Eddie Jones - England's New Coach

First topic message reminder :

So the worst kept secret is out...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12005671/Eddie-Jones-to-be-confirmed-as-England-head-coach-in-next-24-hours.html

Jury's out on this one, will have to see how the 6Ns goes then ponder his selection.

I know what he is after from his players and many of the players who represented England at the World Cup are not the sort of players Eddie would pick. There will be a definite shift in philosophy.

I saw that article RF. This is a big comment. It will be curious to see who gets the axe.

I wonder if players like Lawes, Ben Morgan etc might be at risk....

I certainly think most players at risk will be in the pack...plus players like Barritt (who were on their way anyway) etc

There's been some pretty impressive journalism going on here, trying to start fights where they don't exist. Jones has said in the past, as far as I can see:

1. It's going to be a big challenge for the England coach to manage the players given the lack of control of the clubs; and
2. Armitage would add something to the team but it would be a big call to scrap the foreign player rule.

This gets made out as if he has said:

1. Bring in central contracts immediately; and
2. Scrap the foreign player rule.

Maybe Jones would actually adopt those positions given free reign, but I haven't seen a single comment that actually backs up the way he is being represented in the press.

Personally I'm excited. I think there's a chance for him to put together a really top class coaching panel from scratch and everyone has always said that the team probably wouldn't be quite ready this year.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

I know what he is after from his players and many of the players who represented England at the World Cup are not the sort of players Eddie would pick. There will be a definite shift in philosophy.

I saw that article RF. This is a big comment. It will be curious to see who gets the axe.

I wonder if players like Lawes, Ben Morgan etc might be at risk....

I certainly think most players at risk will be in the pack...plus players like Barritt (who were on their way anyway) etc

The big thing Eddie brings that recent England coaches haven't had is experience in the big arena. Two World Cup finals with Oz and the win with White and the Boks in 07. Japan has proven he's able to select and motivate a side that truly believes they can win, despite the odds, and more importantly, that Eddies his own man.

The last thing he will want is people getting in his ear about where things went wrong, and for that reason he should enlist external support because it's not just Lancaster that got things wrong. There's a culture that needs changing, and a gameplan that needs an overhaul. Eddies unconditional acceptance by the England fraternity will be critical to its on field success, though Eddie obviously has a lot of homework to do to get up to speed.

An exciting tour to oz next year will be the sports centrepiece on 2016.

However, Campese says opting for a foreign coach like Jones, who he feels is no improvement on Lancaster, shows that England are "desperate".

He suggests the RFU should have looked at home-grown candidates like former England international and Newcastle director of rugby Dean Richards.

"I don't think they should have stuck with Stuart Lancaster because he's a school teacher. Unfortunately rugby is a professional sport and we don't need school teachers. I think Eddie is one as well," he said.

"You've got a guy called Dean Richards. A guy like that played for England, great player, gone through the system, apparently he's a very good coach. Why can't you employ someone like that? Then you get a structure underneath.

Campo showing he has no idea what sh1t spouts out of that a$$ he calls a mouth.

As a falcons fan I wouldnt have Dean Richards anywhere near the England job.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

However, Campese says opting for a foreign coach like Jones, who he feels is no improvement on Lancaster, shows that England are "desperate".

He suggests the RFU should have looked at home-grown candidates like former England international and Newcastle director of rugby Dean Richards.

"I don't think they should have stuck with Stuart Lancaster because he's a school teacher. Unfortunately rugby is a professional sport and we don't need school teachers. I think Eddie is one as well," he said.

"You've got a guy called Dean Richards. A guy like that played for England, great player, gone through the system, apparently he's a very good coach. Why can't you employ someone like that? Then you get a structure underneath.

Campo showing he has no idea what sh1t spouts out of that a$$ he calls a mouth.

As a falcons fan I wouldnt have Dean Richards anywhere near the England job.

If Campese ain't taking shots at England, he ain't breathing. I would interpret his comments as validation we made a good move.

Yeah I thinks that true Doc....

One thing I'll be intrigued to see is how he'll handle media in game weeks.

He has that ability to poke the opposition and now he's the head coach of the largest union we may see him get a bit lippy. Lancaster was a humble decent guy that didn't get involved with any of that kind of nonsense. He was respectful of opponents and neutrals kind of sympathised with Lancaster and England because he was a decent bloke.  Eddie's a different kettle of fish.

