[solved]England Pre 2023 6Ns and Beyond.

First topic message reminder :

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/jan/06/eddie-jones-mistakes-with-england-why-i-got-the-sack-rugby-union

Interview with Jones about being sacked there. Some interesting stuff in amongst it.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I would have expected Cinti to catch the second pass to be fair. But I've seen Radwan, Freeman, Malins, Daly throw awful passes or die with the ball quite a lot. None of them have what Arundell has in terms of running abilty. For me a rare talent who will get better very quickly.

You're a lot more sold on him than I am at this moment. Hope I am wrong because that means England has a better shot moving forward. But....

I think I will stream Saints 'A' (Bedford) this afternoon and maybe I can work up a thirst for tomorrow. Watching the effing Rugby starting at 9:15am with a Bloody Mary which will morph into a Shandy and again into a Guinness as the day moves on. With the occasional anti-inflammatory thrown in just for taste.

Dr G
If your liver needs a break during Wales, Ireland can I recommend Guinness Zero? Almost all the taste of normal Guinness whilst giving the old liver time to process the previous 5 hours alcohol consumption.
Apparently Diagio spent 10 years and a rather large fortune on developing it
Extraordinarily good for alcohol free drink.

sensisball wrote:Dr G
If your liver needs a break during Wales, Ireland can I recommend Guinness Zero? Almost all the taste of normal Guinness whilst giving the old liver time to process the previous 5 hours alcohol consumption.
Apparently Diagio spent 10 years and a rather large fortune on developing it
Extraordinarily good for alcohol free drink.

Thanks for the recommendation. Just picked up a 4-pack. The guy at the shop also said it was good. Will try it out over dinner....

I'll second Guinness Zero - though Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout is even better and I would happily drink it in preference to most other beers, full strength or not.

Poorfour wrote:I'll second Guinness Zero - though Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout is even better and I would happily drink it in preference to most other beers, full strength or not.

Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout? I doubt the colonists have that over here....

doctor_grey wrote:

Poorfour wrote:I'll second Guinness Zero - though Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout is even better and I would happily drink it in preference to most other beers, full strength or not.

Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout?  I doubt the colonists have that over here....

Alcohol free Erdinger is something I've found in most places I've travelled and drinks very well if you're into wheat beer. I've had several prolonged spells off alcohol after some issues with using booze to, unsuccessfully it may be a surprise, deal with stress and mental illness. Whilst not my absolute favourite beer the 0% Erdinger ticks many boxes when you combine availability and taste.

Guiness zero is superb, hard to tell from the real thing. Must be cold though.

Ben Cohen did have an “x factor” by the way.. He was worth 10 points a game to England. 3.5 points from his try scoring rate, but the rest from stopping tries. He had a hell of an ability to come across the field and smash an opponent into touch just when it looked like they were certain to score, and he did it in pretty much every game.

I don’t give much truck for labelling players as having an “x factor” or being “world class”. Players look good when they are part of a team that’s functioning well collectively… and a lot of the time their individual stats can be very consistent from bad games to good ones. Rugby’s the teamiest of team sports, except perhaps for rowing.

Ben Cohen did have an “x factor” by the way.. He was worth 10 points a game to England. 3.5 points from his try scoring rate, but the rest from stopping tries. He had a hell of an ability to come across the field and smash an opponent into touch just when it looked like they were certain to score, and he did it in pretty much every game.

I don’t give much truck for labelling players as having an “x factor” or being “world class”. Players look good when they are part of a team that’s functioning well collectively… and a lot of the time their individual stats can be very consistent from bad games to good ones. Rugby’s the teamiest of team sports, except perhaps for rowing.

doctor_grey wrote:

Poorfour wrote:I'll second Guinness Zero - though Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout is even better and I would happily drink it in preference to most other beers, full strength or not.

Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout?  I doubt the colonists have that over here....

A second for Big Drop. They have a range of alcohol free beers that actually taste decent and not just passable. If you can order them in its well worth it.

Erdinger alcohol free I find cloyingly sweet after the first half pint. It's miles better than most of the standard alcohol free garbage from the mainstream larger brands. Not tried Guinness Zero.

