Foot in Touch

Entries tagged as ‘Brad Barritt’

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly (Analysis)

February 5, 2012 · Leave a Comment

The Calcutta Cup was won by England, with a performance that offers optimism amidst the need for improvement

England vs Scotland was, for long periods, really quite boring.  It was tense, it was physical and it was committed; but the inability of either side to string phases together or to handle well produced a game that was disjointed and stodgy.  From the perspective of an England fan, it was a predictably mixed bag, as the new regime was subjected to its first public examination.  I have therefore settled on a new and somewhat lazy mode of analysis, looking at the good, the bad and the ugly from a winning start.

The Good

England won.  They won at Murrayfield, which is a famously difficult ground for the Red Rose, and they did so after only two weeks together.  ’A win is a win’ was a mantra that dogged the Johnson era and was ultimately at the heart of a disappointing World Cup campaign, but in this instance it is a reasonable attitude.  Certainly, given that the performance wasn’t exactly champagne rugby, it is better to have played like that and won than to have played like that and lost.

Several individuals played well, most notably Brad Barritt, who was simply outstanding in defence.  He and Farrell lined up as expected in attack, with Farrell in the wider role, but in defence Barritt was handed the responsibility of the outside centre position and he was magnificent there.  His ability to put in big hits will have made the highlights reel, but much more important was his decision-making, as he consistently knew when to step up, when to drift and when to hold the line.  Indeed, his performance was at the heart of another major England positive – their defensive organisation.  Scotland’s inability to convert overlaps was in part due to their poor execution but it also owed a lot to England’s perfectly timed drift defence.  With Barritt reading nearly everything at 13, and Strettle and Ashton both knowing when to blitz inwards and when to stay wide, the defensive line looked as solid as it has since 2003.  This in turn led to much, much better discipline, as England consistently managed to stay on the right side of the law before turning over dangerous attacks legitimately.

In addition, Chris Robshaw showed ample stomach for the fight, and did a reasonable enough job at the breakdown; Foden was solid as a rock at fullback, saving at least two tries with his tackling; and the scrum, an area of concern before the game, actually had the edge over the Scottish set piece.  Owen Farrell was anonymous with ball in hand but he showed great composure in converting his place kicks, and he and Hodgson both tried to play flat on the gain line, which will reap rewards as the continuity increases.  Also refreshing was the kicking from hand, which was by-and-large of good quality.  Indeed, this was an area which was very significant in England’s victory, as Hodgson comfortably outmanoeuvred Parks, declining to give the Scottish back three easy ball with which to counterattack.

The Bad

Principal among the disappointing aspects was a lack of structure.  This is a new squad, not used to playing together, but a team where the 10, 11, 12 and 13 are all from the same club should be able to gel quickly.  Instead, England barely had the ball for most of the game, and when they did they failed to establish any rhythm.  Leaving aside the handling errors (see below), there didn’t seem to be a coherent plan for where and how to attack and, a brief second-half period aside, there was little in the way of incision.  I can barely remember Farrell, an exciting and creative player, having the ball in his hands while he was at 13; and the potentially explosive back three was restricted to very occasional half-chances.  This lack of structure was exacerbated by the wobbly lineout, which needs to be shored up as a matter of urgency.

The other major disappointment was Phil Dowson, who had a game to forget.  As well as dropping a simple restart, which led to Scotland’s first points, he was only noticeable for the wrong reasons.  Much like Haskell last year, he lacks control at the base of the scrum, which puts significant pressure on Youngs and Hodgson.  Indeed, England’s worst and most self-destructive play of the game, when Ashton ran the ball from a scrum inside his own 22 and conceded a penalty, was in fact caused by Dowson’s failure to provide a solid platform – as the ball squirted out of the scrum on the wrong side, Youngs was unable to throw a long pass to Hodgson and so resorted to Ashton, who was preparing to set off after Hodgson’s kick.  This is symptomatic of the difficulty of playing a blindside flanker at number 8, and Ben Morgan will fancy his chances of a start against Italy.

The (Downright) Ugly

While some of England’s imperfections can be put down to inexperience, both individually and as a squad, some were simply inexcusable.  Both sides were guilty of some cringe-worthy handling errors, a factor which killed any chance of momentum and rhythm in attack.  While Scotland’s mistakes were more costly, most notably when Ross Rennie allowed Foden to spoil his try-scoring pass to Mike Blair, England put themselves under pressure by losing the ball in contact and failing to pass accurately enough.  Hodgson’s admirable desire to play very, very flat (something which he has done magnificently for Saracens all season) was undone by uncharacteristically wayward distribution; and, while both side’s culpability does suggest difficult conditions, professionals at this level should set much higher standards.

Finally, Lancaster himself noted that England were “broken” on several occasions in their one-on-one defence.  As mentioned, their organisation was excellent and they will be pleased to have conceded just 6 points from a 20% deficit in possession.  However, the defensive system has to be supported by good individual tackling and the majority of Scotland’s chances came from simply running straight through an England tackle.  The Welsh, and in particular the French, will not be so profligate, so the white wall of England’s defensive line cannot afford any crumbling bricks.

