15. Alex Goode: 6.5
Showed lovely hands in the build-up to a couple of tries but, as expected, he was one of a handful of playmaking backs that were too lateral in the first half.
14. Anthony Watson: 7
Clinical finish for his first try, a walk-in for his second. Too often, though, he received the ball with a handful of Uruguayan defenders drifting onto him – which, of course, was not his fault in the slightest, but made his job much more difficult.
13. Henry Slade: 8.5
Gorgeous distribution (see: 25 metre pass in the build-up to the first try, deliciously delayed pass for final Nowell try) showed England what they had missed all tournament, and his footballing skills were hugely impressive for his own try. Looked comfortable moving into the 12 shirt too. Whatever England’s future is, he must be part of it.
12. Owen Farrell: 5.5
Surprisingly missed a couple of conversions, and fell off three tackles. I still think he could be a good option at 12 for England in future, but the make-up of the starting backline was all wrong and without powerful runners around him, Farrell suffered.
11. Jack Nowell: 8
Bagged a hattrick, most of which were easy finishes, and worked hard to get himself on the ball whenever he could. Usually followed up with a positive contribution, leaving Uruguayan defenders in his wake.
10. George Ford: 6
Gave a lovely pass for Nowell’s try in the right hand corner, but other than that it was a surprisingly hesitant outing for Ford, who too often picked the wrong option when distributing. Not aided by the lack of strike runners outside him.
9. Danny Care: 7
Injected plenty of tempo to England’s attack, but wasn’t always helped out by those around him. Certainly proved the value he could have added from the bench in previous games.
1. Mako Vunipola: 7
Made light work of the amateur scrummager opposite him and offered himself as a carrier on numerous occasions – although he will perhaps be unhappy not to have made more inroads. Still, a positive performance.
2. Tom Youngs: 6
The lineout ran flawlessly but you could tell that Youngs had played a lot of minutes so far – his usual appetite for the tackle and carry in the loose was lower than in previous weeks.
3. Dan Cole: 6
Did his job at the scrum with little fuss until he was withdrawn on 44 minutes to give David Wilson some game time.
4. Joe Launchbury: 7
Brilliant at the lineout and busy in the loose, finishing as joint second top tackler for England. One of the few to come out of this campaign in credit.
5. Geoff Parling: 7
Oversaw a flawless lineout and offered himself as a carrier more often than he has in probably all three games previously combined.
6. James Haskell: 5
Carried on 13 occasions, which is a decent if not amazing stint, but too often there was little reward. To compound that, he offloaded just once, which all in all adds up to a momentum-sapping display.
7. Chris Robshaw: 5
A performance that pretty much summed up his, and to be honest England’s, World Cup: high on work-rate, low on quality. One second half knock-on with the try line in his sights was almost hard to watch.
8. Nick Easter: 8
His three tries were all easy finishes, but his workrate elsewhere was simply astonishing, carrying the ball a whopping 31 times. Not the future for England, but proved that there perhaps should have been space found for him in the initial squad.
Replacements: 7
Jonathan Joseph showed some silky running and lovely touches to inject direction into a lateral English backline. Jamie George, initial lineout wobble aside, proved his worth with some strong carries and deft hands – George Kruis was similarly destructive running at tired Uruguayan tacklers.
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
Remarkably generous!!!!!
Agreed, especially for Haskell. Can’t believe I used to rate him as a player (may have been my Wasps-tinted spectacles). Looked clumsy, lumbering, and predictable. Praying he finds some form before the Premiership kicks off.
Thought Ford was largely anonymous and if Farrell can’t make his kicks what is the point of him. I couldn’t help wondering what kind of magic could have been produced with Slade at 10, a decent strike runner at 12 (Tuilagi?? Pains me to say it as I hate picking SL favourites but not sure there are any other convincing options), JJ at 13, Nowell/Watson on the wings and Cipriani at 15…
Any reason you’ve decided to drop Brown for Cipriani? Slade would not be pushed to 10.
Our best centres are Slade, Tuilagi, JJ.
such a pity your top performer HS did not start until the RWC was effectively over. Huge blunder from the coaching staff & one of the reasons I believe heads will role. If HS, Ford JJ & Nowell etc had been given their chance & not succeeded than fair enough but to chicken out at selection time for crucial games will be what defines SL in this RWC
Farrell 5.5? Rubbish, a strong 7, 7.5 more like.. He played most of his game time at 10, doing all the things (taking the ball flat, making telling passes and kicked the majority of his goals, missed two out wide) that wonder boy Ford is meant to do better. Ford, went missing too often, made ridiculous decisions (chip kicks in own 22, really?) and really proved why he isn’t international class. Also, the tackles missed by Owen were those already missed by Ford inside him.
