Lancaster Drop Kicked

[Doon frae Troon]

Shame really, I thought he did a good job for England.

IMO He seemed to make the mistake of bulking up his team for the WC and highlighting strength instead of guile.

I liked the way his teams dropped the previous manager's constant petty professional fouling and played with an honest sporting style.

 

[Snelly]

Clearly a good man but perhaps out of his depth at this level.

I would like to see Gatland or Henry in next for England but I can't see them moving.

 

[Piece]

He was a good man, but alas not a great one. You see the strides Australia made in a short time with Cheika; what can be done with the right man with the right tools.

Who's next? Don't know enough about the landscape to offer a name. Surely though, we've got to look at all nationalities to get the best man? Kiwi? I'd also like to see French club players back in the fold.

 

[Lump]

FYI- He quit, he wasn't fired. Shows that he knew he couldn't lay blame to anywhere else other than himself. Something not a lot of coaches would do.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I like his idea of only allowing players based in the UK of being able to play for England - that way you know which players want to play for the shirt and for their country or who wants to coin it in on the French south coast.

 

[lex!]

Yes, a good man, what a shame the way it all turned out.
A breath of fresh air when he arrived, seemed to sweep away a lot of the old baggage and selected some good new players, yet this world cup ended like the last, in stories of squad disharmony and recrimination.
He was supposed to put great faith in his careful decision making wrt selection, yet the whole Burgess thing was a disaster.

 

[lex!]

I like his idea of only allowing players based in the UK of being able to play for England - that way you know which players want to play for the shirt and for their country or who wants to coin it in on the French south coast.

Funny, I thought it was a professional sport.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Funny, I thought it was a professional sport.

It is ?

 

[Piece]

FYI- He quit, he wasn't fired. Shows that he knew he couldn't lay blame to anywhere else other than himself. Something not a lot of coaches would do.

Reading between the words on this statement from the RFU chief, I think the more likely scenario is that the WC review wasn't great reading for Mr Lancaster and both parties agreed that he should go, rather than he voluntarily resigned:

A review into England performance at the World Cup took place after the tournament, with Rugby Football Union chief executive Ian Ritchie stating that Lancaster agreed he should step down from his role.

''The Rugby World Cup was hugely disappointing for everyone associated with the England team and the subsequent review into the team's performance was always intended to be extremely comprehensive, which it has been," said Ritchie.

"Following the review, Stuart and I met, where we agreed that he should step down as head coach. This was subsequently ratified by the RFU board."

 

[Tashyboy]

I like his idea of only allowing players based in the UK of being able to play for England - that way you know which players want to play for the shirt and for their country or who wants to coin it in on the French south coast.

So hypothetically a player that wants to play in NewZealand to improve himself should not be considered. In all honesty some of the players that were picked were massively out of there depth and unfortunate as it was, we got what we deserved. nowt.
For England to catch up the 20 yrs we are behind New Zealand before the next World Cup, the next coach needs to come from the Southern Hemisphere, and I am not too sure he is based in England, further more I would not be to bothered if he "coined it in", as long as I could get excited watching England again. As the Welsh do watching there foreign coached team.
Another thing is as well Phil is that yes he did pick some players which play in the UK, but were/ are about as English as Haggis.
Am not saying there's owt wrong with that coz it works for NZ, but England need to burn the Skool tie approach and start to think outside the box.
I suppose saying that last sentence, the same could be said for football, tennis, golf, cricket, etc etc.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Yes I believe Lancaster was right to pick just from players based here - it's one way to ensure we keep the Prem strong and every man and his dog doesn't jump ship chasing the money - I believe it's the same as NZ who pick players based there.

If Armitage for example really wanted to play for England then there was nothing stopping him moving to a club in the UK.

Not sure about this "20 years behind NZ" and also don't think things are as bad as being made out - think there a lot of talented players in England and with the right coach will make strides forward. It was a period of 3 minutes that knocked England out

Not sure what the "school tie" approach is ?

 

[Foxholer]

I like his idea of only allowing players based in the UK of being able to play for England - that way you know which players want to play for the shirt and for their country or who wants to coin it in on the French south coast.

No idea who actually insisted on that policy, but it prevented at least 1 truly world class player from being selected!

Seems not to be a problem in football, where those 'coining it in' probably earn more in a week or 2 that Rugby players earn in a year!

As for Lancaster, I agree that he was merely pretty good when he needed to be 'great'!

