England 2023 - Post 6N and beyond - Prep for WC

First topic message reminder :

Continued.....

But also comes back to the terrible job Eddie did in not blooding some new players when he had the chance. But mainly my criticism is for the RFU for overseeing this and not removing Eddie early enough. Steve has been left a bum hand which to date he is playing poorly.

A backrow of Curry Vunipola and Lawes which is our first choice backrow has 210 England caps between them and have played together multiple times. As Sam has said, losing your first choice hooker due to injury is unavoidable and comes after a period when we have had 2 outstanding hookers who have monopolised selection. In view of Walker's lack of experience and injury record of late, Tom Dunn might have been a safer selection, but I am the first to criticise SB for going for experienced (slightly past their best) players in preference to younger up and coming talents. In this instance he has gone for Theo Dan who most people in the know think is a real talent on the up.

Come the world cup final the squad will be aiming to be at 100% bar any niggles they pick up along the way. It's a marathon not a sprint.

I don't hold much hope for this world Cup..however I do hold hope rhat we have some potentially cracking kids coming through..many who have been picked in this squad.

If managed properly they can gain massive experience form this and hopefully them and England can really push in post wc in the next 6n etc.

The likes of Theo Dan do look an amazing young talent..so great give them rhe chance. The player and Ebgland will be so much better off for this experience going forward

Didn't realise he was available for Romania too.

Times podcast says they got the scoop on the squad, because some of the players cut, ended up travelling on the same train as journalists going back from the training camp. This meant they knew some of the main headlines, like Slade, and phoned around to fill in the gaps.

Same podcast says Borthwick has selected a squad with the peculiarities of the World Cup in mind. It's straightforward to replace a player with a tournament-ending injury. However, there are other situations which don't generally turn up in the Six Nations etc.

If a player gets a red card - and we've seen a few in recent matches - he will likely miss some matches, and maybe out for the rest of the tournament. He cannot be replaced. The only way to get cover, if it's needed, is to send someone home. The squad will be short a player for the rest of the tournament.

Players may also miss matches with niggles which don't warrant getting sent home. Richard Hill is an example of a player England were prepared to carry, because of his value when fit.

The main new variable is the mandatory stand-down for head injuries. In these cases, coaches might know early on, that a player will be fine to play but will have to count down the days until he becomes available.

The Times is well.behind Borthwick too so wouldn't be surprised that they had an inside line and they're helping cover for them.

Been thinking that Dan reminds me a little of Tom Youngs.

I really like Theo Dan, yes he had a mare on Saturday but so did a few others. If players get a chance, fluff it then are dropped it's going back to dark days of England cricket and football where that used to happen.

He's young and raw but will improve. If he gets repeated chances and can't cope then fine, bin him.

As for RWC, I hold no hope to be honest. After that debacle on weekend even though fringe/dropped players involved I think will have an adverse effect on whole squad especially if during a game things start going badly wrong.

If Eng achieve SF that would be an achievement, I'd seriously be amazed if got to final.

No 7&1/2 wrote:The Times is well.behind Borthwick too so wouldn't be surprised that they had an inside line and they're helping cover for them.

Been thinking that Dan reminds me a little of Tom Youngs.

(I still shudder when his name is mentioned in an England thread.....)

We certainly seen some similarities at the weekend, although Dan arguably has better darts.

Well Borthwick has only had a short time to work with him and he didn't have our primary lineout options on the pitch so I'm sure we'll see big improvements quickly. If he can improve to Youngs standard in the lineout we're cooking on gas.

One can only hope he can get up to Youngs throwing standard fast.....

If anyone can its the England coaches, and they obviously feel confident.

Looking forward to some basic forward power off the driving mauls this weekend. Reckon we should be able to put Wales under massive pressure as we started to do last week. Doesn't sound as if Walker will be risked this week so expect 80 minutes almost seamlessly between George and Dan. Wouldn't be surprised to see one of them pick up a brace of tries.