Again though biggest disappointment was the skipper, as an openside your first job is too secure breakdown ball. Watching Robshaw closely he did not hit a single ruck as first man. A thoroughly shocking performance.
I honestly couldn’t agree with you more. On current form I would take Farrell over Ford.
I think the learning is Farrell isn’t a 12, but can deliver at 10. He delivers a consistent game there.
He would likely be played at 10 if there was a game next week. Got to feel for Ford though.
I think this was a game too far for Robshaw.
If you look at the ruck stats from the Aus game for Robshaw (have a look at Green and Gold’s website), the only player who hit more rucks as either the first or second player there, was Pocock (and I am quickly coming to the conclusion that Pocock is not human). No other player on the pitch came close to either Pocock or Robshaw
He needs to be given a couple of weeks off to get his head right and then just be allowed to immerse himself in the Quins campaign and show us all the form that got him selected in the first place.
Totally agree. I think if we’d started with Farrell, Slade and JJ, the score would have been a fair bit higher. Ford wasted chances, and made some poor decisions in attack, and also missed all his conversions, which is what Farrell’s been marked down for.
Or Farrell, Burgess and Slade – at least it was tried and tested. I do though have some sympathy for young George. He was basically hung out to dry by Lancaster, despite playing pretty well over the last 12 months (including his goal kicking – which he was responsible for when Faz was at 12 vs Samoa).
Managment basically said to him that we don’t trust you. Is it any wonder his confidence was shot and he made errors?
The back and front rows where the combined cause of England’s demise. Agree about Slade, should have been in there as a number 12, together with Farrell or Ford as 10 depending on the opposition and game plan,with JJ at 13
Easter and Parling, though admirable, are now too old and so can bow out. Haskell should be dropped entirely. Wood/Robshaw should not be captain, but maybe one could remain in the squad. Wigglesworth should go, awful. Brown, though getting on, is one of our best players and so can stick around for a few years.
Key players like Lawes, Corbisiero, Tuilagi, Morgan etc should only be considered if 100% fit. Morgan shows it is pointless playing people less than 100%
Decent squad for 6 nations:
FB and W: Brown, Goode, Watson, Nowell, May [Yarde, Wade]
CC: Tuilagi, JJ, Slade [Burrell]
FH: Ford, Farrell [Cipriani]
SH: Care, Youngs [Simpson]
BR: Vunipola, Morgan, Fraser, Kvesic, Ewers, [Clifford, Robshaw]
SR: Itoje, Launchbury, Attwood, Lawes [Kruis]
FR: Corbs, Vunipola, Cole, Brookes [Thomas, Marler]
H: Hartley, George, Youngs
Great squad that mate.
Only changes I’d make is to drop Goode, with Watson wing/second choice fb, then add yarde.
Centres I’d have fourth choice as Ollie devoto.
Scrum half I’d have Chris cook/Dan Robson instead of care.
Kruis I’d swap with Attwood.
George I’d swap to first choice.
Also I’d bring Josh Beaumont in to slug it out with ewers as number 6.
Defo potential to be up there with the best with that squad.
Who would be your captain? I think launchbury would do well
I think Youngs or Launchbury should be cptn. Hartley at a push, but his discipline issues might make it too controversial. He after all did captain England in SA final test 2012, albeit getting yellow carded!
Forgot about Cook, Devoto and Beaumont! Beaumont looks very good indeed.
Largely squad that went to WC and thus, it could be argued, cannot perform – but I think ireland and wales show the merits of sticking with players that are clearly decent, whilst making the odd tinker here and there.
Eng need to change up the back row that has under performed in the tournament and arguably beyond (besides no 8), and settle on our best centres – tuilagi, slade, jj. Besides that the squad looks fine.
On another note: who would get into Lions 2017?
Think on form at present – Vunipola, Vunipola, Launchbury, JJ, Youngs, Youngs, Brown, Watson
Capable but injured/dipped form – Cole, Youngs, Corbisiero, Hartley, Lawes, Morgan, Ford, Tuilagi, Nowell
Agree with most of your squad but I’d still have Parling in there. 31 is not too old for a lock at all. He’s a top class operator. Even a the next WC, 35 is not too old for a lock. Matfield, Shaw, and many more have all proved that.
I would go with Launchbury or Ben Youngs as captain personally. I think Itoje could well be before the next WC but now is too soon.
Strangest thing is; that squad is very close to being what went to the WC other than in the centres (where Tuilagi was injured), and the back row. Be nice if Fraser could stay fit but there’s a good chance he won’t.
