England Rugby - what is needed for a successful future....
Discussion
irocfan said:
London424 said:
Some other thoughts and I think we can all agree it's the Welsh and the French fault. Stick with me on this one.
Since Gatland came to Wales he's played a pretty direct form of rugby based generally on size and power.
In the Euro cup the French teams have stacked their teams with size and power (which has also infected their national team)
To combat this the other teams in the NH, both national and club teams, have jumped on the bandwagon of trying to be bigger and more powerful than the other.
I think we are now at a cross roads of decisions. We can either keep making that same mistake or try and be different.
Go look at that All Black team in the backs and you'll see the complete opposite. Carter, Smith, Milner-skudder, smith, with similar types of replacements.
Oh I dunno - SBW, Nonu, Savea, Naholo... non of them are exactly what you might term 'small' or of 'average' stature Since Gatland came to Wales he's played a pretty direct form of rugby based generally on size and power.
In the Euro cup the French teams have stacked their teams with size and power (which has also infected their national team)
To combat this the other teams in the NH, both national and club teams, have jumped on the bandwagon of trying to be bigger and more powerful than the other.
I think we are now at a cross roads of decisions. We can either keep making that same mistake or try and be different.
Go look at that All Black team in the backs and you'll see the complete opposite. Carter, Smith, Milner-skudder, smith, with similar types of replacements.
What they do have though is skillLook at the backs that Wales were putting out not that long ago
Phillips
North
Biggar
Roberts
Davies
Cuthbert
I don't think anyone there is under 6 ft and 16 stone. It's only 1/2p that is what I'd see as comparable size/shape to the AB's backs.
I'd just like us to pick the best players and not care what other teams are doing. England and the coaching staff got themselves all in to a muddle about personnel. Not helped by the emergence of some truly talented individuals that then cause even more confusion in selection.
I'm pretty sure when I was watching AB v France that the AB centre pairing were playing their 60th game together. Do we have any pairing that's played 6 together?
Edited by London424 on Tuesday 20th October 09:45
Some general musings.
I’m too concerned about future of the England side, we’ve 4 years to get a team together that can hopefully be competitive in 2019.
Why am I not too concerned you may ask? If we get the coaching structure right (I don’t think we’ll get much change in the RFU although I want a revolution!) we’ve had too much success at U20 level for this to not start filtering though into the senior side. Let’s see what a decent coach can do with all the young talent kicking around. I look at Australia who were a shambles 12 months ago, it’s not a big sport in Oz, less players and the ARU aren’t exactly flush, but with a decent coaching set up they’ve turned things around remarkably in that time (they should still have been beaten at the weekend). We also need to remember the England side that got knocked out of their own WC were woefully inexperienced (Lancaster’s fault a bit/a lot).
Our pack and defence has got sloppy while our attacking play has come along leaps and bounds this needs sorting. Defences win games, and world cups consider this:
Try’s scored in the last 5 RWC’s
2011-2
2007-0
2003-2
1999-2
1995-0
The national and club sides goals are not the same, I’m not sure how well central contracts would work but people bearing down too much on the domestic game (particularly the English and French leagues) should remember the NH were generally second best to the SH before the game went pro.
The AB’s will consistently always be the #1 side in the world, it’s their #1 sport and live and breathe it, therefore they produce the best youngsters, the best players, and the best coaches. Their underage system is great by putting sides together based on size rather age, you’re getting everyone with all round skills. Look at the Kiwi hooker Dane Cole’s has all the stereotypical skillset of a hooker but can pass like a back and isn’t a slouch. In the NZ system it’s perfectly plausible he was either always a big a lad or was small and developed the skills before growing when he got older.
Some people blame the weather, but the weather is pretty miserable on the NZ south Island at times and the Highlanders just won the Super 15.
There seems to have been a bit of an arms race in international rugby for a while-since they went pro perhaps? Players getting bigger and bigger when skills should be king. It’s not that difficult to tackle a behemoth, just need the correct tackling technique.
I’m too concerned about future of the England side, we’ve 4 years to get a team together that can hopefully be competitive in 2019.
