Man City: day of reckoning draws near

The Premier League's case against Man City is now being heard.  Should a free-marketeer care about what private football clubs do with their money?  Is this just something to appease sports fans who'd prefer a more level playing-field (and a bit of justice & fairness)?  The same team winning every year is pretty bloody dull.  And if it goes against Man City and they get relegated, how will their quite ridiculously overpaid squad respond?

Personally my game is RU and I have very little interest in the details of this hoo-ha.  But I will summarise the RU precedent for those who don't know it: Saracens, who'd also been winning quite a lot and had comprehensively busted the salary cap -  systematically and quite creatively - to assemble a very hard-to-beat squad with a great many top notch players**; more than anyone else could remotely afford.  They were duly fined and relegated (via an insuperable points deduction).

To me, aside from evening things up a bit and dealing out some justice, the interesting phenomenon was that almost all their prominent players stuck with the team through a dull, and actually somewhat debilitating year in the lower division: they just didn't get sufficiently competitive matches to keep them fully sharp.  But they came back up after a single season via promotion in due course, and they all sharpened up quickly enough thereafter.

The loyalty was impressive.  Whatever money they'd splashed around illicitly, they'd nevertheless obviously built a team ethos that wasn't merely mercenary.

Views on the questions above?

ND

____________

** Plus Owen Farrell

RWC: England not too badly placed

OK, so England beat Fiji on muscle-memory, as predicted.  But overall, I'm more optimistic than I would have expected to be at this stage.  Partly, that's because England have a history of building to the later stages of the RWC rather uncertainly (2007 etc, and even including 2003): but mainly because, notwithstanding 2019, South Africa isn't a bogey team for England.  Let me explain.

In a given period of time, most teams seem to have a semi-irrational bogey.  For years, France couldn't get past England in any competition whatsoever.  Australia often seem to freeze against England.  And France themselves have lately done the job on England.  (England would also fancy New Zealand rather than they would have Ireland ... but let's not, *ahem*, get ahead of ourselves.) 

So - back to Saturday last: what did we witness last week?

Farrell:  for about 10 minutes towards the end, Farrell more-or-less earned his pay - at long last.  (Right up until his crazy knock-on right near the end, which might easily have seen him in the bin at the very death.)  That's a pretty thin return on the many years of undeserved England pay he's drawn.  We'll never know whether Ford + a different captain could have done the same job over that 10 minutes: but then again, the alternative combo might well have closed Fiji down even earlier.  Counterfactuals are like that.  So I'm unrepentant: Farrell shouldn't have played.

Smith:  well, he didn't pick himself at 15, and he gave it everything he'd got.  But, as they say, a good big'un ...  Anyhow, it's irrelevant now; and tomorrow, Steward it will rightfully be.

Tuilagi:  we've all heard the tired old saying, uttered continually over more than a decade - "if Manu's fit, he's in".  Well, by some miracle he's managed to stay fit.  But how many more times is it deemed satisfactory that he storms into a match and grabs a dynamic early try, then fades into the background?  If that's his MO, take him off after 30 minutes. 

Lawes:  how many more times can he be expected to go to the well and draw performances like that?  Unless he has truly superhuman powers of recovery, I don't like to imagine the shape he'll be in after Saturday - whatever duties might be sought of him beyond that point.

Earl:  speaking of super-human ...

ND

Footnote: apologies for the garbled early draft of this post for those who encountered it. 

Farrell / Part 3

Alright, so Farrell now has his record points tally and sentimental indulgence has been granted (well done that lad) - can there be any remaining reason why he isn't given the shove?  If his abject performance on Saturday isn't enough to have him dropped, Borthwick deserves everything that follows.  Fiji might just about be sufficiently shaken that they can be beaten in the quarters using muscle-memory alone: but an England appearance in the finals seems highly unlikely with Farrell on the pitch in any other capacity than water carrier.

Farrell père, now that's a different matter.  No obvious sign that the Irish have peaked too early, is there?

