15. Mike Brown: 6
Grafted hard, carrying more ball than anyone else in the English backline – but, as was the theme of the evening, the Australian defence was more often than not all over him. Made a costly error early in the game in stepping into touch on his own five metre line.
14. Anthony Watson: 6.5
Brilliant finish in the second half, when he had no right to score, bumping off two Australians to give England a glimmer of hope. And how dangerous does he look almost every time he gets the ball (when not kicking out on the full, that is)? Why, then, do England not work harder to get it in his hands?
13. Jonathan Joseph: 6
England looked most dangerous when Joseph was given the ball in the 13 channel. Once he was forced onto the wing, however, he saw far less ball and had far less space.
12. Brad Barritt: 4
15 tackles made and none missed but there were still three tries scored in the backs so is that enough to justify his inclusion? Offered no gainline threat and when he passes he does not commit any defenders, but merely ships the ball on immediately, allowing the defence to drift. He has served a purpose but his time is surely up.
11. Jonny May: 5
Sadly forced off at half time, leaving England shorn of one of their few genuine try-scoring threats. Had a quiet first 40.
10. Owen Farrell: 4
The yellow card was possibly a touch harsh, but it sealed England’s fate just as they were starting to mount a come-back – and for that reason Farrell should have known better. Kicking from the tee was flawless once again, but for the second week in a row he was shown up in the play-making department by George Ford.
9. Ben Youngs: 4.5
Looked like a man who had spent most of the week injured. His crabbing style only works when he is 100% sharp, sucking defenders in. That just did not happen, and as a result his service was slow and predictable.
1. Joe Marler: 4
Romain Poite wasn’t having any of Marler’s complaints about the Aussie hood-winkery, and as a result he was scrummaged off the park. A sorry end to a poor World Cup.
2. Tom Youngs: 6
The lineout functioned well and he was one of the top carriers from England’s pack. Questions remain, though, about whether he destabilises the scrum.
3. Dan Cole: 4.5
Didn’t suffer as much as Marler at the scrummage, but didn’t exactly dominate his opposite man, either. His usually excellent work at the breakdown has been seriously lacking this World Cup, too.
4. Joe Launchbury: 6.5
One of England’s better players but whoever picked him as man of the match ahead of Pocock or Foley – or, in fact, several other Wallabies – needs their head examining. He worked as hard as ever and carried to good effect, but he was positionally found out for both of Foley’s tries.
5. Geoff Parling: 6
The line-out was one of the few successful areas of the game for England, with Parling snaffling Australian ball as well as securing England’s own.
6. Tom Wood: 6.5
Another who did all you could ask from him – carried better than he traditionally has, and grafted as much as ever.
7. Chris Robshaw: 4.5
On a night when Hooper and Pocock caused mayhem at seemingly every single breakdown, England’s lack of a player that could do similar was put seriously in the spotlight. Robshaw is not the only one at fault here of course, but as the openside he has to take the bulk of that responsibility.
8. Ben Morgan: 5
Carried plenty of times but there was a real lack of dynamism to most of them. On a night when Australia’s line-speed was relentless, one of England’s chief metre-makers was cut down before he could ever get going.
Replacements: 5
George Ford introduced a noticeably quicker and wider style of play, that briefly threatened to make a difference. Other than that, the bench did very little to make a difference – for which you have to question its make-up. The scrum briefly flickered into life when Mako Vunipola and Kieron Brookes entered, but it duly capitulated again in the last 10 minutes.
With Ben Youngs having a stinker, Richard Wigglesworth was not the man to make a difference. With Jonny May injured, shifting Joseph onto the wing was necessary because there was no back three replacement – and how instructive was it that Sam Burgess wasn’t trusted as the man to come on and change the game?
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
You’ve been very harsh on Farrell and Barritt. The main reason they were not as effective in attack was that they spent the entire time covering for a back row that simply went missing. A prime example being the Joseph break (after Farrell break and off load )that broke down simply because our back row were hanging about in the centres instead of doing their core role. Pocock and Hooper were excellent but mainly because they had such an easy ride. Ben Youngs game suffered for exactly the same reasons.
Agree on Farrell but not Barritt. Having him at 12 made us far too easy to defend; the Aussies could just drift. Farrell I thought was pretty good in patches, he does what he does. Think he is better in attack than he is given credit for but he is no George Ford in that department.
This really shows up the anti Saracens bias quite well.
I’ll answer points as I see them:
George Ford, how far behind would England have been if he’d started. With no protection from a shocking back row his defence would have been cruelly exposed, 50/60 points worth. He’s a fabulous front foot player, but in this game it was Farrells defensive nous and determination that kept England in the game.
