England & Eddie
-
@shark said in England & Eddie:
The petulance, immaturity and indignity shown by Itoje and Sinckler in snubbing their losers' medals leaves a sour taste in the mouth and England fans should be really disappointed with this behaviour.
They should have accepted them then tossed them in the crowd immediately like SBW in 2015?
-
@junior said in England & Eddie:
@MiketheSnow said in England & Eddie:
@hydro11 said in England & Eddie:
@MiketheSnow said in England & Eddie:
@hydro11 said in England & Eddie:
Is this a troll post? No English here to troll....
Last night showed how tough it is to win a World Cup. If you look at the three tournaments South Africa have won, they haven't been very good in any of them.
- 1995 they beat Samoa, France and New Zealand.
- 2007 it was Fiji, Argentina and France.
- 2019 it was Japan, Wales and England.
Relatively speaking those are very easy runs. In the two most recent cups we won we had off performances in the knock outs. 2011, it was the final. 2015, it was the semi. We could have lost either game.
Before this game people clearly discounted the effect that England's tougher run had had. It's exceptionally tough to win a World Cup having had three tough knock out games. In 2015, we beat Australia in the final who had a much easier draw. However, Australia were much worse than us. England and South Africa are generally closely matched so the tough run was always going to be a factor.
People also discounted how South Africa were a much different team to us. We didn't try to take England on up front; South Africa were always going to. If Sinckler doesn't get injured, England could have won. Maybe if the first couple of minutes of how semi had happened differently, we could have won as well.
Eddie Jones is a great coach who has achieved great things with England over the last four years. I would still have him as coach of the year.
Not sure about this and commented on it earlier.
England's schedule was tough on paper - and I wrote before the tournament started that England wouldn't win the WC because they had Argentina, France, Wales/Australia, SA/NZ, SA/NZ on the trot - but the reality was very different.
They comfortably beat a 14-man Argentina; the France match was cancelled; and they comfortably beat an average Australia side who'd already lost to Wales.
They produced one of the performances of the decade by dismantling NZ in the SF but really that was their only serious challenge prior to the Final.
Conversely SA had to play NZ first up; then a very good Japanese side who were unbeaten with wins over Ireland and Scotland, in the QF; then Wales who were also unbeaten, in the SF.
For me, SA had the harder path - admittedly losing to NZ didn't derail their progress.
Eddie has done wonders with England but he made some fatal flaws this tournament and in the years leading up to it.
-
Sinckler.
Great tournament. But if his best back up is Dan Coles then you're always going to struggle if Sinckler gets a YC or an early injury. -
Youngs
Great going forward. Shithouse going backwards. I would have yanked him at half-time. Spencer couldn't have been any worse. -
Daly
Great athlete, average full-back. Exposed badly today. Willie looked like Cullen in comparison. -
May
He was carrying an injury. Barrett caught him ffs. No way Barrett was catching Watson. -
Slade
Not match fit and made significant mistakes in the games he played in -
Ford
This was not the match to start Ford -
No nasty fluffybunny in the forwards
England have great, technical athletes in all positions but no real hard bastard in the Martin Johnson mould who can bollock them.
Lawes was stuffed twice by Kolbe ffs
How's that for starters?
Strongly disagree with this. Pool play is a bit of an irrelevancy unless you have a tough pool. The New Zealand vs South Africa game happened a long time ago and both teams were going to beat Wales. Japan had had two very good victories but were unlikely to have the physicality to beat South Africa in that game. Japan had already played their final. Wales may have been unbeaten but they were exceptionally poor in the semi final and couldn't threaten the South African line.
Not for the first time today I've questioned whether posters watched the SA v Wales SF.
We scored a try. A good one. England couldn't today, despite 20 odd stabs at it in one passage of play.
It was 16-16 going in to the last 10 minutes.
We had two opportunities to take the lead and blew both.
SA had one chance in the last 5 minutes and took it.
So if we were exceptionally poor, then SA were just poor.
SA didn't do much different tonight, so England lost to a poor team.
