"England not Ireland will finish the season in style"

LumpyChicken

I was just reading the observer sports section today and there was an article by their rugby correspondent Eddie Butler who made a number of snide remarks about Irish rugby, namely stating that Leicester would go on to win the Heineken Cup and "England not Ireland will finish the season in style". There were also some snide remarks about Munster rugby and it's contribution to the lions considering the lost places of Tomas O leary and Alan Quinlan. It seems to me that this biased and subjective view of Irish rugby is nothing more than sour grapes, although I might be wrong and maybe england are the team worth watching not Ireland as Mr. Butler so kindly stated.

thomond2006

Fair enough, post a link so I can read it myself.

LumpyChicken

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2009/may/17/heineken-cup-leicester-leinster

anonymous_joe

LumpyChicken wrote: »

I was just reading the observer sports section today and there was an article by their rugby correspondent Eddie Butler who made a number of snide remarks about Irish rugby, namely stating that Leicester would go on to win the Heineken Cup and "England not Ireland will finish the season in style". There were also some snide remarks about Munster rugby and it's contribution to the lions considering the lost places of Tomas O leary and Alan Quinlan. It seems to me that this biased and subjective view of Irish rugby is nothing more than sour grapes, although I might be wrong and maybe england are the team worth watching not Ireland as Mr. Butler so kindly stated.

Think he's Welsh.

They do seem to hate us. :pac:

English rugby doesn't like losing. Historically they want to dominate us on the pitch, but admire our skill and passion, so long as it doesn't exceed their own. Hence the Lions is historically 8 or 9 England with the remainder us plucky Celts.

It's a patronising attitude, and masks a deep insecurity in their own game. English rugby's not anywhere near as healthy as it should be. They should beat us every year. They've about 10 times the number of players that we do, and yet their league is a poor standard, too physical, too aggressive and too lacking in guile and subtlety, something which, no matter what your feelings about them, were always an important part of England's game. For all the big ugly powerful forwards, there were also Underwoods, Guscotts, etc, and yet, few of their kind are having much effect.

A Leicester win by a multi-national team, captained by an Irish player says as much about the health of the English game as London Irish do about the Irish game, but that's not the point - it's appearance - Leicester embody 'English' rugby. They are to the English game what Munster are to ours (in the past mainly) - tough, dour, winning. A win for Leicester would vindicate an awful year, poor administrative calls which are limiting the international side's efficacy and avoid questioning the style of rugby being played.

In many sports its easier to defend than to attack, or in the case of rugby, to play it tight, avoid risk, etc. It allows teams to become greater than the sum of their parts, and in the case of the English league, the desperate need to win has eradicated to a degree the penchant for flair. The fear of relegation/failing to qualify for Europe, dangers that barely register for Magners League teams are a constant factor.

LumpyChicken

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Think he's Welsh.

They do seem to hate us. :pac:

English rugby doesn't like losing. Historically they want to dominate us on the pitch, but admire our skill and passion, so long as it doesn't exceed their own. Hence the Lions is historically 8 or 9 England with the remainder us plucky Celts.

It's a patronising attitude, and masks a deep insecurity in their own game. English rugby's not anywhere near as healthy as it should be. They should beat us every year. They've about 10 times the number of players that we do, and yet their league is a poor standard, too physical, too aggressive and too lacking in guile and subtlety, something which, no matter what your feelings about them, were always an important part of England's game. For all the big ugly powerful forwards, there were also Underwoods, Guscotts, etc, and yet, few of their kind are having much effect.

A Leicester win by a multi-national team, captained by an Irish player says as much about the health of the English game as London Irish do about the Irish game, but that's not the point - it's appearance - Leicester embody 'English' rugby. They are to the English game what Munster are to ours (in the past mainly) - tough, dour, winning. A win for Leicester would vindicate an awful year, poor administrative calls which are limiting the international side's efficacy and avoid questioning the style of rugby being played.

In many sports its easier to defend than to attack, or in the case of rugby, to play it tight, avoid risk, etc. It allows teams to become greater than the sum of their parts, and in the case of the English league, the desperate need to win has eradicated to a degree the penchant for flair. The fear of relegation/failing to qualify for Europe, dangers that barely register for Magners League teams are a constant factor.