I think it wasn’t so much the squad as a few individual selections. Barritt/Webber over George/half fit Morgan/not playing slade. And then issues like decision making, dealing with pressure. Of course ourbreakdown work too.
35 is certainly not too old for second row, h just reckon between itoje, lawes, launch and kruis he’ll not get in!
I think we will all be hoping Fraser can stay fit- we could really do withhim having 30 odd caps for the next world cup
Possibly come 4 years from now, then those 4 may well be ahead of him; but my point was he shouldn’t be discarded.
It would be great is Fraser could stay fit; such a great talent.
Agree on selection. Still think the wider 31 squad was pretty close to our best choice. Wales XV selection and bench options continually let us down.
When Ed Slater is back, the partnership between him and Kitchener could be mutually beneficial to England as well as Leicester. One or both of them should find themselves in the England squad.
An outside bet in the back row is Brendan O’Connor. With an English Nanny he is joining Leicester after being fantastic in the Super 15 for the last couple of seasons. If he adapts to the English game England will surely want a look at him.
Again from a Leicester point of view, when the Saxons next join up (I’m assuming the summer?) don’t be surprised to see Balmain, Pearce, Harrison, and Bell getting a look in.
The fact is England have a fantastic resource of players on hand that means in four years we could have a world class squad. There are so many good quality players that with the right guidance could excel on the international stage but need a coaching set up with clear guidance, and that knows how to pick a balanced side.
As a Leicester fan, what do you make of catchpole at 12. I haven’t seen too much but he does look good.
The beltrain is a very good prop and Pearce looks a lively prospect. More a 6 than 8?
Look England are the richest nation in on earth, in terms of money, facilities, resources & player no’s, but surely this & your opinion miss the point.
You’re falling into the age old trap, which Lancaster himself was also quick to promote, that within the next 4 years England will be ‘a world class squad’.
You’ve ALWAYS had players aplenty, but it’s in your coaching where you fall over. Without a w class coaching set up you’ll likely fail again. No matter that you may have Superman, Bruce Willis & even King Kong in your squad!
It’s 1st of all about a change in your thinking at the top, i.e. Ritchie, Andrew etc, whereby they keep picking wrongun’s. Somebody’s already mentioned ‘The Godfather’ clause that ‘The fish rots from the head down’.
It’s a mind set change in thinking that’s required. It’s about what you want to achieve & then how you go about doing it.
Otherwise it’s just more of the same with a new face which is unlikely to work.
Impossible to tell anything from this game really as regards individuals. Backline unbalanced and lastly in the first half – no one straightening which as discussed is probably down to lack of strike runners, but still the players ought to know what to do. Running straight and drawing your man is hardly rocket science even for a distributor!
Feel sorry for Robshaw. Still think he will make an excellent 6 for England. Not 7 and not captain. He more than anyone needs to get away from the goldfish bowl. Confidence down at Cuthbert levels.
On one level, am aware that we weren’t good enough, but on the other am slightly concerned about too much change. We need to develop the players we have and give them experience rate than keep chopping and changing. Inexperience didn’t help us in this RWC.
Sorry – “unbalanced and lateral in the first half”
I wish people would stop picking Farrell to play at 10 can they not see the wood from the trees he is not an international fly half and never will be. Don’t justify it by saying Ford had an average game on Saturday the blokes confidence must be shot to bits he will go back to Bath play a few games and I am sure he will be fine.
However if he isn’t pick another fly half Slade or Cipriani
“Oversaw a flawless lineout ”
Against an opposition whose tallest forward was 6’2 I would bloody well expect so. Made no input on their lineout though.
Some positives from the game but this was against Uruguay after all.
In terms of moving forward a novel idea might be to pick your best players regardless of youth or how old they are, being the best should trump everything. The problem for all us fans is that someone else picks the team and they have a difffence of opinion on who the best players are. I for one would not pick tuilagi, but there are plenty who would. It frustrates the hell out of me as in my opinion his size and speed across the pitch far exceeds his skill levels and speed of thought. I couldn’t care less how strong he is, he is not international class. This feteing of tuilagi confirms my view of the rugby in england where gym monkeys are favoured to those who have real flair. It’s a shame
People will always argue for tuilagi. All I’ll say is his record (caps top tries) is pretty impressive. Also can’t think of many players who have dismantled nz like he did all be it in 2012,
Most teams play a monster crash ball centre (Wales, France, Ireland nz, even aus).
Last note, nonu was once slated for just being a lump with no skill, now look at him
On Nonu, I think that the NZRFU told him to go away and work on the skills he was lacking and the did. Has anyone had that conversation with Manu?
They had the conversation, just forgot to mention to him they meant on the pitch, not outside the nighclub
I think that it was still the Maori side step outside the nightclub – still going for contact!
