Re: England bollox
- From: Ben L <bjlongman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 05:36:03 -0800 (PST)
On 8 Dec, 11:43, Klitty <mitti...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
simon s-b <baitt...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
England have more time than ever together these days, and pundits are
complaining they are 'over-coached'. In the old days, they complained
about not having enough time together. The BaaBaas had sod all time
together, and managed to put together more attacking moves than
England in the whole of the AI's. Yes I understand there was a
laissez-
Baa Baas can do that. They don't care about winning or losing.
This Baa-Baas did. Gone was the lacklustre defense and the spurning of
kicks for goal. It was a proper test. Did you see the game?
And
sometimes chucking it around results in breaks. The other side of that
mentality is .... see France v NZ.
faire attitude with the officials, but that doesn't explain decent
lines, coming from depth and generally playing heads-up rugby.
Heads-up rugby? You cant always do that if the opposition defence
doesn't allow it. You need to break them down through phases and pick
your moment. It's called Rugby.
You don't understand what heads-up rugby means.
It means playing to the conditions and the opposition, not attack at
all costs off first or second phase ball.
When a team is playing set patterns or plays based on a rigid strategy
set before the game starts and they are losing, you have a fundamental
problem.
<snip>
You make it sound like kicking is something new. Bullshit. England run
the ball a LOT more than they did 20 years ago for example.
Not on the evidence on the Autumn series. Even accounting for the fact
that 20 years ago was the height of the Rob Andrew kickfest.
the game now are the thinkers not the bruisers, and yet we still seem
to be seeking out the robots like Worsley who will 'do a job'.
That's a players job : to do his job.
And that's Simon's point, Walt - the job description has changed. If
you genuinely believe that props should only scrum and clean out ball
and lift line out jumpers then you didn't watch the Australia Wales
game, or appreciate why Bath miss Stevens so much.
<snip>
<snip>
What style should England by playing that will suddenly make their backs
inventive and fast with hands that never drop the ball at pace?
Well, for starters, they should actually pick a style. Don't play
Wilkinson deep and put Gerachty - who always plays flat - next to him.
Don't remove Gerachty and replace him with Erinle. Don't play 2 wings
out of position at fullback and leave two talented fullbacks like
Goode and Foden at their clubs. Decide if you want a dynamic front row
with someone like Hartley or a more solid one with Thompson. Decide if
you want quicker players like Lawes and Haskell or slower, less error-
prone ones like Deacon and Crane. If you're going to play Croft at 6
then generate quick ball. If that fails, address the problem at
source, don't go for a slow, defensive 6 who probably won't make it to
the next World Cup.
And once you've done that, try and settle on some combinations so that
the back rows, half backs, centres and back threes actually get some
live game time to build understanding.
<snip>
Look its quite simple : England's current backs are shit. All the
coaching in the world is not going to change that.
Possibly they are. But unless you've got a reason why there is such a
sea change from, say, their Heineken Cup form and their international
form then you don't need to be a rocket scientist to work out that the
coaching problem is not insignificant.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: England bollox
- From: Klitty
- Re: England bollox
- References:
- England bollox
- From: simon s-b
- Re: England bollox
- From: Klitty
- England bollox
- Prev by Date: Re: A sideline to the Cooper story
- Next by Date: Re: England bollox
- Previous by thread: Re: England bollox
- Next by thread: Re: England bollox
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
