Shaun Wane

[moorside roughyed]

2 minutes ago, MatthewWoody said:

Who and what can be blame for this England disaster?

Origin, Bennett, the Kangaroos...? What else? 

England where to blame,they weren't good enough. 

[MatthewWoody]

They were embarassing and we should reflect. 

[paulwalker71]

8 hours ago, MatthewWoody said:

We should pick the best available, regardless of the nationality.

I don’t disagree. I wasn’t opposed to Wayne Bennett - but he didn’t really do any better. 

The issue is the number of top quality players we are (not) producing. Until that changes it doesn’t matter who the coach is.

[MatthewWoody]

2 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

I don’t disagree. I wasn’t opposed to Wayne Bennett - but he didn’t really do any better. 

The issue is the number of top quality players we are (not) producing. Until that changes it doesn’t matter who the coach is.

Hmm, got us to the final, down under.

Yesterday, I genuinely think we wouldn't have lost under WB and we'd heve a better gameplan. 

I think yesterday's disaster is as SW as the players' fault.

 

[The Future is League]

12 minutes ago, moorside roughyed said:

England where to blame,they weren't good enough. 

 

1 minute ago, paulwalker71 said:

I don’t disagree. I wasn’t opposed to Wayne Bennett - but he didn’t really do any better. 

The issue is the number of top quality players we are (not) producing. Until that changes it doesn’t matter who the coach is.

The problem for me is that certain clubs only pay lip service to junior development and are quite happy to bring in has been's and never was players from the NRL, who offer nothing for the long term future of the game here.

Short cuts are not the answer to the games problems here. Junior development is the answer, and lots of it.

[Damien]

I think England performed well in this World Cup up to today. They have played some great rugby and have shown some real improvement. I think Wane should also be applauded for picking young players like Farnworth, Welsby and Young.

Conversly some players should never have been selected like McIlorum, Hall, Cooper and he made a rod for his own back by making Tomkins captain. Despite that it's clear something went drastically wrong today and while it's easy to blame some of the selections, and by association Wane, that team was still good enough to win convincingly today. It was not Wane that missed easy tackles, fell asleep at marker or gave away interceptions. It wasn't him continually kicking poorly and wasting field position. In a way its a positive that they played as bad as they possibly could and still got a draw, despite gifting tries to Samoa.

Overall I am happy for Wane to be retained and to be honest can't think of anyone who would improve things anyway. It is important though that he gets rid of the older players that are past it and continues to promote youth, as he has to some extent already. I do think he is the best available to build a team with France 2025 in mind.

[paulwalker71]

1 hour ago, MatthewWoody said:

Hmm, got us to the final, down under.

Yesterday, I genuinely think we wouldn't have lost under WB and we'd heve a better gameplan. 

I think yesterday's disaster is as SW as the players' fault.

 

Well, we'll have to agree to differ.

The "disaster" you refer to is a game that literally could have gone either way until the last second. 

Would the 2017 WC have been a "disaster" if Tonga's last minute disallowed try had counted, and England had been knocked out in the Semis?

Fine margins...

[dkw]

He took McIlorum off and instantly our attacknsped up leading to us dominating and scoring.

He then incomprehensibly brought him back on, and all that momentum was lost. That's just terrible management, plain and simple and he should walk for it.

[EagleEyePie]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

I think England performed well in this World Cup up to today. They have played some great rugby and have shown some real improvement. I think Wane should also be applauded for picking young players like Farnworth, Welsby and Young.

Conversly some players should never have been selected like McIlorum, Hall, Cooper and he made a rod for his own back by making Tomkins captain. Despite that it's clear something went drastically wrong today and while it's easy to blame some of the selections, and by association Wane, that team was still good enough to win convincingly today. It was not Wane that missed easy tackles, fell asleep at marker or gave away interceptions. It wasn't him continually kicking poorly and wasting field position. In a way its a positive that they played as bad as they possibly could and still got a draw, despite gifting tries to Samoa.

Overall I am happy for Wane to be retained and to be honest can't think of anyone who would improve things anyway. It is important though that he gets rid of the older players that are past it and continues to promote youth, as he has to some extent already. I do think he is the best available to build a team with France 2025 in mind.

In fairness I don't see the issue with selecting Hall, Cooper and naming Tomkins as captain. Hall did nothing wrong and was an experienced back up player. Which player who missed out was going to outperform him to the extent that they'd have played ahead of Makinson or Young? It seems like a solid choice to have a reliable player in reserve. Likewise, Cooper played pretty well in every game. He outplayed Lees who I had high hopes for. Not a star but he was essentially prop number 4 and made good metres every game. There's an argument that he should have given Oledzki more of an opportunity but I think there's a few question marks about him defensively. It's not like we had superstars locked away that weren't selected. 