Not buying it.
Well, Mike, I get your point, but where does that leave England's performance against us, given that we beat RSA and then spanked Wales? Perhaps England weren't that great after all and, in fact, we were just really shit...?
They were very good on the day, but we were also really shit. Some pundits seem to think that if a team plays shit, then it's 100% because they were forced to play shit but obviously that isn't true. Likewise its possible to play well when the opponent also plays well.
-
@mofitzy_ said in England & Eddie:
@junior said in England & Eddie:
@MiketheSnow said in England & Eddie:
@hydro11 said in England & Eddie:
@MiketheSnow said in England & Eddie:
@hydro11 said in England & Eddie:
Is this a troll post? No English here to troll....
Last night showed how tough it is to win a World Cup. If you look at the three tournaments South Africa have won, they haven't been very good in any of them.
- 1995 they beat Samoa, France and New Zealand.
- 2007 it was Fiji, Argentina and France.
- 2019 it was Japan, Wales and England.
Relatively speaking those are very easy runs. In the two most recent cups we won we had off performances in the knock outs. 2011, it was the final. 2015, it was the semi. We could have lost either game.
Before this game people clearly discounted the effect that England's tougher run had had. It's exceptionally tough to win a World Cup having had three tough knock out games. In 2015, we beat Australia in the final who had a much easier draw. However, Australia were much worse than us. England and South Africa are generally closely matched so the tough run was always going to be a factor.
People also discounted how South Africa were a much different team to us. We didn't try to take England on up front; South Africa were always going to. If Sinckler doesn't get injured, England could have won. Maybe if the first couple of minutes of how semi had happened differently, we could have won as well.
Eddie Jones is a great coach who has achieved great things with England over the last four years. I would still have him as coach of the year.
Not sure about this and commented on it earlier.
England's schedule was tough on paper - and I wrote before the tournament started that England wouldn't win the WC because they had Argentina, France, Wales/Australia, SA/NZ, SA/NZ on the trot - but the reality was very different.
They comfortably beat a 14-man Argentina; the France match was cancelled; and they comfortably beat an average Australia side who'd already lost to Wales.
They produced one of the performances of the decade by dismantling NZ in the SF but really that was their only serious challenge prior to the Final.
Conversely SA had to play NZ first up; then a very good Japanese side who were unbeaten with wins over Ireland and Scotland, in the QF; then Wales who were also unbeaten, in the SF.
For me, SA had the harder path - admittedly losing to NZ didn't derail their progress.
Eddie has done wonders with England but he made some fatal flaws this tournament and in the years leading up to it.
-
Sinckler.
Great tournament. But if his best back up is Dan Coles then you're always going to struggle if Sinckler gets a YC or an early injury. -
Youngs
Great going forward. Shithouse going backwards. I would have yanked him at half-time. Spencer couldn't have been any worse. -
Daly
Great athlete, average full-back. Exposed badly today. Willie looked like Cullen in comparison. -
May
He was carrying an injury. Barrett caught him ffs. No way Barrett was catching Watson. -
Slade
Not match fit and made significant mistakes in the games he played in -
Ford
This was not the match to start Ford -
No nasty fluffybunny in the forwards
England have great, technical athletes in all positions but no real hard bastard in the Martin Johnson mould who can bollock them.
Lawes was stuffed twice by Kolbe ffs
How's that for starters?
Strongly disagree with this. Pool play is a bit of an irrelevancy unless you have a tough pool. The New Zealand vs South Africa game happened a long time ago and both teams were going to beat Wales. Japan had had two very good victories but were unlikely to have the physicality to beat South Africa in that game. Japan had already played their final. Wales may have been unbeaten but they were exceptionally poor in the semi final and couldn't threaten the South African line.
Not for the first time today I've questioned whether posters watched the SA v Wales SF.
We scored a try. A good one. England couldn't today, despite 20 odd stabs at it in one passage of play.
It was 16-16 going in to the last 10 minutes.
We had two opportunities to take the lead and blew both.
