Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Matt Dawson becomes latest big name to call for Owen Farrell to be dropped by England

Owen Farrell (Photo by Dan Mullan - RFU/The RFU Collection via Getty Images)

Former England scrum-half Matt Dawson is the latest big name in English rugby to call for skipper Owen Farrell to be dropped, despite Eddie Jones’ men coming away with a comfortable victory against Italy in Twickenham.

ADVERTISEMENT

England got off to a rocky start with an early try for Monty Ioane, but England soon hit their straps and opened up on the scoreboard with tries from Jonny May, Anthony Watson, Jonny Hill, Jack Willis and Elliot Daly.

However, writing in his BBC Sport column, the former scrumhalf has called on Farrell to be dropped from the matchday squad entirely.

Video Spacer

Owen Farrell honest about England rugby title chances after Italy win | Six Nations 2021

Video Spacer

Owen Farrell honest about England rugby title chances after Italy win | Six Nations 2021

“Farrell was scrapping, fighting and was lucky he was not punished for a late tackle on Italy scrum-half Stephen Varney,” wrote the 2003 World Cup winner. “He is on the edge. He will not like it, but we have all been there and it has got to be recognised by selection.

“It does not mean Farrell is not going to be a world-class player, but there just needs to be a bit of coaching and training – maybe away from the side. Something needs to happen, because it is holding England back.

“There were moments when he was not sharp, dropping the ball or knocking it on. That may be because he has not been playing while Saracens wait for the Championship to begin.

“You do not lose your world-class status and talent because of a couple of poor games, but it has been an extended period where he has not been lighting it up.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“Against Italy, you had fly-half George Ford zipping around, the ball was getting moved really quickly but 12 – where Farrell played against Italy – is a real problem for England,” said Dawson, who played his last game for England in 2006.

“There is not that link to the outside backs, so everything becomes very lateral and there are no decoys or threat to hold the defence.”

Dawson is not the first former England player to call for Farrell to be dropped, with Harlequins fullback Mike Brown suggesting the very same in the aftermath of the Calcutta Cup defeat to Scotland, albeit suggesting the Saracens playmaker could be benched to allow Ollie Lawrence to play outside George Ford.

“I would rather see England get some of their dangerous players into the match and give them a chance to express themselves — I don’t enjoy watching kick-chase all the time and I am sure people at home don’t either.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“I don’t think Ollie Lawrence at centre and Watson on the wing had touched the ball by then and England need to get these players into the game. Leaving Farrell on the bench would give Lawrence the chance to show what he can do — he has hardly had an opportunity in his short career.”

It’s been a remarkable sea change in public perception for the Saracen, who has been a key leader for England since breaking into the side back in 2012. England head coach Eddie Jones was pressed about his selection prior to the Italy game and he came out firing in defence of his captain.

“Every player is up for selection and it is all dependant on form,” said Jones when asked how he goes about selection. “You look at historical form, you look at present form and you try to make the right decisions for the team – and Owen is no different from any other player.”

“He has been a highly consistent, highly successful player for us. Like a number of players on Saturday, he wasn’t at his best. I know there is a bandwagon, but he is an outstanding player and like any outstanding player they can have a game where they are not at their best. Is that a reason to drop the player? I wouldn’t think so.

“There is no set law or rule for that,” added Jones when asked if Farrell received preferential treatment. “We are always trying to make the right assessment. We had to go through a difficult stage with Dylan (Hartley) when his form was starting to tail off.”

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

S
SK 12 hours ago
The future of rugby: Sale and Leinster mount the case for the defence

I think the argument behind the future of Rugby and defence vs attack is a pertinent one but also misses a big point. Rugby is a game about momentum and big swings of momentum makes games entertaining. You get and lose momentum in a few ways. You kick a 50-22 after defending for multiple phases (huge momentum swing), you get two penalties in a row thanks to bad opposition discipline allowing you to peel of large meters, you maintain large amounts of territory and possession tiring opponents out, you get a penalty from the set piece, a yellow or red card etc. The laws in the past years that have made the biggest impact has addressed stale games where no team can seize the momentum. The 50-22 has been a raging success as it allows huge momentum swings. The interpretations around ruck time and changes there to favour the team in possession has allowed sides like Ireland to wear teams down with possession-based play and maintain and build momentum. The Dupont law (which killed momentum) and now the reversing of it has had a huge impact and now the access interpretation of the laws around kick chases which forces teams and players to allow access to the catcher is set to make a big impact and everyone loves it because it allows a contest on the catch and more importantly could lead to huge swings in momentum. The worst laws have failed to allow teams to seize momentum. When rugby allowed teams to pass the ball back into the 22 and clear it was clearly a bad law as it allowed nobody to build momentum. Clearly the laws that changed several penalty offences around ruck and set piece to free kicks was aimed at speeding up the game but was a poor law because it killed momentum as teams would infringe regularly without major consequences from penalties and also it did not reward the team that made a big play to win possession from a penalizable offence. In the modern game you can win matches in many ways. You can dominate possession and territory like Ireland or play off counterattack and turnovers like France. You can dominate with the set piece and seize momentum that way like SA, or stifle teams with momentum killing defence. You can run strike moves off first and second phase and score in the blink of an eye like NZ. Every team with every style has a chance. World cup finals are all about ensuring that your opponent cannot seize momentum. Every team is so afraid to make mistakes that give away momentum that they play conservatively until they no longer can afford to. The game favours no style and no type of play and thats why the big 4 teams are so closely matched. In the end it all comes down to execution and the team that executes better wins. For my mind that is a well balanced game and it is on the right track.

24 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ ‘I’m coming for you’: Byron McGuigan’s Mancunian malevolence ‘I’m coming for you’: Byron McGuigan’s Mancunian malevolence
Search