Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

'Dinosaur tactics': Eddie Jones' tactical substitutions under the microscope after loss

(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

Marcus Smith’s first start in the Six Nations as England’s flyhalf looked on course to be a successful one after he had scored all 17 of his side’s points with a quarter of the game to go.

ADVERTISEMENT

A penalty goal to take the lead out to 17-10 would be Smith’s last involvement in the match, as Eddie Jones took off his starting 10 in favour of George Ford finishing the match.

The decision was just one of a few puzzling substitutions, with Smith a proven match-winner in the Autumn after he orchestrated one last England possession into kicking range before getting the penalty to kick the winning goal against South Africa.

Video Spacer

RugbyPass Offload | Episode 19

Video Spacer

RugbyPass Offload | Episode 19

Eddie Jones also left reserve scrumhalf Harry Randall on the pine and substituted Jack Nowell into the game just for the final play, which confused fans.

When Luke Cowan-Dickie was in the sin bin, prop Joe Marler had to make a lineout throw without reserve Jamie George yet the pitch, who was brought onto the field once a scrum was required.

With Ford on the field, England turned down a longer range three point attempt that would have drawn the game with three minutes to go from 40-metres out near the touchline. Instead, the kicked to touch around the edge of the 22 and lost the ensuing lineout contest.

On the final scrum which had to be reset multiple times, a final penalty wasn’t forthcoming forcing England to play with the ball. It was turned over quickly by Darcy Graham and kicked into the Murrayfield stands to end England’s chances of coming away with a draw or last chance win with a try.

ADVERTISEMENT

England fans were perplexed with the management of the bench in the aftermath, calling Jones’ decisions ‘dinosaur tactics’ with ‘weird ideas’. Another fan said the decision to substitute Smith with Ford had ‘zero logic’.

ADVERTISEMENT

On the decision Eddie Jones explained that he thought a fresh George Ford could lift England at that point in time.

“We just thought George could lift the game a little bit. Marcus played well and we’re really happy with his performance but it is a 23-man game,” he said.

“We are massively disappointed we have lost,” he added, adopting a more serious reflection on the round one loss.

“Scotland deserved to win but I thought we dominated a lot of the game… but if you dominate you have got to get points and you have got to get enough ahead of the opposition.

“The result is the result. It is tough for us to start the tournament like that. We had a really good preparation and played with a lot of purpose, a lot of drive and a lot of determination.”

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

T
Tom 5 hours ago
What is the future of rugby in 2025?

Briiiiiiiiiiiiiiiistol! Briiiiiiiiiiiiiiiistol! Briiiiiiiiiiiiiiiistol!


It's incredible to see the boys playing like this. Back to the form that saw them finish on top of the regular season and beat Toulon to win the challenge cup. Ibitoye and Ravouvou doing a cracking Piutau/Radradra impression.


It's abundantly clear that Borthwick and Wigglesworth need to transform the England attack and incorporate some of the Bears way. Unfortunately until the Bears are competing in Europe, the old criticisms will still be used.. we failed to fire any punches against La Rochelle and Leinster which goes to show there is still work to do but both those sides are packed full of elite players so it's not the fairest comparison to expect Bristol to compete with them. I feel Bristol are on the way up though and the best is yet to come. Tom Jordan next year is going to be obscene.


Test rugby is obviously a different beast and does Borthwick have enough time with the players to develop the level of skill the Bears plays have? Even if he wanted to? We should definitely be able to see some progress, Scotland have certainly managed it. England aren't going to start throwing the ball around like that but England's attack looks prehistoric by comparison, I hope they take some inspiration from the clarity and freedom of expression shown by the Bears (and Scotland - who keep beating us, by the way!). Bristol have the best attack in the premiership, it'd be mad for England to ignore it because it doesn't fit with the Borthwick and Wigglesworth idea of how test rugby should be played. You gotta use what is available to you. Sadly I think England will try reluctantly to incorporate some of these ideas and end up even more confused and lacking identity than ever. At the moment England have two teams, they have 14 players and Marcus Smith. Marcus sticks out as a sore thumb in a team coached to play in a manner ideologically opposed to the way he plays rugby, does the Bears factor confuse matters further? I just have no confidence in Borthers and Wiggles.


Crazy to see the Prem with more ball in play than SR!

7 Go to comments
J
JW 9 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

In another recent article I tried to argue for a few key concept changes for EPCR which I think could light the game up in the North.


First, I can't remember who pointed out the obvious elephant in the room (a SA'n poster?), it's a terrible time to play rugby in the NH, and especially your pinnacle tournament. It's been terrible watching with seemingly all the games I wanted to watch being in the dark, hardly able to see what was going on. The Aviva was the only stadium I saw that had lights that could handle the miserable rain. If the global appeal is there, they could do a lot better having day games.


They other primary idea I thuoght would benefit EPCR most, was more content. The Prem could do with it and the Top14 could do with something more important than their own league, so they aren't under so much pressure to sell games. The quality over quantity approach.


Trim it down to two 16 team EPCR competitions, and introduce a third for playing amongst the T2 sides, or the bottom clubs in each league should simply be working on being better during the EPCR.


Champions Cup is made up of league best 15 teams, + 1, the Challenge Cup winner. Without a reason not to, I'd distribute it evenly based on each leauge, dividing into thirds and rounded up, 6 URC 5 Top14 4 English. Each winner (all four) is #1 rank and I'd have a seeding round or two for the other 12 to determine their own brackets for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. I'd then hold a 6 game pool, home and away, with consecutive of each for those games that involve SA'n teams. Preferrably I'd have a regional thing were all SA'n teams were in the same pool but that's a bit complex for this simple idea.


That pool round further finalises the seeding for knockout round of 16. So #1 pool has essentially duked it out for finals seeding already (better venue planning), and to see who they go up against 16, 15,etc etc. Actually I think I might prefer a single pool round for seeding, and introduce the home and away for Ro16, quarters, and semis (stuffs up venue hire). General idea to produce the most competitive matches possible until the random knockout phase, and fix the random lottery of which two teams get ranked higher after pool play, and also keep the system identical for the Challenge Cup so everthing is succinct. Top T2 side promoted from last year to make 16 in Challenge Cup

207 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales
Search