You make some excellent points my friend

thomond2006

LumpyChicken wrote: »

You make some excellent points my friend

I second that. Good stuff anon.

themont85

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Think he's Welsh.

They do seem to hate us. :pac:

English rugby doesn't like losing. Historically they want to dominate us on the pitch, but admire our skill and passion, so long as it doesn't exceed their own. Hence the Lions is historically 8 or 9 England with the remainder us plucky Celts.

It's a patronising attitude, and masks a deep insecurity in their own game. English rugby's not anywhere near as healthy as it should be. They should beat us every year. They've about 10 times the number of players that we do, and yet their league is a poor standard, too physical, too aggressive and too lacking in guile and subtlety, something which, no matter what your feelings about them, were always an important part of England's game. For all the big ugly powerful forwards, there were also Underwoods, Guscotts, etc, and yet, few of their kind are having much effect.

A Leicester win by a multi-national team, captained by an Irish player says as much about the health of the English game as London Irish do about the Irish game, but that's not the point - it's appearance - Leicester embody 'English' rugby. They are to the English game what Munster are to ours (in the past mainly) - tough, dour, winning. A win for Leicester would vindicate an awful year, poor administrative calls which are limiting the international side's efficacy and avoid questioning the style of rugby being played.

In many sports its easier to defend than to attack, or in the case of rugby, to play it tight, avoid risk, etc. It allows teams to become greater than the sum of their parts, and in the case of the English league, the desperate need to win has eradicated to a degree the penchant for flair. The fear of relegation/failing to qualify for Europe, dangers that barely register for Magners League teams are a constant factor.

Have to agree, English rugby has an unhealthy obsession with power rugby. If in doubt they pick power players like Jamie Noon who have little subtlety to their games. I often wonder what the likes of Cipriani, Geraghty, Tait, Strettle and Simpson Daniel would achieve in a green shirt or Welsh ect. If those guys do one wrong thing they are out and conservatism rules out. Other nations put more trust in their flair players, i'm not saying we're great at it(in comparision to SH countries) but England are awful at bringing talent to the international stage when they have an abundance of it which is badly handled imo. There is definately a fear factor in English rugby.

Podge_irl

I don't see anything really wrong with that article.

Chucky the tree

From the quick glancy at Butler's article I got nothing like what OP is saying.

anonymous_joe wrote: »

It's a patronising attitude, and masks a deep insecurity in their own game. English rugby's not anywhere near as healthy as it should be. They should beat us every year. They've about 10 times the number of players that we do, and yet their league is a poor standard, too physical, too aggressive and too lacking in guile and subtlety, something which, no matter what your feelings about them, were always an important part of England's game. For all the big ugly powerful forwards, there were also Underwoods, Guscotts, etc, and yet, few of their kind are having much effect.

A Leicester win by a multi-national team, captained by an Irish player says as much about the health of the English game as London Irish do about the Irish game, but that's not the point - it's appearance - Leicester embody 'English' rugby. They are to the English game what Munster are to ours (in the past mainly) - tough, dour, winning. A win for Leicester would vindicate an awful year, poor administrative calls which are limiting the international side's efficacy and avoid questioning the style of rugby being played.

In many sports its easier to defend than to attack, or in the case of rugby, to play it tight, avoid risk, etc. It allows teams to become greater than the sum of their parts, and in the case of the English league, the desperate need to win has eradicated to a degree the penchant for flair. The fear of relegation/failing to qualify for Europe, dangers that barely register for Magners League teams are a constant factor.

The GP has been dicussed far to many times but it's far from a poor league.

Chucky the tree

themont85 wrote: »

Have to agree, English rugby has an unhealthy obsession with power rugby. If in doubt they pick power players like Jamie Noon who have little subtlety to their games. I often wonder what the likes of Cipriani, Geraghty, Tait, Strettle and Simpson Daniel would achieve in a green shirt or Welsh ect. If those guys do one wrong thing they are out and conservatism rules out. Other nations put more trust in their flair players, i'm not saying we're great at it(in comparision to SH countries) but England are awful at bringing talent to the international stage when they have an abundance of it which is badly handled imo. There is definately a fear factor in English rugby.