ND

Farrell / Must Be Dropped / Part 2

From Curry's sending off in the third minute of England's RWC opener on Saturday, England were backs to the wall.  And how George Ford responded! - 27 points from his boot, and a masterpiece of strategic adaptation and game management (which he'd been doing for Leicester all season before his nasty injury in the 2022 Premiership final[1]: so, no surprises whatever).

The suspended Owen Farrell could no more have pulled off that essential performance than fly over the moon: all he'd have come up with would have been blood-and-guts, huff-and-puff, & probably another card.    And England would effectively have been out before the tournament had even really got going.  His red card and still-current suspension during the warm-up series was as felicitous for England as that.  

And there is no obvious vacancy at 12.

This is the RWC; this is serious.  So, back to where we were four weeks ago:  Farrell Must be Dropped.[2]  

ND

____________

[1] Haven't seen this mentioned, but nearly half England's starting 15 (and some of the Argentinians!) have played with Ford at Leicester at one time or another.

[2] Actually, for a little more creativity: when his suspension is lifted, Farrell could be put on the bench against the contingency some opposing eejit decides the solution to Ford's dominance is to drop him with a forearm to the head.  Then the bonehead can take over against the remaining 14 men.  Smith can also be on the bench as a general-purpose option: people already like the thought of him at 15, and he could probably do 9 as well as 10.

Owen Farrell - must be dropped

A bit of Monday Morning Quarterbacking here.  Saturday’s match against Wales confirmed, if confirmation was required – that the liability known as Owen Farrell is one that England’s RWC team does not need. Here’s the Graun’s Robert Kitson: 

While the braced 63rd-minute shoulder to the head of Taine Basham was not the absolute worst of its type, that defence misses the point. In addition to the obvious player-welfare implications, it was reckless and unnecessary.  Nor was this some helplessly overeager debutant flying in. It was England’s captain, who should have known better with his side reduced to 13 men, playing in his 107th Test. It should also have cost his side any chance of victory. 

To me (and many others) this has been obvious for many years.  At the 2015 [sic] RWC I wrote - 

I have been boring my rugby drinking buds for three years predicting that, at a crucial moment in the RWC, England will be down to 14 with Farrell cooling his heels in the bin.

And so it transpired, even though the 2015 details were slightly different: in the vital group match vs Wales, with England ahead, well positioned to finish the game off, and a critical penalty already awarded, in steams Farrell with an obviously premeditated late tackle right under the ref's nose, and the penalty is reversed.  As a direct result, Wales go on to win – and England go out ignominiously in the group stage.   On home soil.  Thanks, Owen, and yes, we already knew you're a hard bastard. 

Eight years on, and no lessons have been learned, either by the perennially dull-witted, thuggish player himself nor successive managers.   And so, two days ago he earned the red card that will see him out for at least the next two matches, and maybe more. 

Why are Farrell’s services retained?  Because, we are told, he is “England’s talismanic leader”.  Let’s think that through.  In Martin Johnson, the all-conquering England RWC 2003 team had a truly talismanic leader – no greater captain of any team at any time, I’d say – and Johnson, too, was no stranger to the early trip to the dugout at a particular point in his career.  The dog had been given a (fairly deserved) bad name and, disproportionately, the refs were ever-ready with the whistle.   But Johnson and everyone else knew this couldn’t go on.   By 2003 he had long since fixed it, and the problem period was over.   

Johnson also fulfilled impeccably his role at lock.  So: superb player; outstanding leader; bish-bosh tendencies under control: perfect captain.  By contrast … the petulant Farrell shouldn’t even be in the team as a player – his distribution skills are pedestrian and his kicking unremarkable – and when after all these years and warnings and penalties and red cards he still fails so comprehensively on the control criterion, he has only one box ticked. 

At this level, that ain’t enough.  Borthwick seemed to be mulling the axe for Farrell when he first took over in such awkward, unwanted circumstances.  Well, here’s the perfect opportunity to wield it now. Get on with it, man, oh, and recall Henry Slade forthwith. 

ND  

UPDATE:  Hmmm.  My argument stands

Eddie Jones: it was indeed time to go.

