A poor record against elite teams must be addressed
Tuesday 25 November 2014 17:27, UK
Before the QBE Internationals kicked off Stuart Lancaster stated that England had to win three of the four internationals – not my words, not some other journalists' but those of the England manager.
That is now impossible. As November nears its end England face Australia, pool rivals in next year’s World Cup with a record of 1-2 going into the match.
Defeat from an English perspective does not bear thinking about. The month when Twickenham was supposed to be turned into the fortress from which a confident assault on the world could be launched next year will be – in rugby terms – a wreck should the Wallabies win.
This really is a significant game in the coaching career of Lancaster and maybe down the road we will look back on it and agree it was indeed his most important match to date. To win the World Cup, the knowledge and confidence of how to beat the big three is a prerequisite. Should Australia win, Lancaster’s record would be one win in three against them. Twickenham or not, this is not the launch pad for World Cup glory.
I have often enough suggested that for all his Six Nations success, Warren Gatland’s terrible record against New Zealand, Australia and South Africa shows his Wales side are flawed – capable of beating physically weaker opponents but not the world. The same verdict has to be aimed at England should they complete the trio of losses against Australia.
The overwhelming positivity of the England management, with their constant talk of progress, was drowned by the realism of serious regression the moment they stopped playing the European teams and faced the big guns. Narrow margins of defeat on the scoreboard were comprehensive victories on the field. These are the realities that need facing, not before losing to Australia but before playing them. That way England have a chance of salvaging victory and finishing the autumn with a disappointing but not so psychologically damaging 2-2 record.
The overwhelming positivity of the England management with its constant talk of progress was drowned by the realism of serious regression the moment they stopped playing the European teams and faced the big guns.
To do that England have to play more in Australian territory. They have to stop playing their practice routines in the wrong part of the pitch and players have to start thinking in the moment, not the recollection of what they are supposed to do. Right now, that is certainly how it looks.
There remains hope for England despite the gloomy prognosis because the side have a potent pack and, if they find out the best way to unleash it, the men in white have a puncher’s chance against anyone when the venue is Twickenham (which is not saying Twickenham is a fortress, more it is not Eden Park or Ellis Park where the chances would be near to nil).
Saturday is a test of the management’s ability to tweak a broadly structured game plan into something flexible that George Ford can get his hands and boot on and turn it into a sorely needed win. Ford was the best thing to come out of a poor performance against Samoa, although he is a long way from the messiah and the nine out of 10 performance he was afforded in the wake of the match.
Saturday will be a stern test for the talented young No 10. Against Samoa he passed the physical test, but the Wallabies will try and make this one a mental test as well. They also offer a far greater challenge despite themselves having the unenviable 1-2 record in Tests since the start of Michael Cheika’s reign.
The difference is that England’s quality of performances has dropped from the first day onwards whereas Australia’s is, at least, a rollercoaster. They beat Wales in Cardiff (they always do) and played some smart rugby. They were average in Paris yet in defeat in Ireland they delivered their best effort of the autumn. Ireland hit them with everything in the first 20 minutes. Ireland were as accurate, aggressive and focused as I can remember. It was top quality Test rugby. Losing 17-0, the Australians roared back and went down with honour to an outstanding Ireland team who are the clear pick of Europe at the moment.
Honourable defeats are not exactly what Australians enjoy. Win at Twickenham and they can head home with victory against both their 2015 pool rivals. Whether they can win the World Cup will be up for debate but their ability to get out of the pool will not be questioned.
Elsewhere, Wales are playing better rugby than England but are just as desperate for a win against the big three. South Africa look jaded and vulnerable but the Kiwis and Springboks find their ways to win. Wales thought they had a great chance against New Zealand. They do have a decent chance against South Africa.
France fell back into their pit of despondency in which they have wallowed through most of the Philippe Saint-Andre time in charge. Argentina tired late on but were clearly the better side for most of the match. They and Scotland are interesting prospects with neither the automatic quarter-final knock-over some (me included in the Scots’ case) might have imagined a month ago.
What a rugby finale we have to November’s sequence of Test matches. I cannot wait for Saturday to see whether England have the strategy and game management to win or whether the flowering talents of the Wallabies will land a heavy blow on the reputation of England’s players and management. Tense and thrilling, Test rugby as it should be.
Stuart answers your emails...
Got a question for Stuart? Email him at skysportsclub@bskyb.com, Tweet @SkySportsRugby #askskyrugby or use the feedback form below.
Stuart, another loss for Wales and, the truth is, they are ranked number seven in the world for very good reason, that's how good we are. We keep losing to the big boys because we aren't good enough, I’m afraid. I hate to say it, but we won't make it out of the group stages at the World Cup. The All Blacks are in a different class to Wales. France and Ireland have both beaten Australia but we couldn't – why? If Wales lose to South Africa this weekend is that the end of Warren Gatland or should Wales stick with him?
STUART REPLIES: Wales lost to Australia because they keep losing to Australia. The players have a psychological issue. I have long been castigated in Wales for saying that winning styles in the Six Nations are irrelevant to beating the best in the world. Wales are a good European team under Gatland but not a world force. Joe Schmidt is trying to take Ireland further. As for not getting out of the pool, I tend to agree with you but there remains hope in Wales - have you seen how England are playing? While they have lost two games to date Australia have been the most impressive of the three teams in that particular pool with Wales playing the better rugby to England. There is time and hope for Wales (not to mention England and Australia) – now is not the time for despair.
Stuart, what lessons do you think England can learn from Ireland and what does Stuart Lancaster have to do in next year’s Six Nations to get England right for the World Cup?
STUART REPLIES: Territory, a game plan that is handed over to a 10 and the understanding that pretty patterns win few prizes. Ireland have been doubly dynamic to England but the sharp cut of the intellect has most impressed me in this Ireland team. No shock with Schmidt at the helm.
Stuart, do you really think that Clive Woodward is right in saying Ford and Owen Farrell should be given a good run at 10 and 12? I'm all for Ford at 10 but putting an out of form fly-half into the 12 role makes no sense whatsoever - yes, Woodward harps on about a kicking 12, but there are far better 12s in this country who should be given a chance. Farrell and Brad Barritt should be sent back to Sarries – get Ford running things with Kyle Eastmond at 12 and Luther Burrell at 13 - that is a back line that should be given a run of games!
STUART REPLIES: Ford should definitely be running it and Farrell is not in form to earn selection but you say that as a fan and I say it as a broadcaster/journalist. Ford does not convince me as a kicker and, to beat Australia, England need to squeeze matters up front. An old fashioned England with a bullying pack and a brilliant kicker did for the Aussies in 2003. Would you not be tempted to try the same in 2014? All I will say is that the Farrell at 12 selection is not straightforward.
England's back-row - I know it's been done to death but Lancaster needs to sort this out. Chris Robshaw showed just how vital he is and his tackling is superb. James Haskell was brought in for carrying and ability at the breakdown, but he offered very little beyond penalties. His only saving grace was how much worse Tom Wood looked when he came on. Haskell was, at least, strong in defence with a few big hits but it's not as though England need another out-and-out tackler in the back row alongside Robshaw. Either bring in another monster carrier like Dave Ewers or a proper ball-stealer like Matt Kvesic or Steffon Armitage!
STUART REPLIES: Armitage's absence has been discussed. Principle is possibly going to be prioritised over England maximising their best team. As for the ball-carrying absence it was endemic of a team that could not find the foundations to build anything. They are muddled at the moment. Strip back the model, scrum and line out and send big men down the middle with a fly-half to coax them into the corners and attack at the right time. More clarity and less confusion, please England.