Why am I not too concerned you may ask? If we get the coaching structure right (I don’t think we’ll get much change in the RFU although I want a revolution!) we’ve had too much success at U20 level for this to not start filtering though into the senior side. Let’s see what a decent coach can do with all the young talent kicking around. I look at Australia who were a shambles 12 months ago, it’s not a big sport in Oz, less players and the ARU aren’t exactly flush, but with a decent coaching set up they’ve turned things around remarkably in that time (they should still have been beaten at the weekend). We also need to remember the England side that got knocked out of their own WC were woefully inexperienced (Lancaster’s fault a bit/a lot).
Our pack and defence has got sloppy while our attacking play has come along leaps and bounds this needs sorting. Defences win games, and world cups consider this:
Try’s scored in the last 5 RWC’s
2011-2
2007-0
2003-2
1999-2
1995-0
The national and club sides goals are not the same, I’m not sure how well central contracts would work but people bearing down too much on the domestic game (particularly the English and French leagues) should remember the NH were generally second best to the SH before the game went pro.
The AB’s will consistently always be the #1 side in the world, it’s their #1 sport and live and breathe it, therefore they produce the best youngsters, the best players, and the best coaches. Their underage system is great by putting sides together based on size rather age, you’re getting everyone with all round skills. Look at the Kiwi hooker Dane Cole’s has all the stereotypical skillset of a hooker but can pass like a back and isn’t a slouch. In the NZ system it’s perfectly plausible he was either always a big a lad or was small and developed the skills before growing when he got older.
Some people blame the weather, but the weather is pretty miserable on the NZ south Island at times and the Highlanders just won the Super 15.
There seems to have been a bit of an arms race in international rugby for a while-since they went pro perhaps? Players getting bigger and bigger when skills should be king. It’s not that difficult to tackle a behemoth, just need the correct tackling technique.
a311 said:
There seems to have been a bit of an arms race in international rugby for a while-since they went pro perhaps? Players getting bigger and bigger when skills should be king. It’s not that difficult to tackle a behemoth, just need the correct tackling technique.
I don't think the problem is tackling the big blokes it is being tackled by them. I was sitting in the front row at the Stoop when a flanker tackled a wing, both going at speed. There was an oooh from those around me. Both players got up for the scrum - the wing knocked on - and carried on playing. The wing left the field at 60 mins, limping. It's not good for the sport. We have players turn up to play for our club and you know that they won't get in the first team 'cause they're too light. Even in the 2s they get injured. Whatever happened to scrum halves? We played against a newly promoted team with a brilliant, but small, #10. He was engineering so much that my side organised a legal tackle that left him needing treatment by half an hour. From then on he got rid of the ball immediately. We won at a canter.It's what happens.
If you look back on the greats of the old amateur days on YT you'll see a 15 running rings around the big blokes. The comments say that we don't see their like now, and they are right, unless you are watching under 19s.
We had a brilliant wing in our club as a kid who was picked by a local private school for greater things. He'd put on 4 stone by the next time he played competitive rugby and was just fast and could accelerate. He was too big a lump for his old twisting and sidestepping, his main gifts. In his last county match our chair said that it was a shame the lad had been selected as he'd be bulked up.
Big as he is, he's spent more time injured than fit in his premiership club and has only played for England a couple of times, being injured both times.
But what's the answer? Rugby at weight levels into adult?
Derek Smith said:
a311 said:
There seems to have been a bit of an arms race in international rugby for a while-since they went pro perhaps? Players getting bigger and bigger when skills should be king. It’s not that difficult to tackle a behemoth, just need the correct tackling technique.
I don't think the problem is tackling the big blokes it is being tackled by them. I was sitting in the front row at the Stoop when a flanker tackled a wing, both going at speed. There was an oooh from those around me. Both players got up for the scrum - the wing knocked on - and carried on playing. The wing left the field at 60 mins, limping. It's not good for the sport. We have players turn up to play for our club and you know that they won't get in the first team 'cause they're too light. Even in the 2s they get injured. Whatever happened to scrum halves? We played against a newly promoted team with a brilliant, but small, #10. He was engineering so much that my side organised a legal tackle that left him needing treatment by half an hour. From then on he got rid of the ball immediately. We won at a canter.It's what happens.