Sport's a tough business, and nobody has the right to stay at the top forever.  Despite his many achievements, with England and elsewhere, it was clearly time for Eddie Jones to go.  The autumn test series was indeed a test, and he failed.

Jones worked wonders with the disorganised and demoralised 2015 side (even if one suspects almost any new broom would have dusted them down).  The immediate Grand Slam, followed by an epic tour of Australia - I have never watched a defensive effort like England's in the Second Test - suggested he was doing more than just making a handful of much-needed changes.   His choice of captain, the 'mongrel' Dylan Hartley, seemed inspired.

So where did it go wrong, for such a thoughtful and successful coach?  

1. Seems to me he's a tactician and not a strategist.  He plans carefully and successfully for particular games - for Australia, the semi final over New Zealand in 2003; for Japan, the extraordinary victory over South Africa; and for England the exceptional win over NZ in the 2019 semi final - a game he must have been working on from the moment the pools were announced several years before.  And then ... it was absolutely clear he had no equivalent gameplan for the final - a contingency just as foreseeable.  In fact, just like 2003 when Woodward's England beat him in the final.  (Clive Woodward: now there's a strategist.)
2. Stubbornly 'keeping faith' with the wrong players, admirable though 'loyalty' may be.  Two examples (out of several I could list):  Farrell and Tuilagi.  I don't care what "warrior" attributes he possesses, Farrell is a liability at international level - directly and predictably responsible for England going out in the Pool stage in 2015.  He shouldn't have been in the squad, let alone the post-Hartley captain.  And Tuilagi's physical frailty (sounds like a crazy thing to say, but rugby aficionados will know what I mean) makes his formidable performances of ten years ago an irrelevance.

If England can get Borthwick to step in - and I presume this is primarily a matter of money - the squad is strong enough to mount a turnaround in time for the RWC.  And he's just the man to do it.  Thanks, Eddie, and farewell.

ND

Kicking Off, Kicking On: RWC and Other ...

Apologies for my dereliction of blogging duties recently - have been abroad.  Sort of hoping, faintly, for a Brexit result whilst I was away.  Hopeless, of course; though something mildly amusing awaited at Gatwick upon returning.  In the big poster telling you which queue to join at the 'border', they've relegated the EU to just one among many flags of nations (etc) that don't require visas.  Nothing special, just one flag among many.  Made me smile, anyway (a touch of Gove?)

More of a result in the RWC last week, for the English and Welsh at any rate. We had a look at this a few weeks ago after the first round of matches, and things have panned out pretty much as they seemed at that point.  England going nicely; Wales OK too, provided injury doesn't strike;  Ireland confirmed as having peaked too early, as had been pretty evident for several months; and Scotland, well, ...

But now injury has struck for Wales, and with it their serious prospects of advancing against South Africa, IMHO.  The latter are really playing hardball now.

For England, drawing Australia in the Quarters was (a) predictable and (b) exactly what suited Jones and his boys.  A well-understood opponent presenting no fear-factor.  And on Saturday England showed every sign of just enjoying themselves thoroughly.  A great way to move forward to the big'un.

Ah yes, the ABs.  And because this fixture, too, was entirely predictable, we may be sure Jones has something in mind for the occasion.  Something he's been hatching for months, if not years - as he does.  Something special.

What made facing the Aussies in the Quarters ideal, was that Jones had no need to show his hand.  They were eminently beatable using basic means: solid defence, good territorial play.  (In the event, the defence wasn't even tested as much as in that epic Second Test against the same opponents, away from home, in 2016.)

The ABs know they will be facing something extra this weekend.  Will it be enough?  Can't guess.  But the whole 2019 RWC has been as favourable to England as could reasonably have been hoped for.

ND

(a) Surrounded by Idiots (b) Weekend Reading

A common complaint about standards of discourse in public life is that politicians & civil servants know nothing (I may even have said this myself), ditto journalists - and yet it is they who push to the front and dominate the field.  Where are the expert voices?

