England vs Wales - Ford dropped

[MrPartridge]

3 pets would tie the match

I love that…

[Doghashadhisday]

3 pets would tie the match

I love that…

One man and his dog could have done the job

[mightymouse]

I actually think it was not a bad decision to go for touch. The bad decision was to throw to the front and to himself instead of to the centre or back to a second row. Driving a lighter weight back row forward about 7 yards Into touch is a lot easier than driving a second row forward about 20 yards.

Also I could not understand why as the Welsh side of the field started to resemble a scene out of MASH why he would sub his front row who had been playing very well and disrupt a well functioning if slightly dull back line. He could have maintained tainted the Co tinuity that had been denied Wales and just play the game out safely

[WhitecapTiger]

I actually think it was not a bad decision to go for touch. The bad decision was to throw to the front and to himself instead of to the centre or back to a second row. Driving a lighter weight back row forward about 7 yards Into touch is a lot easier than driving a second row forward about 20 yards.

Agree with that. I understand the decision to go for the win. So does James Horwill:

http://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/ne ... es-horwill

that's Ex Aussie skipper and Robshaw's team mate at Harlequins next season James Horwill

[drc_007]

Have to say all five watching the match at our house were astonished when Robshaw chose to kick for touch. Perhaps the most important point is you can't defend against a penalty, all you can do is stand and watch. With a line-out you always feel you have a chance.

[biffer]

I agree with MM. The bad decision was the lineout call to 2, enabling the drive into touch. Think Robshaw saw it as 'taking responsibility' to throw to himself, which is a reasonable captain's attitude, but tactically throwing to 2 in that situation was dumb.

[jgriffin]

The latest in the 'it wasn't me, Gov' handwashing saga.
http://tinyurl.com/op5d65r

The corner kick would've been fine with any other England pack but the recent ones who seem clueless and skill-free. Think what MJ or Deano or Borthdick would've done with a 5m lineout - game over for Wales!

[Jeremy Anderson]

For me the call to the corner was fine and should have been backed by Lancaster. The execution was poor with a call to the front.
However we lost the match because we choose two centres and a 10 would could not create a try if they had played for days. Interestingly the try we did score was Ben passing directly to May cutting out the 10 and both centres. For me the real fault was with selection. Burgess or Barrett should have played with Slade and Ford starting ahead of Farrell.
We needed to score more points than Wales and retreating into our shells to try and stop them scoring is not the way to win a world cup. Will Lancaster have the courage to pick a team to take on Aus or will he stay with his crash bang centres and a 10 who cannot do anything in attack?

[jgriffin]

For me the call to the corner was fine and should have been backed by Lancaster. The execution was poor with a call to the front.
However we lost the match because we choose two centres and a 10 would could not create a try if they had played for days. Interestingly the try we did score was Ben passing directly to May cutting out the 10 and both centres. For me the real fault was with selection. Burgess or Barrett should have played with Slade and Ford starting ahead of Farrell.
We needed to score more points than Wales and retreating into our shells to try and stop them scoring is not the way to win a world cup. Will Lancaster have the courage to pick a team to take on Aus or will he stay with his crash bang centres and a 10 who cannot do anything in attack?

Alas the latter is more likely.

[Sajerj]

For me the call to the corner was fine and should have been backed by Lancaster. The execution was poor with a call to the front.
However we lost the match because we choose two centres and a 10 would could not create a try if they had played for days. Interestingly the try we did score was Ben passing directly to May cutting out the 10 and both centres. For me the real fault was with selection. Burgess or Barrett should have played with Slade and Ford starting ahead of Farrell.
We needed to score more points than Wales and retreating into our shells to try and stop them scoring is not the way to win a world cup. Will Lancaster have the courage to pick a team to take on Aus or will he stay with his crash bang centres and a 10 who cannot do anything in attack?

With the greatest respect Jeremy, that is simply untrue. England won excellent line out ball off he top in a planned move. Burgess ran the first decoy, holding three defenders, and then Barritt ran the second decoy allowing Farrell to put Watson in behind having come right across from the right wing. It set up excellent second phase ball for Ben to put May in.

[Bill W (2)]

For me the call to the corner was fine and should have been backed by Lancaster. The execution was poor with a call to the front.
However we lost the match because we choose two centres and a 10 would could not create a try if they had played for days. Interestingly the try we did score was Ben passing directly to May cutting out the 10 and both centres. For me the real fault was with selection. Burgess or Barrett should have played with Slade and Ford starting ahead of Farrell.
We needed to score more points than Wales and retreating into our shells to try and stop them scoring is not the way to win a world cup. Will Lancaster have the courage to pick a team to take on Aus or will he stay with his crash bang centres and a 10 who cannot do anything in attack?

With the greatest respect Jeremy, that is simply untrue. England won excellent line out ball off he top in a planned move. Burgess ran the first decoy, holding three defenders, and then Barritt ran the second decoy allowing Farrell to put Watson in behind having come right across from the right wing. It set up excellent second phase ball for Ben to put May in.

Tut, tut, Jeremy. You missed the sublety and cleverness of the Lancaster preplanned move and the contribution of Burgess and Barritt in their off the ball runs.

Were they apparent at any other time in the match?

[Sajerj]

Jeremy did indeed miss it Bill. But to the objective viewer it was a fine England move, started by excellent line out work from Youngs and Paring, and well finished by Ben and May. A better move than the Welsh backs put together all evening.

I think there are a lot of objective criticims to be made of Barritt and Burgess. But simply discounting everything good they do with the sole desire to rubbish them does not read well.

[KevinR]

Even then, Watson nearly butchered the chance. The bottom line is that we have some very good qualities but, overall, l we are not quite good enough.

[MurphysLaw]

Borrowed this from the unoffy - a view from NZ.

Some interesting points about the coaches, a 'Frankenstein England', and an inability to play with instinct when under pressure...Rattue, the reporter, rarely has anything good to say about England, but imo some of this seems to ring true ....
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/ ... 21&ref=rss


England team v Aus apparently to see another mid-field combo of Farrell - Barritt - Joseph, with a late test on Ben Youngs. Launchbury and Morgan to come into the pack, with Burgess and Kruis on the bench.

[4071]

However we lost the match because we choose two centres and a 10 would could not create a try if they had played for days. Interestingly the try we did score was Ben passing directly to May cutting out the 10 and both centres.

From a break created by a back-line move that ALSO missed out both centres.