Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Going after Finn Russell backfired for England

(Photos by Craig Mercer/MB Media/Getty Images and Dan Mullan - RFU/The RFU Collection via Getty Images)

England’s first Test under new head coach Steve Borthwick against Scotland showed glimpses of a new identity and some promise in terms of reviving an attack that had become threadbare.

ADVERTISEMENT

But it was a couple of lapses on defence born from a desire to pressure Scotland flyhalf Finn Russell which ultimately backfired for the home side.

Two Scottish tries can be traced back to England chasing Russell and leaving the defensive line compromised.

Video Spacer
Video Spacer

This tactic to go after the Scotland No 10 was visible early.

On an early clearing kick 10 minutes in Farrell took the opportunity to bury the Scottish flyhalf with a strong tackle, signalling England’s intent to try and throw the playmaker off his game with extra attention.

Minutes later Scotland had their first attacking lineout opportunity and Farrell went after him again, costing his side a line break that ultimately led to Scotland’s first try.

Scotland ran a clever deliberate overthrow from the lineout to captain Jamie Ritchie (6) who linked with Russell (10) out the back behind a block runner.

ADVERTISEMENT

Smith (10) had the threat of Russell (10) covered but Farrell (12), insistent on making another big hit on the Scotland No 10, broke rank and went after him.

It was fairly unnecessary with the ball well gone by the time Farrell got there.

Scotland’s centre Huw Jones (13) had flashbacks to 2018 with a gargantuan hole to burst through.

ADVERTISEMENT

England midfield’s defence was very poor on this occasion, not up to Test match standard.

Scotland took play down to the five metre line after Jones was able to find an offload. England’s defence was reeling after one phase.

Under penalty advantage Scotland used a grubber kick in behind the line to find open space.

It was a great play by the Scotland midfield combination of Tuipulotu and Jones, made possible by the costly initial decision by Farrell to go after Russell and concede a line break.

Marchant wasn’t able to do much to prevent Jones’ pursuit of the kick with a feeble attempt to slow him down, having had to track across after instructions from Farrell.

The England No 13 was originally on the opposite side of the ruck but told to fold by his captain. This was just one example of England’s confusion around the policy of splitting the midfielders on either side of the ruck.

Later in the second half it came back to bite them a second time.

On Scotland’s next big attacking possession, Farrell essentially made the same decision to rush out of the line and belt Russell as Scotland went wide from a lineout play.

The big tackle by Farrell forced a key turnover, but unfortunately for England their exit kick found Duhan van der Merwe who tore them to pieces with one of the all-time great individual tries.

The issue with Farrell’s original tackle, despite coming up with a big play, was that it was arguably Marchant’s assignment.

England looked to show Scotland the sideline with a drift defence and it was Marchant’s man, but Farrell again broke rank and went after him.

Farrell overriding his teammate is not ideal for England’s midfield combination to build chemistry and trust.

The pair of England defenders that Van der Merwe ran through on the kick return were Farrell and Marchant.

The England captain didn’t make an attempt after some light shading by Scotland. By all accounts Van der Merwe was Farrell’s assignment, he started the return on Farrell’s inside shoulder and bounced outside him.

There were big communication issues between the two centres not helped by Farrell’s vendetta against Finn Russell. Was Marchant deferring to Farrell after just being slighted by him?

The try scored by Scotland’s scrumhalf Ben White in the second half to spark the Scotland comeback included more breakdowns in communication by England’s playmakers.

Scotland played wide to the left touchline after a scrum and have a ruck roughly five metres infield.

England’s backline was crowded around the breakdown, the backfield pendulum swung too far around while naturally the inside backs drifted across tracking the ball.

England’s defence then falls apart with self-inflicted communication issues and poor decision-making.

On the next phase Marcus Smith (10) chased after Russell just to shove him in the back after the pass, while Owen Farrell (12) decided to reset the opposite edge and abandon the short side.

Farrell (12) took himself out of the line to sprint across the backfield toward the opposite edge. Smith (10) also decided to join Farrell.

Marchant (13) tried to raise the alarm and called for help with too many England players going to the open side.

The aerial shot illustrates just how disjointed England’s defence was.

Only one of Smith or Farrell needed to potentially be on the opposite edge, but both went. Neither are in a position to be of use as the ball is recycled.

Ben White slipped the one-on-one tackle of Ben Curry and scampered through exactly where Smith and Farrell were defending.

Had one of them remained they would have likely been able to clean up Curry’s miss.

In the final quarter Scotland knew they had England on the ropes.

