Northern Edition
Select Edition
Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Woodward names the one 'major learning for the future' for Borthwick

England head coach Steve Borthwick during the Guinness Six Nations Rugby Championship match between England and Ireland at Twickenham Stadium in London, England. (Photo By David Fitzgerald/Sportsfile via Getty Images)

Sir Clive Woodward has questioned the timing of England head coach Steve Borthwick’s substitutions after their 33-31 loss to France in the final round of the Guinness Six Nations.

ADVERTISEMENT

The World Cup-winning coach was effusive in his praise of England after a third-place finish in the Championship, paying credit to Borthwick in his Daily Mail column after a “strong campaign” with “so many positives for England”.

The 68-year-old’s only criticism remains the timing of the substitutions made by the head coach, saying the changes made in Lyon were unnecessary.

Video Spacer

Farrell vs Borthwick – Boks Office on who would take it | RPTV

Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Duration 0:00
Loaded: 0%
Stream Type LIVE
Remaining Time 0:00
 
1x
    • Chapters
    • descriptions off, selected
    • captions off, selected
      Video Spacer

      Farrell vs Borthwick – Boks Office on who would take it | RPTV

      The Boks Office crew are back to discuss the latest goings on in the Six Nations. Watch the full show exclusively on RugbyPass TV

      Watch now

      England raced to a 24-16 lead within seven minutes of the start of the second half, overturning a six-point deficit at half-time. Those tries preceded wholesale changes to England’s front-row.

      England did not score again for another half-hour, as the hosts surged back into the lead. While there was nothing in the match to suggest those changes were the cause of France’s comeback, Woodward still feels they were not needed.

      Points Flow Chart

      France win +2
      Time in lead
      43
      Mins in lead
      26
      53%
      % Of Game In Lead
      32%
      67%
      Possession Last 10 min
      33%
      3
      Points Last 10 min
      7

      “One thing I’d still like Borthwick to do is a bit more thought on substitutions,” he wrote. “He replaced the entire front row early in the second half against France. Those switches included captain Jamie George.

      “I don’t think they were needed. Neither was removing Henry Slade for Manu Tuilagi who was having a strong game. Why take off your best players, especially your captain? That’s a major learning for the future but overall, well done Steve.”

      ADVERTISEMENT

      Woodward was particularly complimentary of Ellis Genge, crowning the loosehead as his player of the match. The Bristol Bears star was taken off as part of the front-row switch just moments after putting Ben Earl through a gap in the build-up to Marcus Smith’s try.

      “I thought Ellis Genge was just outstanding and for me man of the match. He scrummaged well, was strong in defence, and showed some nice passing. There is no doubt England have got a more-than-promising team if they approach games with an all-out attacking mindset.”

      Related

       

      ADVERTISEMENT

      KOKO Show | July 22nd | Full Throttle with Brisbane Test Review and Melbourne Preview

      New Zealand v South Africa | World Rugby U20 Championship | Extended Highlights

      USA vs England | Men's International | Full Match Replay

      France v Argentina | World Rugby U20 Championship | Extended Highlights

      Lions Share | Episode 4

      Zimbabwe vs Namibia | Rugby Africa Cup Final | Full Match Replay

      USA vs Fiji | Women's International | Full Match Replay

      Tattoos & Rugby: Why are tattoos so popular with sportspeople? | Amber Schonert | Rugby Rising Locker Room Season 2

      Trending on RugbyPass

      Comments

      2 Comments
      F
      Flankly 491 days ago

      SCW really struggles to follow the modern game, doesn't he?


      “Substitutions weren't needed”? Huh?


      There are lots of reasons for doing substitutions, other than them being obviously or immediately needed. Coaches are managing workload and test minutes for individual players, they are building depth, giving players opportunities to prove themselves, experimenting with combinations and tactics, creating competition for places, preparing for future opponents etc.


      We also do not have access to the GPS data, which tells coaches precisely how tired players are, how quickly they are resetting in defense etc. Starters are told to empty the tank, and coaches watch the fuel guage in real time. They see that a player is off the pace long before fans do.