If you look back on the greats of the old amateur days on YT you'll see a 15 running rings around the big blokes. The comments say that we don't see their like now, and they are right, unless you are watching under 19s.
We had a brilliant wing in our club as a kid who was picked by a local private school for greater things. He'd put on 4 stone by the next time he played competitive rugby and was just fast and could accelerate. He was too big a lump for his old twisting and sidestepping, his main gifts. In his last county match our chair said that it was a shame the lad had been selected as he'd be bulked up.
Big as he is, he's spent more time injured than fit in his premiership club and has only played for England a couple of times, being injured both times.
But what's the answer? Rugby at weight levels into adult?
Edited by London424 on Tuesday 20th October 16:07
Going back a few years, perhaps even more than 2, I was watching my local team, Blackheath, when they used to be quite good. So more that just 2 years.
One of the pack left the #15 exposed and the lad got tackled just as he went for a kick. The B'heath captain grabbed the player who left the 15 exposed and slapped him around the head. The 15 hardly ever got tackled in those days.
One of the pack left the #15 exposed and the lad got tackled just as he went for a kick. The B'heath captain grabbed the player who left the 15 exposed and slapped him around the head. The 15 hardly ever got tackled in those days.
Will Greenwood made a comment that made me think the other day regarding the relatively high injury casualty rate of the NH lads Vs the SH. His conclusion was the SH lads are just made of different stuff, and in the NH our players have had hit the gym to compete with the South's natural physicality.
I don't buy into this as the white population in SA, Arg, NZ are mostly of European ancestry but the Māori and pacific islanders are certainly made of some different stuff.
I was down watching our 1st and second teams at the weekend-tier 5 stuff. Our seconds were up against a clearly well drilled outfit, much better than us technically but they were much smaller and just got beaten up by us. It was quite embarrassing for them, they got to the point they were too scared to take a ball in!
On the other side of the coin our first team have traditionally had a big side but we've found in recent years our better big players are getting poached by the sides that pay as you play (most but not all are in the Scottish Borders). Now I'm out probably for the season too we're more short of ballast in the forwards in terms of ball carrying line breakers. The result is after a couple of hammerings we've had to adapt to a game based on quick ball that's really coming together and on a 3 game winning streak-the point is you adapt and play to your strengths.
I think the AB's backs are plenty physical enough to compete, Savea is huge, Milner-Skudder not so much, Noholo is around 16 stone,
I don't buy into this as the white population in SA, Arg, NZ are mostly of European ancestry but the Māori and pacific islanders are certainly made of some different stuff.
I was down watching our 1st and second teams at the weekend-tier 5 stuff. Our seconds were up against a clearly well drilled outfit, much better than us technically but they were much smaller and just got beaten up by us. It was quite embarrassing for them, they got to the point they were too scared to take a ball in!
On the other side of the coin our first team have traditionally had a big side but we've found in recent years our better big players are getting poached by the sides that pay as you play (most but not all are in the Scottish Borders). Now I'm out probably for the season too we're more short of ballast in the forwards in terms of ball carrying line breakers. The result is after a couple of hammerings we've had to adapt to a game based on quick ball that's really coming together and on a 3 game winning streak-the point is you adapt and play to your strengths.
I think the AB's backs are plenty physical enough to compete, Savea is huge, Milner-Skudder not so much, Noholo is around 16 stone,
Kermit power said:
Cheib said:
Kermit power said:
One of the problems - and one which is starting to change, thankfully - is that for many years, kids were streamed according to ability. Certainly from around U15 upwards, this might make sense, but putting kids into A, B & C teams at the age of 7 and usually pretty much keeping them there from then onwards is absolutely nuts, not least because of the difference of speed at which they develop.
Likewise, having all kids playing in their school year group is equally nuts, again because of the differential in speed of development. Fortunately, it's looking as though grouping players on size is likely to be more the way forwards.