I'm pretty sure they'd achieve little to nothing in a green shirt as they wouldnt of gotten ahead of ROG. It's plan to see to evveryone that Cipriani, Geraghty et all just aren't good enough yet to play international rugby at one of the most important positions in rugby. Ireland are hardly a nation to model yourself when talking about developing/bringing on OH's. If ROG had anywhere near the injury problems JW had we'd be in just as bad a shape as they are.

anonymous_joe

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't see anything really wrong with that article.

It's not that bad, Butler's usually fairly calm, but it's an odd direction to take in terms of how to approach the subject matter.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The GP has been dicussed far to many times but it's far from a poor league.

It's not a poor league - they've as many teams in the final as the Magners League for a reason, but it's a league that is constantly overhyped. It's not as good as Sky et al make out, and it does have some structural problems.

I'd guess you watched the LIrish Leicester game, and watching some very talented players do nothing for 80 minutes is just awful. The passing, handling and attacking decision making was dire, handling skills, attacking vision etc are all lost in the relentless pursuit of physical power.

There was a moment in the first half when Tom Croft was just running superbly, my mate commented that you'd think he was a winger or a centre, and yet there was so little of that. They can do that, but choose not to. And that's a weakness.

Judgement Day

LumpyChicken wrote: »

I was just reading the observer sports section today and there was an article by their rugby correspondent Eddie Butler who made a number of snide remarks about Irish rugby, namely stating that Leicester would go on to win the Heineken Cup and "England not Ireland will finish the season in style". There were also some snide remarks about Munster rugby and it's contribution to the lions considering the lost places of Tomas O leary and Alan Quinlan. It seems to me that this biased and subjective view of Irish rugby is nothing more than sour grapes, although I might be wrong and maybe england are the team worth watching not Ireland as Mr. Butler so kindly stated.

Thanks for posting the link from the Guardian NOT the Observer but I think you must have a chip on your shoulder to have interpreted an anti-Irish bias in the article! Eddie Butler is a former Welsh International player and his views as expressed were very impartial from my reading of the article. He did not state that Leicester would go on to win the HC but that they could. He was very generous in his summary of Leinster's performance in the semi and of Munster's previous contributions to European rugby. His only 'slight' bias (?) could possible be seen in the final lines>>>"Far from cancelling each other out, the similarities could produce a storm of invention, a final to remember, with Leicester contributing to the view that England, not Ireland, are finishing the season in style." Hardly anti-Irish sentiment. Still if you read the British press looking for anti-Irish bias I am sure that you will find it.

C'MON LEINSTER

anonymous_joe

Judgement Day wrote: »

Thanks for posting the link from the Guardian NOT the Observer but I think you must have a chip on your shoulder to have interpreted an anti-Irish bias in the article! Eddie Butler is a former Welsh International player and his views as expressed were very impartial from my reading of the article. He did not state that Leicester would go on to win the HC but that they could. He was very generous in his summary of Leinster's performance in the semi and of Munster's previous contributions to European rugby. His only 'slight' bias (?) could possible be seen in the final lines>>>"Far from cancelling each other out, the similarities could produce a storm of invention, a final to remember, with Leicester contributing to the view that England, not Ireland, are finishing the season in style." Hardly anti-Irish sentiment. Still if you read the British press looking for anti-Irish bias I am sure that you will find it.

C'MON LEINSTER

*coughs* Stephen Jones.

The English Times is fairly pro-Ingerland anti-Gallant Gaels.

themont85

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I'm pretty sure they'd achieve little to nothing in a green shirt as they wouldnt of gotten ahead of ROG. It's plan to see to evveryone that Cipriani, Geraghty et all just aren't good enough yet to play international rugby at one of the most important positions in rugby. Ireland are hardly a nation to model yourself when talking about developing/bringing on OH's. If ROG had anywhere near the injury problems JW had we'd be in just as bad a shape as they are.

I'm not just talking about out halfs here. But okay lets look at it. England have selected the likes of Goode and Hodgson at 10 in the past who lets face it are not international standard. Whatever about Cipriani's poor form, he is a seriousely talanted player as is Geraghty, they are miles better than those guys who are 'solid' players. Cipriani is upto international standard that is pure crap imo, look at what he did vs Ireland last year. He isn't the finished article and has issues but when will he be if MJ has no faith in him? Clearly Ireland couldn't allow that kind of talent to be squandered, we don't have the depth they do at all.

themont85

That Butler article is grand. Last weeks one essentially accused Irish rugby colluding to get Quinlan off was pure drivel.

