Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Jones backtracks on TV Smith/Farrell quip and has pop at Woodward

(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

Eddie Jones has backtracked on his live TV comment that Marcus Smith and Owen Farrell is a strategy now seemingly set in stone for his England team. The teething 10/12 combination of the respective Harlequins and Saracens out-halves had its best outing yet on Saturday when seven tries – including two from Smith – and 52 points were scored against an outclassed Japan in the second match of their four-game Autumn Nations Series.

ADVERTISEMENT

That performance has put England back on track following last Sunday’s 29-30 slip-up versus Argentina, rejuvenating confidence that next weekend’s glamour Twickenham clash against the All Blacks is not a mission impossible for a home team that has struggled with inconsistent displays.

Jones implied during an interview on Amazon Prime that the Smith/Farrell combination was now here to stay. However, when the remark was said back to him at his media centre briefing about an hour after full-time, he retracted what he had suggested and added that if better information was required, journalists should instead ask ex-England boss Clive Woodward, one of Jones’ fiercest critics in recent times.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

The subject of Smith and Farrell in tandem at the heart of English creativity behind a dominant pack was raised when a journalist said: “I think you said on telly you have already decided that Marcus and Owen are going to play together again. Have you set that in motion for the autumn now?”

Jones laughed when he heard this and he quickly put his big-sounding TV comment into context. “Well, that was with Dylan (Hartley) and Matt Giteau, it was like drinking at the bar, two old players.

Related

“But look, we think Marcus and Owen can be really good together but like any strategy, you have just got to keep having results and there is no reason why they shouldn’t continue being that, but we don’t get a team sheet and put those two names in ink that you can’t rub out.

“So yes, yes, we really like it but there is always changes that you need to make and we need to be flexible and we need to be adaptable and we will be. So this obsession with saying these two need to be ten and twelve is not the way we really think.

ADVERTISEMENT

“You (media) guys can think like that. I am sure Clive Woodward has got his thoughts on it, so maybe you can ask him. He can maybe give you some better information than I can.”

Having chuckled at himself for taking his latest swipe at Woodward, Jones went on to agree that the England attack did look far more potent than six days earlier when greatly shackled by the Pumas. “Our running and kicking game gave us opportunities to move the ball. They are a handy team, Japan – it was just seven points to the All Blacks (when they played in Tokyo two weeks ago).

“So we were able to get on the front foot through our running and kicking and then we were able to move the ball in the space but we probably missed 20 points. Conservatively we missed 20 points out there.”

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 2 hours ago
'Passionate reunion of France and New Zealand shows Fabien Galthie is wrong to rest his stars'

Where? I remember saying "unders"? The LNR was formed by the FFR, if I said that in a way that meant the 'pro' side of the game didn't have an equal representation/say as the 'amateur' side (FFR remit) that was not my intent.


But also, as it is the governing body, it also has more responsibility. As long as WR looks at FFR as the running body for rugby in France, that 'power' will remain. If the LNR refuses to govern their clubs use of players to enable a request by FFR (from WR) to ensure it's players are able to compete in International rugby takes place they will simply remove their participation. If the players complain to the France's body, either of their health and safety concerns (through playing too many 'minutes' etc) or that they are not allowed to be part in matches of national interest, my understanding is action can be taken against the LNR like it could be any other body/business. I see where you're coming from now re EPCR and the shake up they gave it, yes, that wasn't meant to be a separate statement to say that FFR can threaten them with EPCR expulsion by itself, simply that it would be a strong repercussion for those teams to be removed (no one would want them after the above).


You keep bringing up these other things I cannot understand why. Again, do you think if the LNR were not acting responsibly they would be able to get away with whatever they want (the attitude of these posters saying "they pay the players")? You may deem what theyre doing currently as being irresponsible but most do not. Countries like New Zealand have not even complained about it because they've never had it different, never got things like windfall TV contracts from France, so they can't complain because theyre not missing out on anything. Sure, if the French kept doing things like withholding million dollar game payments, or causing millions of dollars of devaluation in rights, they these things I'm outlining would be taking place. That's not the case currently however, no one here really cares what the French do. It's upto them to sort themselves out if they're not happy. Now, that said, if they did make it obvious to World Rugby that they were never going to send the French side away (like they possibly did stating their intent to exclude 20 targeted players) in July, well then they would simply be given XV fixtures against tier 2 sides during that window and the FFR would need to do things like the 50/50 revenue split to get big teams visiting in Nov.

307 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ 'Steve Borthwick hung his troops out to dry - he should take some blame' 'Steve Borthwick hung his troops out to dry - he should take some blame'
Search