DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 120790--------------------------------------------------
O/T ‘I couldn’t tell you what we are:’ England’s search for
identity goes on...
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: March 7, 2024, 5:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Six Nations 2024
‘I couldn’t tell you what we are:’ England’s search for identity
goes on
Steve Borthwick changes his plan for every game but that leaves
him open to charges of being overreliant on data
Gerard Meagher (Guardian)
Wed 6 Mar 2024 18.00 GMT
What do England want to be? What are they trying to be? How are
they perceived by opponents and what is the identity they are
trying to forge? The very fact that these are not easy questions
to answer illustrates the predicament for Steve Borthwick’s side
with two daunting Six Nations matches remaining.
To frame things another way, try summing up England in a single
sentence. For a lot of their rivals it is a far easier task:
Ireland are a well-oiled team, relentless and precise. Wales are
green but full of fight, Scotland lethal on the counterattack.
Beyond the Six Nations, South Africa are a team who knock the
front door down, and New Zealand marry speed and skill like no
other. But England?
Sam Underhill is one of the squad’s deepest thinkers, among
their most articulate players, but he struggled to characterise
England this week. “I think it’s hard to have that level of
self-awareness,” he said.
“You want to be a physical team [with] a massive emphasis around
the set piece. We want to have a good defence, it’s historically
something we’ve gone after. And the attack stuff, we’re trying
to develop and improve. I probably couldn’t tell you what we
are, because I’m in it, so I can’t really look from the outside
and get that perspective. That’s what I guess we’re trying to
look at.”
Part of the problem is Borthwick’s insistence that each game
plan is tailored specifically to the opposition. All teams do
that to a degree but the constant shape‑shifting makes it
all the more difficult to forge an identity and leaves England
open to the kind of accusations, made by Will Carling this week,
that they are overreliant on data and, by association, what it
says about their opponents.
The problem is compounded because England are always striving
for cohesion but they have players coming from 10 clubs, all
with their own thoughts, ideas and styles. It is a problem we
are hearing a lot about this week because Ireland are held up as
the opposite, a side for whom cohesion comes so much easier
because of their domestic structure.
“You judge us against Ireland – [they] are together for long
periods and you look at their attack and it’s phenomenal,” says
Dan Cole. “But their players know who’s going to be there
because they do it day in, day out, 365 days a year, pretty
much. Whereas we have to come together, we have a tournament
here, a tournament there, we’ve got new players in squads,
people come from different teams playing in different ways –
which is great, it’s a strength in the fact we have different
diversities of how you play the game. But it’s also a weakness
in some regards because you have to get them on the same page,
play a certain way that England play, and sometimes it goes
against the instinct of a certain player, or a certain club, or
a certain team.”
If it is hard to get on the same page then it is all the more
difficult to stay on it when things start to go wrong. The
capitulation against Scotland was a clear example and it was
telling to hear Maro Itoje lambast his teammates afterwards for
playing “tip-tap rugby” and “hot potato”. The inference is that
some players sought to respond to Scotland’s opening try by
playing with abandon whereas others favour a more route-one
approach.
It was also a problem during England’s World Cup warm-up
campaign when players began to question the restrictive game
plan that was not yielding results. But by the time they arrived
in France they had adopted a more belligerent attitude in
response to the criticism they received for losing at home
against Fiji and, as a result, there was a collective buy-in to
the kick-heavy game plan. It did not win them many admirers yet
at least England were clear on their identity.
When Courtney Lawes was asked about it during the pool stages,
his response was unequivocal. “We’re a really strong defensive
team,” he said. “That’s our backbone. We’re an aerial kicking
team and are very good at getting the ball back.”
Since then England have overhauled their defensive system. They
say they are looking to be more expansive with ball in hand yet,
according to reports, are spending little time practising it and
made a staggering 25 handling errors against Scotland. They have
not scored more than two tries in a game since putting Chile to
the sword last September and though we hear words like
“transition” and talk of World Cup cycles, England are staring
down the barrel of a fourth successive Six Nations with only two
wins.