Do you England fans want the full beam Eddie whom may be a genius but can spark things up and create flame wars? Or do you prefer a reserved Eddie that lets his players do the talking on the paddock?

Eddie could end up being SCW mark II
(perception wise)

Can't wait to see how it pans out

I think England need a strong character with a bit of a ruthless edge. Well, I think any international team needs a hard and tough leader, as I wouldn't trust very many rugby teams to self-govern. Rugby players can be... an interesting mix. England especially though as they are so heavily scrutinised by the media.

ebop wrote:One thing I'll be intrigued to see is how he'll handle media in game weeks.

He has that ability to poke the opposition and now he's the head coach of the largest union we may see him get a bit lippy. Lancaster was a humble decent guy that didn't get involved with any of that kind of nonsense. He was respectful of opponents and neutrals kind of sympathised with Lancaster and England because he was a decent bloke.  Eddie's a different kettle of fish.

Do you England fans want the full beam Eddie whom may be a genius but can spark things up and create flame wars? Or do you prefer a reserved Eddie that lets his players do the talking on the paddock?

Eddie could end up being SCW mark II
(perception wise)

Can't wait to see how it pans out

Not sure how many people remember but in 2003 Eddie and Sir Clive used to get into it through the media all the time. Some of it clearly was just to have a shot at the other guy because, well, I think they both enjoyed it. Eddie and Sir Clive were mark 1 and mark 1A. The funny thing was they both knew the game and played their parts to perfection. With both guys no one ever really knew when it was gamesmanship and when, or if, they meant any of it. More so because they can be short tempered.

One would hope Eddie has mellowed a bit, but not too much. As someone said, the possibility his getting into it with Gatland could well be a lot of fun, as long as no one takes it personally. Would be a disappointment if they both take the high road.

ebop wrote:... neutrals kind of sympathised with Lancaster and England because he was a decent bloke...

If supporters of other teams are inclined to slag off England, they will do so even if we select a team of choirboys coached by David Attenborough. The England team was not notably more loved or respected by such people under Lancaster.

I think Jones was the best available option once we limited ourselves to international experience. He's said some sensible things, and in particular I'm glad he has said that players who want to play for England should play in England. If Abendanon and Armitage think they are better players now then they should come back and prove it and their commitment.

There's a good opportunity for a fresh start with the coaching team. I wonder if they might try and get someone like Baxter or Ryan involved part-time, given the aim to have Jones' successor as a member of the new coaching team.

I disagree Rugby Fan but I'll just speak for myself rather than make generalisations. I honestly felt sympathetic towards England during/after the World Cup. It was partly how Lancaster had held himself over his tenure and also 'my' perception of how England fans reacted (in general) to what happened. I made a few terrible jokes at England's expense but I honestly did feel a bit bad for yous. No doubt there are plenty of people out there that loved every minute of it though.

Eddie was a bit of a rascal in his day. Quite like him actually but he could push one's buttons. Guess my point is, if you have a coach with excessive bravado it could rub off on fans. Fans may feel inclined to defend him if he does/says certain things out of loyalty. Then it gets a bit hectic. But I think doctor_grey is right, Eddie has probably mellowed with age. He's probably more savvy and subtle with how he pokes the opposition these days.

But we'll see

Some comments from Australian site The Roar.

However handing Jones a first tier team again may be a mistake. The pressure to win will be immense, with the Six Nations only months away – followed closely by a three-match Test series against a highly motivated Wallabies team in June. Jones did not face these pressures with Japan and last time he did as head coach, health problems ensued.

Wallabies supporters old enough to remember will be smiling gleefully at England’s choice. We remember the beginning of the dark years that came under Jones’ charge. England supporters will be hoping for something different.

I will be very interested to see how this pans out. Tactically, he is very astute so he may turn England’s results around in reasonably quick time.

Long term, I’m not so sure. It will be interesting to see how English players react to his leadership style. Typically, if they have a period of good results everything will be rosy, but if they have some adverse results then all the backstabbing and rumors will start, with emphasis on his way of doing things.

If Australian rugby thought highly of Eddie they wouldn’t have sacked him, then gone for John Connolly, Robbie Deans, Ewan McKenzie and Michael Cheika when Eddie was always available. But Aussie knew what Eddie could bring to the table and he didn’t get a look in. It’s quite stunning that England has done this.

Jones single handedly set the course of Australian forward play into the mire and only the bloody minded determination of Michael Chieka in resetting the standards have brought us back to a modicum of respectability.