I thogut they were comparing him to Shalk Brits. Hence why they were so keen to fast track him.

king_carlos wrote:
Fitness was clearly a huge issue in the Six Nations but as has been discussed to death I think that's just the Prem being a poorer standard now. The players aren't getting week in, week out high level matches to prepare them anymore. Since the double whammy of ringfencing and the lower cap most weekends now seem to be one or two strong games then far too many duds with rotated squads and high score lines but low quality. The jump to the Six Nations is then absolutely gigantic and many players looked exhausted at the end of the first half and then early in the second half.

If the full strength squad look less fit than the opposition come the RWC then that's very much a coaching fault after such a long training block. A largely second string side, many of whom have now been dropped, fading in the first warmup isn't a big concern to me though.

I am really surprised, given how knowledgeable people generally are on this board, that there doesn't seem to be a good understanding of conditioning and tapering.

The basic principle is that if you want to develop strength and fitness you train with higher intensity and a heavier load than if you are simply looking to maintain it. You also have to break down muscle in order for it to repair itself and become stronger. As teams transition from pre-season to competitive games, the S&C team reduce the intensity and load to maintenance levels - but until that's done players will suffer a hit to their match endurance because their bodies are still recovering.

In, say, athletics - where early season competition overlaps with training for the bigger events - you will regulary hear athletes talk about their performance in terms of where they are in their training and whether they have tapered yet.

You don't hear about that much in rugby unless you're close to a top level side, because it nearly all takes place in the close season. The one time it doesn't is in the run up to the RWC, where warm up games overlap with training. I heard several former pro players talk about England around the squad announcement, and they were all pretty clear that England players still have a heavy training workload and haven't begun their taper. It's maybe not surprising - we have the same S&C coach that the Boks had last time, and they began with a loss in their first pool game (where they dominated for the first half hour and then blew themselves out - sound familiar?) but had the fitness to outlast England in the final.

And before anyone says it, "but they're world class athletes and should be able ot do better" doesn't cut it here. It works exactly the opposite way round: they become world class athletes by training like this and tapering their training load to peak exactly when they need to. Which is, ideally, on 28 October.

Fair enough Poorfour but how come likes of NZ manage it repeatedly? I cannot think of a time where NZ were beaten because they werent fit enough, can you?

If Eng were still under heavy workload etc and they are aiming to get it spot on for RWC then fair enough but doesn't every team do that? Wales I'm sure will be fit for RWC so are you saying they peaked on Saturday?

Maybe it was a training issue regards S&C but I just thought England weren't good enough. Simple as that really, it didnt strike me as they ran out of steam really, just ran out of ideas.

Both teams would be roughly on the same level of prep. Maybe a bit like Lancaster's issues in 2015 as to we played a bit too wide in the first half. This team is being built for tight aggressive carries and for the winger to chase kicks, no point going outside that; must have had Borthwick and Walter's tearing their hair out leaving a slight drop in performance in the 2nd half. Keep coming back to Borthwick's point though, we were creating plenty of opportunities just not taking them.

Poorfour - To be fair, I can absolutely imagine folk supporting several sports closely and not being familiar with tapering unless they are avid readers of some of the better autobiographies or have done it themselves through competing.

I'm aware of it through rowing competitively for instance. There are so many training hours involved in rowing that you simply have to taper.

Until very recently it would absolutely be possible to play rugby to a good level and support it consistently but not hear about tapering though.

Aled Walters has got an incredible reputation in S&C throughout rugby through his work with Munster (that filtered into Ireland's excellently professionalised pathways), the Boks and Tigers. From what I can find in pods, interviews, etc about his methods it does sound like a lot of it is a bigger focus on base cardio at a low intensity ( which has lots of names such steady state and UT2 in rowing, zone 2 or maf in running) and better periodisation in programming. It has had brilliant results but isn't really state of the art from a S&C perspective in the broader picture. Rugby has generally lagged a bit behind in this regard.