The exit strategy became run it from deep to take advantage of the cooked forward pack. They nearly scored when Kyle Steyn broke free down the right hand side and found Stuart Hogg backing up inside.

They did score through Duhan van der Merwe after going sideline-to-sideline, with Russell pulling the strings to stretch England past their limits.

If England had preserved a bigger lead it may not have mattered that they ran out of puff. The defensive breakdowns on two occasions, Jones’ try and White’s try, were largely avoidable.

Marchant may end up paying the price for his defensive showing but he wasn’t helped by his captain.

Although Farrell may have let his side down on more than one occasion on defence it was his showing on attack which offered hope that a rebuild under Borthwick will reap results soon.

There were clear schemes to get England’s two most prominent ball carriers involved, No 8 Alex Dombrandt and Ellis Genge, while Owen Farrell’s role at No 12 more resembled the old 10-12 axis with George Ford.

Farrell’s involvement at first receiver throughout the match was more pronounced, particularly on the 10-phase passage of attack that led to Max Malins’ second try. He took over on every phase and directed proceedings.

The Farrell-led attack had no issue winning the gain line and grinding down Scotland until the opportunity presented for Malins on the edge with tidy work from forwards Genge and Lewis Ludlam to make the most of the opportunity.

When Marcus Smith was involved as first receiver England didn’t quite find the same rewards, with Smith opting to plug the corners in behind with kicks when nothing eventuated.

When the England captain is playing as a de facto 10 and Smith is used as a floating runner in behind, England look their best. Farrell knew when to flatten up more and play flatter.

Smith’s best play came off a pullback pass when he identified the space in behind Scotland’s winger Steyn and executed the chip over the top for Malins to dive on.

It wasn’t a fine-tuned machine but definite strides were made on attack, the side only managed eight tries in last year’s entire campaign and scored three in the 29-23 loss.

It was the decision to chase after Finn Russell that really cost England as Scotland made them pay for doing so.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Boks Office | Episode 37 | Six Nations Round 4 Review

Cape Town | Leg 2 | Day 2 | HSBC Challenger Series 2025 | Full Day Replay

Gloucester-Hartpury vs Bristol Bears | PWR 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

Boks Office | Episode 36 | Six Nations Round 3 Review

Why did Scotland's Finn Russell take the crucial kick from the wrong place? | Whistle Watch

England A vs Ireland A | Full Match Replay

Kubota Spears vs Shizuoka BlueRevs | JRLO 2024/2025 | Full Match Replay

Watch now: Lomu - The Lost Tapes

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

2 Comments
R
Roy 777 days ago

Nonesense article. England dropped off tackles but for the most part, they pressured Finn and he had a difficult day. Yeah England were wide open to Huw Jones' try but this is international rugby, you won't stop everything. England won the kicking game largely thanks to getting in Finn's face and closing down options.

D
David 777 days ago

Obviously the tackle school had no impact on Farrell it's in his nature/DNA if he was not playing for England he would be on the door of a nightclub I'm quite surprised Steve did not stand Farrell down he was on a suspension and could have been Red Carded by the ref if he actually noticed the cheap shots on Russell with no ball in hand, we need Farrell but we don't need his poor skill set.

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

R
RedWarriors 2 hours ago
Antoine Dupont undergoes surgery on injured knee ahead of long absence

Rugby incident, happens scores of times in a game. Dupont wasn’t even hit with much force, Beirne just clears him and force is added from behind from Furlong.

We can’t have special treatment for France just because their star is the one who gets unlucky.

There is already a lack of clarity around actual Written decisions and how they differ from bans.

For example, Mauvaka the official written decision states Mauvaka to have made a ‘reckless’, ‘deliberate’, shot ‘to the head’ of a ‘player in a vulnerable position’ on the ground. That’s a high level entry ban of 10 weeks. However, the press release did not show ‘reckless’ or ‘vulnerable player’ ticked alloweing Mauvaka to enter at the 6 match mid range.

Similarly Ntamack’s written report showed that it was a ‘reckless’, ‘head shot’ with ‘injury’. The injury was a fully displaced nose bone and Ntamack apologizes for the injury in the written report. This should give Ntamack an entry level of 6 weeks but in the Press Release ‘Injured’ is unticked meaning Ntamack gets away with a 4 week entry ban. This is not counting the fact that the world knows he deliberately injured Thomas.

No. France have been abusing the system for years, recently spreading disinformation about the Ringrose ban in order to undermine confidence in the process.

Giving France even more special treatment is not the answer.