SA had one chance in the last 5 minutes and took it.
So if we were exceptionally poor, then SA were just poor.
SA didn't do much different tonight, so England lost to a poor team.
Not buying it.
Well, Mike, I get your point, but where does that leave England's performance against us, given that we beat RSA and then spanked Wales? Perhaps England weren't that great after all and, in fact, we were just really shit...?
They were very good on the day, but we were also really shit. Some pundits seem to think that if a team plays shit, then it's 100% because they were forced to play shit but obviously that isn't true. Likewise its possible to play well when the opponent also plays well.
I have to agree - without taking away from England's performance one bit.
Had one or two decisions been different, a bit more discipline from a few players we could have stolen that game. The 2015 team would have done that I think.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in England & Eddie:
@junior said in England & Eddie:
Yep, Lancaster was putting together a great team, very capable of lifting Bill at home, were it not for Sam Burgess and the RFU's meddling
I've heard a number of stories on the Burgess saga - none of which, if true, prefect well on Rob Andrew
Little does
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in England & Eddie:
@mofitzy_ said in England & Eddie:
@junior said in England & Eddie:
@MiketheSnow said in England & Eddie:
@hydro11 said in England & Eddie:
@MiketheSnow said in England & Eddie:
@hydro11 said in England & Eddie:
Is this a troll post? No English here to troll....
Last night showed how tough it is to win a World Cup. If you look at the three tournaments South Africa have won, they haven't been very good in any of them.
- 1995 they beat Samoa, France and New Zealand.
- 2007 it was Fiji, Argentina and France.
- 2019 it was Japan, Wales and England.
Relatively speaking those are very easy runs. In the two most recent cups we won we had off performances in the knock outs. 2011, it was the final. 2015, it was the semi. We could have lost either game.
Before this game people clearly discounted the effect that England's tougher run had had. It's exceptionally tough to win a World Cup having had three tough knock out games. In 2015, we beat Australia in the final who had a much easier draw. However, Australia were much worse than us. England and South Africa are generally closely matched so the tough run was always going to be a factor.
People also discounted how South Africa were a much different team to us. We didn't try to take England on up front; South Africa were always going to. If Sinckler doesn't get injured, England could have won. Maybe if the first couple of minutes of how semi had happened differently, we could have won as well.
Eddie Jones is a great coach who has achieved great things with England over the last four years. I would still have him as coach of the year.
Not sure about this and commented on it earlier.
England's schedule was tough on paper - and I wrote before the tournament started that England wouldn't win the WC because they had Argentina, France, Wales/Australia, SA/NZ, SA/NZ on the trot - but the reality was very different.
They comfortably beat a 14-man Argentina; the France match was cancelled; and they comfortably beat an average Australia side who'd already lost to Wales.
They produced one of the performances of the decade by dismantling NZ in the SF but really that was their only serious challenge prior to the Final.
Conversely SA had to play NZ first up; then a very good Japanese side who were unbeaten with wins over Ireland and Scotland, in the QF; then Wales who were also unbeaten, in the SF.
For me, SA had the harder path - admittedly losing to NZ didn't derail their progress.
Eddie has done wonders with England but he made some fatal flaws this tournament and in the years leading up to it.
-
Sinckler.
Great tournament. But if his best back up is Dan Coles then you're always going to struggle if Sinckler gets a YC or an early injury. -
Youngs
Great going forward. Shithouse going backwards. I would have yanked him at half-time. Spencer couldn't have been any worse. -
Daly
Great athlete, average full-back. Exposed badly today. Willie looked like Cullen in comparison. -
May
He was carrying an injury. Barrett caught him ffs. No way Barrett was catching Watson. -
Slade
Not match fit and made significant mistakes in the games he played in -
Ford
This was not the match to start Ford -
No nasty fluffybunny in the forwards
England have great, technical athletes in all positions but no real hard bastard in the Martin Johnson mould who can bollock them.
Lawes was stuffed twice by Kolbe ffs
How's that for starters?
