Autumn Internationals 2017: Rate the Match England v Argentina

Twickenham

What did you think of today’s match between England and Argentina at Twickenham?

What were the main talking points? Here is your opportunity to share your views and see what others have to say.

Give the match a rating out of ten and then leave your comments below.

Rate the Match: England v Argentina

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

38 thoughts on “Autumn Internationals 2017: Rate the Match England v Argentina

  1. Absolutely dire. No structure, attack or intelligent play. Furthermore, it meant I missed the Scotland Samoa game, which sounded like a belter.

  2. When the most creative player is your loosehead well…
    Robshaw anonymous. Slade awful. Joseph did nothing. Ford clueless without Faz running him outside. Hartley couldn’t keep hold of the ball.
    Just plain abysmal. Hopefully a blip but things have to improve next week otherwise a huge step back has been taken.

  3. The afternoon was perfectly summed up with the shot of EJ slamming his notes down while simultaneously yelling a more austere version of “oh deary me” as the boys went through yet another Keystone cops routine.
    We know England can be slow starters in the autumn but i felt a little complacency has crept in. Argentina never lie down and credit to them for making England work. It was ,however, troubling to witness such dull ineptitude at times. Maybe their heads are still in the Algarve?

  4. Thought under hill debut was a bright spot in a dull affair. Although a shame for brown,thought his going off might have been a glimpse of future but didn’t really happen. Hopefully be better next week!

    1. Indeed regds Underhill, but he did NOTHING in attack.. which has to be an issue for England. And didn’t he give THAT pen away in front?

  5. Hmmm… didn’t really go as planned. I think the difference between a side that’s just come together and a side that had just been through the 4 Nations really showed. Two problem areas for me: possession and line breaks. We gave away too much balland failed to turn them over enough and when we had the ball only Losowski and Hughes seemed capable of breaking the line. I thought Slade tried too hard and Ford missed Farrell. However, given that JJ was largely anonymous I’d start Slade vs Aus at 13 with Faz back at 12.

    1. Agreed about Ford-Farrell- Slade pairing perhaps with Lozowski on bench. JJ was anonymous which was interesting bearing in mind the conversation re JJ on here in the week prior to the game.
      Slade did do enough to merit another outing. Whether people like it or not options for every position need to be unearthed and if that means rousting out the odd player existing on past performances so be it.
      I’d play George against the Aussies as well as May.

      1. There were four or five occasions when opportunities were nipped in the bud due to Slade. If those had gone to hand, we could have been looking at both a larger score, and a more entertaining game. Perhaps it was nerves, but I think it shows how unique the Ford-Farrell partnership is (one that’s been formulated over years and conquered the world since age-grade rugby), and that replicating that is unlikely to be an option.

        1. Jeff
          You are right about the Ford-Farell axis but what happens if Ford and/or Farell are injured?
          Eddie needs OPTIONS that is all!
          The ABs went through 4/5 fly halves in 2011.
          Yes F-F axis is number 1 but what is number 2 and 3?
          With regard to Slade, he gave the try-scoring pass to Roko if you had forgotten. He was inches away from providing another to Hughes. JJ by contrast was virtually invisible (again?) Slade deserves another outing imo. My moniker would be to keep all options in rather than ditching people at the slightest knee-jerk.

          1. Agree. Slade is a class act as shown at Exeter, and still a relatively inexperienced player internationally. If the F-F axis is broken by injury, you need to have back-up options, and just because he had a nervy game (he has been a relative exile since Lancaster got the chop, not unfairly but it meant that his personal stakes were higher than most others on the park) does not mean he should be jettisoned. He was certainly guilty of trying to force thing, but this I felt was down to the added pressure, and also the feeling we all had that England should have been doing better. Feeling that you’re being judged on your ability to make a game fizz, you are obviously going to try harder in a match like yesterday’s, and unfortunately most of those opportunities misfired (not all through his own error).
            Point being, I will be disappointed (and England will be shooting themselves in the foot) if he is now relegated to bench or even out of the squad due to one poor showing. The F-F axis had plenty of iffy days a few years ago, and comparing a settled partnership with raw potential new ones is harsh at best. Slade deserves another chance to prove the same potential is there.

            1. VJ
              Exactly. I couldn’t have said it better myself. Give the man (Slade) a fair run-in of 3-4 games and then dump him if necessary if he still hasn’t sparked. The whole one chance saloon thing is ridiculous. No one has said that Slade is a replacement for Farrel either. He is just an ALTERNATIVE come injury and or loss of form.
              To expect Farell to play every game in the WC even if he is on form and injury free would be madness too. Its about the squad. Dare i say it…..we just had the Lions and that was a squad/team affair.

