Comments on: Autumn Internationals 2017: England Player Ratings versus Argentina

By: John Yeatman

John Yeatman — Wed, 15 Nov 2017 14:22:49 +0000

As the maximum seem to be 8 and the minimum 5, you might as well grade them:
DROP NOW (4)
Poor (5)
Satisfactory (6)
Good (7)
Excellent (8)
World Cup Winner (9)

By: AlexD

AlexD — Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:59:35 +0000

Fair enough said the wise man!
A lot of pundits have been saying England will lose at least once before the WC. So i wouldn’t be fixated with securing a 100% winning track record either (though preferable). Even the ABs are learning to lose now and again! In fact losing can be a GOOD thing due to the reality check that immediately follows (coupled with the necessary improvement). For that reason i wouldn’t be scared of blooding Slade again in the fire and fury if the Aussie game. What better learning environment. No need for bubblewrap, cotton wool and cuddles!

By: Jake

Jake — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 22:04:12 +0000

Lets agree to disagree on the pass.
I dont think anyone here is doubting Slade’s quality, but I think many, including myself, was expecting/hoping for a bit more from him. I dont think he is as green as you make out; yes he has only played a couple of times at Twickenham but he has been picked for England a few times now and has played on some of the biggest stages in club rugby.
Again, I think you’re confusing criticism of one performance with a desire to drop him altogether. He should be given a chance but is the Australia game the time to do that? I dont think so.

By: AlexD

AlexD — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:06:11 +0000

Jake
We can argue til the cows come home about THAT pass. The touch judge, the ref and I thought it was ok. Hence it was given. You are entitled to think it forward if you want.
I prefer to give Slade a little more leeway/scope than you perhaps!
Why? He is a good player playing for his 2nd time at Twickenham (1st was in WC 2 yrs ago). He has had a very roller-coaster ride with England (not all his fault…..a broken leg that was potentially career threatening…..eddie’s selection policy was slow to identify back up (i.e. no’s 2 and 3) amongst the girls/backs and the fact Slade is a victim of his own success at Exeter by being picked in more than 1 position.
Personally i’d argue everything Slade did right was worth two in the bush for everything JJ did for that reason! I can’ t be any clearer….just give the lad a chance? A little nurture and England will be rewarded.
I’d mark JJ DOWN for having what….40 odd caps now and having a shit one whilst Slade did little worse as a relative international rooky ( I gave a joint 5 for general co-dependent ineptitude with the ‘star’ player that is JJ earlier. I’d shine a bloody great light on JJ. His performances after Scotland in this years 6ns were average as was his Lions performance!
No AB back of that many caps (JJ’s 40 odd) is allowed to have a frankly piss poor outing and survive to the subsequent game (in effect be rewarded for failure by playing again)
This is English selectorial folly! CONSISTENCY of selection is required as well as the criteria for success (as intimated by Leon’s excellent scoring system) .
JJ a 6! Ha i laugh in the face of adversity.

By: Jake

Jake — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 17:55:11 +0000

Alex, think we have discussed JJ v Slade previously ;)
I think JJ overall contributed more to the team, he was defensively sound and made fewer mistakes.
Slade was in the team to be a 2nd playmaker, a task which he didnt really fulfill. There were some good parts to his performance, but he couldve done more distributing and less taking into contact.
Counter arguments to your points above:
1) The pass was relatively straight forward no? Little pressure from the defender and he nearly butchered another opportunity.
2) JJ isnt being scored for this game based on his past performances. He was better defensively than Slade, and made fewer errors. The past experience does, and should, count against Slade in terms of team selection. He is trying to displace JJ (as Ford and Farrell are both pretty much guarenteed).
3. I hope he does, as you have said we need him firing and providing competition for the places. But he had a real chance to last weekend, maybe some hyperbole on here/by journalists, but he still could’ve done better.

A win against Oz is crucial though, for momentum and morale, so i dont know if we will see Slade in the match day squad.

By: Rugger80

Rugger80 — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 17:29:40 +0000

AlexD i would still mark Slade a point below JJ. I agree JJ should not be marked as a 6 (see my prior comments) but at the same time JJs best attributes are his pace and footwork over a short distance, but that only comes into play if your 10 and 12 are helping to create this, so some blame here to Slade & also Slade butchered a couple of passes and gave ball away. Most of the time in many of England games in 2017 JJ is receiving the ball static or in a crowded area and Houdini he is not! We saw against Scotland given the right space he is clinical. As for defense he is always sound. Put JJ in that Australian backline against Wales on Saturday he would have scored an 8 ranking!!

By: AlexD

AlexD — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:55:35 +0000

Ratings on Slade too harsh. I’d give him and JJ a joint 5 for a combined centre pairing performance that couldn’t be split by a piece of paper.
JJ is clearly being let off the hook here due to his credit in the bank from past performances.
Leon’s rating (not Joe’s) would put JJ as GOOD and Slade POOR.
What a myopic view.
1. Slade gave Roko’s scoring pass which was not an easy one but the ref gave it and so end of. By definition it was therefore a great pass……why ?Because the try was given. Nothing else matters.
The only 2 people on the pitch who knew absolutely were the touch judge (as S. Barnes pointed out) and Slade himself. The touch judge gave him the benefit of doubt or called it horizontal or backwards. If Slade knew otherwise i’m sure he’ll get it spot on next time (just to satisfy the moaners)
2. JJ has past performance and experience whilst Slade had virtually none.
3. Going forward Slade i’m sure will rise to the occasion (if allowed the 3-4 caps that Hughes and Brown to name just two players that were allowed time to gently settle in)
3. Slade has virtually no previous (the WC at Twickenham against uruguay apart) and as JJ did nothing of note all match to merit his’star’ rating on here i give them 5 EACH. Thats a BEST rating.

By: Dazza (Dazzle)

Dazza (Dazzle) — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:56:13 +0000

Leon I’m loving your player score guide there and I’m going to suggest an added stipulation. Should the players position and the role they’re fulfilling be considered? If so I would say Mako and Hughes deserve an 8?

I would also agree with Rugger80 that Ford is nowhere near a 7! One good pass does not warrant a score so high. I don’t remember him making any breaks or really creating much either?

If T’eo is fit I would love to see a midfield of Faz, T’eo and Slade but, at the moment I would start with Ford, Faz and Daly in midfield. This would give Daly a chance to play in his favoured position and get May back on the left wing.

I think what this game showed is that Hartley is not as good a captain on the field as he seems to be off it and. We missed Farrell’s leadership, Itoje’s work-rate, attitude and energy.

By: Leon

Leon — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:33:31 +0000

Are we not rating the oppo?

By: Leon

Leon — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:22:22 +0000

Using these guidelines i would rate them as follows
Mako – 7
Hartley – 5
Cole – 5
Lawes – 6.5
Kruis – 5
Robshaw – 6
Underhill – 7
Hughes – 7
Youngs – 4
Ford – 6.5
Daly – 5
Slade – 4
Joseph – 5
Watson – 6.5
Brown – 6
Bench – 7

By: Rugger80

Rugger80 — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:19:54 +0000

Looks sensible to me Leon & based on that table I would mark down the following by one point: Robshaw, Hartley, Watson, Joseph, Ford, Brown & The Bench. Collective team performance 5. Satisfactory because of the win only. I do not think this is harsh at all. Some people will say Argentina not given enough credit, but I am sorry they are a poor team right now and there are no excuses here.

By: Hutch

Hutch — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:15:52 +0000

Yes, I like the idea of establishing a rating system, and it should be easier to stick to if we are just rating one team.

Until now, the ratings process has been totally subjective, dependent upon whomever is writing them!