Jackz

themont85 wrote: »

That Butler article is grand. Last weeks one essentially accused Irish rugby colluding to get Quinlan off was pure drivel.

Written to give Croft the best chance to go on the lions. The commentary by Sky in the Cardiff v Leicester match, when they knew Quinlan was likely to be cited was also ridiculous, they just stopped short of saying Croft was god, ignoring his mistakes and continuing to give him high praise as play continued. They didn't shy away from showing the incident with Quinlan again and again and again. I have my ticket for Murrayfield and I just hope Leinster do themselves justice and put in another top notch defensive performance.

Amabokke

LumpyChicken wrote: »

I was just reading the observer sports section today and there was an article by their rugby correspondent Eddie Butler who made a number of snide remarks about Irish rugby, namely stating that Leicester would go on to win the Heineken Cup and "England not Ireland will finish the season in style". There were also some snide remarks about Munster rugby and it's contribution to the lions considering the lost places of Tomas O leary and Alan Quinlan. It seems to me that this biased and subjective view of Irish rugby is nothing more than sour grapes, although I might be wrong and maybe england are the team worth watching not Ireland as Mr. Butler so kindly stated.

He is correct about Leicester winning the HC. However, Ireland and not England have already finished the season in style.

Not every journalist can be biased towards the Irish now you know :rolleyes:

Maybe a week in the sun doing some tanning will help with a few extra layers of skin.

Snickers Man

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't see anything really wrong with that article.

+1.

Lighten up lads, FFS. If you get offended by that you'll die of apoplexy before you're 30.

I seriously think Leinster are going to do it this year. They just seem to be in the zone with regard to the Heineken Cup. Contepomi is a big loss. Van der Linde is the Leinster Christian Cullen. (great reputation but spends most of his time here on the treatment table) But it's a real chance for the likes of Sexton and Healy to step up and come of age.

I think the people likely to take a shine off the Irish season are the Boks. If the tour goes badly, and it's quite likely that it could, at least in the tests, the accepted wisdom will be that putting so much faith in an Irish flash in the pan was unfounded.

But let's wait and see, eh.

theKramer

Dunno why anyone would get worked up about that article. I saw nothing wrong in that at all.

Chucky the tree

anonymous_joe wrote: »

It's not that bad, Butler's usually fairly calm, but it's an odd direction to take in terms of how to approach the subject matter.


It's not a poor league - they've as many teams in the final as the Magners League for a reason, but it's a league that is constantly overhyped. It's not as good as Sky et al make out, and it does have some structural problems.

I'd guess you watched the LIrish Leicester game, and watching some very talented players do nothing for 80 minutes is just awful. The passing, handling and attacking decision making was dire, handling skills, attacking vision etc are all lost in the relentless pursuit of physical power.

There was a moment in the first half when Tom Croft was just running superbly, my mate commented that you'd think he was a winger or a centre, and yet there was so little of that. They can do that, but choose not to. And that's a weakness.

I've never seen sky hype up the GP to anything it wasnt. Why do you knock sky for hyping up the GP when people in this forum go about how the ML is the best league is europe? Are they not just as bad? Big Matches like finals very rarely live to what you expect and there almost never free flowing attack affairs.

I dont judge a league on one game. Look at the HEC Quinns vs Leinster match, Leinster defended for nearly all of it, put we all call that a magnificant display blah blah blah yet when it happens in the GP it's a negative borefest of power rugby. Look at Munster, they modelled themselves on forward power based rugby with little attacking flair for years and everyone could find enough complimentary words to use on them.

themont85 wrote: »

I'm not just talking about out halfs here. But okay lets look at it. England have selected the likes of Goode and Hodgson at 10 in the past who lets face it are not international standard. Whatever about Cipriani's poor form, he is a seriousely talanted player as is Geraghty, they are miles better than those guys who are 'solid' players. Cipriani is upto international standard that is pure crap imo, look at what he did vs Ireland last year. He isn't the finished article and has issues but when will he be if MJ has no faith in him? Clearly Ireland couldn't allow that kind of talent to be squandered, we don't have the depth they do at all.

