Courtney Lawes' 52-minute Pro D2 debut ends with a win for Brive

I thought Steve Borthwick's plan to play three open sides for the first 40 worked, but having three big ball carriers, with less speed, on the bench didn't. We lost the ability to disrupt Irish possession and given that much ball, Ireland are too good a team not to score points. Perhaps start the Curry twins on the flanks next week but with a bona fide No 8 between them, probably T Willis? Earl on the bench so you have a mobile back rower to keep the breakdown threat going for the full 80? A few other replacements who didn't really convince but Ireland had all the momentum by then so it's difficult to be sure. Still feels like England are being out coached as much as out played at the moment.

All down to experience.

Haha why don't you just do an Eddie 2.0? Oh, thats right, because it wouldn't be 2.0 at all! More like 5.0 LOL

Big names, sure, I can understand how you want to raise them above, so I won't argue that point as it belittles some great players.

I’m not actually sure what we’re debating

Haha so we have a win, and two loses. You flip your respective judgement of both teams along with those results.

I mean poor team lost to good team, then good team beat poor team twice. So you clarified your team for me, but now we have a question of the relevant changes in the two sides.

For instance, it could be poor team lost to good team (2022), and now, good team at home beat good team away twice. I was trying to see where along that line you actually were.

From the sounds of how much higher you rate this SA'n team you are closer to a good team v good team outlook, rate the 24' team at least equal, given how well they still performed against this new SAn team. This is reasoned for example by, Vaa'i performing better than either lock you mention. Sititi performing better than whoever, and so on and so forth. I just don't think you want to accept it. Somehow it skews your judgement, that's what I was digging deeper to find.

Personally, while I definitely agree they were a "better, more balanced side", I think they were also a bit more 'off' that in say 22', because of these changes. In some respects I think Razors team had it easier than Fosters. So I don't really know where we're at.

I wasn't sure why you brought up England either lol

Yes, I'm only refering to the end of his tenure, the part that affects their current ranking you're talking about.

Yeah a good England post, were was that made? Agree with the similarities with NZ too. Lucky we have a huge influx of talent to counter it.

Oh, btw, assume you caught the clash, I'm pleasantly surprised that Ireland were back to that mean and slick team that visited the republic last year. Result didn't do justice to how badly England tanked after a good first 30min.

I expected England to be the team with better polish (they went with a weird lineup mind you).

Bolded the important part as well. You are one of the best sides, and when you were in Englands position (ie outside the top 3), you might have had some tight, key, wins so to speak, but also a lot of poor performances. England haven't had those poor performances, all their games have been tight and giving SA the best run for their money during the EOYTs (more than what Ireland would have too). Big difference that you aren't appreciating with a simple 'they didn't win' mentality and might be why they don't have the same criticism applied (please don't tell me you're one of those that say they should be the best team in the world given blah blah, and of SA, NZ, France, and Ireland!).

Is anyone here talking like these events are a 'problem'?

How does Lancaster view it do you know, do you think like he's turned his life upside down sort of thing to come to France/this role (hence bad treatment could be viewed a problem)?

If Owen's next to go I wouldn't think he'd be concerned in the slightest. It doesn't mean like the typical french J Marc suggests, that it means he's not being professional. What I'm thinking is that the only losers from this sort of treatment/culture is the teams fans. Where is the reason for needing to change, professionally disappointed you could have achieved something?

You just displayed every criticism I have heard of French rugby. You need to reread your post and contemplate a little if you want to be an individual.

Which came first (yeah I know another chicken of the egg example), FFR having no money to sell their national team as a product, or not having a national team to make money out of?

But with big investment, and big expectations comes big pressure. And it becomes even more important for the right culture (and leadership) to balance out the sharp edges.

Yep, this is exactly what I see playing out currently. With the shift towards international rugby is sustainable though I don't know.