If you are looking lighter rather than alcohol free Northern Monk's Striding Edge is less than 3% and a very good pale.

Another vote for Guinness Zero! One evening of it was enough to fix any wavering I had on dry January, today is going to be my first pint of the year

formerly known as Sam wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

Poorfour wrote:I'll second Guinness Zero - though Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout is even better and I would happily drink it in preference to most other beers, full strength or not.

Big Drop Galactic Milk Stout?  I doubt the colonists have that over here....

A second for Big Drop. They have a range of alcohol free beers that actually taste decent and not just passable. If you can order them in its well worth it.

Erdinger alcohol free I find cloyingly sweet after the first half pint. It's miles better than most of the standard alcohol free garbage from the mainstream larger brands. Not tried Guinness Zero.

If you are looking lighter rather than alcohol free Northern Monk's Striding Edge is less than 3% and a very good pale.

Sam, KC:
Erdinger?  I remember visiting their brewery outside Munich years ago.  Not too common over here, but I will take a look.  I didn't know they had a no alcohol version of their lager.  

For Big Drop, it seems they do have a US location in Connecticut, about half-way between NYC and Boston.  Then it hit me, this is alcohol-free, so it can be shipped.  Wasn't even thinking that yesterday! So, with two recos in the bank, already ordered my 4 pack. Will let you know....

Thanks gents!

By the way, and not pertaining for anything, right now it is 0°F outside.  Nut-cutting cold, as we used to say in the old language.

Good luck with the weather and the non alc doc.

Non alcoholic beers have improved massively in the last couple of years. I keep asking at the Stoop if we can have something other than Heineken Zero or whatever it is they have. I think there’s a real opportunity if they get organised for it.

Well I think alcohol is called for today. Some interesting calls to be made for Italy and some pressure builds for Borthwick. I've said om the other thread in the heat of turning the match off from watching late that it should signal the end of some players. I'm caught in that I think ideally players should be given a run of games to prove themselves, just the weaknesses I see in some shone through today and it's so bloody frustrating. We shouldn't be losing a game like that and although the players made some stupid errors it just felt down to the coaches that one.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well I think alcohol is called for today. Some interesting calls to be made for Italy and some pressure builds for Borthwick. I've said om the other thread in the heat of turning the match off from watching late that it should signal the end of some players. I'm caught in that I think ideally players should be given a run of games to prove themselves, just the weaknesses I see in some shone through today and it's so bloody frustrating.  We shouldn't be losing a game like that and although the players made some stupid errors it just felt down to the coaches that one.

This game should absolutely signal the end of the line for some England players.  And others should be put on notice.  To me the coaching staff has to do better.  But as a first game out and frankly the match was close, so a partial get-out-of-jail-free card.  But players not doing the basics they usually do at other levels.  Basics like tackling, not releasing the ball, passes to nowhere, kicks when not on, and more.  That ain't on Borthwick yet.  Still on the players for ne more week.

And yes, I prescribe alcohol to all who watched England today.

Yeah. Plus note Evans in a short time seems to have had a positive impact. I can't imagine Sinfield has had a happy birthday.

VdM scored a great try but he went through 5 tackles? That is woeful.

Only players in credit from yesterday were Sinckler, Genge, Chessum, Ludlum(excellent and in fairness quite a few of us would have picked Willis instead) and Smith.
A few were OK and a few were pretty poor.

Willis surely comes into the team now but who knows as its early days with Borthwick and it'll take a while to settle. I suspect we will see a different midfield but after that I don't know. Thought vP had a nice tidy game. Chalk and cheese with the guy who replaced him. I did manage to laugh when a pass went about a foot over ludlams head and the following one Smith had to pick off his laces. Must be a nightmare at first receiver to know where and when it will go.

Your favourite 7.5... Slade will come in.

The back row didnt work at all. Ludlum excellent in the first half disappeared in the second....Curry anonymous...

Itoje....going through the motions...
Youngs needs to go
Farrell or Smith at 10...
Farrell no where near 12...pray Kelly is fit
Isiekwe is a lock now simple
Bring Willis and Ted Hill

Quins fans....is Marchant too quick rush out in defence?

