all that matters and with that comes a culture of winning

Now it transpires Farrell tried to influence the ref at half time v Aus, after having influenced the coach to pick his son. It just gets worse and worse.

Lancaster just burned his legacy and set England back 10 years. His decision to play Burgess was as ill founded as his decision to take him off. His indecision when it comes to Ford and the clear nepotism in the coaching ranks is frankly disturbing.

Lancaster inherited a circus and turned it into a a laughing stock. Too concerned about 'culture' and not about results.

15 centre pairings come the Uruguay game, his last maybe his most productive.

He abandoned England's strength in the set piece while turning the midfield into a utter shambles.

And I'm afraid that it may be Cipriani who ends Catt's England career.

A shocking travesty. And even now there is speculation he may stay. if he doesnt walk onto his sword after the RWC then he has no sense of responsibility for taking a great rugby nation to the brink, looking over and then diving in.

HammerofThunor wrote:and it's not even suggesting England players are turning on each other. But hey, you keep stirring that pot if that's how you get off.

Maybe a reference to Catt threatening Cipriani or Haskells Twitter abusing of England players

The usual training bust up, and some spat on twitter - yeah, keep trying, you'll unearth some dwarves if you try hard enough.

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:and it's not even suggesting England players are turning on each other. But hey, you keep stirring that pot if that's how you get off.

Maybe a reference to Catt threatening Cipriani or Haskells Twitter abusing of England players

Haskell spoke to EX England players. Ex-England players have a log tradition of turning on he current players because they know best. It happening again is not news. Nor is Catt a player. And that 'threat' (supposedly AFTER Cipriani had been dropped by England) is based on "media reports", which usually means it's based on nothing and just gets cross-referenced so much the origin is lost (someone made it up).

Of course some people just lap this stuff up and I'd expect nothing less from you (when it's England, you're the first to jump on it to squash it when it's regarding Wales).

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:and it's not even suggesting England players are turning on each other. But hey, you keep stirring that pot if that's how you get off.

Maybe a reference to Catt threatening Cipriani or Haskells Twitter abusing of England players

Haskell spoke to EX England players. Ex-England players have a log tradition of turning on he current players because they know best. It happening again is not news. Nor is Catt a player. And that 'threat' (supposedly AFTER Cipriani had been dropped by England) is based on "media reports", which usually means it's based on nothing and just gets cross-referenced so much the origin is lost (someone made it up).

Of course some people just lap this stuff up and I'd expect nothing less from you (when it's England, you're the first to jump on it to squash it when it's regarding Wales).

What happening to English rugby is unique. When Wales coach squandered his charge so blatantly he was sacked before the team left France. Same should happen here. England need to get rid of Lancaster asap. I imagine they dont want to do it while RWC is on as it would seem somewhat unsightly if the host nation sacked its own coach in the midst of he tournament but then no host nation has ever done what Lancaster has done.

If England want to stay second rate, keep him. i assume they dont.