It is a rut that is proving increasingly hard to get out of and
though the Rugby Football Union may think otherwise, but the
“hybrid” contracts coming in next season are unlikely to be a
silver bullet.
There is an argument, then, that Borthwick ought to have stuck
to his guns and persevered with the limited if effective game
plan that took them to the World Cup semi-finals. Because
without a consistent identity it becomes all the more difficult
for players to get on the same page. If they do not have a modus
operandi, a bespoke way of playing they can fall back on, then
unravelling as they did at Murrayfield becomes all the more
likely.
On Saturday they go into the home match as considerable
underdogs though it is the kind of fixture that suits England
because they will have less of the ball than Ireland and are
better at frustrating high-quality opponents, rather than
imposing their game plan on them. But Carling is not alone in
speaking out of late and the knives are being sharpened. There
are different ways to lose but defeat will put Borthwick’s job
under genuine scrutiny for the first time.
#Post#: 120793--------------------------------------------------
Re: O/T ‘I couldn’t tell you what we are:’ England’s search for
identity goes on...
DIR By: Banstead Quin
Date: March 7, 2024, 5:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's like the first 90 minutes of Mike Basset, England
manager......responding to the criticism game by game and not
focussing on a way to win, rather than on what the oppo do.
He needs to, metaphorically, play 44 fu**ing 2 and get on with
it
#Post#: 120794--------------------------------------------------
Re: O/T ‘I couldn’t tell you what we are:’ England’s search for
identity goes on...
DIR By: MaidstoneQuin
Date: March 7, 2024, 5:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Essentially theres a few things why England are crap.
1. SB himself. Dull player, dull captain, and very much a safety
first choice.
2. Inexperienced coaching set up for test rugby, who seemingly
only got the job based off a title when the one season Sarries
weren't at the races.
3. Trying to implement safe tactics that work in the
premiership, but at test level you need to be different.
4. Selecting players who aren't used to the dull mind numbing
rugby, but individually are very good when allowed to play an
attacking game (IE Smith). Then they are brought in to a
training camp and essentially told to forget everything thats
got them there, and to play a different way. Point proven in how
disjointed Marcus looks when he comes back to us for a few games
5. The blitz defence is a gimmick. We lost by Scotland to our
biggest margin! We do not have the players with the pace and
strength to play that system effectively.
With the above, its no wonder why after 20 tests we look as poor
as we did when Eddie was here in his last days. Brian Ashton
didn't last much longer than the amount SB has had, and I think
even SB's win % will be less then the one Ashton was sacked for,
once we lose to Ireland and France.
If I were SB, and I was sticking to his stick it up your jumper
approach, hoping we get a line out we can shove over, this is
the team he should pick.
1. Marler
2. George
3. Cole
4. Itoje
5. Ewels
6. Ludlam
7. Earl
8. Barbaery
9. Spencer
10. Ford
11. Cokansiga (sp)
12. Tuilagi
13. Lawrence
14. Nowell (Yes I know he cannot be picked by you get the point)
15. Steward
Lets look at the facts, Under SB we've lost to Scotland twice,
Ireland twice, destroyed in the biggest ever defeat at home by
France, lost to Fiji at home, and only narrowly beat wales at HQ
on two occasions. To think it's suddenly going to click and we
start winning convincingly is delusion
#Post#: 120798--------------------------------------------------
Re: O/T ‘I couldn’t tell you what we are:’ England’s search for
identity goes on...
DIR By: ChiddQuin
Date: March 7, 2024, 6:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: MaidstoneQuin link ---
>
>
>
> Lets look at the facts, Under SB we've lost to Scotland twice,
Ireland twice, destroyed in the biggest ever defeat at home by
France, lost to Fiji at home, and only narrowly beat wales at HQ
on two occasions. To think it's suddenly going to click and we
start winning convincingly is delusion
>
--- End Quote ---
Sadly I think you are correct.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1