Categories: 6 Nations · England · Scotland
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

England’s Saullvation

January 4, 2012 · Leave a Comment

Could Andy Saull be the answer to England's openside flanker problem?

Jack Lewars

Stuart Lancaster will announce his first England squad this week amid a strange sense of optimism.  Forget England’s form since 2003, forget the World Cup: a new regime means new players and new combinations, and that inevitably means hope.  In some instances, this is well-founded – England have their greatest abundance of quality full-backs in years, as Foden fights off Brown, Abendanon and Goode, and scrum-half and wing both look promising.  However, as Chris wrote on this blog in October, the key positions of openside flanker and creative centre remain in doubt.  Andy Saull’s recent form, therefore, could not be better timed.

Saull is one of the players who seems to have been around for a while.  He has notched over 100 appearances for Saracens without winning a senior England cap, and he seems to figure in most people’s consciousness as ‘workmanlike’.  He was not on the previous coaching team’s radar, as they preferred shifting a talented blindside flanker to seven rather than recruiting a specialist seven, and he never made the EPS under Johnson.  It would therefore be some jump for him to start in such a key position against Scotland on February 4th.

However, several things are in his favour.  First, despite his journeyman image, he is only 23, thus fitting the bill for a side that needs to build towards 2015.  In addition, he has played for three England age-group sides and, crucially, the Saxons, where Lancaster was his coach, so the new man knows his strengths.  Third, as mentioned, he is a genuine, out-and-out seven, which the World Cup showed to be a crucial ingredient of a successful side.  And fourth, and most importantly, he has been at the heart of Saracens’ fantastic recent form.

No game has better showcased Saull’s attributes than that against Harlequins on 27th December.  Despite the man-of-the-match award going to Brad Barritt (a contender for the centres, although not the most creative one), Saull was the difference between the two sides.  He won penalties which Farrell could turn into points, he stopped the home side from building momentum and he dominated the much-vaunted Quins’ captain Chris Robshaw.  Most notable of all, however, was his ability at the breakdown, where he stole, spoiled and scrapped for Harlequins’ ball for the full eighty minutes.  It is this last attribute that makes him a serious contender for Lancaster’s back row.

England have for some time lacked a player who can jackal well and rip possession.  This problem has been so chronic that I remember Steve Borthwick cementing his place as captain in 2009 when he performed the feat once against France.  In the World Cup, after the games against Argentina and Georgia, England’s back rowers had achieved three turnovers between them.  David Pocock, in the quarter-final against South Africa, managed nine on his own, at least six of which were legal.

In keeping with the world’s best flankers, Saull has the knack of arriving at the breakdown at exactly the right time, which is crucial under the current laws.  With the tackler now obliged to release both player and ball before challenging, the days of bringing a runner down and seamlessly swinging into the jackal are gone.  The most effective time to reach the breakdown is at the exact moment at which the tackle is completed – you can then drop into position over the ball and either tear it free or win a penalty for holding on.  This rewards players with a high work rate, who are prepared to chase the ball even when it isn’t in their channel, and Saull is both a tireless runner and a strong player, capable of resisting the first hit from the attacking ruckers.  Whether he is stealing possession, or just slowing it down by getting his hands on it, he is a massive asset for any team.

When Saull signed a three-year contract extension at Saracens in 2009, Brendan Venter called him a “giant stake… helping to underpin our future”.  If Lancaster tries a traditional openside for his new England squad, he may well end up saying the same thing.

Categories: 6 Nations · Aviva Premiership · Coaches · England · Harlequins · Players · Saracens
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

England – what next?

October 30, 2011 · 1 Comment

Johnson, if he survives the ongoing RFU review, will have to reinvent England if they are to win the World Cup on home soil in 2015

Chris Gollop

Reviews seem to be in vogue these days. Ever since the Ashes debacle of 2006/7, during which the only success was the heroics of Andrew Flintoff (of the drinking variety, obviously), reviews have taken over the sporting world. The Schofield Report – widely ridiculed at the time it was delivered – has clearly reaped rewards in some way, although Kevin Pietersen’s removal of Peter Moores was, as the man himself modestly admitted, the most important factor in England’s recent rise to number one in the ICC Test Match rankings.

Where the ECB has led, the RFU now follows. After England’s poor displays in the World Cup – both on and off the field – it has been decided that one review will not suffice. The RFU’s own review of the World Cup failure is guided by Rob Andrew, who will give recommendations to the board. English rugby fans will, I’m sure, be full of confidence that such an authoritative figure is in charge. In addition, there is an ‘independent’ review, chaired by Fran Cotton, into the structure of the Rugby Football Union. I should imagine that his report will be very brief. In fact, I shall summarise it for you in two words: call Clive.

The problem is that the RFU is in total disarray. It is not clear who holds the power, which would suggest that no one has the ability to sack Martin Johnson. Much, then, will depend on whether he wants to continue in his role. My feeling is that he will not want to give up the job now: this would be the first glaring failure in his rugby career. But, on the other hand, I do not think that he would be too proud a man to admit that he couldn’t quite achieve what he wanted to for whatever reasons.