Well.  In my part of the universe one of the most prominent professional bodies is the Energy Institute, some of whose work is excellent.  It has just published the first results of its 'Energy Barometer', obtained by exhaustive polling of a 'college' of 850, selected to be representative of its 21,000 members.  One of the questions they answered was this:

In the UK, which technologies have the greatest potential to make a cost-effective contribution to decarbonisation, without subsidies, by 2030? (select up to 4) [my underlining]

And coming in at #2, with 42% of these sages voting for it, is   ...  Nuclear!  

Nuclear?  Without subsidies, by 2030?  And these are 'professional' people!  With jobs in the energy industry, and votes in elections, and things like that.  We may be thankful they didn't make it #1 (which was of course energy efficiency, at least they got that right).  Universal suffrage?  It's over-rated.

ANYHOW:  here's some weekend reading for you.  Don't be put off by the title ('Despair Fatigue') or the leftie breast-beating of the first third.  It gets round to addressing some of the serious themes we knock around in these parts - what's the reality of the UK economy; do we and can we survive on the back of the London 'financal services' industry; prospects for a genuine uprising of the disenchanted under Corbyn etc etc - all the big stuff. 

"... in many ways Britain [still] resembles an imperial economy: while it does export machinery, pharmaceuticals, plastics, petrol, and a whole variety of high-quality artisanal products, in sheer material terms it takes in far, far more than it sends out. So we must ask a simple question: Why do other countries continue to send their things to Britain? How is it that the island manages to take in so much more from the rest of the world than it gives them in return?"

Kinda germane to the whole Brexit thing, no?  Read on.  And as the frogs limber up to hurl their money at Hinkley Point ... Allez les rosbifs! - England for the Grand Slam!

ND
 

Eddie Jones' England

Settling in for another weekend of Six Nations rugby as the tournament rumbles on its satisfactory way.

I write as an Englishman, of course.  Ireland and Wales contrived an early draw which is hardly helpful to either cause: the Welsh and French must slug it out at 8pm on a cold winter's Friday night (what's that all about?); and the others will contest the wooden spoon.

That Eddie Jones, what a card.  Maro Itoje?  Nah, mate, he'll be great one day but it's too early just now.  Then, a couple of weeks later - I told him he had to work on a few things; he's done that, and now he's ready.  Elliot Daly?  Nah, mate ... then, a couple of weeks later ...  Good enough for me: Daly should have played in the RWC and he can't get into the starting line soon enough SFAIAC.

And I like the gracious way Jones is allowing the hapless and hopeless Robshaw a dignified passage to the bed nearest the door.  He still has to fix Farrell's petulance though.  Another gratuitous display last time out: it can't go on.

Jones' arrival seems to gave galvanised everyone, notably including James Haskell (and his agent / ghostwriter) who has gone into overdrive on the mouthing-off-for-the-journos front.  We've had issues with the puffed-up, pumped-up Mr H before, and he's still a big oaf: but he's done his time, worked his passage, obtained a sense of humour and - within his obvious limitations - playing better than ever.  The RWC fiasco wasn't down to him.

But back to Jones: it's great to see someone with such a crystal-clear view on what needs to be done.  "We're only under pressure when we don't know what to do" (which is true in almost every sphere of life) - he's thought it all out and lets them know exactly what to do.  Speaking of which, Jonny Wilkinson is equally clear-sighted in his match-day punditry for ITV, with instantaneous, incisive (and utterly authoritative) diagnoses + practical prescriptions.  He'll make a great coach, too, if he's minded to give it a go. 

ND

RWC: the Dogs that Didn't Bark at England

The media dogs didn't really bark after Wales deservedly beat England last weekend.  All too nervous of rocking the boat when everything can still be rescued with a good win over Australia and a couple of other quite plausible things going England's way -  the first of which was Fiji depriving Wales of a bonus point yesterday.  So let's start by rounding out the optimistic side of the picture: the Aussies - like the French - are not a team that England have ever really feared (which in large measure explains 2003 and 2007).    They've lost to them many a time, of course, and can do so again: but they haven't mentally given them seven points before the first whistle, unlike their feelings about the AB's and SA.