Strongly disagree with this. Pool play is a bit of an irrelevancy unless you have a tough pool. The New Zealand vs South Africa game happened a long time ago and both teams were going to beat Wales. Japan had had two very good victories but were unlikely to have the physicality to beat South Africa in that game. Japan had already played their final. Wales may have been unbeaten but they were exceptionally poor in the semi final and couldn't threaten the South African line.
Not for the first time today I've questioned whether posters watched the SA v Wales SF.
We scored a try. A good one. England couldn't today, despite 20 odd stabs at it in one passage of play.
It was 16-16 going in to the last 10 minutes.
We had two opportunities to take the lead and blew both.
SA had one chance in the last 5 minutes and took it.
So if we were exceptionally poor, then SA were just poor.
SA didn't do much different tonight, so England lost to a poor team.
Not buying it.
Well, Mike, I get your point, but where does that leave England's performance against us, given that we beat RSA and then spanked Wales? Perhaps England weren't that great after all and, in fact, we were just really shit...?
They were very good on the day, but we were also really shit. Some pundits seem to think that if a team plays shit, then it's 100% because they were forced to play shit but obviously that isn't true. Likewise its possible to play well when the opponent also plays well.
I have to agree - without taking away from England's performance one bit.
Had one or two decisions been different, a bit more discipline from a few players we could have stolen that game. The 2015 team would have done that I think.
Yeah, and to me that is really the little straw that broke the camels back.
We know through experience that playing 3 knockout games at your peak hasn't been achieved by anyone even us. You have to try your best to get your run to the final right (while actually getting there).
After having to face Ireland in the quarters we couldn't go with the option of stepping up in increments. We had to go hard first week. The obvious next plan was to back your systems and abilities in the semi without getting so psyched up as to make getting to the final a waste of time. It didn't work for two reasons. First because England threw all their eggs into our basket and second because we lacked the maturity to deal with that. If there was a game for the old heads to be used it was that semi. Enforce the discipline and cut down the small errors and we could well have scraped through, which is all we needed to do. -
@junior said in England & Eddie:
(As an aside, my view is that he's under-achieved somewhat with this
EnglandAll Blacks team. In20182016, they beat all and sundry and should have gone on to dominate world rugby for the next 4 years given the talent available. Instead, they've been a muddling and inconsistent team, lacking in composure when the heat really went on.)Wise words....
-
Yesterday I was simultaneously happy for the victorious Boks, and pissed off at the manner of England's defeat. Last night I watched "Building Jerusalem", though, and felt relatively sanguine about the loss. Winning Bill is hard, there's a thousand things that need to go right in execution and even then you need a dollop of good fortune along the way; in contrast only a few things need to go awry, or the breaks don't fall your way, and you're farked. I don't believe in fate, I think , but I do like Terry Pratchett's idea of the narrative imperative - that some stories are just so good they have to happen. History loves a good narrative, and Kolisi's was just a great story! England will rise again, and win it again - 2023 looks a good shout given the age of the current squad and the quality of the age group cohorts coming through.
A couple of other random thoughts (before I forget my Silver Fern password until at least the 6N):
Japan - excellent hosts, honoured by their gallant and exciting national team.
Medalgate - I don't care how pissed off the England players were, awarding medals to the losers is part of the ritual - flush it down the hotel bog afterwards for all I care, but whilst you're at the ceremony suck it up and play your part with grace. Given the politeness of Japanese culture I thought that it was poor show by those who balked at the medal. But it's equally poor show that some will take this incontrovertible evidence as an opportunity to trot out all the tired old xenophobic tropes about arrogant hateful English rugby, the bane of the global sport. Hey ho.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Disgusted-of-TW said in England & Eddie:
Yesterday I was simultaneously happy for the victorious Boks, and pissed off at the manner of England's defeat. Last night I watched "Building Jerusalem", though, and felt relatively sanguine about the loss. Winning Bill is hard, there's a thousand things that need to go right in execution and even then you need a dollop of good fortune along the way; in contrast only a few things need to go awry, or the breaks don't fall your way, and you're farked. I don't believe in fate, I think , but I do like Terry Pratchett's idea of the narrative imperative - that some stories are just so good they have to happen. History loves a good narrative, and Kolisi's was just a great story! England will rise again, and win it again - 2023 looks a good shout given the age of the current squad and the quality of the age group cohorts coming through.
