The Red Rose of England
I've made a promise that I intend to keep, at least for the time being. My observations are dispassionate as opposed to invective, although I cannot limit myself tp a signed 'non abusive' treaty.My first venture into the new year will be my honest- to -goodness evaluation of the England side as an impartial but somewhat erudite rugby impresario.
My observations will have nothing to do with Martin Johnson or Rob Andrew or the summer and fall disasters.
The motif behind this particular report is seige mentality.
There can be no doubt that the England pool of players have the bigger and stronger and , probably, the faster and better conditioned players than Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
My analysis is based upon the Guinness Premiership and to a certain extent the Heineken Cup.
It is also difficult, as I stated before to separate the players on each team as a collective English side, because there are so many players of different nationalities on the field at the same time.
Here is what I have seen.
The English attack at the defensive and offensive breakdown is what I will refer to as 'seige mentality'.
This style , if you will allow, is not what it appears. It does not in the end separate the men from the boys as one would recollect in the SH tests for example. The players in mass appear to stumble over one another in something akin to team mayhem in an attempt to preserve the ball properly for the backs or phase rugby , or even when disrupting the opponent's ball.
I find that this tactic is simply at this time a reinvention of what the English did so well for such a long time. That being the driving or rolling maul. It wasn't pretty but it was effective.
Having said that, have a fair look at a match and make the determination for yourself.
It isn't clever rugby. It isn't useful rugby. It isn't even thugby. It is panamonium.
Time and time again I have heard the announcers repeat the phrase that goes something like' there is no form, there is no rhythm, no structure.'
I can see that for myself.
It isn't really fair to bring the All Blacks into this assessment but I am going to because they do two distinct things that the English cannot seem to manage with all their brute strength. It doesn't take athleticism to clear the path of the ball effectively without intoducing stop signs at a five way intersection. It can be done since we are now talking about a two way street, in rugby theory.
Players can come to the breakdown at pace and hit the ruck or even a player in the maul with intent to accomplish a predesigned result. This can be taught and most certainly learned ;otherwise the All Blacks would not be admired for this very same technique.
But to accomplish this basic, even fundamental necessity, each player must present the ball at the right time, naturally and in some similar fashion, or at least in a familiar way. There is a moment in rugby time to stop and present. It is not that easy but it should be at the level we are talking about.
It isn't enough to know how to kill the ball. The important learning advantage of killing is surviving.
Watch how inept the English players are at presenting the ball. It is in an inverse proportion to their stifling the ball.
I must ask myself upon further observation which comes first, the chicken or the egg.
My suggestion is that once the English realize how poorly they utilize clean ball, they will realize how much improved their ball handling skills become.
I have come to think that it is a psychological block.....perhaps even resembling their innate notion of democracy....collectively or individually, which will it be?
This is too much for even me.