Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

'We've got a lot of work to do': No quick fix for England after Scotland defeat

By PA
Steve Borthwick and Kevin Sinfield (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

Steve Borthwick insists there are no quick fixes as he attempts to revitalise an underperforming England team burdened by the failings evident during the Eddie Jones era.

ADVERTISEMENT

A 29-23 Guinness Six Nations defeat by Scotland provided some promising moments but ultimately a seven-try thriller at Twickenham was a disappointing start to Borthwick’s reign.

England’s new head coach took charge in December after Jones was sacked in response to a grim 2022, inheriting a side struggling with a number of significant defects.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

While Ireland and Scotland have made strong early impressions on the Six Nations, Borthwick knows a salvage job which to date numbers only 11 days in camp will not happen overnight.

“We know we’ve got a lot of work to do. I’ve been frank from day one in saying there’s a lot of work to do,” said Borthwick, whose next assignment is a round two clash with Italy at Twickenham on Sunday.

“When I looked at the team in the autumn, when I measured the team and got all the data for the team, we weren’t good at anything. It was as frank as that.

“So we are trying to build some strengths in this team and some bits we are pleased about and some bits we are disappointed about. My job is to make sure we get some improvements for Italy.

ADVERTISEMENT

“There are multiple areas we have tried to change. You saw some improvement in the scrum against Scotland which I was pleased about because it has been ranked as the worst scrum in tier one rugby.

“We saw some improvements in the attack and speed of ball and we tried to improve the breakdown where England were ranked the ninth quickest, so one of the slowest in tier one.

“I’d seen a habit within the team of conceding points early and not being able to respond to it. We conceded points against Scotland and the biggest thing I was looking at was the response. I thought the response was magnificent.

“We saw improvement against Scotland in a lot of areas. Some areas didn’t go so well and we need to make sure we get those addressed. Some take longer than others.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We are trying to rebuild the set-piece here. That takes time. You saw some improvement in our attack.

“In terms of the way we hit in defence, there were improvements there but there were a couple of tries which Scotland took brilliantly, which is immense credit to them.

“I feel disappointed with the result. I asked the players to do some things differently. I have asked the players to play a new way.

“I have got to get the players to believe in themselves and get the players to bring their strengths to the pitch.

“I want them to play to the best of themselves, which we haven’t seen them do for a while. I think you saw an improvement in that regard against Scotland.”

Veteran hooker Jamie George admits that “something wasn’t quite working” last autumn when defeats by Argentina and South Africa, plus a draw with New Zealand, sealed Jones’ fate.

Losing to Scotland, albeit narrowly in a Calcutta Cup classic, is a setback but George insists the players are determined to bring about England’s recovery.

“We’re all very, very ambitious people. We want to take England rugby back to the top and we’re aware that it hasn’t been good enough, especially in the autumn,” the Saracens front row said.

“Eddie took the brunt of it in terms of losing his job, but at the same time we were the people on the field. So we have to take accountability for it too.”

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 13 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 Jordie Barrett gesture singled out by Ronan O'Gara after loss Jordie Barrett gesture singled out by Ronan O'Gara after loss
Search