I agree with you on the size issues...it makes total sense. Likewise, having all kids playing in their school year group is equally nuts, again because of the differential in speed of development. Fortunately, it's looking as though grouping players on size is likely to be more the way forwards.
But pretty much the most successful state rugby school in this country is a school called Campion (I think it's the only state school to have won the national cup or was at least the first) operates (or at least used to when I played against it) a streamed system where they have A, B and C forwards and backs in every year group. It's been hugely successful for thirty years or more.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/articl...
Funnily enough it mentions in there that they had a better result against Australia schoolboys in 1985 than England......I left school in 1986 and played against that team. No wonder we got a thrashing!
The governing bodies are looking into it, and they are more than considering the new regulations regarding shortening set piece time as they have in the NRL in Australia.
Larger aerobic capacity required = less player weight = less injuries + wider running game = wider appeal + increased revenue.
It is coming.
Larger aerobic capacity required = less player weight = less injuries + wider running game = wider appeal + increased revenue.
It is coming.
Robbo66 said:
The governing bodies are looking into it, and they are more than considering the new regulations regarding shortening set piece time as they have in the NRL in Australia.
Larger aerobic capacity required = less player weight = less injuries + wider running game = wider appeal + increased revenue.
It is coming.
didn't someone mention that an idea was to only have the clock running while the ball was live? As soon as you cut the time taken to set the scrum and line-outs from game time you are forced to be less bulky and fitter.. mind you then matches would end up being 3 hours long lolLarger aerobic capacity required = less player weight = less injuries + wider running game = wider appeal + increased revenue.
It is coming.
Robbo66 said:
The governing bodies are looking into it, and they are more than considering the new regulations regarding shortening set piece time as they have in the NRL in Australia.
Larger aerobic capacity required = less player weight = less injuries + wider running game = wider appeal + increased revenue.
It is coming.
I'm not sure I'd want league uncontested scrums in union. Is that what the NRL one is?Larger aerobic capacity required = less player weight = less injuries + wider running game = wider appeal + increased revenue.
It is coming.
I agree though that the scrum needs major overhaul. There still seems to be this idea at the top level that rugby is there for just 1/3rd of the players. It should fulfil its prime function: getting the ball back in play ASAP. I've yet to see a lineout, which has the same purpose, have have five resets.
The main problem with scrums is that they are impossible to referee. If it collapses, it is normally through a number of causes and the ref just picks one.
We do, at the moment, seem to be reaping the escalation in size, with injury after injury. Look at Wales' tournament, with half a dozen players not being able to continue. This rate of injury in most other sports would not go unnoticed. Nor unaddressed.
Line-outs need addressing too.
The current fashion seems to be for the throwing team to have a huddle 10m away, leaving the defending team ready and waiting, then jog in and throw to an incompletely formed line.
I also feel theryv were much more of an athletic contest when no switching of positions or lifting was permitted.
The current fashion seems to be for the throwing team to have a huddle 10m away, leaving the defending team ready and waiting, then jog in and throw to an incompletely formed line.
I also feel theryv were much more of an athletic contest when no switching of positions or lifting was permitted.
irocfan said:
Oh - and @ #1
GET RID OF ROB f
kING ANDREW
I mean seriously what has that done?
This, sorry but big Sir C fan, he should be the director or rugby. As he said interviewing for the job is a waste of time, there are maybe 5 coaches who are at the level for a side like England. RFU time to use the money and go and get Gatland/Edwards. Simple question do you think Aus/New Zealand would be worried about another Lancaster england side, or s*** bricks if Gatland got in charge of a squad with those resources and depth.GET RID OF ROB f
kING ANDREWI mean seriously what has that
done? revrange said:
irocfan said:
Oh - and @ #1
GET RID OF ROB fkING ANDREW
I mean seriously what has that done?
This, sorry but big Sir C fan, he should be the director or rugby. As he said interviewing for the job is a waste of time, there are maybe 5 coaches who are at the level for a side like England. RFU time to use the money and go and get Gatland/Edwards. Simple question do you think Aus/New Zealand would be worried about another Lancaster england side, or s*** bricks if Gatland got in charge of a squad with those resources and depth.GET RID OF ROB f
kING ANDREWI mean seriously what has that
done? As for the comments above about speeding up the game I'm not sure how much faster they can realistically make it.