Sinfield needs to read the riot act to the whole team....you cant fall off tackles.

Yep surely everyone now sees Smith Farrell isn't answer, Smith was good yesterday I thought but Farrell is captain so Borthwick will pick him. Get Farrell 10 with Smith bench. Kelly 12, Lawrence at 13 with Marchant bench.
Ludlam good most of match I thought, Englands best player by a mile. Dombrandt and Curry too on and off.
Maybe give Itoje a rest on bench and start Chessum Ribbans for Italy.

I would be looking to start Mitchell at 9 to see what he can do with JVP on the bench. I REALLY hope that Kelly is fit again so he can do the job that Farrell can't. Earl to start at 7 with Willis benched and Itoje to a have a game off. Big Dave Ribbans with Ollie Chessum could work REALLY well, and lock cover should be Isiekwe. Dombrandt I think needs a second chance. 13? I would start Lawrence with Marchant on the bench.

Geordie wrote:Your favourite 7.5... Slade will come in.

The back row didnt work at all. Ludlum excellent in the first half disappeared in the second....Curry anonymous...

Itoje....going through the motions...
Youngs needs to go
Farrell or Smith at 10...
Farrell no where near 12...pray Kelly is fit
Isiekwe is a lock now simple
Bring Willis and Ted Hill

Quins fans....is Marchant too quick rush out in defence?

Sinfield needs to read the riot act to the whole team....you cant fall off tackles.

I fail to see what Slade would bring, perhaps the pretence of being a playmaker may mean he drops Malins. I hope Kelly is fit personally. Whichever Lawrence carried better than Marchant in his cameo.

Slade would offer defence in the centers. I know this seems like a novel idea based on yesterday's performance.

Itoje. I think people are falling into the trap of judging a very good player in different standards than those less visible. I have not looked at the stats but struggle to see what isiekwe did when he got on the pitch yet it would seem he's gone up in the rankings.

Yeah it's a fair point in defence. I'm going that's more the switch in systems, though the amount of missed tackles was ridiculous.

Italy being the next game is an issue in the sense that we’ll likely win anyway so whatever the line up we don’t learn much.

BamBam wrote:Italy being the next game is an issue in the sense that we’ll likely win anyway so whatever the line up we don’t learn much.

My thoughts as well.

Regards Slade, I'm not convinced he's answer in centre. He's had so many chances but never nailed it for England. Great on front foot going forward but when it's roll up sleeves time? I'm not so sure.

I'd say the exact opposite to that mm. Really underwhelming in attack good in defence and scrabbling.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'd say the exact opposite to that mm. Really underwhelming in attack good in defence and scrabbling.

But earlier you said and I quote "I fail to see what Slade would bring"?

Anyway, I would try Kelly and Lawrence 12 13. Marchant bench. Smith bench. Farrell 10.

But who knows. We'll probably get Manu and Billy back now...

Even Billy 36 would be a better option at 12. Can see Borthwick picking Farrell at 10 for the next match.

mountain man wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'd say the exact opposite to that mm. Really underwhelming in attack good in defence and scrabbling.

But earlier you said and I quote "I fail to see what Slade would bring"?

Anyway, I would try Kelly and Lawrence 12 13. Marchant bench. Smith bench. Farrell 10.

But who knows. We'll probably get Manu and Billy back now...

And then said its a fair point to loss on his defence. I wouldn't have him in the team at all but I've never seen him good in attack. He got some plaudits in the autumn despite knocking the ball on any time he got it. He's never brought a good passing game to England.

Seemingly everyone wanted Marchant at 13 and now he should be discarded?

I like the make up of Smith/Farrell/Marchant....it reminds me of the Ford/Farrell/JJ which was great in the day.

I'd stick with the former tbh...I think it has potential. Farrell is a better 12 than Kelly and Marchant a better 13 than Lawrence (the other 2 as backups).

Kelly deserves his chance if fit though. Whose your bench 9 now sarge?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Kelly deserves his chance if fit though. Whose your bench 9 now sarge?

Deserving is strong. Farrell is our best option there for me still. Kelly isn't particularly great, he's not going to solve all of our issues.

I'd stick with the same combo and look to bring Kelly or Lawrence from the bench.

No doubt if Kelly comes in and struggles straight off, people will be calling for somebody else.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Seemingly everyone wanted Marchant at 13 and now he should be discarded?

I like the make up of Smith/Farrell/Marchant....it reminds me of the Ford/Farrell/JJ which was great in the day.

I'd stick with the former tbh...I think it has potential. Farrell is a better 12 than Kelly and Marchant a better 13 than Lawrence (the other 2 as backups).

Except Smith Farrell Marchant just didn't work! Marchant not really at fault as he wasn't getting chance to do much. I just listened to BBC pod, apparently Smith carried 14 times and made a total of 15 metres or something. That is ridiculous so something needs to change. Smith Farrell didn't work last year, didn't work yesterday.
Wasn't it Einstein who said definition of madness is doing same thing over and over and expecting a different result?

Since when was a 10 judged on metres made?

You can't continually change players every game, especially in the 10-13 channel. Players need time to develop an understanding. It's not fantasy rugby.....

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Kelly deserves his chance if fit though. Whose your bench 9 now sarge?

Deserving is strong. Farrell is our best option there for me still. Kelly isn't particularly great, he's not going to solve all of our issues.

I'd stick with the same combo and look to bring Kelly or Lawrence from the bench.

No doubt if Kelly comes in and struggles straight off, people will be calling for somebody else.

He was the stand out 12 in the prem let alone English 12 for a huge chunk of last season. And has come back and looked good again. And your bench 9?

I'd like to see Kelly and Lawrence get a run of games personally. I think both are more than good enough.

On the 12 issue, I do find it strange that, since Greenwood's retirement, England's best 12s have probably been Farrell (as part of the Ford-Farrell-Joseph axis) or Tuilagi, neither of whom are a 12 by trade. During that period, the best out-and-out 12s would be Hape and Barritt maybe? Both of whom could probably at best be described as "solid". I guess Flutey for a brief period, although arguably he started out as a fly-half anyway. For whatever reason, England has really struggled to produce a genuinely good 12 for a while, which given the resources they have is a bit odd.

I think we'll see limited changes for Italy. Borthwick will want as much consistency as possible. Kelly if fit might come in, which means Farrell pushes to 10 presumably. Smith wasn't awful against Scotland, but I'm not sure he was particularly good either. I tend to agree with Sam that he still looks a bit "novice"-like, whereas at this stage of his career I would be hoping for him to be bedding in a bit more. There are extenuating circumstances - overly complex attacking shape favoured by Jones, ever-changing midfield, etc. - but he's had a fair few caps now, and I would like to see a bit more progress TBH.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Since when was a 10 judged on metres made?

You can't continually change players every game, especially in the 10-13 channel. Players need time to develop an understanding. It's not fantasy rugby.....

I'm not but point is he was running into traffic hence so little metres made. That's not his game. He needs a proper 12 outside of him, hence why he's so good for Quins. A 10 of his ability shouldn't be running into opposition players, he needs space and options.
As for continually changing, Smith Farrell been a year now and it's not working unless you can convince me otherwise.

Outside him at Quins he has arguably the best 12 in the world.

Kelly isn't a 10th of the player Esterhuizen is I'm afraid, he's offers nothing like the big Saffer. Farrell is the best 12 we have unfortunately.

And bench 9 sarge?

Marchant I don't know about, but he certainly wasn't able to do b the job of two men.

Most of Smith's running was behind the gain line looking for the next opportunity. He did show some good touches. Really good.

I still don't see what Farrell did apart from miss kicks and hurt his head

lostinwales wrote:Marchant I don't know about,  but he certainly wasn't able to do b the job of two men.

Most of Smith's running was behind the gain line looking for the next opportunity. He did show some good touches.  Really good.

I still don't see what Farrell did apart from miss kicks and hurt his head

As I said on the match thread (quoting oneself is a sign of being a bit of a narcissist?), another player at 13 outside Farrell and another almost invisible performance. After a while it isn't the fault or limitations with the players at 13.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Outside him at Quins he has arguably the best 12 in the world.

Kelly isn't a 10th of the player Esterhuizen is I'm afraid, he's offers nothing like the big Saffer. Farrell is the best 12 we have unfortunately.

Maybe it's me, but it seems a lot of people are talking about Kelly as if he is a seasoned vet with 30, 40, 50 caps and if he plays everything will look rosier. What I see is a young player, playing well who seems to have a high ceiling. I certainly want to see him get his shot but it is a reach to say he is the answer at 12 until he plays well for an extended period of time. Inside Centre is a big issue for England and perhaps even competence at 12 is a big upgrade?

Yesterday's match was a good illustration of the way a new coaching team can't change the selection dilemmas posed by the current England set-up.

Athough pundits believed Eddie Jones spent most of his time trying to spite them with his selections, the next few months will probably show how he was trying to manage the trade-offs as he saw them.

When Borthwick announced his team, amost everyone said the back row looked better balanced. On the day, however, that's not how it played out. While you can't write off Dombrandt and Ben Curry after that showing, if they don't turn out to be consistent international standard, then maybe that's what Jones had concluded. If he felt he couldn't rely on Dombrandt or Simmons while Billy Vunipola was off form, then it explains why he experimented with Tom Curry at 8, with a hybrid flanker at six.

doctor_grey wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Marchant I don't know about,  but he certainly wasn't able to do b the job of two men.

Most of Smith's running was behind the gain line looking for the next opportunity. He did show some good touches.  Really good.

I still don't see what Farrell did apart from miss kicks and hurt his head

As I said on the match thread (quoting oneself is a sign of being a bit of a narcissist?), another player at 13 outside Farrell and another almost invisible performance.  After a while it isn't the fault or limitations with the players at 13.

Marchant was quiet and whilst I'd like to point at Faz for that he played the traditional 12 role so Smith could have control at 10. If Smith didn't use Marchant it was because he didn't think it was on. Marchant did make the positional error that gifted VDM the chance to run round Farrell. That was exceptionally poor from a player that's normally so good defensively, he jumped out the line for the White score as well but assuming Ben Curry was going to make a tackle he'd make 99% of the time probably isn't the worst mistake you could make.

If Kelly is fit bringing him into the midfield would help significantly because he's a defensive leader and plays the role that Farrell was given week in and week out in the Prem. I doubt he'll light up the attack but he's the type of solid player England could build off. If he isn't fit the. Seb Atkinson would have been on my list to try but he's not in the squad.

Backrow and midfield. Those are the two areas that need tweaking. Otherwise England nearly put things together a few times.

If you're mentioning Marchent for the being poor the DvdM try (I don't think he was), you have to mention Dombrandt's awful attempt at a tackle and Steward yet again getting stepped far too easily (for 2 tries?).

The backrow and back 3 as a collective were pretty awful.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:If you're mentioning Marchent for being poor the DvdM try (I don't think he was), you have to mention Dombrandt's awful attempt at a tackle and Steward yet again getting stepped far too easily (for 2 tries?).

The backrow and back 3 as a collective were pretty awful.

An international winger at full speed should be able to beat a covering defender 1vs1 with that much space. Steward and JVP dive in which I'm not a fan of, stay on your feet, maybe concede a bit more ground but make sure you get something on him. Dombrandt does great to get there but trying to grab VDM from an upright position was ridiculous.

Still none of that happens if Marchant fills the line properly and doesn't leave a gaping chasm between him and Farrell. Farrell deserves quite a lot of stick for racing out the line and leaving nothing but space for Scotland for most the game but the VDM try does hang quite a bit on Marchant unfortunately.

Either way...terrible defence all round.

I'll take it you don't know who you'd have as your bench cover then sarge.

What's happened with the officials this 6 nations, don't remember us having so many SH ones before. England have 3 NZs a Frenchman and a SA.

At least England have an extra day to figure out what to do, who to drop and so on.