Farrell was one player who gave his all and didn’t stop. A different ref could easily have interpreted his yellow card as Giteau running a blocking run and engaging the defender allowing Hooper to run a gap causing Burgess to have to make a desperation high tackle. It wasn’t hot headed or even particularly dangerous (did Giteau make too much of it perhaps?) In an all round game Farrell is still the best option at 10, maybe not as attacking as Ford but certainly enough as proven in points of first half.
Barritt, in defence immense but yes, as much as I respect the guy, perhaps not international class. Who do you pick? Well Burgess really, he has shown enough quality and will learn from this experience
The real issues lie with pack, it needs sorting. If only they’d done their jobs in the last 20 vs Wales and in last game a different outcome could easily have been seen. At no point was Farrell given ball from which to be able to kick aggressively. Watch what happens when playing behind a dominant Sarries pack. At that point Farrell becomes world class. Put any fly half behind a misfiring pack and they look awful (see Dan Biggar first half vs England). That fault lies with coaching.
Bias? I’m a massive fan of Farrell, he is fantastic and I’d have started him for this match, and all England matches. However, Barritt was awful.
How can his defence be called immense? His job is to organise it, yet we conceded three tries through the backs?
Despite being the apparent defensive guru that holds it all together, there is not evidence that England concede less tries him him playing.
Burrell is the best option we have right now unfortunately.
As I’ve mentioned before Barritt tackled all he could. The reason for this was because our back row was awful. If they’d done their job Barritt would have been I’m position to organise, as it was him Youngs and Farrell found themselves doing the back rows work which then exposed the back line. The fact tries didn’t come through first phase is testament to those three players efforts.
Then play Brad at 6 then. A centre needs to be able to offer more than tackling.
You miss the point. You cannot criticise Brad for his lack of attacking when he wasn’t able to do so because of the failings of others.
That has been his failing for the past 4 years, even when the fwds provide good ball. He is a long way short of international class. Our best performances in the 6n have been when he has been absent. The defence held up for the most part too.
“Put any fly half behind a misfiring pack and they look awful (see Dan Biggar first half vs England). ”
Seriously? Biggar was world class in that entire match. He was the opposite of what awful can look like. Madness.
Biggar was far from world class in that match. Consistently kicked ball down Billy Vunipola throat allowing England to return play with interest (should have done more with it.
Did nothing to change the plan of thumping Jamie Roberts up the middle.
Had nothing to do with the try.
Missed a simple drop goal.
Missed touch on two occasions.
Hardly world class.
Can’t agree Jez – don’t think you have seen Wales much. Our setpiece is far from dominant against England so we keep the ball on the pitch when it suits (he did make excellent kicks far more than you are giving him credit for).
For the kicks in field we knew that Vuni et al wouldn’t return it with much against our defence and that is how it came to pass. We also knew that if we kept the ball on the pitch, and away from scrums, we had the fitness to take the last quarter. Masterclass in controlling play from Biggar.
Every team of the week by every single pundit had him as the 10 of the week after that match so you’re obviously seeing something poor in his game that the rest of us are not seeing.
“Watch what happens when playing behind a dominant Sarries pack” – my nan can look like an awesome 10 behind a dominant pack. You seem to have a view contrary to the majority that the true measure of a quality 10 is how well he plays when given an armchair ride.
Pretty embarrassing in every facet from a management point of view. Youngs clearly was not fit. Wrigglesworth is not a test level player. Robshaw shown up big time. Make up of the bench made absolutely no sense. Farrell and Ford as a pairing don’t really work, especially with Barritt in the 13 channel.
I’ve been at Twickenham for some very depressing occasions; this tops all.
SL has to go, along with Farrell on the back of the rumours. I’d be tempted to keep Rowntree and Catt, but with a new head coach for sure. Then it is on to who…Baxter maybe? Wayne Smith if we can get him? Eddie Jones is available and pretty handy?
England have a nucleus of really good players coming though, from Ford and Watson to Launchbury and Itoje. We need a top class coach to take us forward.
We’ve been out scrummaged by Fiji, shamed against Aus and France
Whether the issues technical or selectorial (is it solely or partially on Rowntree) I have no idea. But English rugby without a solid set piece is … well not English rugby
George for Youngs and Moose/Brookes for Cole and I think we would have had much greater stability (parking the Hartley discussion)
Let’s not forget 2011 and the persistent selection of Matt Stevens as a loosehead, it’s time for a new forwards coach as well
My top picks would probably be Baxter for a forwards coach (maybe Steve Borthwick involved as well), head coach needs to be someone with proven international experience. If they are outside a (subjective) ‘top 10’ or world coaches then not good enough for us!
