International Rugby

[PaulWinch again]

Thing is his selection was largely vindicated in the first half. It's his changes that buried us. Terrible last 20 mins. They've got one game to save it now. Basically if we beat Australia we're probably through.

[PaulWinch again]

England's biggest isn't style of play it's indiscipline. If you concede 10+ penalites every game you're going to lost most of them.

[Proposition Joe]

Thing is his selection was largely vindicated in the first half. It's his changes that buried us. Terrible last 20 mins. They've got one game to save it now. Basically if we beat Australia we're probably through.

Wouldn't surprise me to see Wales lose to Fiji to be honest.

And changes or non changes, that game was in the bag.  England only have themselves to blame.

[paul_e]

Thing is his selection was largely vindicated in the first half. It's his changes that buried us. Terrible last 20 mins. They've got one game to save it now. Basically if we beat Australia we're probably through.

Well no it wasn't, that's the problem.  The pack was vindicated because we destroyed them at the set piece and restarts.  The issue is we should've been out of sight by the time he made changes.  Aside from that the bench in any sport serves 2 purposes, 1 is injury cover and the other is to bring in players who change the game.  I didn't see anyone on that bench who could come on and change the game except maybe Launchbury, but given we lost Lawes to bring him in it had no effect.  Ford was player a loser because his game is about bring in intelligent runners to open gaps, and only Watson fits that brief from the 5 he had outside him.

As I've said before the indiscipline comes because we can't win turnover ball or slow play down effectively with the choice we have at 7.  Our best player at the breakdown is Dan Cole and whilst he's decent for a prop he's never going to compete legally with Lydiate and Warburton.  Add Armitage to that side and we'd see 3-4 less penalties per game.

[OzVilla]

Aussies are celebrating. One because England lost and two because they think it's a good result for them.  Not sure how, if everything goes to form (cough) it'll just mean a winner takes all game at Twickenham surely where England have a pretty good recent record against them.

[PaulWinch again]

Thing is his selection was largely vindicated in the first half. It's his changes that buried us. Terrible last 20 mins. They've got one game to save it now. Basically if we beat Australia we're probably through.

Well no it wasn't, that's the problem.  The pack was vindicated because we destroyed them at the set piece and restarts.  The issue is we should've been out of sight by the time he made changes.  Aside from that the bench in any sport serves 2 purposes, 1 is injury cover and the other is to bring in players who change the game.  I didn't see anyone on that bench who could come on and change the game except maybe Launchbury, but given we lost Lawes to bring him in it had no effect.  Ford was player a loser because his game is about bring in intelligent runners to open gaps, and only Watson fits that brief from the 5 he had outside him.

As I've said before the indiscipline comes because we can't win turnover ball or slow play down effectively with the choice we have at 7.  Our best player at the breakdown is Dan Cole and whilst he's decent for a prop he's never going to compete legally with Lydiate and Warburton.  Add Armitage to that side and we'd see 3-4 less penalties per game.

Well it kind of was because the starting 15 had pretty much complete control of the game. I agree the bench wasn't right and Slade should have been there instead of Goode. But his big selection calls, Farrell and Burgess, both played pretty well. The Armitage factor is slightly unfair due to the rule the the RFU has in place. Ultimately Armitage knew by playing abroad he effectively makes himself unselectable. He could have done something about that, but he didn't.

Anyway it's by the by now, Lancaster has one game to save his England career. The way the group pans out, if we beat Australia we're probably through and if we don't we're out. So it's quite simple now. I'd be half tempted to go with a Burgess and Joseph partnership in that game, if JJ is fit.

[nigel]

I thought England always looked fairly comfortable, but when you keep giving penalties away in kicking distance you always leave yourselves open to a sucker punch. The substitutions seemed to hand it to the Welsh.

Positive spin on this is that Wales wont beat Australia where as I think we could.
But for me, with the Welsh injuries mounting beating Fiji is not a forgone conclusion. If, and it's a massive IF, Fiji turn up they could very well turn them over.

[paul_e]

Thing is his selection was largely vindicated in the first half. It's his changes that buried us. Terrible last 20 mins. They've got one game to save it now. Basically if we beat Australia we're probably through.

Well no it wasn't, that's the problem.  The pack was vindicated because we destroyed them at the set piece and restarts.  The issue is we should've been out of sight by the time he made changes.  Aside from that the bench in any sport serves 2 purposes, 1 is injury cover and the other is to bring in players who change the game.  I didn't see anyone on that bench who could come on and change the game except maybe Launchbury, but given we lost Lawes to bring him in it had no effect.  Ford was player a loser because his game is about bring in intelligent runners to open gaps, and only Watson fits that brief from the 5 he had outside him.