Why do you think Cipriani was dropped? He was dropped because he had some shocking performances and it was clear to everyone he couldnt consistantly perform at that level. He'd just come back from a bad ankle break aswell so I think even playing him in the first place was a bad idea. When Cipriani can constantly put in top performances week in week out for Wasps then you can argue about how he should be in the England team.

anonymous_joe

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I've never seen sky hype up the GP to anything it wasnt. Why do you knock sky for hyping up the GP when people in this forum go about how the ML is the best league is europe? Are they not just as bad? Big Matches like finals very rarely live to what you expect and there almost never free flowing attack affairs.

I think Top 14's the best league in the world personally.

I don't necessarily think that the GP is bad, just not as healthy as it should be. It could be a fantastic league, as it is, I don't reckon it is.

And I know it was only one game, and a final at that, but it's also the most immediate example of the GP.

I dont judge a league on one game. Look at the HEC Quinns vs Leinster match, Leinster defended for nearly all of it, put we all call that a magnificant display blah blah blah yet when it happens in the GP it's a negative borefest of power rugby. Look at Munster, they modelled themselves on forward power based rugby with little attacking flair for years and everyone could find enough complimentary words to use on them.

I've frequently compared Munster prior to this season to Leicester, in terms of a tight forward based game.

And while you could look at the Leinster-Quins game as a bit of an odd one (two teams meant to be attacking powerhouses mustering two penalties and a try between them in 80 minutes) I don't disagree that teams like Munster have historically been very tight and power-based, but looking at the two tournaments right now, one has Munster, Leinster, Ospreys and Cardiff who are all exciting teams to watch, in contrast to who...? Quins? Irish? Maybe Bath?

Far more players are available to the Premiership teams (double the number of people play rugby in England than in Ireland, Wales and Scotland combined, in fact, probably triple) and yet the flair players, etc, just don't seem to be coming through for England in contrast to the Magners League, where lads like Fitzgerald, Earls, Halfpenny, Biggar, Roberts, etc are all making waves.

Chucky the tree

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I think Top 14's the best league in the world personally.

I don't necessarily think that the GP is bad, just not as healthy as it should be. It could be a fantastic league, as it is, I don't reckon it is.

And I know it was only one game, and a final at that, but it's also the most immediate example of the GP.

What about the semi final matches? I didnt see the Quinns/Irish match but I enjoy the Leicister bath match and dont think it was negative at all.

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I've frequently compared Munster prior to this season to Leicester, in terms of a tight forward based game.

And while you could look at the Leinster-Quins game as a bit of an odd one (two teams meant to be attacking powerhouses mustering two penalties and a try between them in 80 minutes) I don't disagree that teams like Munster have historically been very tight and power-based, but looking at the two tournaments right now, one has Munster, Leinster, Ospreys and Cardiff who are all exciting teams to watch, in contrast to who...? Quins? Irish? Maybe Bath?

Far more players are available to the Premiership teams (double the number of people play rugby in England than in Ireland, Wales and Scotland combined, in fact, probably triple) and yet the flair players, etc, just don't seem to be coming through for England in contrast to the Magners League, where lads like Fitzgerald, Earls, Halfpenny, Biggar, Roberts, etc are all making waves.

I dont find Ospreys enjoyable to watch at all, they've been this year muck tbh. While wasps have hit a bad patch this year they have been a good side to watch. I think Leicester are unfairly criticized as being a boring team to watch. I mean if you look at finals in all areas of sport there never the best, in fact their usually one of the worst displays of the whole season in term of attacking play and risk taking.


The reason you dont see players coming though in England is because the playing pool is so big. Who does Fitzgerald have competing for his 11 spot? Ian dowling? It's hardly going to be difficult to keep his place there.

England have players like Danny Care(22), Ben Foden(22), David Strettle(25), Nick Abendannon(23), Ojo topsy(23), Cipriani(21), Shane Geragthy(22), Toby flood(23) and I'm sure there's plenty more if you asked a someone who knew the in's and outs of the GP. But they are all compteting for the same spot or else have players like Dylan armitage, Mark Cueto, Riki Flutey etc ahead of them.