Farrell 5.5, Ford 6?! Really!!?? So Farrell misses two conversions and a couple of tackles, but does make one good break early in the first half and links up well with Slade and the back three and gets marked 5.5?
Ford puts crossfield kicks into touch, misses all his conversions, fails to jump on a loose ball, instead knocking it on on the floor to give away possession, hardly makes a decent break all game, and shows some serious hesitation and gets marked a 6?
This should have been a game for Ford to flourish and how his attacking flair, but he didn’t even get his kicking boots on. Think you must have been watching a different game to me.
To be honest I think you’ve been quite generous in all these scores apart from Easter, Nowell, Slade and Launchbury.
Dazza, take off your Sarries tinted specs, and see my comments above re Ford. He has been hung out to dry and looked a lot better with a balanced midfield of Slade and Joseph.
My specs were well and truly off Benjit. Thrown off in disgust ;-)!
I just couldn’t understand Farrell being marked down for missing two tackles and two conversions, when the two tackles Farrell missed were tackles already missed by Ford, and Ford missed all his conversions.
Also don’t remember Ford making any memorable breaks through the midfield or really threatening the gain etc, etc.
I don’t remember Farrell putting in a cross field kick in his own 22, with two men outside him and two defenders in front of him (said kick then going straight into touch!). Or bending down to attempt to pick up the ball from a wobbly line out throw (from a Sarries player no less!!), only to knock it on. Either jump on it, or kick it up field, but don’t try and pick it up with the Urugayan pack piling through from the lineout.
I take your point about Ford, but at this level players have to take it on the chin and move on. This should have been the ideal game for Ford to do that, concentrate on running the back line and getting some flow to the attack. Maybe he would have been better without Farrell? I don’t know, but if he can’t take the knocks and kickbacks that come at this level, then he’s not going to make it at this level.
Whoever takes this England team forward from here needs to think long and hard about what sort of midfield they want to play with, and play the players who fit that. Both Ford and Farrell should have a part in that, as they are the best we have at the moment.
I take your points Dazza, didn’t think Ford had a great game, but put it down the points above. Again I know as a pro he needs to take this on the chin (and I’m sure he will) but the mecurial players have always needed better man managing that this coaching team seems capable of doing.
Ford was trusted with 2 starts, neither tier one nations (not that we are these days), and both times required a defensive baby sitter in Barritt and Farrell. I think even the most self confident of players would be affected.
Farrell was chosen to tackle and kick, both with mixed success. Maybe just have them both at 5.5 and be done with it!
I think an even score for both would be fair. Both of them made mistakes that neither should make at this level, especially against a team like Uruguay.
I would like to see Burrell with Slade in the midfield, as I think they would compliment each other better than Burrell and JJ. Also think Slade and Daly would be a good partnership. Slade looked quite comfortable at 12, and Daly needs to be in the set up.
Good thinking Dazza.
I’ve also been critical of Ford before as, when the hair dryer’s, on he can make duff choices (kicking needlessly to the oppo when retention of possession was the right choice; e.g. v Saracens late on & also v Fr over there) & his execution deserts him (again v Fr when he dropped a catch, missed a pen touch, dropped out on the full plus kicked down Spedding’s throat, all in the 1st 7!)
However, I’d have him in over Farrell any day as at least he has the potential of being able to run, pass or kick. Farrell will kick goals & tackles (except for missing his man, Foley, twice, allowing Oz to score tries), but offers little else – at top level.
Personally I’d have gone for Cipriani over the 2 of them, but that’s another story.
Seems Ford needs counselling to keep his thinking going under pressure because, unless he can master this, England need to move on to another.
Agree regds midfield as well. Lancs chipped & chopped & changed till it made my head (& his?) spin. Dunno why he didn’t go with the Bath line & supplement it with say JJ, Slade(?), Nowell etc.
Late on, when Nowell scored down the right at 1 time in particular, England’s back line handling looked (& was) slick, but I ? why they weren’t playing like this from the beginning, i.e., v Wales & Oz. Can surely only be from the coaches’ lack of belief & faith in an all court game & fear of failure? Why else on earth would Burgess have EVER got into these sides… & then, even more rapidly, be gone!?
So, your last para makes perfect sense to me… & hopefully to Ritchie, Andrew etc… & as much to the point, the ‘new'(?) coach/es.
The scoring must be taken with a grain of salt here as the oppo could hardly knock the skin off a rice pudding.
Most look good when their side dominates possession, territory, but it’s v better teams that these points ratings need to be made.
As mentioned above though, when Nowell scored a particular try of note, England’s midfield handling was sharp… & as they could only play what was in front of them, some of these moves still rated highly.