Jones strikes me as a guy who is good with tactics but not particularly great with man management or talent development.

Jones has a dictatorial style which doesn’t always go down well particularly with veterans. His last year in charge of the Wallas in 2005, they played horrible, robotic style Rugby which culminated in 9 straight losses and a pink slip for Eddie. His overall body of work is pretty solid. I would class him as a pretty good coach that has the runs on the Board at World Cups.

Ouch, not much love there

Could be just a case of noses being put out of joint because an Australian is coaching the old enemy. Maybe a bit like when Deans coached Australia. Will never forgive him for that. There was also a QLD Reds debacle that some over there still hold against Eddie. But these things happened a long time ago.

Rich Freeman, who knows more about Eddie Jones' stint in Japan than any other journalist writing in English, gives his thoughts on what to expect.

Jones’ long-time association with Japan meant he knew exactly what needed to be done to get the team ready for a World Cup and the camps were not for the feint-hearted. Up every day at the crack of dawn, the team put in at least three sessions a day, with Jones cracking the whip at every opportunity.

“Only in Japan could that have been done,” said one of the other coaches, while most of the players I talked to admitted they had at some stage harboured thoughts of quitting.

http://www.rugbyworld.com/countries/england-countries/eddie-jones-will-bring-hard-work-and-straight-talking-to-england-role-52559

Horses and courses Rugby Fan.
I hope Jones is smart enough to distinguish between what was necessary and possible in Japan, and what it is that England need in 2016.

If not this could get very interesting very quickly!

Guys like Haskell and Marler may be in for a shock, they're both quite left field but also speak their mind which could rub him the wrong way.

Whatever Jones was in 2005 hes had plenty of experience since then to modify his ways if he thought it necessary. Personally, I can't remember an England coach make so many comments that resonate exactly with my thoughts. I'm excited about what he could do for England. My only concern is that he does look a little fragile. I hope his health stands up to the challenge ahead of him.

Few more tidbits http://www.planetrugby.com/news/jones-ready-to-shake-england-up/

An unflattering assessment by elements of the Aussie press to say the least. Jones may have presided over rocky spells for them but surely he's can't be the single root cause for every ill to have befallen them in the last decade!? It's implausible to suggest he set the platform for the likes of Deans and Mackenzie to fail 8 years after he'd left his post; pretty sure those two were highly slated for frailties in their own right.

Still, I can appreciate some of the points underlying the sensationalism. Jones has accumulated a decorated career, though most of the work was done away from the unique scrutiny a head coach of England or Australia would experience. He was successful as a consultant for SA and Saracens; as head coach of Japan, a nation with significantly lower expectations than the top tier. But you need to go back a long way to the last time Eddie succeeded as head coach of a top side.

I also can't help but see some accuracy in the statement that Eddie's attributes lie more in the strategic domain than in the motivational (i.e. man-management) field. Perhaps England would have done better to persuade him to fill an assistant position.

Coaching is a rough and tumble profession.  It's hard to find anyone with an unblemished record.  Even this year Japan lost to the USA before beating them in the RWC.  He was the head coach of QLD when they lost by almost 90 points to the Bulls, a horrific beating.  On the other hand his record with Brumbies and Wallabies was pretty good until the end at Wallabies when they crashed and burned.  Jake White had his bad run of games in 2006 with the Boks and somehow survived to win the RWC the next season.  

Point being, Eddie has lost some but won more.  Will he last all 4 years?  Who knows.  But he is a competant coach who certainly has the ability to give England a reasonable chance at the next RWC.  He is certainly saying the right things, especially about laying a strong foundation for the future which is obviously a requirement by his new bosses.  

I wanted an English coach from the Premiership.  But I am also confident Eddie knows what needs to be done and is flexible enough to adapt to different opponents and game situations.  Time will tell, but we could have done a lot worse than hiring Eddie.

As he mentioned English coaches, who do people will think will fill the roles?

I read McGeechan wants Jones to keep on Farrell and the rest of the crew - why's he got it in for England exactly?

Eddie Jones should be allowed to bring in his own coaching staff. Who ever he feels comfortable with.

He should not have to keep the current coaches, the ones under Stuart Lancaster that is.

Unless their is a line in his contract that says he is duty bound to keep Farrell, Roundtree, and Catt. if that is the case then i personaly think England are doomed from the start.

nathan wrote:As he mentioned English coaches, who do people will think will fill the roles?