          2. Slade was ok but this was his chance to step up and show he is ready to be an England starter. He didnt take his chance.
            Yes the pass to Roko was slade, but it was almost forward. Then the pass to Hughes was no where near on the money. I just think with all the hype around Slade prior to this game, he couldve done a lot more. JJ was quiet but did he have that much of a chance with the ball. The same could be said of the back three, nothing from Daly or Roko all game.

            1. Jake
              That makes it even more of an amazing pass then…surely! It was on the edge and as flat as could be (much like the ABs are wont to do day in and day out….we don’t criticise them for it… we applaud them). By your logic skill is skill only if the ABs do it.
              On the Slade front, as VJ says, give the guy a break. His first start (i didn’t say ‘finish’) excluding the Argie tour which can’t have been as ‘on the line’ as at Twickenham yesterday, and he’s being asked to step down having played for an under-performing side where only Superman would have come out with full recommendations.
              Yes Slade is my option number 2…..we still need an option 3 and i’m not counting anyone out just becos poor JJ might have less playing time in the interim.
              Lets not be scared of a little competition for places. The ABs aren’t.

              1. Well no, the trajectory was forward and could easily have been ruled no-try. What would have been better from Slade is a lateral/slightly-backwards pass to Roko, who was in acres and would’ve finished the try either way. Not sure about the reference to the ABs as I made none.
                Then it isn’t his first start? I understand there may have been nerves but all I’ve said is that he really failed to perform, the pass to Hughes should have been routine and yet it was no-where near him.
                Certainly there should be more competition, and luckily for us Lozowski showed us that he can provide it.

                1. Jake
                  Agreed Jake, they did under perform. I just think it would be a shame to eject such a clearly talented player so quickly. All brilliant club players need a ‘settling in’ or ‘transition’ period to international level and imo Slade merits it. Under Eddie he has had no other starts apart from Argentina on tour (correct me if i’m wrong). Brown certainly got a good 3-4 games for England as a rooky whilst his performaces were a 0bit iffy before he was accepted (though he does split opinion somewhat)

  6. Just thought i’d name my team and bench for nxt wk. Daly May, JJ,Faz,Watson, Cole,George, Mako,U/Hill,Hughes,Robshaw,Launchbury,Lawes,Care,Ford. Bench, Roko, Youngs,Slade,Williams,Genge,Hartley,Itoje,Simmonds.

  7. I for one am not going to be too harsh on that performance.It reminds of matches in my playing days against the cantankerous neighbours who we were always going to beat but they were always going to do everything to disrupt us. These games were never satisfactory-You just chalked it up as a Win and moved on. As EJ is wont to say the only judgement that counts is the scoreboard. Im sure many were disappointed but champagne rugby is not something that can be turned on like a water tap. As for the game I thought Underhill was very destructive in the tackle but to compliment this we need some more ball carrying ability elsewhere. I think that EJ is going to have a long hard think as to whether Robshaw can deliver more with the ball in hand or whether he is going to take a punt on an explosive ball carrier such as Simmons or Mercer. As for the Backs I would be wary of making snap judgements on the basis of one game though I think it would be a good idea to retain Roko even if only on the bench as he is a true gamebreaker.

    1. Your point about CR6 is an interesting one. We seem to be struggling for balance in the back row and have done for a while. Perhaps EJ is torn between fielding two fetcher/carriers a la the wallabies or a true o/s ,big eight and a 6 who can tackle and carry. Underhill was a bright light in the darkness yesterday but if we persevere with him then Robshaw has to carry more as you say. Surely there are a couple of sixes out there who can do that?

  8. I can’t believe England will play quite as badly against the crims. It’s just as well they got this one out of the way so there will be a lot of work done over the coming week. I think Ford is due a rest so Farrel should play at ten then I would keep Slade and JJ on and bring May for the left wing.I’d also bring George in and give Farrel the captaincy.
    The performance was rusty, to say the least, but there were some good individual performances, notably from Hughes and Underhill.I thought Loz did well when he came on

  9. Painful performance. Firstly I don’t buy the whole “team just coming together for first Autumn test”. Bar Slade and Underhill this is a team well versed in playing together, and also I look at Ireland v South Africa. Ireland blooding in some new players but looked like a side who had just played 10 games on the spin! Based on this performance there is still some way England need to go to be world beaters. I am a Quins fan and always admired Robshaw but we seriouly need a better ball carrier in the back row and time for Robshaw to be dropped as we only have 2 years to find that missing link. We have enough ‘grafters’ in our front five and now Underhill to disrupt. Backs were dissapointing; seemed jumbled, unsure of who was running where, a lot of attempted solo work but lacking cohesion. Just not opening up space to use the pace we have with Daly, JJ, Watson. Don’t know how EJ can fix that as he can run through as many training drills as he wants but ultimately it’s the players on the field that need to execute. Like I say seemed like too many solo efforts with no running support and players just going to ground taking contact. Much improvement needed & mentally this was not good for England in my view.