The World Cup has demonstrated the huge gap between Northern and Southern hemisphere quality of Rugby and a lot of that, imo, is down to the business side the game! It's unlikely to change in the near future, so future coaches are going to be just as hamstrung by clubs as Lancaster (and to a certain extent Roy Hodgson) has been!

And i'm still amazed that top division Club games are played when Internationals are played - rather distorting both results and the attraction of top players!

 

[GB72]

Honestly, I am glad to see the back of him.
It was not that he bulked up his players before the world cup, quite the opposite. All the conditioning training was on pace and stamina over strength to play a game similar to that played in the 6 Nations, high tempo, quick ball etc. He then reverted to the old brute force tactics and had a team ill prepared to carry out the game plan. The England Front Row are still struggling now to get that out of their systems.
He had no idea of a centre pairing, dropped an under developed Burgess into a team whilst excluding those who had earned place causing disharmony, he played Ford in all the warm up games then drops him when it matters, he picks Robshaw at open side, which he clearly is not, the drops Cipriani who was one of the few rays of hope in the 3 lacklustre warm up games, the list goes on.
Yes he seems like a decent enough chap and started well but was so far out of his depth that it was scary.
Now we just need to get rid of Richie and Rob Andrew at the RFU and start to build a working structure to run the England team.

 

[Robster59]

Yes I believe Lancaster was right to pick just from players based here - it's one way to ensure we keep the Prem strong and every man and his dog doesn't jump ship chasing the money - I believe it's the same as NZ who pick players based there.

If Armitage for example really wanted to play for England then there was nothing stopping him moving to a club in the UK.

Not sure about this "20 years behind NZ" and also don't think things are as bad as being made out - think there a lot of talented players in England and with the right coach will make strides forward. It was a period of 3 minutes that knocked England out

Not sure what the "school tie" approach is ?

Sorry but I totally disagree. Players should have the right to play where they want to. The major income is from their club matches not the international ones. It's a relatively short career so why not do the best you can. You won't see a massive exodus to the continent but to refuse to pick anyone who does not play in the UK is tremendously short-sighted and does not do what's best for the national side.

It works for other sports who have players playing overseas.

 

[Foxholer]

Now we just need to get rid of Richie and Rob Andrew at the RFU and start to build a working structure to run the England team.

Not sure about Richie, but i don't believe Rob Andrew is good for English rugby! Seems to be a 'great survivor' and great for Rob Andrew though!!

And can't fault your analysis either! Cipriani's recall/exclusion seems bizarre to me - personality clashes?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Sorry but I totally disagree. Players should have the right to play where they want to. The major income is from their club matches not the international ones. It's a relatively short career so why not do the best you can. You won't see a massive exodus to the continent but to refuse to pick anyone who does not play in the UK is tremendously short-sighted and does not do what's best for the national side.

It works for other sports who have players playing overseas.

I believe NZ also only pick players playing domestically ? Hence why all their players despite the lure of the French and Saracen millions stay where they are - because they value playing for their country higher.

 

[upsidedown]

I believe NZ also only pick players playing domestically ? Hence why all their players despite the lure of the French and Saracen millions stay where they are - because they value playing for their country higher.

That's right Phil although Carter did have a year off a while back to play in France. Also their season is a lot less intense than UK, although again travelling times can be harder with trips to SA

 

[Deleted member 15344]

That's right Phil although Carter did have a year off a while back to play in France. Also their season is a lot less intense than UK, although again travelling times can be harder with trips to SA

In that year he was ineligible to play for NZ is that right ?

Did I hear it right that some clubs from Argentina are joining the Super 14 ?

 

[Tashyboy]

Phil it works in NZ because they are the best of the best, Argentina who got miles further than England and played superior rugby have players from all over the world. If they only played players from Argentina they would struggle to beat Cleethorpes over 45's.
Re players playing abroad, using another sport, Salford FC could not understand why a player would not play a game because he had chance of earning 5 k modelling. Gary Neville who is an ex pro footballer who is a coach of England "said we know where his priorities lie". Yes you bloody plank,his family.
The same applies to rugby players. The issue here is not where players play, it's where they don't play, and in the positions they played and in the positions the coach played them.

 

[upsidedown]

In that year he was ineligible to play for NZ is that right ?

Did I hear it right that some clubs from Argentina are joining the Super 14 ?

He was on a sabbatical with the blessing of the union and played for them in same season as he did for Perpignan.

A team from Japan has joined this year I think and will only be time before one comes from Argentina. Just checked fixtures and team from Japan and Argentina are featured