Baxter or Ryan involved part-time as forward coach, with the aim to have one as Jones' successor as a member of the new coaching team. Borthwick could also help out part-time.

Gustard or Edwards as defence coach.

Attack coach is trickiest, although England have never had so much talent available in the backs. As a left-field suggestion: Austin Healey.

Wayne Smith as a consultant - say 10 days work in the next year.

Note to Laurie:

June 11 2016, must watch Australia -v- England.

The selection of the supporting coaches is the first and perhaps most indicative hurdle that he and the rfu will need to cross.

Keep things as they are and another massive opportunity will have been squandered to enhance and expand our home grown talent and provide a legitimate line of succession.

I think Baxter has to be in the shake down with others mentioned above. There certainly is the talent in our game, its just that we've failed to support it over the last decade.

I do think there is a chance that we could win in Japan with Jones at the helm, and I hope I am right to think that he believes that as well. However I don't think we should be surprised if he decides to move on after a couple of years. He knows his worth and I doubt will hang around if he thinks he's taken us as far as he can.

Barney McGrew did it wrote:I read McGeechan wants Jones to keep on Farrell and the rest of the crew - why's he got it in for England exactly?

I would be surprised if Eddie kept Farrell Snr in the ranks. He was one of the biggest issues England and Lancaster had. He also brings a conflict of interest into the team with his son being involved in the team, not something that Eddie likes.

majesticimperialman wrote:Eddie Jones should be allowed to bring in his own coaching staff. Who ever he feels comfortable with.

He should not have to keep the current coaches, the ones under Stuart Lancaster that is.

Unless their is a line in his contract that says he is duty bound to keep Farrell, Roundtree, and Catt. if that is the case then i personaly think England are doomed from the start.

He is allowed to bring in his own staff, he's already mentione he'll sit down with the current ones then decide if he needs to go out and hire

Would people say Catt hasn't worked as backs coach? We've looked much better and scored tries....

Catt might have worked...but is he the kind of man to address Jones each morning (after his mandatory team-building cold shower) with: "Present and Prepared Sir! Ready for Duty...Sir!!!" "Sir! Yes, Sir!!"

Jones will suspect free thinkers...... Catt doesn't have long left.

One of my concerns about including some of our most promising candidates for head coach in the set-up now is that they could end up tainted if it all goes pear-shaped under Jones.

It wouldn't be bad planning to keep someone like Baxter or Mallinder -  if that's where we are likely to look in the future - completely away, so they are a fresh alternative in the event the RFU have yet again appointed the wrong man.

In case anyone thinks that's being unduly pessimistic, I'd point out that it is very rare for an assistant coach at national level to step up to the main job and give a decent account of himself. Steve Hansen is the stand-out exception.

There are a number of reasons why that might have happened. Some people are natural assistants, good at their defined roles, but find it hard to adapt to being in charge. Others might do their job well enough but be damned by association with a failed head coach. Some people might just be not very good, no matter what.

Whatever the reason, it makes no sense to me to put all our promising coaching eggs in this new basket when the evidence shows that most good international coaches come in fresh to the job rather than inherit the role.

eirebilly wrote:He also brings a conflict of interest into the team with his son being involved in the team, not something that Eddie likes.

I think that counts as yet one more example of "things that Eddie does or doesn't like" which has no basis in anything Jones has said or done.

It's on record that Jones doesn't like players to have dogs as pets. Feels they take the players' minds away from the game during down-time. He likes his players to play x-box games instead to keep their reflexes up. So more mature minded players that have moved on from their gaming days may be under pressure now.

SecretFly wrote:It's on record that Jones doesn't like players to have dogs as pets.  Feels they take the players' minds away from the game during down-time.  He likes his players to play x-box games instead to keep their reflexes up.  So more mature minded players that have moved on from their gaming days may be under pressure now.

XBOX LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Everyone know PS4 is where it is at, he needs to modernise fast.

I was always XBOX before I moved on to my more mature days. PS was always a girl's console in comparison

Rugby Fan wrote:

eirebilly wrote:He also brings a conflict of interest into the team with his son being involved in the team, not something that Eddie likes.

I think that counts as yet one more example of "things that Eddie does or doesn't like" which has no basis in anything Jones has said or done.

Pretty sure that he said he did not like any sort of conflict of interest within teams when he was with SA back in the day. Sure its an out of date comment from several years ago but I can only imagine he may not have changed his mind.

