Dean Ryan 

England are no wide boys and should recognise their limitations

Dean Ryan: England have a world-class pack, resilience and defensive structure but their back line make little of forwards' dominance
  
  

Owen Farrell England
England could replace fly-half Owen Farrell, pictured being tackled by New Zealand's Luke Romano, with Freddie Burns but they would miss his resilience and mental strength. Photograph: Tom Jenkins for the Guardian Photograph: Tom Jenkins

Stuart Lancaster has talked about wanting this England side to play with pace and width, but I would say there is no chance of a successful World Cup in 2015 if they keep trying to do that. Holding their hands up and admitting it may help this team move forward. England playing to their strengths may not give the Twickenham crowd the same kind of thrill as watching Charles Piutau and Kieran Read off‑loading at pace, but Dan Cole destroying Tony Woodcock at the scrum has a beauty all of its own.

England obliterated New Zealand at the scrum and England obliterated New Zealand at the scrum well before Woodcock strained the hamstring that forced him off at half-time. When they got the field positions where they could make that count, and could set up drives, England showed they have a pack of world-class forwards and they dominated the middle 40 minutes of the game.

The problem was the backs' inability to make anything of the chances created by that forward pack. The back line was poor against Australia, it was poor against Argentina and it was poor on Saturday. They never put New Zealand under pressure in any sense. The midfield does not work and their kicking was long and desperate. Other than Mike Brown, there is not a lot going on behind the scrum.

To be fair to Lancaster, I'm not sure there is an answer out there. Manu Tuilagi would have been interesting with his ability to bulldoze and create something that way but he is more about knocking the door down than opening it. Billy Twelvetrees offers something a bit different to Brad Barritt and Joel Tomkins but he is not as good defensively and I do not think we are good enough to play a second receiver. You could try changing Owen Farrell for Freddie Burns but you would lose the resilience and mental strength the Saracens fly-half shows.

The first 20 minutes summed up everything we all feared. New Zealand were sharp and did everything with pace and, at 17-3 down, England deserved credit for not crumbling and shipping 40 points.

The All Blacks were living up to all the hype: they were precise, deliberate, Read's off‑load for Julian Savea's first try was magnificent and the countering was almost what the script had said. But England were extremely resilient, took their opportunity to create some pressure when it came and the next 40 minutes were theirs.

That was in part caused by the loss of Dan Carter to injury early on. Aaron Smith's box kicks from scrum-half were never good enough and I'm not convinced of Aaron Cruden's long-kicking game. So once Carter went off their kicking was reduced to simple, high box kicks and when you do not win that high game you end up back under pressure.

So even though England were ineffective in attack they created pressure, Craig Joubert started giving them penalties and Farrell was putting them over. At the hour mark I really thought it was England's to win. I just could not see how New Zealand would get field position but they are so alive on the counterattack and in broken play that you cannot seem to shut them out for 80 minutes.

For all that England have a world-class forward pack, resilience and defensive structure they remain vulnerable to those moments of brilliance because the backs do not make the most of the dominance laid down by the forwards. So it may be time for Lancaster to say: "This is what we are and we should try to maximise that." South Africa have arrived at that conclusion: they kick an awful lot and are heavily reliant on their big forwards and they have become fed up with pretending to be anything else.

I think potentially England need to do that because there are areas where they are excellent. They are not very good at the other game, of trying to find space and width, because the precision in the back line is poor and they just end up in a mundane, phase game that looks so predictable against a decent defence. I don't think there will have been a moment when England worked the ball wide that caused the All Blacks coaches' hearts to have skipped a beat, whereas from the scrum and driven lineouts they will have frequently.

The search for an all-court game is not working but England have a world-class pack and should play to its strengths.

 

Leave a Comment

Required fields are marked *

*

*