Too lenient on Farrel and Brown. This game called for a cool head, not the re-emergence of the angry men too intent on smacks rather than skills. The Aussies sledged and smacked Brown expertly and it played right into their hands. To say the yellow for Farrel was harsh is odd – yellow for without the ball and/or no hands, take your pick. The former could be debated, the latter looked clear to me.
Really need to add a coach to these ratings – moving JJ out to the wing? Criminal.
Also multiple players down pts for pre-match interviews – which dippy said they were going to smash the Aussies in the first 20? Was that Youngs? Foolish thing to say.
Robshaw down a pt for me. Agree with the pts for his skills but as a captain he seemed totally lost. Very quiet when he shouldn’t have been. A brave man but put in a position beyond his skill set.
Had wondered why Wiggles was in the squad until I saw his post match interview. First time I’ve heard him and the northern accent was clear. Northern +1. Saracens +1. Guaranteed squad pick. Also see Goode, Farrel, Burgess….
agree with your comment about JJ being moved to the wing but with the truly awful and uninspiring bench Bomber had picked what else could he do, Burgess perhaps………
A bench he selected, so it was still his fault.
Brighty I am not disagreeing with you, hence the Burgess comment.
Agree with your comment on Brown. He was awful – made all the worse by the fact he’s usually got such a tight game. So many mistakes he can’t possibly only get .5 less than Launchbury.
Brown always makes up for it in other ways though. He was bad but even on his bad day he does enough right.
Find it difficult to argue with many of those scores – maybe a little too generous on some but that’s probably just because the memories of that display are still a little raw!
Agree with Jacob – Lancaster and Farrell have to go. There is genuine talent in the squad but it’s not being utilised and because of that you have to look at the coaching set up. Rowntree I feel is a good coach but if he’s judged on what the forwards done then the evidence of Saturday night would condemn him as well. I loved Mike Catt as a player, but looking at the team and the performance I can’t see any of his influence anywhere. Either his message isn’t sinking in or he’s being ignored. Feels like we just need to start again.
The RFU needs to look at the rule of not picking players from outside England. Everyone has been banging on about the fact that Armitage is seemingly no where near the squad. There are also too many seemingly bad selection decisions that are being made. Of course these comments are made with hindsight but even so. The Burgess selection for one – why pick him as a centre when he plays flanker for his club and has looked better there? I admire the work rate of Brad Barritt but he has never bought anything to the attack. Nothing. It bewilders me that he still gets in the squad let alone the first XV!
There is a lot of talent in and around the England squad at the moment. We need a strong head coach to nurture that talent. If we get one we can be genuine world contenders again but if the RFU just employ another yes man who won’t question them then we’re just going to be stuck in the same rut that we’ve been in since November 2003
Re Catt being ignored, I think Blood & Mud has quite an insight into how England’s selection meetings go:
http://www.bloodandmud.com/2015/08/inside-the-england-rugby-world-cup-squad-selection-meeting.html
Yeah that feels about right!!!
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but the squad clearly wasn’t good enough, Bomber doesn’t pick on form and merit else Burgess (at centre) and Barritt would not have been picked.
One of our main problems was no plan B and the lack of a genuine game changer(s) on the bench.
I would’ve left Barritt and Burgess out for Burrell and Elliott Daly, left Andy Goode out for Christian Wade and bought in Cipriani as yes he is a pillock but he is a talented pillock who, say bought on against Wales could’ve changed the game.
I also believe Waldrom should’ve been selected but couldn’t think who for, Haskell would be my first choice but Waldrom is pure no. 8 so when Billy got injured he should’ve been drafted in instead of Easter.
Imagine a defence worn down after 60 minutes of play then having to face the likes of Wade and Waldrom, frightening.
Lancaster’s main problem is his reluctance to be bold, brave and roll the dice, I have been a fan of his for many years but England have won nothing under him and it is now time for a change.
I would also add, to SL’s long list of limitations, is a lack of ruthlessness. I think that this campaign was doomed with the Wales selection. Yes I know it almost worked, but I happen to think if Slade and Burgess were playing we’d have been further ahead. However my point is, having cast Ford adrift, SL then attempts to limit the damage by giving Ford a postion on the bench. A bolder coach would’ve have backed his decsion over tactics (i.e. “this is no reflection on George, blah blah, we felt we needed a different game plan, balah blah) and have put Slade (to cover 10/ 13) and Nowell (wings/ fb) on the bench. These guys couldve done some serious damage in the last 15 mins.
– Brown too error prone to deserve a 6
– Youngs has to be lower for the scrum shaming
– Barritt did even less than I expected (which is not saying a lot)
– We were not completely out of the game when Farrell lost the plot, this was unforgivable
– Robshaw is generous at 4.5 as well, not so much for the individual performance but for the captaincy. I read this morning he has more caps as captain than MJ! This is more than sufficient time to develop your leadership to the extent where you can read what is going on in a game and scream at your team to commit numbers and clear out.
Was anyone else incognito yesterday?
#HideTheRose
I was incognito as far as wearing my Coventry Rugby shirt with pride as they beat Plymouth Albion on Saturday, C’mon Cov!
We were out of the game well before the 70th minute. That occurred at the point our back row went missing.
Entire coaching staff needs to go. Rowntree included. I think Wig is a good coach, but every coach has a shelf life. He’s been involved in the set up since 2007. England’s fwd play looks a bit tired and predictaable and need freshening up. Out breakdown performance has been consistently poor and now his bread and butter of the set piece is in tatters. And whilst Lancaster/ Farrell/ Catt should rightly take the blame for the selectorial cul-de-sac that is Farrell, Barritt and Burgess, so too should Rowntree for T Youngs, which then necessitated the selection of Wood and Parling that further upset the balance of the forwards and de-powered the scrum.
I said before the match that Wigglesworth on the bench was a risk, with B Youngs likley not to last the match, and so it proved. Care, could’ve covered wing (as could Simpson if our myopic coaches had selected him), instead we had a scrum half who slowed the game down, when we needed to play at tempo.
Heads must roll after this fiasco, including Ritchie. How on earth they thought it a good idea to select a rookie coaching team four years out from a home world cup – well, words fail me. As Dean Ryan points out, given the pool we were in they shold have at least planned for this contingency, but no usual waffle and a pre-determined white wash review to follow.
I am beyond angry at all of this. Given the financial committments the RFU have had to give to WR, I really hope they lose a shed load of money over this. maybe then they will shaken out of theit cosy complacency.
Farrell yellow card. I think the criticism is a bit harsh. He had a player virtually on top of him who looked as though he was going to take a pass. Clever Aussie play, but what do you expect a player to do in that situation – not go for the tackle and hope his man doesn’t get the ball? Bearing in mind that we are talking split seconds in real time, I don’t really think he deserves this. Not to mention 2 similar Aussie infringements which didn’t get punished like that. Not saying it changed the result before anyone gets on their high horse, but consistency is something we all hope for. Personally thought Burgess should have had 10 for his tackle, so we would still have been down to 14.
Credit the Aussies with playing right on the game line is really how this should be looked at.
On reading this again, I meant Burgess getting 10 minutes in the sin bin NOT a score of ten!
I agree Staggy, I aslo thought Giteau made a meal of it, which is disappointing and possibly why Farrell copped it and not Burgess.
Before the match I feared England may undeservedly win due to a home ref, but if anything it was the other way. Wouldn’t have changed the result IMO, but might have made it a closer match. Personally I knew we were screwed at half time, despite the optimism coming from Jonny and Sir Clive.
The video ref turned that into confusion. The video ref can clearly be heard saying that the card is for no arms, not for “without the ball” as possibly that can be interpreted as you said. But off the ball (bought by a dummy runner) AND no arms, just a should straight into the chest – yellow card.
And yes, Hooper should also have had a yellow card.
OK Brighty. Missed that. Can’t remember exactly how he tackled him, but you are most probably right. In which case fair enough, and if that is the case he probably does deserve criticism.
Still bananas that a FH was playing outside centre effectively. That is criticism for SL and his bench selection.
Does anyone have Barritt’s “offencive” stats. There usually worth a chuckle. Metres made: 0 Defenders beaten: 0. Line Breaks: 0…
Brad Barritt
K – P – R – MR – CB – DB – OL
0 – 4 – 4 – 6 – 0 – 0 – 0
So better than usual as he made 1.5m per carry
I really do find those stats quite offensive
Only real problem was the scrum. We’d have won the game if it functioned, as I can’t recall Cole or Marler being in a dominant international scrum in the last two years I don’t know where Lancaster’s consistent faith in them has come from.
Seriously? So with a dominant England scrum you’d have backed England’s backs to outplay Australia’s? Cannot see how anyone could have concluded that – even if the scrum was 70/30 in England’s favour I’d have gone for an Aussie win.
Old fashioned thinking now to imagine a dominant scrum is a deciding factor in a win – see Japan v SA, Wal v Eng, Wal v Fiji, Georgia v NZ, etc.
Personally I think it would have been a closer game. What England needed more was parity at least at the breakdown.
With so many players being selected from abroad by other nations it is surely shooting oneself in the foot to deny England the same advantage. All the above comments point the finger at England’s inability to win turnover ball, yet there is a player two and a half hours away doing it week in, week out!
Steve
I think Barritt has had his day (a good run though it was). England need a new ‘basher’ in the centre (perfectly provided by Tuilagi and/or Burgess if he is allowed to develop in that role) Both provide more in attack, the latter with league style off-loads.
Robshaw (controversial I know) I would say has had his day as captain (give it to Woods) and even his position in the team is now debatable. New no 7 required rather than the incumbent 6.5 (Kvesic/will Fraser and look to the future). Steffon Armitage must now be brought in (Woodward said it in the papers 5 months ago – I guess his opinion about the club v country debate is the same as mine!) An entire new front row with Hartley back would be nice too!
Finally develop both Slade and Wade because they are the future.
Last but not least Rowntree and A Farrell out (going by the decline of the forward play and indecision and high rotation rate amongst backs)
‘Bomber’ – my instinct says out and get experienced outsider (Schmidt any day or Eddie Jones – the latter fans might not like but then this ain’t footy is it – we’re allowed foreigners honest!)
Jacob sorry to blow your “wish” away. Eddie Jones has signed to coach the Stormers in the super series for the next 2 years. He was the inspiration behind the ‘Boks WC win in France in 2007. He was responsible for the biggest upset in rugby WC history this year when Japan beat the ‘Boks. He is a “TOP CLASS” coach and player manager, very knowledgeable and a great motivator. SA is extremely fortunate to have 2 of the worlds top coaches, man managers at the moment. EJ and the Golden Lions coach, Johan Ackerman. Neither of whom will get the ‘Bok coaching job. Follow the 2016 Super series, follow the Stormers and the Golden Lions you will be amazed at what they will produce.
Eddie Jones has also got on record to say he’d be willing to speak to the RFU if SL was to depart…
Don’t think there is a chance Eddie Jones turns down a big pay day to manage at test level to manage a Super Rugby franchise.
Perhaps Barritt should convert to flanker, couldn’t be any worse than those in the squad
I’m struggling to see how Farrell and Youngs get such low scores and yet Wood gets a 6.5, Robshaw (fair enough) and Morgan a 5, and they were the players who are supposed to provide the quick ball?
Morgan may have carried a few times, but didn’t exactly threaten the gain line! When he got near it he just shipped it onto someone else.
Wood certainly didn’t do all I would ask of him as an international 6 playing in a team hosting the World Cup. Hit rucks, win ball, make tackles, carry ball, threaten gain line, make offloads and generally make a nuisance of himself. Funnily enough all the things the Aus 6 was doing really.
I’m not even going to comment on Robshaw!
Going forward I would seriously consider having Burgess at 6 instead of 12. Get Burrell and Cipriani back in the squad (not 12T), and some of the younger guys that have come through the age levels. Sam Hill, Nick Tompkins etc have all been playing for their respective clubs and can be brought into the squad, even if it’s just to get them involved. We need some new blood and fresh perspective to take the team forwards. Get Itoje in now along with guys like Ewers, Kvesic, Fraser, Daly, Wade and give them a chance.
I don’t want to see a lot of these names on the team sheet when whoever announces the team for our next game after this World Cup.
If bookies are right forget about Burgess, he’s back off to rugby league with Rhinos. The next 6 should be Maro Itoje who’ll be captain before long too.
Personnel out: Wilson, Parling, Haskell, Easter, Wigglesworth, Barritt, Ashton
Personnel in: Thomas, Itoje, Slater, Ewers; Fraser, Simpson, Devoto, Daly
Team for 6 nations opener:
1 – Corbisiero
2 – Hartley
3 – Cole
4 – Launchbury
5 – Lawes
6 – Itoje
7 – Fraser/Armitage
8 – Vunipola
9 – Youngs
10 – Ford
11 – Nowell
12 – Tuilagi (burrell if injured)
13 – JJ
14 – Watson
15 – Brown
Replacements: Vunipola; George; Brookes; Attwood; Ewers; Care; Slade; May
Extended squad: Thomas, Marler, Mullan, Slater, Kruis, Clifford, Kvesic, Morgan, Simpson, Farrell, Cipriani, Devoto, Burrell, Daly, Yarde, Wade, Rocko