As I've said before the indiscipline comes because we can't win turnover ball or slow play down effectively with the choice we have at 7.  Our best player at the breakdown is Dan Cole and whilst he's decent for a prop he's never going to compete legally with Lydiate and Warburton.  Add Armitage to that side and we'd see 3-4 less penalties per game.

Well it kind of was because the starting 15 had pretty much complete control of the game. I agree the bench wasn't right and Slade should have been there instead of Goode. But his big selection calls, Farrell and Burgess, both played pretty well. The Armitage factor is slightly unfair due to the rule the the RFU has in place. Ultimately Armitage knew by playing abroad he effectively makes himself unselectable. He could have done something about that, but he didn't.

Anyway it's by the by now, Lancaster has one game to save his England career. The way the group pans out, if we beat Australia we're probably through and if we don't we're out. So it's quite simple now. I'd be half tempted to go with a Burgess and Joseph partnership in that game, if JJ is fit.

But as i said, that control came from the pack not from the backs.  In open play Farrell was poor but no one will talk about because he kicked all his chances and made a couple of decent tackles. Barritt was anonymous and the wings largely worked off scraps, even the try we scored we fucked up the move and Wales left a massive blind side when we were recycling.

[Duncan Shaw]

VP looking resplendent, lovely to see!

[AlexAlexCropley]

Any reason why the Villa Park crowds were 39,526/39,605 rather than 42,500?

[lovejoy]

It was a problem with the execution, leading to us not putting them away when on top. Felt like I'd been mugged on the train back.

[PaulWinch again]

Thing is his selection was largely vindicated in the first half. It's his changes that buried us. Terrible last 20 mins. They've got one game to save it now. Basically if we beat Australia we're probably through.

Well no it wasn't, that's the problem.  The pack was vindicated because we destroyed them at the set piece and restarts.  The issue is we should've been out of sight by the time he made changes.  Aside from that the bench in any sport serves 2 purposes, 1 is injury cover and the other is to bring in players who change the game.  I didn't see anyone on that bench who could come on and change the game except maybe Launchbury, but given we lost Lawes to bring him in it had no effect.  Ford was player a loser because his game is about bring in intelligent runners to open gaps, and only Watson fits that brief from the 5 he had outside him.

As I've said before the indiscipline comes because we can't win turnover ball or slow play down effectively with the choice we have at 7.  Our best player at the breakdown is Dan Cole and whilst he's decent for a prop he's never going to compete legally with Lydiate and Warburton.  Add Armitage to that side and we'd see 3-4 less penalties per game.

Well it kind of was because the starting 15 had pretty much complete control of the game. I agree the bench wasn't right and Slade should have been there instead of Goode. But his big selection calls, Farrell and Burgess, both played pretty well. The Armitage factor is slightly unfair due to the rule the the RFU has in place. Ultimately Armitage knew by playing abroad he effectively makes himself unselectable. He could have done something about that, but he didn't.

Anyway it's by the by now, Lancaster has one game to save his England career. The way the group pans out, if we beat Australia we're probably through and if we don't we're out. So it's quite simple now. I'd be half tempted to go with a Burgess and Joseph partnership in that game, if JJ is fit.

But as i said, that control came from the pack not from the backs.  In open play Farrell was poor but no one will talk about because he kicked all his chances and made a couple of decent tackles. Barritt was anonymous and the wings largely worked off scraps, even the try we scored we fucked up the move and Wales left a massive blind side when we were recycling.

We did fuck up the try, but that had nothing to do with Farrell, Burgess and Barritt they worked it very well before Watson's pass.

[PaulWinch again]

I still think there's a good chance we'll go through, because I can see us nicking the game on Saturday and I think ironically Wales will pay the price for that victory.

[PaulWinch again]

Incidentally what do you reckon on chances of Woodward coming back to coach us? The RFU has changed since he was last in charge and he might relish another crack at it with a younger squad with great potential.

[cheadlevilla]

Incidentally what do you reckon on chances of Woodward coming back to coach us? The RFU has changed since he was last in charge and he might relish another crack at it with a younger squad with great potential.

No chance at all in my view, which is a shame as I'm convinced he changed the face of modern coaching.
My problem with Lancaster is that he seems to have planned, timed substitutions which are made no matter how well the incumbents are playing. Rugby thrives on momentum and he keeps destroying it for "impact substitutions" which aren't always needed