      Lastly, the Bomb Squad mindset is about playing the last 15-20 minutes with a fresher, stronger and quicker team than the tired opposition. Under current substitution rules Borthwick will need to groove this kind of strategy to be competitive.


      Coaching in SCW’s day could afford to be naively outcome-oriented. But today coaches have to focus on process and let the score take care of itself. That’s the way to deliver consistent wins. And there will be mixed results until the process kicks in.


      The good news for England is that the processes seem to be coming together, including in defense, attack, set pieces and game management. As relates to substitutions, without understanding the context and the intent we really can’t say whether they achieved their goals, but regardless, we do know that the substitutions did not derail the win.

      B
      Bull Shark 491 days ago

      My thoughts exactly. He seems to think the coaches are working off doodled notes taken on the bus ride to the stadium.


      Or that the players should be subbed just as they become lame from exhaustion.


      No sophisticated models or data. Stoneage stuff.

      Load More Comments

      Join free and tell us what you really think!

      Sign up for free
      ADVERTISEMENT

      Latest Features

      Comments on RugbyPass

      N
      NH 1 hour ago
      'The Wallabies need to convert much better - or Melbourne could be much worse'

      Nice one as always Brett. I think the stats hide a bit of the dominance the lions had, and they would look alot worse in that first half when the game was more in the balance. You mention it here but I think it hasn’t been talked about enough was the lineout. The few times the wallabies managed to exit their half and get an opportunity to attack in the 1st half, the lineout was lost. This was huge in terms of lions keeping momentum and getting another chance to attack, rather than the wallabies getting their chance and to properly ‘exit’ their half. The other one you touch on re “the will jordan bounce of the ball” - is kick chase/receipt. I thought that the wallabies kicked relatively well (although were beaten in this area - Tom L rubbish penalty kicks for touch!), but our kick receipt and chase wasn’t good enough jorgenson try aside. In the 1st half there was a moment where russell kicked for a 50:22 and potter fumbled it into touch after been caught out of position, lynagh makes a similar kick off 1st phase soon after and keenan is good enough to predict the kick, catch it at his bootlaces and put a kick in. That kick happened to go out on the full but it was a demonstration on the difference in positioning etc. This meant that almost every contested kick that was spilled went the way of the lions, thats no accident, that is a better chase, more urgency, more players in the area. Wallabies need to be better in who fields their kicks getting maxy and wright under most of them and Lynagh under less, and the chase needs to be the responsibility of not just one winger but a whole group of players who pressure not just the catch but the tackle, ruck and following phase.

      17 Go to comments
      J
      JW 2 hours ago
      Competing interests and rotated squads: What the 'player welfare summer' is really telling us

      Thanks for the further background to player welfare metrics Nick.


      Back on the last article I noted that WR is now dedicating a whole section in their six-point business plan to this topic. It also noted that studies indicated 85-90% of workload falls outside of playing. So in respect to your point on the classification of ‘involvements’ included even subs with a low volume of minutes, it actually goes further, to the wider group of players that train as if they’re going to be required to start on the weekend, even if they’re outside the 23. That makes even the 30-35 game borderline pale into insignificance.


      No doubt it is won of the main reasons why France has a quota on the number of one clubs players in their International camps, and rotate in other clubs players through the week. The number of ‘invisible’ games against a player suggests the FFRs 25 game limit as more appropriate?


      So if we take it at face value that Galthie and the FFR have got it right, only a dozen players from the last 60 international caps should have gone on this tour. More players from the ‘Scotland 23’ than the more recent 23.


      The only real pertinent question is what do players prefer more, health or money? There are lots of ethical decisions, like for instance whether France could make a market like Australia’s where their biggest rugby codes have yearly broadcast deals of 360 and 225 million euros. They do it by having a 7/8 month season.

      68 Go to comments
      TRENDING
      TRENDING 'He's a lot bigger than I thought he was... he's an athlete' 'He's a lot bigger than I thought he was... he's an athlete'