When I watch games the clock stops the most and players are taking breathers for two things. Injury treatment (lots of those) and substitutions (pretty much 16 of those every game).
Gone are the days of 5 minutes to complete a scrum. You might get a couple of re-sets but refs are calling penalties so quickly on scrums nowadays.
London424 said:
revrange said:
irocfan said:
Oh - and @ #1
GET RID OF ROB fkING ANDREW
I mean seriously what has that done?
This, sorry but big Sir C fan, he should be the director or rugby. As he said interviewing for the job is a waste of time, there are maybe 5 coaches who are at the level for a side like England. RFU time to use the money and go and get Gatland/Edwards. Simple question do you think Aus/New Zealand would be worried about another Lancaster england side, or s*** bricks if Gatland got in charge of a squad with those resources and depth.GET RID OF ROB f
kING ANDREWI mean seriously what has that
done? As for the comments above about speeding up the game I'm not sure how much faster they can realistically make it.
When I watch games the clock stops the most and players are taking breathers for two things. Injury treatment (lots of those) and substitutions (pretty much 16 of those every game).
Gone are the days of 5 minutes to complete a scrum. You might get a couple of re-sets but refs are calling penalties so quickly on scrums nowadays.
Alot is talked about the size of players and yes players are bigger and fitter than before, but i dont think you need huge guys to win games. It is down to how you want to play the game. AB's are physically strong but you wouldn't say they are monsters, they are just mobile, can hold their own in the scrum and make sure they hit the gain line at pace, or make sure they are first to the breakdown.
At the top level of rugby anyone should be able to tackle other player. Alot is made of the chock tackle to smother the ball but going that high is going to potentially cause you more issues and more chance of injuries. If they are a big guy take out the feet and they will go down.
London424 said:
But that was my observation about the AB's. They aren't all big monsters in their back division. Same for Australia. Genia, Cooper, Foley, Beale, Giteau, Mitchell etc.
OK, Genia and Giteau aren't huge, but Quade Cooper is 6'1" & 14 stone 8, Foley is 6'0" & 14 stone, Beale 6'0" & 14 stone 2 and Drew Mitchell 6'0" & 14 stone 7, so they're not exactly midgets, are they?irocfan said:
didn't someone mention that an idea was to only have the clock running while the ball was live? As soon as you cut the time taken to set the scrum and line-outs from game time you are forced to be less bulky and fitter.. mind you then matches would end up being 3 hours long lol
How about reducing the number of substitutions? If the players (generally) had to complete 80 minutes then that would have an impact on the ideal size/weight? Remove the ability to switch the entire front row out as a matter of course. Equilibrium25 said:
How about reducing the number of substitutions? If the players (generally) had to complete 80 minutes then that would have an impact on the ideal size/weight? Remove the ability to switch the entire front row out as a matter of course.
I thought replacements were introduced to overcome the problem of injuries.I’m all for speeding up the game, as a forward I appreciate a good scrum-there’ve been one or two in the WC where it’s been a real test of strength and technique but otherwise I can see why to Joe Public how it becomes a bore-fest.
We have a lot of dual code players and our game at the weekend was what everyone hates about Rugby Union i.e. very stop start. I think the ref thought he was refereeing the World Cup final too, I had to laugh when he penalised us for a crooked scrum feed-can’t remember the last time I saw that happen at any level!
We have a lot of dual code players and our game at the weekend was what everyone hates about Rugby Union i.e. very stop start. I think the ref thought he was refereeing the World Cup final too, I had to laugh when he penalised us for a crooked scrum feed-can’t remember the last time I saw that happen at any level!
Derek Smith said:
I thought replacements were introduced to overcome the problem of injuries.
You may well be right, but I can't help but think that it has made things worse in the long run. If you know that you only have to play 55/60 minutes then that must impact your ideal build. We now have bigger guys slamming into each other harder for a shorter time, then some more massive guys coming on fresh to hurtle into a mix of fresh and fairly tired guys.Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff