Northern Edition
Select Edition
Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

England overcome tactical quandary from inventive Azzurri

Jack Nowell celebrates one of his two tries against Italy

England overcame a tactical conundrum to keep their Six Nations Grand Slam hopes alive with a 36-15 win over Italy on Sunday.

Eddie Jones’ side came into the clash at Twickenham as heavy favourites to make it three wins out of three in this year’s competition, as they seek a repeat of their 2016 Grand Slam.

But they were left baffled during a first period in which Italy refused to commit men to the ruck, meaning there was no offside line and the Azzurri forwards were free to step across and cut down the space available to England.

The unusual tactic had England asking referee Romain Poite for guidance on the rules but with no help coming from the official, Italy took advantage of their hosts’ confusion to lead 10-5 at the break, Giovanbattista Venditti’s opportunistic try coming after Dan Cole’s score had given the hosts an undeserved lead.

The half-time interval provided the break England desperately needed as Danny Care and Elliot Daly touched down inside the first 10 minutes of the second period, only for Michele Campagnaro’s excellent solo effort to bring Italy back within two.

England came again, though, and their first bonus point in Six Nations history was sealed by replacement Jack Nowell, Ben Te’o then marking his maiden start with a fifth before Nowell added his second as the hosts chalked up a 17th straight win.

The margin of victory was comfortable in the end, but England were well below their best in the first half and would have been behind had Tommaso Allan not missed two presentable chances from the tee inside the first 20 minutes.

Those spurned opportunities were punished as Cole touched down from a rolling maul in the 24th minute, although Owen Farrell set the tone for a poor day from the tee on his 50th cap as he failed with the extras.

Some sustained Italy pressure was eventually turned into points in the 33rd minute, Allan dropping for goal and after he struck the right-hand post from a subsequent penalty, Venditti reacted quickly to gather the ball and go over.

But Italy were caught cold at the start of the second half, Care taking a quick tap penalty and surging for the line and England were over on the same side three minutes later as a series of offloads freed Te’o, who fed Daly to scamper across the whitewash.

On the hour, Campagnaro proved Italy were not done yet by skipping past several weak tackles to score but then extreme pressure on the Italy line allowed England to work the ball to the right for Nowell to secure a bonus point.

Te’o added gloss to the scoreline and as Italy tired and Nowell then claimed his brace as England moved three points clear of Ireland atop the table.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

KOKO Show | July 22nd | Full Throttle with Brisbane Test Review and Melbourne Preview

New Zealand v South Africa | World Rugby U20 Championship | Extended Highlights

USA vs England | Men's International | Full Match Replay

France v Argentina | World Rugby U20 Championship | Extended Highlights

Lions Share | Episode 4

Zimbabwe vs Namibia | Rugby Africa Cup Final | Full Match Replay

USA vs Fiji | Women's International | Full Match Replay

Tattoos & Rugby: Why are tattoos so popular with sportspeople? | Amber Schonert | Rugby Rising Locker Room Season 2

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

N
NH 1 hour ago
'The Wallabies need to convert much better - or Melbourne could be much worse'

Nice one as always Brett. I think the stats hide a bit of the dominance the lions had, and they would look alot worse in that first half when the game was more in the balance. You mention it here but I think it hasn’t been talked about enough was the lineout. The few times the wallabies managed to exit their half and get an opportunity to attack in the 1st half, the lineout was lost. This was huge in terms of lions keeping momentum and getting another chance to attack, rather than the wallabies getting their chance and to properly ‘exit’ their half. The other one you touch on re “the will jordan bounce of the ball” - is kick chase/receipt. I thought that the wallabies kicked relatively well (although were beaten in this area - Tom L rubbish penalty kicks for touch!), but our kick receipt and chase wasn’t good enough jorgenson try aside. In the 1st half there was a moment where russell kicked for a 50:22 and potter fumbled it into touch after been caught out of position, lynagh makes a similar kick off 1st phase soon after and keenan is good enough to predict the kick, catch it at his bootlaces and put a kick in. That kick happened to go out on the full but it was a demonstration on the difference in positioning etc. This meant that almost every contested kick that was spilled went the way of the lions, thats no accident, that is a better chase, more urgency, more players in the area. Wallabies need to be better in who fields their kicks getting maxy and wright under most of them and Lynagh under less, and the chase needs to be the responsibility of not just one winger but a whole group of players who pressure not just the catch but the tackle, ruck and following phase.

17 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
Competing interests and rotated squads: What the 'player welfare summer' is really telling us

Thanks for the further background to player welfare metrics Nick.


Back on the last article I noted that WR is now dedicating a whole section in their six-point business plan to this topic. It also noted that studies indicated 85-90% of workload falls outside of playing. So in respect to your point on the classification of ‘involvements’ included even subs with a low volume of minutes, it actually goes further, to the wider group of players that train as if they’re going to be required to start on the weekend, even if they’re outside the 23. That makes even the 30-35 game borderline pale into insignificance.


No doubt it is won of the main reasons why France has a quota on the number of one clubs players in their International camps, and rotate in other clubs players through the week. The number of ‘invisible’ games against a player suggests the FFRs 25 game limit as more appropriate?


So if we take it at face value that Galthie and the FFR have got it right, only a dozen players from the last 60 international caps should have gone on this tour. More players from the ‘Scotland 23’ than the more recent 23.


The only real pertinent question is what do players prefer more, health or money? There are lots of ethical decisions, like for instance whether France could make a market like Australia’s where their biggest rugby codes have yearly broadcast deals of 360 and 225 million euros. They do it by having a 7/8 month season.

68 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING John Barclay makes concerning Owen Farrell observation despite Test spot calls Barclay makes concerning Farrell observation despite Test spot calls