A couple of other random thoughts (before I forget my Silver Fern password until at least the 6N):
Japan - excellent hosts, honoured by their gallant and exciting national team.
Medalgate - I don't care how pissed off the England players were, awarding medals to the losers is part of the ritual - flush it down the hotel bog afterwards for all I care, but whilst you're at the ceremony suck it up and play your part with grace. Given the politeness of Japanese culture I thought that it was poor show by those who balked at the medal. But it's equally poor show that some will take this incontrovertible evidence as an opportunity to trot out all the tired old xenophobic tropes about arrogant hateful English rugby, the bane of the global sport. Hey ho.
I do agree with your post but would also point out that those very cliched tropes do have a basis to feed off and that actions like those the other night will keep stoking the fires.
There is no denying that rugby in England is a sport propped up by the 'entitled'. Yes, you may have gone a long way to spreading the player base away from elite schools but the financial support and administration is still mainly 'moneyed'.
I'm not saying they are bad people, just that there are attitudes that flow down and a certain level of arrogance that many don't like. Many in England itself don't like it either so this isn't just us poking you.
So, you can either embrace it as part of who you are and wear the barbs of others or try and change the fabric of the game there. I think the first option is easier. -
@Crucial said in England & Eddie:
@Disgusted-of-TW said in England & Eddie:
Yesterday I was simultaneously happy for the victorious Boks, and pissed off at the manner of England's defeat. Last night I watched "Building Jerusalem", though, and felt relatively sanguine about the loss. Winning Bill is hard, there's a thousand things that need to go right in execution and even then you need a dollop of good fortune along the way; in contrast only a few things need to go awry, or the breaks don't fall your way, and you're farked. I don't believe in fate, I think , but I do like Terry Pratchett's idea of the narrative imperative - that some stories are just so good they have to happen. History loves a good narrative, and Kolisi's was just a great story! England will rise again, and win it again - 2023 looks a good shout given the age of the current squad and the quality of the age group cohorts coming through.
A couple of other random thoughts (before I forget my Silver Fern password until at least the 6N):
Japan - excellent hosts, honoured by their gallant and exciting national team.
Medalgate - I don't care how pissed off the England players were, awarding medals to the losers is part of the ritual - flush it down the hotel bog afterwards for all I care, but whilst you're at the ceremony suck it up and play your part with grace. Given the politeness of Japanese culture I thought that it was poor show by those who balked at the medal. But it's equally poor show that some will take this incontrovertible evidence as an opportunity to trot out all the tired old xenophobic tropes about arrogant hateful English rugby, the bane of the global sport. Hey ho.
So, you can either embrace it as part of who you are and wear the barbs of others or try and change the fabric of the game there. I think the first option is easier.
I'll take the unlisted option C, "neither" - I'm too long in the tooth to lose sleep over the situation one way or another. It was a passing thought, nothing more.
-
@Disgusted-of-TW said in England & Eddie:
Yesterday I was simultaneously happy for the victorious Boks, and pissed off at the manner of England's defeat. Last night I watched "Building Jerusalem", though, and felt relatively sanguine about the loss. Winning Bill is hard, there's a thousand things that need to go right in execution and even then you need a dollop of good fortune along the way; in contrast only a few things need to go awry, or the breaks don't fall your way, and you're farked. I don't believe in fate, I think , but I do like Terry Pratchett's idea of the narrative imperative - that some stories are just so good they have to happen. History loves a good narrative, and Kolisi's was just a great story! England will rise again, and win it again - 2023 looks a good shout given the age of the current squad and the quality of the age group cohorts coming through.