With Ireland the compteition for places just isnt there. Fitzgerald and Bowe dont really have anyone close to them. Keith Earls is our best propect and outside of the it's pretty thin. I think people forgot just how young guys like Cipriani, Geraghty, flood(25 caps already) etc all are. People go on about Sexton and Keatley being the next big things and how we need develop them slowly but England never had the chance to do that with Cipriani or Geraghty has they had no good or even decent OH so they had to be thrown in. MJ I think has realised that it's better to scarifice the present form and play the like's of Goode so the young guys can come along slowly. I'd hate to think what could of happened to if ROG break a leg or missed a season 2 years ago and we had to throw Sexton or Keatley in there.

twenty8

Judgement Day wrote: »

Thanks for posting the link from the Guardian NOT the Observer
C'MON LEINSTER

Got to Love it when someone feels opinionated enought to highlight someone else's 'mistake' and then find out that they are wrong themselves!!

The article WAS in the Observer not the Guardian. Guardian - Mon - Sat. Observer - Sun!!

Judgement Day

twenty8 wrote: »

Got to Love it when someone feels opinionated enought to highlight someone else's 'mistake' and then find out that they are wrong themselves!!

The article WAS in the Observer not the Guardian. Guardian - Mon - Sat. Observer - Sun!!

Well thank you too! I didn't realise my mistake until you pointed it out - not being a fan of the British press. The nature of message boards/email etc is that the immediate response can miss the finer points.

Care to comment on the points raised by the OP rather than my oversight? Most contributors seem to agree with my view.

Big whoop,he got the name of the newspaper wrong.

The article itself is rubbish like most of Butlers anti Irish tripe,his hyping of Croft is laughable at this stage.
You would think Croft is world class in every position on the pitch the way Butler goes on about him.

Butler is Steven Jones twin when it comes to rugby journalism.

Stev_o

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I'd guess you watched the LIrish Leicester game, and watching some very talented players do nothing for 80 minutes is just awful. The passing, handling and attacking decision making was dire, handling skills, attacking vision etc are all lost in the relentless pursuit of physical power.

Tbh when is the last time you'v seen a exciting rugby professional final with flowing rugby. Generally unless you support either side it's like watching paint dry considering most teams go out to win and not to play rugby.

Stev_o

Stev_o wrote: »

Tbh when is the last time you'v seen a exciting rugby professional final with flowing rugby. Generally unless you support either side it's like watching paint dry considering most teams go out to win and not to play rugby.

Munster v Leinster was quite exciting I thought.

Stev_o

Alexander Straight Logger wrote: »

Munster v Leinster was quite exciting I thought.

Which final is this then?

Stev_o

Stev_o wrote: »

Which final is this then?

The Semi-Final of the Heineken cup the other week.

Stev_o

Alexander Straight Logger wrote: »

The Semi-Final of the Heineken cup the other week.

That's not a Final though.

anonymous_joe

Stev_o wrote: »

Tbh when is the last time you'v seen a exciting rugby professional final with flowing rugby. Generally unless you support either side it's like watching paint dry considering most teams go out to win and not to play rugby.

Well...

The two semis were decent. In fairness last final I can remember is Celtic league 01.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

What about the semi final matches? I didnt see the Quinns/Irish match but I enjoy the Leicister bath match and dont think it was negative at all.





I dont find Ospreys enjoyable to watch at all, they've been this year muck tbh. While wasps have hit a bad patch this year they have been a good side to watch. I think Leicester are unfairly criticized as being a boring team to watch. I mean if you look at finals in all areas of sport there never the best, in fact their usually one of the worst displays of the whole season in term of attacking play and risk taking.


The reason you dont see players coming though in England is because the playing pool is so big. Who does Fitzgerald have competing for his 11 spot? Ian dowling? It's hardly going to be difficult to keep his place there.

England have players like Danny Care(22), Ben Foden(22), David Strettle(25), Nick Abendannon(23), Ojo topsy(23), Cipriani(21), Shane Geragthy(22), Toby flood(23) and I'm sure there's plenty more if you asked a someone who knew the in's and outs of the GP. But they are all compteting for the same spot or else have players like Dylan armitage, Mark Cueto, Riki Flutey etc ahead of them.


