Right the wrongs
England can rise again by learning from errors
England 2015 is now without England and, as in 2011, questions need to be answered. Stuart lancaster and his players will be devastated and I do not think there is an England fan who will question their dedication and will. But tumbling out at the group stage of a home World Cup is just not good enough. The fans deserve a response.
Former new Zealand captain Sean Fitzpatrick has a great phrase about every new Zealander worldwide being a ‘shareholder’ in the all Blacks and this is what he believes creates the wonderfully strong connection between the fans and their team.
They are constantly holding their Union, team management and players to account for their actions and hence the performance of their beloved all Blacks. It’s not always a comfortable process because harsh and honest words have to be spoken, but the rewards are arguably the best sporting team over the past century.
Here are some of the questions to which I would like answers:
What happened in the 77th minute of England v Wales?
England’S World Cup came to end at this point, not against australia. This one moment spoke volumes. It needs to become clear exactly how that call was made.
Who made the call not to kick for goal? Was it ever discussed in the team meeting? If not, why not? If England had kicked the goal and levelled the score, what would they do from the kick-off? What would we do from the restart if he missed?
Who called the line-out to the front and why? did everyone know the ramifications of losing, drawing or winning against Wales regarding the points table?
It needs a detailed debrief which will tell you everything about this team and the detail required to think correctly under pressure.
How could Lancaster get a six-year contract?
WHY were Stuart lancaster and his coaching team awarded a six-year contract after three years of modest achievement?
It sent out the wrong message to coaches and players. It created a comfort zone that can never exist i n professional sport and was put in place by individuals who have clearly never operated at this level.
The England team is not a development project, it is the head of a mighty pyramid.
Why was selection so muddle?
England have struggled to get their basic selections right and that is the key to successful teams.
They were all over the place on occasions. Fly-half: first it was Owen Farrell, then george Ford and then right at the death when the pressure came on, it was back to Farrell. danny Cipriani was kept at arm’s length.
Who was England’s preferred choice at 12? We will probably never know.
Who was the centre to bring out the best in Jonathan Joseph? again, in 42 Tests since 2012 and three World Cup matches, England have never settled.
Selection was further confused by introducing Sam Burgess into the midfield, an area which should have been one of massive strength but was allowed to become a major problem.
Burgess was fast-tracked into England’s midfield, while luther Burrell — ever- present f or England in the previous two Six nations and a player who links well with Joseph — lost his place in the squad.
Where was Steffon Armitage?
England have settled f or s econd best by not even considering a flanker who is frankly among the best in the world, a three-time European champion and a European Player of the Year.
armitage was told some years ago that he wasn’t good enough for England, so took himself off to Toulon where he became fitter and learned his trade in that elite environment.
The RFU came up with a self- generated ruling saying that overseas players would be ineligible for selection, so armitage was never considered, nor was another European Player of the Year nick abendanon. They should have at least been part of the equation.
Was the culture forced?
PAST players’ name plates on the changing-room pegs; the arthur Harrison VC award; that collage of past greats in the tunnel; the march through the crowd to the car park; the little Victoria Crosses woven into their shirts.
These are all nice touches and I used to love finding such ways to tap into what playing for England should mean. But it all felt a little forced and this sudden over-emphasis somehow implies that previous England teams were somehow less proud to represent their country.
That ‘culture’ is never going to make you into a winning team. Build a winning team and the culture follows. England got this the wrong way round.
What is the team’s identity?
THIS is one of the most important aspects which needs to be addressed. Rather than establishing an off-field identity, England need to find what they really stand for on the field.
They became happy being a team led by a dominant pack who could out scrum and outmuscle anyone, but all of a sudden this has disappeared. They were humbled by australia, the team this blueprint was designed to defeat.
Are there enough leaders?
YOU need big characters to drive the team, to be outspoken at team meetings and sometimes with the media, individuals who are happy to make decisions under pressure.
There is a niceness to the England team which doesn’t strike fear in their opponents. This is about more than Chris Robshaw. I do not think enough players stood up behind him and snarled at the rest of the world.