Jones, Gustard and McCall take credit for a defensive masterclass
Australia did not know what hit them against an England side with total confidence in each other
Ido not think that I can remember a better defensive effort at this level, certainly not one against such a potent attacking force as Australia’s. England were quite outstanding in Melbourne in winning this Test and the series, and it was all built on a stunning defensive effort.
The crucial thing for me is that Eddie Jones appears to have got into the minds of some of these England players.
Take George Ford. His defence has improved immeasurably. He now fully understands what he needs to do without the ball.
He has always had talent, but by coming to recognise that there were parts of his game that needed to be improved, his impact has been greatly enhanced. He had one of his finest games in this Test.
As well as his defence, his tactical kicking, along with that of Owen Farrell, was crucial to the result. It was interesting that Ford did not kick much off first phase and, instead, would often kick off the fourth or fifth phase after England had used their power runners off Ford himself and scrum-half Ben Youngs.
But, crucially, Jones knew that this sort of attitude to defence was always there in the likes of Dylan Hartley, Farrell, Maro Itoje, James Haskell, Chris Robshaw and others, but what he has done is instill it into players such as Ford, Anthony Watson and Jonathan Joseph.
He has also given confidence to Billy Vunipola, George Kruis and Dan Cole in doing what they can do. The collective improvement has come because every player seems confident that the player next to him will be doing his job to the highest standard.
The mindset of the whole team is totally different. In that respect, you also have to give a lot of credit to defence coach Paul Gustard and even to Mark McCall, the director of rugby at Saracens. The spine of this team are all Saracens players and the defensive system is Saracens’ under Gustard.
Australia scored four tries in that first Test in Brisbane and looked so dangerous, and yet here it was very different. The work done in the week by Gustard must have been incredible. You can only defend like that if you have all 15 players fronting up.
The difference this week was that the one-on-one tackles were always made. England were clever at the breakdowns. The tackler was working hard, as was the second man in, meaning that England almost always had a defensive line of 13. The inside players were driving the line speed, so whenever Australia tried to move the ball wide there were already players in position opposite them.
Last week in Brisbane, Australia often had four players to England’s two in those positions; this week it was mostly man-on-man simply because of the work being done on the inside by the England defenders.
Yes, you might say that conditions did help England, with the ground maybe slowing up the Australians by half a yard or so, but that should not take anything away from England’s control and calmness.
The key is that if no one is missing the first-up tackles, then the other players can all get themselves ready in a strong defensive position to make the next tackle.
These small things gather themselves and have a strong impact on the bigger picture in any match. Psychologically, they put pressure on your opponents and that is what happened to Australia here.
I do not think that Australia knew what hit them. They would never have expected to have to work as hard in attack. They have some outstanding attackers, but they were never given the room or the two-on-ones that they are so good at exploiting.
They just did not expect to be going through nearly 20 phases time and time again and not getting a natural overlap somewhere.
Exceptional attacking players such as Israel Folau were making errors because they were trying to force matters. Australia did not play well simply because England did not allow them to.
Usually, after phases three, four and five, you might be expecting to free up runners, but that was not even happening here after 15 or more phases. It was remarkable, as was the number of tackles England (169) made compared to Australia (49).
There were some crucial moments in the match, and none more so for me than that three-minute period immediately before half-time when Australia pounded at England’s line after Billy Vunipola had thought time was up and kicked the ball out.
You do have to say that England were maybe a little bit fortunate not to pick up a yellow card at some stage during that time, but there was huge personal discipline among the players to keep doing the right thing five, six or seven times in defence.
It was a huge psychological boost for England that they went into the break 10-7 up rather than behind on the scoreboard, and they survived 21 phases, which is remarkable.
It was heroic. It reminded me of working with Shaun Edwards and how he always says that championships are won on defence.
I have always agreed with that, but I have always thought that a team are ultimately measured by what they do without the ball. That is where honesty and attitude are revealed. Jones’s substitutions worked well, too. The likes of Courtney Lawes and Jamie George had significant impacts late on, so, too, Joe Launchbury and Paul Hill, who were on at the end for a crucial scrummage penalty. This is a team who have grown so much in six months. They have redefined themselves.
You can look back at the Rugby World Cup-winning side of 2003 and assess how great they were, but you have to remember that it was built over about six years, not six months. Many of those players had done it for the British and Irish Lions as well as for England.
It puts into perspective what this side have done – and also what they might do in the future.
The hosts didn’t expect to be going through 20 phases time and time again