Welly wrote:

SecretFly wrote:It's on record that Jones doesn't like players to have dogs as pets.  Feels they take the players' minds away from the game during down-time.  He likes his players to play x-box games instead to keep their reflexes up.  So more mature minded players that have moved on from their gaming days may be under pressure now.

XBOX LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Everyone know PS4 is where it is at, he needs to modernise fast.

Shut up, Xbox is where it's at. PS4 is for the kiddies... Jones knows this and expects his players to play the adults console.

i'm with Yappy, clearly the xbox is the way for the modern man to keep his reflexes sharp

SecretFly wrote:It's on record that Jones doesn't like players to have dogs as pets.  Feels they take the players' minds away from the game during down-time.  He likes his players to play x-box games instead to keep their reflexes up.  So more mature minded players that have moved on from their gaming days may be under pressure now.

I take it the 2015 RWC Squad went to the dogs

Can't see Eddie reading too many man management books or bringing in motivational speakers to wind the squad up or rushing off to NZ for ideas. I guess that means he probably knows what hes doing and doesn't need to ask anybody else? Poor old SL what he really did was hang up a big sign saying "I haven't got a clue".

Come on he's clearly not perfect but realising you don't know everything isn't a failing.

englandglory4ever wrote:Can't see Eddie reading too many man management books or bringing in motivational speakers to wind the squad up or rushing off to NZ for ideas. I guess that means he probably knows what hes doing and doesn't need to ask anybody else? Poor old SL what he really did was hang up a big sign saying "I haven't got a clue".

I thought that bit was the strangest.  It's like Bond turning up in one of Blofeld's underground complexes looking for a demonstration of the mechansim Blofeld intends to kill him with next time they meet.  What's Blofeld going to do?  Show him the real mechanism?

"What you gotta do, Stuart - and we plan on doing it when we go over there to the WC - is pretend for a few months that you're going to play it one way.  Keep playing it that way.  Get absolutely spot on playing it that way.  Then when that first game comes - play it completely differently.  That's the secret.  Here's your souvenir Kiwi and signed All Black shirt, and have a good trip home".  

If he wanted to find out about New Zealand rugby it was better to pretend you're not there, not to telegraph your arrival beforehand.

Lancaster real problem was that he did not take England to the next level.  They reached the plateau and then no real improve (and very much a decline during the World Cup).  As long as Jones can show an upward trajectory, he will get support like Woodward who though initially did not succeed, did show promise and improvement.

Sadly for whatever reason, Lancaster rather 'flat-lined'.

One mark of this, is that England have virtually no world class players, whereas almost all of the other top eight countries do.

However I think Jones is starting at good time (for him).

cb wrote:England have virtually no world class players

With all due respect this is probably the crux of the issue.

How can Jones change this?

Serious question.

ebop wrote:

cb wrote:England have virtually no world class players

With all due respect this is probably the crux of the issue.

How can Jones change this?

Serious question.

Win a few games then the players will start to be considered 'world class' (an expression I hate btw)

Really, win a few games?

We have no players in the world class bracket, maybe Launchbury, maybe Hartley if he gets back to his best in a white shirt. Potential is there though when you see some players coming through. Itoje, Launchbury, Fraser, Kvesic, Vunipola, Hughes, Ford, Slade, Joseph, Tuilagi, Watson, nowell all have very real potenital at becoming that good. The question is will they and how much influence will Jones have in that? They won't all get there and there'll be others who also come through.

ebop wrote:Really, win a few games?

Its a team game. This is what I think

There are a very small number of absolutely best on the planet type players about which there shouldn't be any argument (although of course there is).

Then there are a lot of very good players who fit well into very good teams that let them do their thing and really showcase the talents they have

Then there are a lot of very good to exceptional players in bad teams who would look brilliant in better ones. (i.e. a few from any PI team you can mention, guys like VDM from Canada, and the odd gnarly forward from the East European teams)

Most players deemed to be 'world class' are those in the second group (NZ included). If England start winning lots of games against decent opponents then the team members will start to be talked about as 'world class'.

Its all about perception. Reality is much harder to measure which is why I think the expression is crap

I agree with LIW - "World Class" is a meaningless expression in many ways.

We have a large number of international class players...and many who can step up to be leading international players... or players who would be chosen in a World XV.

I really do think its more tweaks to personnel and tactics than mass changes.

And judging by Lancasters selection history im not sure he would have made the right changes.