Without planning on winding you up - at what point do you think not winning will become a monkey on the back for England? I'm interested in what people think in general.
For us, I think it was after 1999. 1991 was you can't win them all. 1995 we got poisoned. 1999 was WTF is wrong with these guys!
By 2003, we were getting Gregan's "Four more years" taunt - one of the greatest sledges in sport, but it has turned into the "Curse of the Bambino" for the Aussies - because they're going to do at least the same 24 year drought we did.
Thought South Africa started with a lot more composure than England on Saturday - perhaps under less pressure because they weren't favourites but maybe because their drought was shorter.
A couple of others who didn't manage to face down their demons were Ireland, who didn't look like getting past their QF and Wales, who had a chance to go to the big dance, but that Patchell (?) dropkick was a terrible option.
-
It’s been a terrible rwc for Ireland, losing to Japan , the traditional quarterfinal exit and it looks like they might have lost their title of most disliked team in the game to the poms .
I’m old fashioned though and going to buck the trend and maintain the way I felt about them before the rwc though .
-
@Chris-B said in England & Eddie:
@Disgusted-of-TW said in England & Eddie:
Yesterday I was simultaneously happy for the victorious Boks, and pissed off at the manner of England's defeat. Last night I watched "Building Jerusalem", though, and felt relatively sanguine about the loss. Winning Bill is hard, there's a thousand things that need to go right in execution and even then you need a dollop of good fortune along the way; in contrast only a few things need to go awry, or the breaks don't fall your way, and you're farked. I don't believe in fate, I think , but I do like Terry Pratchett's idea of the narrative imperative - that some stories are just so good they have to happen. History loves a good narrative, and Kolisi's was just a great story! England will rise again, and win it again - 2023 looks a good shout given the age of the current squad and the quality of the age group cohorts coming through.
Without planning on winding you up - at what point do you think not winning will become a monkey on the back for England? I'm interested in what people think in general.
For us, I think it was after 1999. 1991 was you can't win them all. 1995 we got poisoned. 1999 was WTF is wrong with these guys!
By 2003, we were getting Gregan's "Four more years" taunt - one of the greatest sledges in sport, but it has turned into the "Curse of the Bambino" for the Aussies - because they're going to do at least the same 24 year drought we did.
Thought South Africa started with a lot more composure than England on Saturday - perhaps under less pressure because they weren't favourites but maybe because their drought was shorter.
A couple of others who didn't manage to face down their demons were Ireland, who didn't look like getting past their QF and Wales, who had a chance to go to the big dance, but that Patchell (?) dropkick was a terrible option.
The choker tag was applied to us with glee from the NH as a way to say 'see, you aren't really that good when the pressure is on'. There was endless talk of peaking between RWCs.
England threw everything and re-mortgaged Twickenham to win this one. Brought the best coach, gave him a licence to lose while he molded and tested players and strategies, and scoured the registry offices for eligible players yet still came up short. The richest union in the game with the biggest pool to choose from and they can't find a way to the goal. -
Eddie...What isn't to like about Eddie? He seems to have the right attitude, is able to develop players, can coax epic performances out of teams with semi-regularity.
I'm sure England fans are disappointing at the loss - but I doubt they are left scratching their heads at puzzling selections throughout the cycle and can see the players were well prepared and went out there with a clear gameplan which just didn't come off.
Every interview I've seen with him where he isn't shit stirring I've quite enjoyed.
Who posted a series of off-the-record comments he made at a function (that were swiftly deleted and probably rightly so)? His views were pretty insightful and remarkably candid for the coach of England.
England... I mean they've made more RWC finals in the pro era than we have? Can't really stick the boot in.
-
-
@Frank said in England & Eddie:
@rotated said in England & Eddie:
England... I mean they've made more RWC finals in the pro era than we have? Can't really stick the boot in.I'd say winning the finals is much more important.
Unless you want to give out participation awards.No doubt - but it's all a bit binary to say win the RWC or everything is a failure.
England have put together more good RWC campaigns than NZ in the pro era, and some absolute shockers as well.