Rigidity, stubbornness, and conservatism have been the hallmarks of Johnson’s managerial career. There is no flexibility in gameplan or selection. It would seem, from the outside, that whether Johnson goes or stays, a new coaching set-up is needed. England need to play with more dynamism and intensity, and skill. Basically, they need to watch videos of the All Blacks. John Wells, Mike Ford and Brian Smith should be relieved. We have seen glimpses of brilliance in attack over the past few years, but these have been too rare. And while this may have more to do with the lack of quick ball from the forward pack, and Johnson’s selections at centre, it is the ideal time for a change of philosophy. Likewise, in the forwards England need a new direction. John Wells epitomises Leicester of old: stubborn, gritty, dogged. This is not the way of modern rugby. These qualities are all essential, and the values incorporated in the Leicester teams in which Johnson and Wells played are crucial, but England should strive for a different approach these days.

The positive for England is that there is a young core of players with exceptional talent. In the current side, we know what Foden and Ashton can do when they get the ball in space; Armitage had a good World Cup and showed the form which excited everyone when he was starting at fifteen for England; Haskell carried extremely well; Lawes, Youngs, Simpson, and Cole are great prospects; and, most importantly, Manu Tuilagi showed why the regulars at Welford Road were purring about his abilities last season. This group of players can form the spine of an exciting side. Outside the World Cup squad, certain players have started the season particularly well: Christian Wade has been electric on the left wing for Wasps, and Turner-Hall and Lowe are combining very well for Quins, to name a few.

England clearly have the players. But they have been deficient as a team since their glorious victory in Sydney eight years ago. There have been numerous problems, but the most significant aspect of England’s decline was the loss of two players. While many great names retired, and others were injured for substantial periods of time, what affected England more than anything was the loss of Neil Back and Will Greenwood. Woodward axed Back immediately after the World Cup, trying to build for the future – only to bring him back when he realised his error. You cannot manufacture an openside flanker, nor can you play without one. No one has been able to fill Back’s boots. Moody, for all his effort, enthusiasm and awe-inspiring bravery, was found wanting as a top-class openside. He never had the ability of Back on the floor, nor could he provide an effective link between forwards and backs. It pains me to say this, as Moody is one of the best blindsides I’ve watched, and he formed a brilliant pairing with Neil Back at Leicester. But if this World Cup has highlighted anything, it is the importance of number sevens. Similarly, since Greenwood retired, England have not had a genuine playmaker in midfield. Greenwood brought assurance, calm, brilliant distribution, and a sensational try-scoring record to the England backline.

England need to concentrate on these positions. Tuilagi has to start in the midfield, and might even play at twelve. He has very good hands, and with experience at outside centre, could do a very similar job to Ma’a Nonu. But he needs an able partner. There has been a lot of discussion about Brendan Venter’s lovechild – sorry, I meant Brad Barritt – who has impressed with his direct running and offloading game. If I were the England manager, I should have a quiet word with Richard Cockerill and ask him to play Matthew Tait outside Tuilagi for the Tigers. Tait is a very frustrating player, who should have achieved much more – we all assumed he would kick on from the 2007 World Cup final and cement his place at thirteen. But he’s too good a player to give up on. As for Neil Back’s replacement, Dave Seymour is the outstanding candidate at the moment. He has been pouncing on any loose ball for Sale, is good on the ground, and can be a good linkman.

My choices aren’t necessarily the correct ones, but these are the selection issues which must be dealt with first. There are many options in the rest of the side, but one problem remains: the selection of a captain. Johnson was keen to trot out the old maxim that you pick your team first and captain second – something with which I generally agree. But there is a worrying lack of leadership in the current crop of players. Perhaps this is not such a bad thing, just a reflection of their youth. Of the players that are fairly certain to start, Dylan Hartley is the only one with significant captaincy experience. I’m not sure his regular presence in James Haskell’s World Cup video diary will particularly help his cause, nor his part in the inappropriate behaviour towards a female hotel worker in Dunedin, nor the fact that one of the first hits on a Google search for “Dylan Hartley” is a blog discussing whether he is the most hated player in rugby – and not because he is such a good player. Haskell himself is out of the equation whilst playing in Japan, and, by all accounts, is not the most well-respected bloke. All in all, this leaves England in a sticky situation. Tom Croft, if he rediscovers his Lions form, will be a certainty on the blindside, but he neither seems to have the presence nor the charisma to be a successful leader. Chris Robshaw? He is leading Quins very well this season, and would be as good as anyone at the job.

To conclude, I would assert these things confidently about England’s direction: Martin Johnson has failed as a selector and should not be solely in charge of  picking the team; the coaching set-up needs changing; and England need to find a genuine number seven and balanced midfield pair. There are many names linked with the England job, about which I will not speculate. However, I think it would be madness not to include Shaun Edwards in the coaching team: his credentials speak for themselves, and his passion and enthusiasm – bordering on the insane – are infectious. As for the players, let’s hope that we find a Neil Back and that Tuilagi can become half the player Greenwood was. Otherwise, it might be another disappointing four years.

Categories: England · Players
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,