3 Go to comments
B
Bryan Magana 6 hours ago
Why the ‘State of Origin’ will have a big say in Schmidt’s Wallabies selection

Scammed and Saved: GrayHat Hacks Turned My Crypt0 Nightmare Around

It all started with a dream and a single email. I’d been saving Bitc0in for years, hoping to buy my first home. On a rainy Tuesday, I received what looked like an urgent message from my wallet provider, asking me to verify my account details. The email was polished, the logo perfect, and the urgency felt real. Without thinking twice, I clicked the link and entered my credentials. It wasn’t until hours later, when I checked my wallet and saw a balance of zero, that the horror sank in. My 2.5 BTC, worth over $150,000, was gone. The scammer had drained it through a series of rapid transactions, scattering it across the blockchain like digital dust in the wind.

I was devastated. My dream of homeownership vanished in a click, and I felt like a fool. Days blurred into a haze of panic and regret until I stumbled upon GrayHat Hacks online. Their testimonials spoke of miracles, st0len crypt0 recovered, lives restored. Desperate, I reached ou to them. They explained that while Bitc0in’s blockchain is public, tracing st0len funds is like finding a needle in a haystack. But they had the tools: proprietary software that could analyze transaction patterns, identify wallet clusters, and potentially link the scammer’s address to an exchange where the funds might be frozen.

GrayHat Hacks dove into the blockchain, following the trail of my st0len Bitc0in as it hopped from wallet to wallet. They used advanced clustering algorithms to group addresses likely controlled by the same entity, narrowing down the scammer’s footprint. Then came the breakthrough: one of the wallets was tied to a known exchange. It was a tense few hours, but I eventually received the email I’d been praying for, my Bitc0in was recovered.

GrayHat Hacks expertise turned what felt like an impossible loss into a second chance. They even took the time to teach me how to spot phishing scams, ensuring I’d never fall victim again. If you’re reading this, heart pounding after a crypt0 nightmare, know that GrayHat Hacks is the real deal. They’re not just technicians; they’re lifesavers, blending cutting-edge blockchain analysis with a human touch. My dream of a home is back on track, and I owe it all to them.

You can reach out to them via email at grayhathacks@contractor.net or WhatsApp +1 (843) 368-3015

Website https://grayhathacksblog.wixsite.com/grayhathacks

78 Go to comments
B
Bryan Magana 6 hours ago
Six changes for Ireland, including the return of Jack Crowley

Scammed and Saved: GrayHat Hacks Turned My Crypt0 Nightmare Around


It all started with a dream and a single email. I’d been saving Bitc0in for years, hoping to buy my first home. On a rainy Tuesday, I received what looked like an urgent message from my wallet provider, asking me to verify my account details. The email was polished, the logo perfect, and the urgency felt real. Without thinking twice, I clicked the link and entered my credentials. It wasn’t until hours later, when I checked my wallet and saw a balance of zero, that the horror sank in. My 2.5 BTC, worth over $150,000, was gone. The scammer had drained it through a series of rapid transactions, scattering it across the blockchain like digital dust in the wind.

I was devastated. My dream of homeownership vanished in a click, and I felt like a fool. Days blurred into a haze of panic and regret until I stumbled upon GrayHat Hacks online. Their testimonials spoke of miracles, st0len crypt0 recovered, lives restored. Desperate, I reached ou to them. They explained that while Bitc0in’s blockchain is public, tracing st0len funds is like finding a needle in a haystack. But they had the tools: proprietary software that could analyze transaction patterns, identify wallet clusters, and potentially link the scammer’s address to an exchange where the funds might be frozen.

GrayHat Hacks dove into the blockchain, following the trail of my st0len Bitc0in as it hopped from wallet to wallet. They used advanced clustering algorithms to group addresses likely controlled by the same entity, narrowing down the scammer’s footprint. Then came the breakthrough: one of the wallets was tied to a known exchange. It was a tense few hours, but I eventually received the email I’d been praying for, my Bitc0in was recovered.

GrayHat Hacks expertise turned what felt like an impossible loss into a second chance. They even took the time to teach me how to spot phishing scams, ensuring I’d never fall victim again. If you’re reading this, heart pounding after a crypt0 nightmare, know that GrayHat Hacks is the real deal. They’re not just technicians; they’re lifesavers, blending cutting-edge blockchain analysis with a human touch. My dream of a home is back on track, and I owe it all to them.

1 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Ex-England star's hat-trick helps Force to Super win over Fijian Drua Ex-England star's hat-trick helps Force to Super win over Fijian Drua
Search