    1. I still wonder if complacency was a factor yesterday,Rugger. England’s record over the last year has been excellent even though some of the performances have been dodgy. If i’m right in my assumption, the Aussies will burst that bubble which may be a good thing should it happen.

      1. i dont think complacency really played a part….well I truly hope not, as for me there are still positions up for grabs in the longer term plan. Clearly missed Farrell and I think this shows how good he is at controlling the link play. For me we kicked far too much given the chase game was poor and slow. Comparison to Ireland they kicked to SA and just pressured relentlessly. England did not. Australia will be the best benchmark before the six nations. If we lose like Wales did then we are miles off where we need to be! Hopefully not though!!

        1. Agree with you on the gameplan Rugger. Thinking back on the game, I cant really picture any parts of it where we had prolonger periods of possession. We kicked it away and then couldnt turn Argentina over. Daly didnt challenge in the air once, and a couple were certainly contestable; is this a result of his last outing v Argentina.

    2. For the first time I am querying Eddie’s selection.Hartley clearly isn’t the number one Hooker in England and I don’t see a lot of leadership on the field.He should have been roasting his troops yesterday.And as a Quin I agree Robshaw’s impact is not big enough and will be even less in 2 years time.Ewers for one a better choice.And Underhill is purely a defensive 7z.Doesn’t figure much at winning turnovers or ball in hand in attack.Eddie needs to think deeply about whether these 3 should continue to figure

  10. Well so far England have had eight games this year, and managed one convincing performance. Other than that they have looked very average and tbh a rather boring team to watch. Defence was solid and I think underhill could develop into quite the player. But England need to make a statement next week or they will rightfully start to have a lot of doubters.

  11. I expect a bigger margin win by England. Argentina put young inexperienced players in back-row. Surprisingly England got almost nothing from it.

  12. I can’t remember the last time I was so disappointed watching England play. JJ anonymous, Slade unimpressive and sloppy.
    Lozowski comes on and goes straight through the defence. Running against tired opposition maybe, but showed with that one chance what he can do from the 12 position.
    Despite the back row having a good balance I still felt our work at the breakdown was poor.
    Hartley and Ford both uninspiring.

    I would have Itoje and Kruis in next week with Lawes in at 6. Not that Robshaw had a bad game but Lawes has been the best 6 in the Premiership so far this season. Ford and Farrell with Daly at 13 if May is fit. Watson at 15 with Roko on right wing. JJ on the bench. Obviously George in for Hartley!!

    When you’re trying to improve your attack but your loosehead wins man of the match, you know there’s a problem!!

    1. Daly really needs to put in some good performances; this season has been nothing but underwhelming for him compared to last.
      Was very impressed with Lozowski, hits very hard and has pace to burn. Slade was anonymous and as a 2nd playmaker, he needed to provide for the outside backs more.
      Personally i didnt think Ford played too poorly, had a few nice passes and kept us playing in the right areas of the field, especially when we were deep in our own half.
      As stated above, the box kicking was pointless as we barely challenged Argentina in the air at all. If this is to be the tactic, the wingers have to get up. Roko tbh made a great take, albeit out of bounds. This is the area where Daly needs to really improve if he is to play wing/fullback…he never challenges in the air.

  13. George to replace Hartley. Mercer to replace Robshaw. May to replace Roko. Farrell to replace Slade. Maro to replace Kruis. Watson to remain at Full back.

  14. woulod it be such a bad thing if England lost to Australia? It might persuade Jones that it is time to ditch the old guard ie Hartley, Brown, Cole and Robshaw

    1. Interesting point Michael. Reality checks are never a bad thing. The problem lies in finding replacements (George excepted). Who is the next tight head on the block? Harry Williams has done well in his cameo role but is he ready to step into DC’S boots, given that Sinckler is out of sorts and out of favour and Collier is also a novice at this level. watson looks ok at f/b and we desperately need a more dynamic back row but is Simmonds the answer? How about Mark Wilson too?
      If the ineptitudes of last saturday are repeated against the Wallabies, i fear we may find that we don’t have the strength in depth we like to boast.

