Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

'I'd be worried': England must 'find our own fire' before Italian Test

By PA
(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

Ellis Genge has demanded England look inwards for inspiration rather than relying on the roar of Twickenham when they face an Italy side in the ascendancy.

ADVERTISEMENT

Steve Borthwick’s reign opened with a 29-23 defeat by Scotland and while the Azzurri have traditionally been the weakest opponents in the Guinness Six Nations, they have been revitalised by last year’s victories over Wales and Australia.

Even though the Calcutta Cup ultimately remained in Scottish hands the buzz had returned to Twickenham. However, Sunday matches at the venue tend to produce more muted atmospheres.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Genge, England’s vice-captain, insists his team must “find our own fire” in their pursuit of their first win under Eddie Jones’ successor.

“I’d be worried if we don’t motivate ourselves to be honest,” the Bristol prop said.

“If we’re not trying to win and are relying on the fans to give us the energy to do so, we are probably not in the right spot.

“It’s brilliant to have a loud crowd and loads of noise but in the same breath it’s not something we’re necessarily relying on – we have got to find our own fire.”

ADVERTISEMENT

England have won all 29 previous encounters against their round two opponents, but for the first time since entering the Six Nations in 2000 Italy are viewed as a genuine threat.

Their 36-Test losing run in the tournament ended against Wales last year and they built on that by toppling Australia 28-27 in Florence a few months later, before taking France to the wire in a 29-24 loss last Saturday.

“There were all those articles about whether Italy should be replaced in the Six Nations by Georgia, but they have really showed their worth over the last few fixtures,” Genge said.

“They had that big win in Wales away from home and played brilliantly against France, so they are definitely no mugs.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Everyone was reasonably shocked about how close it was against France and they had every opportunity to win if a few things went their way.”

The increasingly familiar sight of Scotland lifting the Calcutta Cup provided a disappointing start to the post-Jones era, but Borthwick is starting from the ground up having insisted he inherited an England side that “wasn’t good at anything”.

“We have a lot of catching up to do. The situation here is different with this team,” Borthwick said.

“You see those teams who are in a four-year cycle putting the final touches to their teams, but our situation is different. It’s clear why that is.

“We can’t do anything about what is gone before. All we can do is maximise every day going forward.

“We tried to do that when we came into camp two-and-a-half weeks ago and tried to do it during the Scotland game.

“I want this team to deliver, to win. I want the supporters and players to be proud of this team. I am also pretty clear about how much work there is to do and want to get on with it.

“There were certain things that improved during the Scotland game but we need more growth in other areas. I want England to go into every game in a position to try and find a way to win.”

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 9 minutes ago
How law changes are speeding up the game - but the scrum lags behind

Too much to deal with in one reply JW!

No problem, I hope it wasn't too hard a read and thanks for replying. As always, just throwing ideas out for there for others to contemplate.


Well fatigue was actually my first and main point! I just want others to come to that conclusion themselves rather than just feeding it to them lol


I can accept that South Africa have a ball in play stat that correlates with a lower fitness/higher strength team, but I don't necessarily buy the argument that one automatically leads to the other. I'd suspect their two stats (high restart numbers low BIPs) likely have separate causes.


Graham made a great point about crescendos. These are what people call momentum swings these days. The build up in fatigue is a momentum swing. The sweeping of the ball down the field in multiple phases is a momentum swing. What is important is that these are far too easily stopped by fake injuries or timely replacements, and that they can happen regularly enough that extending game time (through stopping the clock) becomes irrelevant. It has always been case that to create fatigue play needs to be continuous. What matters is the Work to Rest ratio exceeding 70 secs and still being consistent at the ends of games.


Qualities in bench changes have a different effect, but as their use has become quite adept over time, not so insignificant changes that they should be ignored, I agree. The main problem however is that teams can't dictate the speed of the game, as in, any team can dictate how slow it becomes if they really want to, but the team in possession (they should even have some capability to keep the pace up when not in possession) are too easily foiled when the want to play with a high tempo.

152 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
How law changes are speeding up the game - but the scrum lags behind

The essence of rugby a fair physical competition for the ball?

No, that's describing League. Rugby is a beautiful game about executing scoring maneuvers. You should take up league, right up your ally as a physical contest imo.

If that is so using the scrum as just a reset takes out the competitiveness

If we forget (or even use to help understand) your first question, I still don't understand where you're going/what you're thinking.


What do you mean by just a reset? Like league where the ball is rolled/placed at the 8s feet to play with? I don't agree with any of those crazy suggestions here (even as a reward to the team that wins the scrum, I'm not even sure it would be a reward), no ones talking about depowering the scrum. At least not in this article/instance.

If there is no penalty for being beaten in the scrum we might as well just restart with a tap

To who? The team that was previously in possession? A scrum is a means of contesting for possession after play stops in open field (as apposed to when the ball goes dead, where it's a lineout). Are you proposing that core basis of the game is removed? I think it would make a much better game to just remove the knock on, as someone has already said, scrums resulting in a penalty as punishment for knocking the ball on is ridiculous. If you want to turnover the ball when someone looses it, you simply have to regather it before they do. That's how ever other game I can think of other than League works. So just get rid of the problem at the roots, it would be a much better "drastic" change than removing the contest from restarts.

In the lineout ruck and maul successful competition gets rewarded and illegal competition gets penalised no one is arguing about that. So is the scrum different?

No one is arguing that removal from scrums either. It is the plethora of nothing offences, the judgmental "technical" decisions by a referee, that are in the middle that are being targeted. Of course this is not a unique problem to scrums, lineouts will result in penalties simply from a contact of arms by jumpers, or rucks whenever a play hangs an arm over someones shoulder when cleaning them out. This article is about tackling the 'major' offences hindering the quality of the game.


But other than these questions, if you want to know my main opinions in my post you will see I agree that the ball should need (always and in every type of circumstance) to be played if it is available at scrum time.


Otherwise the TLDR of all my comments (even thoughts in general) on this particular question is that I agree advantage should be had in instances were the team with the ball 'won' the 'advantage' and where some sort of advantage was 'taken' away. In this respect the scrum had to be rolling forward to win an advantage. But I'm flexible in that if it speeds up the game to award a penatly, that's great, but if they also stop the clock for scrums, I'm happy with way instead. That is very few instances by the way, the majority of the time the ball is able to be played however.


The big question I have asked Bull about is what advantage or opportunity was taken away from a strong scrumming team when opposition causes the scrum to collapse? What sort of advantage was taken away that they need to be a penalty reward, that would seem to be way over the top for most offences to me.


So on that point, I'll like your perspective on a couple of things. How do you think lineouts compare to scrums? Do they offer you enough reward for dominance, and do you think all such meaningless offences should be lessoned (slips or pops while going backwards, contact with the jumper, closing the game, good cleanouts to some fool whos ducked his head in a ruck etc)?

152 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Leinster player ratings vs La Rochelle | Investec Champions Cup Leinster player ratings vs La Rochelle | Investec Champions Cup
Search