Consensus amongst the punditry is that the England-Wales result is explained by (a) odd selection; (b) even odder subsitutions; (c) poor decision-making and/or lame execution at the critical late penalty / line-out.  This last is a given, and very troubling; but par for the course with Robshaw.  The (unforced) late introduction of Ford was indeed daft in this particular game: but if (a) is code for *Burgess*, I disagree.  Who better in the squad to be lining up Jamie Roberts?  - and look what he did to Roberts face-to-face when they collided: exactly what he was there for.   When the welshman first hit the international scene (and I do mean 'hit'), England selected a blindside flanker - Joe Worsley - to cover the inside-centre channel, with good effect:  and that was viewed as tactically brilliant.

It's other selectoral choices that are bad: but so deeply hard-wired in the Lancaster set-up, there's little point in bemoaning them now.  Robshaw.  Not much more to be said, really - particularly because barring injury we are stuck with him for as much of the RWC as England are still on the pitch.

Secondly, however - and eminently fixable - is the liability that is Farrell (Owen).  He kicks his kicks, OK?  But otherwise he is wooden, hot-headed, petulant; and, I suggest, he is (d) as much responsible for the Wales result as (b) and (c).  Why?  Because at a critical stage in the second half, with England squarely ahead and in an excellent position to finish the game off, up he comes into the Wales 22, with England's lineout ball just to come, and puts in a grotesque  - obviously premeditated - late tackle, right under the ref's nose.  Position reversed, penalty Wales, and they are set up to mount their splendid revival. 

(Why does he do this?  Same reason as always, I suppose, to prove what a hard bastard he is.  IIRC he has never seen yellow or red for this in an international but it must be a matter of sublime good luck and he shouldn't reckon on that continuing.  In fact, he should never get the gig in the first place.  I have been boring my rugby drinking buds for three years predicting that, at a crucial moment in the RWC, England will be down to 14 with Farrell cooling his heels in the bin.  For all intents and purposes we may have seen it already.)

You can google the incident I am referring to and not find any critical mention of it with Farrell named.  Some of the "as it happened" reports record the late tackle with no names mentioned: one links it with Farrell but doesn't make any comment; and one calls the tackle 'needless' but doesn't mention his name.  See what I mean about the dogs not barking?

But it seems we must start with Farrell in possession again.  Ho, hum.  Your own selections for England at 10, 12 and 13 - to face Australia - in the comments, please:  (i) from the current RWC squad, (ii) selecting freely from qualified England players.  And a great weekend to all concerned.

ND

________________
UPDATE

at a crucial moment in the RWC ...

Well, the dogs will certainly be barking now.  I shall be particularly interested to see how the Grauniad's seven pundits, all of whom forecast an England victory, will handle themselves  

The Week Just Gets Better

It started well, and isn't it building up nicely !  I'm under no particularly rosy illusions, but as headlines go, these are the ones you want to see. 

Victory for David Cameron as EU budget faces cuts for first time in history

Yes, throwing up all the Euro-cards is going to yield the who-knows-what benefits for quite a while to come, if Cameron plays his own hand well.

OK, a big 'if', and I already said I'm under no illusions - but we gotta work with what we have.  So - here's hoping for a cracker at Landsdowne Road.  Have a great weekend !

ND

So, Farwell (for now) Martin Johnson

Oh dear, it really didn't work out at all. If ever proof were needed that generalship and strategy are entirely different from leadership and execution, here it is.

No-one expects a manager to be able to cover all the bases himself, and Heaven knows the RFU can afford as big a coaching team as it needs. So he's no tactician ? Hire one. Doesn't know back play ? Get a specialist. etc etc.

But ... he does have to be able either (a) to select players, and then frame the strategy to suit the chosen team, or (b) devise a strategy, and select accordingly. And in particular he needs to be able to pick a captain - he of all people should know that.