Tomkins was the obvious choice as captain too as he was guaranteed to start due to not having any better options once Lomax was ruled out.

McIlorum, on the other hand, seems pretty much impossible to defend. He had a reasonably good season at Catalans but hasn't been in contention with England for years because he simply isn't good enough. He has flaws that can be smoothed over at Super League level but mean he's severely lacking at the highest level. Going with just one recognised 9 when that player has never been able to play the full 80 even at peak fitness is bizarre.

I know there's criticism of Wane that he just picked the Wigan old boys but that doesn't really hold up to scrutiny, except in the case of McIlorum, where he seems to have a pretty huge blind spot for his weaknesses. He's clearly a player who demonstrates a lot of the qualities that Wane admires but at some point he should have realised that for all the heart and determination McIlorum was coming up against teams that actually have quality.

[MatthewWoody]

1 hour ago, paulwalker71 said:

Well, we'll have to agree to differ.

The "disaster" you refer to is a game that literally could have gone either way until the last second. 

Would the 2017 WC have been a "disaster" if Tonga's last minute disallowed try had counted, and England had been knocked out in the Semis?

Fine margins...

It's a disaster cause we had no plan B or no plan at all. We shouldn't have been in that position. 

Let's talk about the rotation of the forwards, the choices, etc. 

We didn't lose on margins. 

We shouldn't have been in that situation at all. 

Losing at home to Samoa, with all due respect, and not getting to the final even if Aus and NZ were on the other side of the table is a disaster. 

[fighting irish]

17 hours ago, EagleEyePie said:

We either reach a semi final or get to a final and lose regardless of who the coach is. Bennett performed well, then performed terribly (albeit as GB, but that wasn't enough to save him). McNamara oversaw some terrible performances but also managed to improve his reputation while England coach but still won nothing. No England coach will ever win anything until we have a team capable of it. Its utterly pointless to keep changing the coach when we've seen pretty much nothing change as a result.

Ultimately Wane made some squad selections that I thought were poor, but ultimately he didn't bomb a try from a good cross field kick, that was Makinson. He didn't drop the ball over the line when it was arguably harder not to score, that was Watkins. He didn't switch off and gift Samoa two easy tries, that was Watkins and Welsby. He didn't gift Samoa field position twice in golden point by trying to be cocky and then overrunning the play at the ruck, that was Welsby.

Just like all the positive things that England did were the players, rather than the coach. There's not much a coach can do at this level except pick the team and set a game plan that they hope the team will stick to.

Until we can field a team with real strength and real depth and with players at the top of their game we're not going to take the next step and win a tournament.

I made some similar points in another post yesterday evening.

I'm interested to hear your opinion on how you account for the lack of energy, passion, attention to detail and the woeful decision making, loose carries, bad passes, dropped balls etc. etc.?

To me they seemed as if they were doped. They certainly weren't enjoying themselves. 

They were sluggish in mind and body, apparently apathetic towards the necessary moment by moment competitive processes, paralysed (by fear perhaps) in the face of lively opposition and finally (arrogantly) ashamed of a one point loss to a very good side.

I suspect, the paralysis might be down to abject fear of (unacceptable) failure instilled by a deeply patriotic coach, to whom losing is absolutely anathema.

For that, Wane must take some responsibility. 

[RP London]

Sometimes you have to lose one.. he has hardly had any games as coach and I think England will be better for being able to actually build up to a tournament. This build up has been a mess, I know it has for many but samoa have a lot of club team mates etc. 

If wane wants to stay to right a wrong then let him I think he'll be ok and build a good team for 2025. We need to give him some proper internationals and a good number so that he can test combinations etc and build for a good run. 

[Mr Frisky]

14 hours ago, Jughead said:

Bateman (32), Burgess (33), Cooper (37), Hall (37), Hill (38), Makinson (34), McIlorum (37), Sneyd (34), Tomkins (36), Watkins (34), Whitehead (36). 

That’s the ages of a selection of England players in three years. For many of those above, today was their last chance at a World Cup win, so you won’t have to worry about McIlorum or Hill in future, anyway. That’s without mentioning Lomax (35), Walmsley (35) and Farrell (35).

It’s really a passing of the baton between now and the 2025 World Cup. The future is in the players like Jack Welsby, Herbie Farnworth, Lewis Dodd, Morgan Knowles, Mik Oledzki, Victor Radley KPP, Dom Young and a handful of players who will likely remain. 

Of those players Burgess, Bateman and Makemson will be around and will be close to selection. 

Its the young props to replace Alex and Hill that's a worry though.

[Damien]

14 minutes ago, fighting irish said:

I made some similar points in another post yesterday evening.

I'm interested to hear your opinion on how you account for the lack of energy, passion, attention to detail and the woeful decision making, loose carries, bad passes, dropped balls etc. etc.?

To me they seemed as if they were doped. They certainly weren't enjoying themselves. 