The Boks being so much sharper than England late in the 2019 final is also in large part because their tight five depth meant they could rotate their big boys and substitute them early. Etzebeth for instance had played 240 minutes from 5 apps going into the final. Itoje had played 320 minutes from 4 apps and that was with England having their toughest pool game cancelled. I think that was a positive of the Boks 'bomb squad'. They weren't just bringing a fresh tight five on for the second half. They also had a starting front five that rarely have to play 80 minutes.

mountain man wrote:Fair enough Poorfour but how come likes of NZ manage it repeatedly? I cannot think of a time where NZ were beaten because they werent fit enough, can you?

A generally higher standard of domestic competition than the Prem but also a short season meaning they can get internationals rested and peaking for the right time. Somewhat like Ireland are now doing. That is basically periodisation in training and tapering. So exactly what Poorfour is referring to really. Just a domestic setup and talent pool that are better set to succeed.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the Prem being at by a distance it's strongest coincided with England's improved performance against the ABs for instance.

If Eng were still under heavy workload etc and they are aiming to get it spot on for RWC then fair enough but doesn't every team do that? Wales I'm sure will be fit for RWC so are you saying they peaked on Saturday?

Wales had a few more first choices in their squad to be fair. Not full strength of course. Two debutants at prop for instance. Morgan, Wainwright, Dee, Rowlands, North, LRZ and Davies in the starting XV should be in their first choice 23 at the RWC. Then Biggar, Elias and T Williams on the bench. 1/2P will depend on Sanjay's fitness. It's not unrealistic that Llewellyn and Jenkins might be thereabouts too.

Seeing Morgan and Wainwright, two cracking players, look fitter than Dombrandt doesn't concern me at all. If Ludlam had faded as well that would be a different story. Or if Tom Curry were comprehensively outworked. But I thought Ludlam's work rate throughout was impressive.

As said I do think most the players who faded have now been cut. Which was realistically why so many of the fringe players were in that 23. To make a final judgement. The only players who might be in the RWC 23 I had concerns about fitness wise were Care and Stuart.

Maybe it was a training issue regards S&C but I just thought England weren't good enough. Simple as that really, it didnt strike me as they ran out of steam really, just ran out of ideas.[

That's more my view. Some players such as Dombrandt (again...) and Pearson (I rate him really highly but he did fade after a strong start) maybe seemed short on the fitness side. Others such as Cokanasiga and Porter just didn't look good enough. I wouldn't say either looked knackered. Just outclassed.

mountain man wrote:Fair enough Poorfour but how come likes of NZ manage it repeatedly? I cannot think of a time where NZ were beaten because they werent fit enough, can you?

I am completely with Poorfour having many years ago trained with elite cyclists (I was not an elite cyclist for clarity, but went on training riders with a couple of friends who were - their 'go easy' days were my bust a gut days!). I'm also slightly surprised more folks aren't really aware that peak condition is called a 'peak' for a reason...

Interestingly enough, between 2010 and 2018 New Zealand won all bar two of the trinations/rugby championship tournaments. Those two were of course 2011 and 2015 - when they went on to win the world cup. In total across the three games they lost in those years, they scored only once in the last 20 minutes.

A couple of updates of interest I've spotted.

Billy is apparently close to a return on Saturday. Which would be good news as he's generally a player that gets better with game time. Rather than someone such as Lawes who seems to have mastered the ability to return from layoffs at his best.

Borthwick has also mentioned that LCD is being monitored and there are suggestions from a few journalists that he's on the standby list as he might be fit at the back end of the tournament. So I can't wait for the amusing moment when a reserve back who played against Chile suddenly develops an injury that allows LCD to get called up.

Big wrote:

mountain man wrote:Fair enough Poorfour but how come likes of NZ manage it repeatedly? I cannot think of a time where NZ were beaten because they werent fit enough, can you?

I am completely with Poorfour having many years ago trained with elite cyclists (I was not an elite cyclist for clarity, but went on training riders with a couple of friends who were - their 'go easy' days were my bust a gut days!).  I'm also slightly surprised more folks aren't really aware that peak condition is called a 'peak' for a reason...

Interestingly enough, between 2010 and 2018 New Zealand won all bar two of the trinations/rugby championship tournaments.  Those two were of course 2011 and 2015 - when they went on to win the world cup.  In total across the three games they lost in those years, they scored only once in the last 20 minutes.

Exactly, so NZ were/are able to get training/fitness right for a sustained period.

None of us are party to fitness data on the players so we are guessing what is going on. Maybe they are mid training and will get it bang on for Oct. Can only hope so but a lot here seem to think it's fitness is reason why England havne't done very well last 2 years. Perhaps it's just they are not good enough.

mountain man wrote:

Big wrote:

mountain man wrote:Fair enough Poorfour but how come likes of NZ manage it repeatedly? I cannot think of a time where NZ were beaten because they werent fit enough, can you?

I am completely with Poorfour having many years ago trained with elite cyclists (I was not an elite cyclist for clarity, but went on training riders with a couple of friends who were - their 'go easy' days were my bust a gut days!).  I'm also slightly surprised more folks aren't really aware that peak condition is called a 'peak' for a reason...

Interestingly enough, between 2010 and 2018 New Zealand won all bar two of the trinations/rugby championship tournaments.  Those two were of course 2011 and 2015 - when they went on to win the world cup.  In total across the three games they lost in those years, they scored only once in the last 20 minutes.

Exactly, so NZ were/are able to get training/fitness right for a sustained period.

I think the point was that in 2011 and 2015 that they sacrificed the Tri Nations in order to focus on their fitness work for the world cup. The aim being to peak at the world cup and not in the summer beforehand.

Anyway.
Just listened to BBC Rugby podcast on squad announcement and my God Borthwick is dreadful answering questions or not as was case.
At least Jones didn't duck a question but Borthwick should be coaching a cricket team the amount of times he played a defensive shot.

I've always been a critic of Monye but at least he made some sensible relevant points. Chris Jones basically asking questions and post interview saying what us Eng fans think. Eng can tolerate a pragmatic team if they win or an entertaining one if they lose but playing pragmatic aka dreadful boring rugby AND losing is not good enough. If England don't win this Saturday then knives be out is gist of it.

Danny Care was a bit better although he's in squad so hardly going to rock boat but he at least admitted Eng not good enough. Borthwick just blathered on.

Did it fill me with hope for RWC? Not really...

mountain man wrote:
Exactly, so NZ were/are able to get training/fitness right for a sustained period.

None of us are party to fitness data on the players so we are guessing what is going on. Maybe they are mid training and will get it bang on for Oct. Can only hope so but a lot here seem to think it's fitness is reason why England havne't done very well last 2 years. Perhaps it's just they are not good enough.

Not exactly.  They could reliably peak each year with an amazing set of players and coaches, but they couldn't maintain that form all year round.  In the years they wanted to be in peak form in October, they were much worse in August and were losing matches they'd normally win.  That was my point really.  

But I do completely agree that this England team is not good enough - I don't think it's a case of fitness issues or quality issues, I think it's both.  I don't think England will be world beaters come the world cup, but I do think they will be much better than they were against Wales at the weekend!

Well in all honesty England couldn't be a lot worse. They were dreadful, 22 handling errors or something?

I think Eng will be better and could even win on Saturday but I suspect confidence of any players in team from last week might be fragile.
Eng need to win and win well. A scraped win or even worse another loss be pretty gruesome.

mountain man wrote:Anyway.
Just listened to BBC Rugby podcast on squad announcement and my God Borthwick is dreadful answering questions or not as was case.
At least Jones didn't duck a question but Borthwick should be coaching a cricket team the amount of times he played a defensive shot.

I've always been a critic of Monye but at least he made some sensible relevant points. Chris Jones basically asking questions and post interview saying what us Eng fans think. Eng can tolerate a pragmatic team if they win or an entertaining one if they lose but playing pragmatic aka dreadful boring rugby AND losing is not good enough. If England don't win this Saturday then knives be out is gist of it.

Danny Care was a bit better although he's in squad so hardly going to rock boat but he at least admitted Eng not good enough. Borthwick just blathered on.

Did it fill me with hope for RWC? Not really...

No, he's exactly what we needed following Jones. Straight talking Englishman, who knows the players inside and out. He clearly knows how to get the best out of people. Remember this WC is all down to Jones, and to be fair the players. It's not Borthwicks fault that he's been painted into this corner. Realistically it'll be the next AIs before you can truly think this is Borthwicks team. Unless he pulls out some real magic this WC and wins it for us.

It's sounding like they might be getting a few players back on Saturday. Billy is apparently close. Whilst Lawrence, Chessum and Arundell have reportedly been back in full training. AFAIK the experienced guys who have had recent injuries in Lawes, Manu, Daly and Watson are all fit.

Ribbans won't be available after the HIA. I very doubt Turry will be back yet either after rolling that ankle. I haven't heard anything on Walker being back in full training yet either.

Just adding what I've read the last couple of days to the 23 I tried predicting on Sunday, we could see something like below at the weekend:

1.Marler 2.George 3.Stuart 4.Itoje 5.Chessum 6.Ludlam 7.Willis 8.Vunipola
9.JvP 10.Ford 11.Daly 12.Farrell 13.Lawrence 14.Watson 15.Steward

16.Dan 17.Genge 18.Sinckler 19.Lawes 20.Earl 21.Youngs 22.Tuilagi 23.Arundell

I'd say that's starting to look like a much better balanced squad. That's no guarantee it will play well of course.

Farrell at 12. No thanks.

I rate the Ford-Farrell partnership. As said many times, I think the best rugby I've seen England play since 2003 has been with those two together in the midfield.

In past it worked but Farrell much better at 10 I think. I can understand Farrell being moved to 12 if say Ford or Smith subbed on but I wouldn't want a starting team as that .

I think Ford/Farrel 10/12 will be fine. We are 100% focussed on tactical (or not very tactical) kicking when attacking, or when under pressure so two very gook tactical kickers is a must have. Smith is a brilliant talent but Borthwick and co can't get the best from him, at this point of time it seems pointless playing him.

Big wrote:

mountain man wrote:Fair enough Poorfour but how come likes of NZ manage it repeatedly? I cannot think of a time where NZ were beaten because they werent fit enough, can you?

I'm also slightly surprised more folks aren't really aware that peak condition is called a 'peak' for a reason...

I can only go on the performances on the pitch. We lost the last 15 minutes in almost every 6Ns game and faded badly last Sat. If we peak fitness wise in the RWC final I will eat my new hat (but I will also do that with a smile)

Yup - a am not buying the idea that their sluggishness was due to the point in their training. Wales would surely be at a similar point, its a pattern repeated for years. Every opponent knows to run England around the pitch until gaps appear

TJ wrote:Yup - a am not buying the idea that their sluggishness was due to the point in their training.  Wales would surely be at a similar point, it's a pattern repeated for years.  Every opponent knows to run England around the pitch until gaps appear

agreed...we aim to play slow and try to use our supposed physicality. Look at our scrum halves deliberately playing slow ball once the artillery is in position. If we tried to play quickly - SCWs mantra - then we would need to train accordingly.

TJ wrote:Yup - a am not buying the idea that their sluggishness was due to the point in their training.  Wales would surely be at a similar point, its a pattern repeated for years.  Every opponent knows to run England around the pitch until gaps appear

I would have expected Wales to be at a similar stage in their preparation, because Gatland's teams are usually like that. But they weren't, perhaps because they were starting from a higher base so had done less heavy fitness work, or perhaps because Aled Waters likes to go even later than Gats in starting the taper.

And it's precisely because opponents know that they can create gaps by running England around the pitch that a later taper may be deemed necessary.

It's not just me saying this, by the way. I went to a debenture holder's event at Twickenham on Monday (courtesy of a mate who is one), and the panel of Dylan Hartley, Chris Ashton and Jamie Roberts all agreed that England's performance looked as if they hadn't tapered yet. But hey, what do pro players know?

New thread ladies and gentlemen - https://www.606v2.com/t71187-england-the-build-up-and-winning-the-world-cup-at-a-canter#4101223