Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Eddie Jones' 'finishers' are the only thing keeping England on track for the Slam

Ben Te’o

England’s victory over Wales in Cardiff  highlighted what a difference the bench makes, writes Lee Calvert.

ADVERTISEMENT

Eddie Jones says lots of things to the media. Most of it is nonsense about percentages or how he received his eye injury, but one thing he said has been borne out in the opening two matches: that he does not see the bench as substitutes but as “finishers.”

In the first week against France the Australian emptied the bench and changed the dynamic of the game. France had been on top physically throughout and, were it not for some poor decision making and certain players catching like they had feet for hands, would have been well ahead. Going into the final 20 minutes it seemed France’s relentless physicality would see them over the victory line. Then on came Jamie George, James Haskell, Danny Care and Ben Te’o. Each played a part in the smash and grab win – Te’o literally smashing over the line.

Fast forward a week and England found themselves in a similar predicament. After a decent opening 15 minutes building to a try, Wales exerted consistent pressure on the England defence. Though they squandered a few chances the home side ultimately ended up the lead going into the last quarter of the game. Once again Jones unpacked the pine, sending on the same suspects and his side again changed the shape of the game, leading to a last gasp win. At the post-match press conference he admitted: “We’ve used up all our get out of jail free cards.”

What is it about the England bench that has made it so much more effective than their opponents?

[rugbypass-ad-banner id=”1485479950″]

At Cardiff on Saturday both Jones and Wales stand-in coach Rob Howley both sent on the reserve cavalry in the last half-hour. The key difference was that the Wales subs were from the old school way of thinking around the bench as replacements: the second-best, inferior versions of the starters.

Jamie Roberts, a shadow of his once-great former self, replaced Scott Williams; young lock Corey Hill replaced the powerful Jake Ball; Scott Baldwin, a hooker who is not even the best option at his club, came on for the hard-as-nails Ken Owens. And then there was Gareth Davies, the scrum-half in the worst form of his admittedly short life.  Each of these replacements offered nothing at best or weakened a position at worst, and each seemed to have no specific role in changing the game positively for Wales.

England’s additions were the opposite. Jamie George is the form hooker in Britain and arguably would be starting if it were not for Dylan Hartley having the captaincy. He added abrasive zip. James Haskell ran straight and hard and grafted his team over the gainline against a tiring defence. Danny Care hurried up the ball and had the forwards carrying off him, and Ben Te’o brought dynamism and power to the midfield, demonstrated by his one bullocking run turning Wales around as the game entered the final stages.

ADVERTISEMENT

Before the tournament England fans had begun to ask that Eddie Jones show them what his full gameplan for the team looks like. On the evidence of the first two weeks of the Six Nations this plan is: play well for 10 minutes, defend like hell, empty the bench, play well for 10 minutes… and win.

While this surely can’t be the long-term plan it’s certainly working for now. For their fans England are irresistible while for their opponents who are coming so close to beating them they are no doubt infuriating.

Who’s to say there won’t be few more free jailbreaks as the team head towards the record number of straight test wins?

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

J
JW 11 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Well I was mainly referring to my thinking about the split, which was essentially each /3 rounded up, but reliant on WCs to add buffer.


You may have been going for just a 16 team league ranking cup?


But yes, those were just ideas for how to select WCs, all very arbitrary but I think more interesting in ways than just going down a list (say like fl's) of who is next in line. Indeed in my reply to you I hinted at say the 'URC' WC spot actually being given to the Ireland pool and taken away from the Welsh pool.


It's easy to think that is excluding, and making it even harder on, a poor performing country, but this is all in context of a 18 or 20 team comp where URC (at least to those teams in the URC) got 6 places, which Wales has one side lingering around, and you'd expect should make. Imagine the spice in that 6N game with Italy, or any other of the URC members though! Everyone talks about SA joining the 6N, so not sure it will be a problem, but it would be a fairly minor one imo.


But that's a structure of the leagues were instead of thinking how to get in at the top, I started from the bottom and thought that it best those teams doing qualify for anything. Then I thought the two comps should be identical in structure. So that's were an even split comes in with creating numbers, and the 'UEFA' model you suggest using in some manner, I thought could be used for the WC's (5 in my 20 team comp) instead of those ideas of mine you pointed out.


I see Jones has waded in like his normal self when it comes to SH teams. One thing I really like about his idea is the name change to the two competitions, to Cup and Shield. Oh, and home and away matches.

41 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Yes I was the one who suggested to use a UEFA style point. And I guessed, that based on the last 5 years we should start with 6 top14, 6 URC and 4 Prem."

Yes I am aware that you suggested it, but you then went on to say that we should initially start with a balance that clearly wasn't derived from that system. I'm not a mind reader, so how was I to work out that you'd arrived at that balance by dint of completely having failed to remember the history of the competition.


"Again, I was the one suggesting that, but you didn't like the outcome of that."

I have no issues with the outcome of that, I had an issue with a completely random allocation of teams that you plucked out of thin air.

Interestingly its you who now seem to be renouncing the UEFA style points system, because you don't like the outcome of reducing URC representation.


"4 teams for Top14, URC and Prem, 3 teams for other leagues and the last winner, what do you think?"

What about 4 each + 4 to the best performing teams in last years competition not to have otherwise qualified? Or what about a UEFA style system where places are allocated to leagues on the basis of their performance in previous years' competitions?

There's no point including Black Lion if they're just going to get whitewashed every year, which I think would be a possibility. At most I'd support 1 team from the Rugby Europe Super Cup, or the Russian Championship being included. Maybe the best placed non-Israeli team and the Russian winners could play off every year for the spot? But honestly I think its best if they stay limited to the Challenge Cup for now.

41 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Former All Blacks coach offers progress report on Joseph Manu's preseason Former All Blacks coach confident in Joseph Manu's progress
Search