They were sluggish in mind and body, apparently apathetic towards the necessary moment by moment competitive processes, paralysed (by fear perhaps) in the face of lively opposition and finally (arrogantly) ashamed of a one point loss to a very good side.

I suspect, the paralysis might be down to abject fear of (unacceptable) failure instilled by a deeply patriotic coach, to whom losing is absolutely anathema.

For that, Wane must take some responsibility. 

It was only in the last 10 mins when they had gone 2 scores behind that England showed any intensity or line speed in defence. Until then they had been pedestrian and sluggish.

[fighting irish]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

I think England performed well in this World Cup up to today. They have played some great rugby and have shown some real improvement. I think Wane should also be applauded for picking young players like Farnworth, Welsby and Young.

Conversly some players should never have been selected like McIlorum, Hall, Cooper and he made a rod for his own back by making Tomkins captain. Despite that it's clear something went drastically wrong today and while it's easy to blame some of the selections, and by association Wane, that team was still good enough to win convincingly today. It was not Wane that missed easy tackles, fell asleep at marker or gave away interceptions. It wasn't him continually kicking poorly and wasting field position. In a way its a positive that they played as bad as they possibly could and still got a draw, despite gifting tries to Samoa.

Overall I am happy for Wane to be retained and to be honest can't think of anyone who would improve things anyway. It is important though that he gets rid of the older players that are past it and continues to promote youth, as he has to some extent already. I do think he is the best available to build a team with France 2025 in mind.

I hope he can find a way to allow them to enjoy themselves and dispel their obvious (paralysing) fear of failure. 

[Damien]

5 hours ago, fighting irish said:

I hope he can find a way to allow them to enjoy themselves and dispel their obvious (paralysing) fear of failure. 

I'm not sure if it was a fear of failure. They just didn't turn up until it was too late and looked off the pace. That to me was a consequence of 4 easy games in which pretty much everything had gone to plan. I daresay there was some complacency in there too and that the players had one eye on the final. In contrast Samoa got battered by England and had a great, tough, close game against Tonga last week and have had to fight to get to where they are now. That showed yesterday.

Edited November 13, 2022 by Damien

[Niels]

If there was complacency against a side containing 7 NRL final players then that is a poor preparation by the coach. 

I think the difference is the successful teams don't make such excuses. If Samoa had had the same mindset that they lost at Newcastle because they just didn't turn up, they wouldn't have overturned a 60 point deficit. 

 

 

[MatthewWoody]

1 hour ago, Niels said:

If there was complacency against a side containing 7 NRL final players then that is a poor preparation by the coach. 

I think the difference is the successful teams don't make such excuses. If Samoa had had the same mindset that they lost at Newcastle because they just didn't turn up, they wouldn't have overturned a 60 point deficit. 

 

 

Spot on.

[Damien]

Just now, MatthewWoody said:

Spot on.

It's really not. It's perfectly possible for a coach to do and say all the right things and players to still be complacent. It doesn't take much for a player to be off at elite level.

[Leonard]

4 hours ago, MatthewWoody said:

Hmm, got us to the final, down under.

Yesterday, I genuinely think we wouldn't have lost under WB and we'd heve a better gameplan. 

I think yesterday's disaster is as SW as the players' fault.

 

And was a ref call away from the biggest humiliation in RL history in the semi and scored 0 points in the final. 

Small margins. 

[MatthewWoody]

3 minutes ago, Leonard said:

And was a ref call away from the biggest humiliation in RL history in the semi and scored 0 points in the final. 

Small margins. 

Hmm, he came close, SW did get humiliated.

About the final, only conceded Aus a try. When had it happened before? 

But yeah, he's Australian and SW is English so it's ok. 

[MatthewWoody]

12 minutes ago, Damien said:

It's really not. It's perfectly possible for a coach to do and say all the right things and players to still be complacent. It doesn't take much for a player to be off at elite level.

He should have told the players to keep it basic and don't overplay. 

If he did and they didn't listen to him, it's a problem.

He selected the players who underperform.  

[MatthewWoody]

I mean, the way Eng played the extratime was embarrassing. 

Somebody must take responsibility. 

[Damien]

Just now, MatthewWoody said:

He should have told the players to keep it basic and don't overplay. 

If he did and they didn't listen to him, it's a problem.

He selected the players who underperform.  

They did not overplay, thats stupid. Players lost their heads, it happens. Wane certainly did not tell the players to kick the ball dead repeatedly, for Williams to run himself time and again on the 4th or make the many unforced mistakes they made that led to tries.

[Archie Gordon]

Wane's had a go and he's not delivered. I don't think he is a very good rugby brain and I don't think his teams play with much intelligence. But he's been given another year, which I don't think is a disaster. He'd need to beat NZ this time next year to get the 2025 gig.