With Ireland the compteition for places just isnt there. Fitzgerald and Bowe dont really have anyone close to them. Keith Earls is our best propect and outside of the it's pretty thin. I think people forgot just how young guys like Cipriani, Geraghty, flood(25 caps already) etc all are. People go on about Sexton and Keatley being the next big things and how we need develop them slowly but England never had the chance to do that with Cipriani or Geraghty has they had no good or even decent OH so they had to be thrown in. MJ I think has realised that it's better to scarifice the present form and play the like's of Goode so the young guys can come along slowly. I'd hate to think what could of happened to if ROG break a leg or missed a season 2 years ago and we had to throw Sexton or Keatley in there.

I'm far too drunk to ans=eerte properly. ALl I'll say is that in all fairness I'd be startled if someone as aware of the general status of the game was unaware of the obvious weaknesses English rugby has to overcome.

Chucky the tree

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I'm far too drunk to ans=eerte properly. ALl I'll say is that in all fairness I'd be startled if someone as aware of the general status of the game was unaware of the obvious weaknesses English rugby has to overcome.

That they have no good OH?

twenty8

Judgement Day wrote: »

Well thank you too! I didn't realise my mistake until you pointed it out - not being a fan of the British press. The nature of message boards/email etc is that the immediate response can miss the finer points.

Care to comment on the points raised by the OP rather than my oversight? Most contributors seem to agree with my view.

Excuse me Judgement - it was you who made the mistake and felt that you had to highlight what you thought was the OP's mistake. We all make them around here - so lighten up and stop feeling like you have to pick on the 'finer points'.

As regards for the article - I felt that it was fine. It was a piece that looked at the emergence / dominance of Irish rugby and felt that a British team could spoil what could be a champion year for the country. Nothing wrong with that.

anonymous_joe

Chucky the tree wrote: »

That they have no good OH?

I'd have put forward that it's worse than that - they've plenty of good OHs, they just haven't kept faith with one and given them a real chance.

Ireland have O'Gara, and that's it. Sexton, Humphreys and Keatley aren't ready yet.

England have Floods, Goodes, etc, not to mention guys like Hodgson, Wilkinson (if he's not broken for an extended period of time) but none of them has been able to step up.

There's definitely a need for quality props in England, a nation that's produced many unreal props seems a bit lacking in future props, Stevens' loss will have hurt them more than it should, a guy like Jason White is probably the best English prop in the world, and he's just too bloody old for them to use him for any length of time. But there's no-one who looks like stepping up. (At least we've got a Cian Healy) In fact, one of the props of the year in the GP was Irish.

Second row seems a problem, they've a guy like Kennedy whose a superb leaper, but they've no-one of the stature of O'Connell, Wyn Jones, etc, a point cruelly emphasised by Borthwick not making the Lions. How many England Captains haven't made the Lions before?

What England has a huge number of are great backrow forwards and great outside backs, therein lies their future - they will return to the top of the pile in the Northern Hemisphere, but they shouldn't have ever slipped.

partyguinness

I dont see much wrong with the article TBH except that he is just playing up Leicester and England but so what?

garbanzo

Lads, lads, lads lets not descend into an argument about nothing here. Let's get some constructive discussion going on the important matters. Saturday beckons . . . bring it onnnnnnn

Chucky the tree

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I'd have put forward that it's worse than that - they've plenty of good OHs, they just haven't kept faith with one and given them a real chance.

Ireland have O'Gara, and that's it. Sexton, Humphreys and Keatley aren't ready yet.

England have Floods, Goodes, etc, not to mention guys like Hodgson, Wilkinson (if he's not broken for an extended period of time) but none of them has been able to step up.

There's definitely a need for quality props in England, a nation that's produced many unreal props seems a bit lacking in future props, Stevens' loss will have hurt them more than it should, a guy like Jason White is probably the best English prop in the world, and he's just too bloody old for them to use him for any length of time. But there's no-one who looks like stepping up. (At least we've got a Cian Healy) In fact, one of the props of the year in the GP was Irish.

Second row seems a problem, they've a guy like Kennedy whose a superb leaper, but they've no-one of the stature of O'Connell, Wyn Jones, etc, a point cruelly emphasised by Borthwick not making the Lions. How many England Captains haven't made the Lions before?