      1. I think England’s strength in depth has been over hyped for a few years now, mainly by the English press. I do think we have a good core of players to choose from when we are hit by injury but for me true strength in depth is when you can replace ‘like for like’ with little impact on the team. On Saturday we saw how Farrell was badly missed, and Itoje and the players taking their places are just not at the same level – especially if we are talking about winning World Cups! I think Underhill will be a regular now and EJ needs to take a punt on some other fresh faces as we only have 2 years to really develop and know our very best starting XV come 2019. Robshaw defo needs to now make way. People were ranting on how we missed him in the Six Nations but I saw nothing in the game Saturday that inspired me with his performance (and yes he was not alone). We are missing big Billy too. Credit to Hughes, he seems to have the hunger but my view is BV is just a different level in how he reads the game, he has power and intelligence. End of the day lets be honest though that there really is fine margins between the top teams and performances swing left and right for all teams – even NZ have had a few iffy games in the past 12 months where you thought they would walk a win easily. Lets just hope England can move on from Saturday and turn out a performance against the Wallabies. I’d take a competitive loss by a small margin against them over the dire performance I saw on the weekend!

  15. My changes v Australia.
    Farrel and Slade centre pairing
    Itoje for Kruis
    George for Hartley
    H. Williams for Cole
    Watson at FB
    The others same as Saturday last.

  16. So much stated, by so many, about so little?

    When ‘(England) expect(ed) nothing less than a thundering victory’.

    Well, some comments from the English media; ‘sluggish, laboured, turgid, grindathon, snail-like, disjointed, shifting sands of selection (v consistency), lack of snap & crackle (presumably unlike rice crispies)’.

    Afterwards DH opined; ‘..plenty 2 work on (like what?), the ball was a bit greasy, (England were) a bit rusty, DEFENSIVELY we wanted to keep a clean sheet,.. but winning is the main thing (with that performance?!)’.
    N. Hughes; (England) ‘..will learn from this (again, like what?)’.
    BV; ‘They are a GOOD side’..(which has only lost their last 16 v tier 1 opposition!?).
    Dallgallio; ‘The AB’s would have scored 5 or 6 (v Argentina)’..as EJ predicted of England!
    SCW; ‘(England’s)..inability 2 inject pace’.

    S Times; ‘England decided this match with a try that was yards forward. This was.. nothing like convincing.. Argentina missed 5 kicks’! ‘Tucalet had competed 4 the ball with arms & eyes ON the ball, it was ridiculous that T had 2 depart’. (Me)..the resulting overlap cost Argentina their 1st try.

    IMO, following this debacle for England, EJ has taken England BACK to where they were before the last WC when the indecisive Lancaster had the same mid field selection issues.

    He has NOT taken England’s attack anywhere. It’s as sharp as a baseball bat. He’s long fudged the inside backs with 2 fly1/2s, then compounded this error last Saturday by playing Slade (who didn’t help his cause by chucking only 2 into touch!) @ inside centre when he plays (mostly) @ outside for Exeter.

    Jones needs to pick either Farrell or Ford @ fly1/2 (since he long ago, in SL’s tradition, never even considered Cipriani). He must then pick & stick with his mid field or it’s going to be too late by next yr, esp with NZ coming to town.

    Compared with Ireland, this was like chalk & cheese. Ireland did nothing that flash, although there was an incision & some innovation in their back line (e.g. the odd wrap around). Their game plan, including their kicking game (although kicking it against better defences will not always work like last w/end), was precise, with definitive tactics & was effective v SA. England they were NOT!

    A cobbler spouting wag here recently opined that the ABs were not yet out of the woods. Well, are England out of the woods? In fact have they not just marched further back into them? Would he rather his team in their current posi, or NZ’s?

    This is not to state that England won’t win v Oz next Sat, after all they are @ home still with All that implies, but they’ll need to do more than ‘work on things’. They’ll need to work OUT just HOW they’re going to unpick Australia, as it’s unlikely that they can rely on yellow cards & Ford’s CONSERVATIVE boot to accumulate a decisive victory, which is what IS required, come this w/end.

  17. Forgot; Worryingly for them & their baseball bat like attack, Lozowski’s was the ONLY decisive break England made all game!

    & ‘WERE’..his team in their current posi, or NZ’s?

Leave a Reply