Oct 2015
9:23am, 4 Oct 2015
5,192 posts
|
Too Much Water
Very disappointed. Robshaw and Lancaster - well they tried their best but it wasn't good enough. Both will be gone, probably Rowntree too after the scrum suffered. I reckon they may go all-in for Shaun Edwards as a new coach, I would like to see Catt stay though.
Re Armitage, the RFU don't want their best players playing overseas... It's their policy and he had the option to come to Bath...
I don't think Farrell deserves the criticism he gets, ok he's not a twinkle toes like Ford but there's a place in the squad for him for sure. Maybe he can be the answer to the 12 question?
Hopefully Burgess can learn the ropes at 6, and be part of a refreshed back row, sans Robshaw
My last prediction is that flat track bully Alex
Goode will score 5 tries next week and a load of uninformed fools will question why he wasn't starting!
|
Oct 2015
9:31am, 4 Oct 2015
582 posts
|
Cheg
Pick your best regardless of where they play.
It was a collective failure. Farrells yellow put the gloss on the Aussie victory, but we went out of the World Cup for team reasons.
Wales game was where it was lost, bit more composure last 10 minutes and this morning feels very different.
|
Oct 2015
11:06am, 4 Oct 2015
21,163 posts
|
Dave A
Surely the best player for a position should be picked, not squeezing a player in just because they are a good player.
|
Oct 2015
11:13am, 4 Oct 2015
21,164 posts
|
Dave A
Agree with TMW, Burgess is a back rower. He plays there at Bath then gets selected in a position he should never play in in the biggest tournament around. He's almost destined to fail, especially in the eyes of the media when he plays there.
|
Oct 2015
11:16am, 4 Oct 2015
21,165 posts
|
Dave A
And, from the little I've seen, the speed of ball when trying to create something out wide needs some serious work. As does the attacking wing/three quarter line. England won't be able to play open, flowing, try scoring rugby if they don't sort that out.
|
Oct 2015
11:22am, 4 Oct 2015
5,193 posts
|
Too Much Water
Dave - England don't need to play open flowing rugby. They could easily (and I would be happy to see), a game built on set piece, strong kicking and territory. I like 10 man rugby because when it's done well it's very hard to beat.
However they weren't able to that well either!
|
Oct 2015
11:32am, 4 Oct 2015
21,166 posts
|
Dave A
I agree, watching a game played well is great to watch. Despite my tending towards league, I do appreciate good forward battles orchastrated by skilful half backs. But when that doesn't work, what then? They tried a bit of catch up rugby last night. It didn't work, because they don't have the stuff in place to execute it. I'm not saying the backs lack skill, because to get to this level they clearly have. But they didn't seem to have the organisation in place to execute good moves out wide.
Maybe it was just because it was panic stations because they were on their way out. Perhaps they need to have more than just a good set of forwards and half backs playing on the pitch?
In the last World Cup, from memory, they dominated SA with great forward play and kicking in the 1st half. In the 2nd half SA turned it round on them and they had no other answer.
|
Oct 2015
11:36am, 4 Oct 2015
630 posts
|
Crash Hamster
Armitage, Kvesic, Slade, Itoje must all have improved their international chances immeasurably...
|
Oct 2015
11:37am, 4 Oct 2015
631 posts
|
Crash Hamster
How Rowntree has turned a dominant pack into one going backwards is a complete mystery...
|
Oct 2015
12:46pm, 4 Oct 2015
10,393 posts
|
Wriggling Snake
The thing that struck me was Australia were smarter, much smarter, better kickers, thought about it and made the right calls at the right time. Intelligence, rugby game playing intelligence and basic intelligence too.
Lancaster and Robshaw are serial failures. They do't have it. Gormless. All talk but can't do it. Especially Robshaw.
Bye Bye to both of them.
A professional game, results driven, decisio makers.
England lack all that.
|