What England has a huge number of are great backrow forwards and great outside backs, therein lies their future - they will return to the top of the pile in the Northern Hemisphere, but they shouldn't have ever slipped.

Plenty of good OH's? Bit much. Hodgson is great until he players in a match of actual significance and then he crumbles. Goode never impressed in a International match either. He was flawless club player and kicker in the club game but he seemed to struggle on the international stage and missed some chance a player like him shouldnt. Flood's only 23 but he'd be the OH this summer if he wasnt injuried, was impressive in the 6 nations I thought.


I don't know much about their prop situation or props in general tbh.


POC's dont come aorund to often though, once he and BOD leave we'll be struggling ourselves. I think MJ just named Botherwick as a safe pick because he knew he wouldnt be around much longer and this gives him a chance to suss all the players out for himself then decide who will get it. Obviously it's extremetly difficult to make assumptions on who would be a good captain but I wouldnt be suprised if they gave it Tom croft long-term. Every rugby nation has slipped though, where it's due to missing good players and crucial positions or having a **** coach it always going to happen no matter how big their playing pool.

anonymous_joe

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Plenty of good OH's? Bit much. Hodgson is great until he players in a match of actual significance and then he crumbles. Goode never impressed in a International match either. He was flawless club player and kicker in the club game but he seemed to struggle on the international stage and missed some chance a player like him shouldnt. Flood's only 23 but he'd be the OH this summer if he wasnt injuried, was impressive in the 6 nations I thought.

An embarrasment of riches compared to us though.

Bet Shane Geraghty's kicking himself for choosing England now. ^^

I don't know much about their prop situation or props in general tbh.

They're surprisngly important. ^^

The leading English club side has an Argie and an Italian as their starting props. Not a good sign really.

POC's dont come aorund to often though, once he and BOD leave we'll be struggling ourselves. I think MJ just named Botherwick as a safe pick because he knew he wouldnt be around much longer and this gives him a chance to suss all the players out for himself then decide who will get it. Obviously it's extremetly difficult to make assumptions on who would be a good captain but I wouldnt be suprised if they gave it Tom croft long-term. Every rugby nation has slipped though, where it's due to missing good players and crucial positions or having a **** coach it always going to happen no matter how big their playing pool.

Bigger the pool bigger the chances of getting the players you need. They're still struggling to replace Dallaglio, Johnson, Back et al. And who wouldn't?

Chucky the tree

anonymous_joe wrote: »

An embarrasment of riches compared to us though.

Bet Shane Geraghty's kicking himself for choosing England now. ^^

As I said, if ROG got a major injury over the last x years we'd be up **** creek, we've just been blessed that he hasnt. That's the only difference, IF JW hadnt done his Samual L jackson impression they'd be in much better shape.

anonymous_joe wrote: »

They're surprisngly important. ^^


The leading English club side has an Argie and an Italian as their starting props. Not a good sign really.

lol, I know that much. I see they have a guy from gloucester on the sqaud who's 26 which is young for a prop, couldnt tell you how he is or the props in their churchill cup team.

anonymous_joe

Chucky the tree wrote: »

As I said, if ROG got a major injury over the last x years we'd be up **** creek, we've just been blessed that he hasnt. That's the only difference, IF JW hadnt done his Samual L jackson impression they'd be in much better shape.

If they had the player Wilkinson was (not sure what he is these days) they'd have dominated since 03. He was unreal. Such a game winner.

When O'Gara goes I wonder if we'll realise he was phenomenal or an illusion. I personally think he's a talented mover of the ball, with a magnificent boot and lamentable defending. He's certainly got class on the pitch, but I'm not sure if we rely on him as much as we think we do, or, to put it another way, I think if forced to, we could make something work.

lol, I know that much. I see they have a guy from gloucester on the sqaud who's 26 which is young for a prop, couldnt tell you how he is or the props in their churchill cup team.

Best props in England who are English are still White and Vickery tbh.

Sheridan's a better Tony Buckley. ^^

Jackz

in u face Eddie Butler

partyguinness

Jackz wrote: »

in u face Eddie Butler

Hell Yeah brother...:D