Instead (to take just one example) England has a tremendous pool of back-row talent, and no coherent back row: compare and contrast with the one that was driving Johnson's arse forward all those years. Oh, and no captain. Whatever Moody's undisputed talents and bravery - leading from the front, fine, but - being permanently face-down in the mud after yet another over-the-top solo charge doesn't really do the job.

Whatever Clive Woodward imagines, the 2003 World Cup belongs exclusively to Johnson; and no-one can take that away from him. He's still a thoughtful and deeply knowledgeable sportsman. The very best of luck for whatever's next.

ND

NZ vs France: whom to support ?

So, not England for the final then - I got that one really wrong. But which of the protagonists does the neutral favour ?

Well God knows New Zealand deserves a fillip after the earthquake and it may be churlish to consider anything else. But in rugby terms ...

To my way of thinking there has always been something deeply unattractive about the Kiwis. Always boasting about their skillful running rugby, always at pains to decry the kicking game. But all that carefully practised crossing, shepherding and obstruction; and then there's the brutality. OK, it's a man's game etc etc, but from the leg-breaking antics of Colin Meads to the spear-tackle on Brian O'D, somehow the much vaunted oh-so-skillful stuff often looks more like calculating thuggery.

By contrast I give you the French and, in the words of Nelson, an Englishman should hate the French as he hates the Devil himself. But as exuberant exponents of the 15-man game, they have given a lot of pleasure over the years. They have also seen off the Kiwis on more than one critical occasion of course, though they don't look much like pulling it off this time.

So: good luck to New Zealand in the hope it will bring them good cheer. And let's hope the French make them earn it: it will be all the sweeter for that.

ND

RWC: Scotland Ahoy

Everything going nicely towards the predicted place in the finals for England. Sorry for poor old Andy Robinson & all that. (Actually, I'm not: a dreadful freudian slip from him in the immediate post-match interview - "we had the match under control in the second half ... that group of players let it slip ..." - bet that did wonders for morale in the camp)

So - will it rain ? Everyone will have been reminded of what happened in 2000. Then again, it rained for the France game in RWC 2003, and England humiliated 'em. As Clive Woodward said when the French blamed it on the elements: I've been to France, and it rains there too!

The only teams England actually fear are NZ & SA - one of which will be staking out the other finals slot, and will probably win. Which will it be ?

ND

England vs Scotland

One more shallow pot-hole in England's road to the Grand Slam ahead. Poor old Andy Robinson is continually telling us he "doesn't understand losing", which can only mean he's a slow learner.

This is a game where England need to run amok. Defences are good these days but they should really put 40 points on Scotland - less than 30 isn't good enough in World Cup year. Zara will just have to be tactful to her mother afterwards.

ND



Different styles ...

6 Nations: Those Rugby Songs

Here we go ... the 6 Nations - sponsored by our very own RBS !
(and I do mean our very own). Altogether now -


The fate of old Hosni Mubarak
Is grimmer than anyone thinks
At the height of the rioting season
He tries to hide in the Sphinx
But the Sphinx’s secret passage …


ND

Phil Woolas: Let Joy Be Unconfined

Well this has made my week, and no mistake. With the 'retirement' of McNulty, Woolas was unchallenged as the most odious of the bunch.

Now all they need to do is to fix the outrageous postal voting scandal ...

Oh, and one other thing to make my weekend complete: England to beat the Kiwis this afternoon. Conditions are identical to that of the famous afternoon in November 1993: glorious autumn day, England not given a prayer ... It was the first match with the 'new' North and East stands in place at Twickenham, and the crowd were excited to find that the extended high concrete roofing had the effect of bouncing sound back into the bowl. After the haka, a tentative burst of Swing Low was tried - and it echoed around marvellously. Spirits were suddenly high: hey, this is great !

And so was the score-line of 15:9, marred only by Jamie Joseph's disgraceful footwork on the ankle of the prone Kieran Bracken, on the pitch for his first cap. Joseph perpetrated his outrage in full view as the action moved upfield, and the crowd let him know what they thought. The boy Bracken was strapped up, though, and he soldiered on.

The NZ supporters got rock-all on the train back to Waterloo. But they took it in good part.

ND