Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

Analysis: England's Rugby World Cup game plan explained

By Ben Smith
England's Rugby World Cup game plan is structured around three kicking zones. (Photos/Gettys Images)

Eddie Jones has referred to his side’s game as a ‘modern’ version of English rugby, an attempt at refreshing an old way of playing.

ADVERTISEMENT

It is certainly true that they adhere to a game of past ages – the one constant with their game is a commitment to territorial advancement. They simply do not value possession anywhere near as much as territory, using the kicking game to trade the ball for ground upfield wherever possible.

It can be said that for the most part, they do not want the ball.

Whilst the addition of attack coach Scott Wisemantel and a host of new players has sharpened up aspects of their starter plays, the interplay between the forwards and backs is a long way off the level of Ireland or New Zealand. They are not built to hold the ball for long periods of play and the detail in their shape is haphazard at times.

However, what they make up for a lack of creativity, flair and spellbinding play is with bruising defence, punishing physicality, and dominant set-piece fuelled by the territorial kicking of their halves.

On the back of the boot of Youngs and Farrell, England builds the platform to unleash a ferocious defence and continually make the opposition feel like they are going backward – usually because they are.

It sounds simple enough but this is exactly how they do it and what they will do to try to win the Rugby World Cup.

England’s kicking zones

England’s game is constructed around three key kicking zones, the first being the exit zone – inside or just outside the 22m.

ADVERTISEMENT

Halfback Ben Youngs (9) will handle almost every exit, the most important zone to execute kicks. There is a no-nonsense approach to it, re-positioning the ruck if required but never playing a phase more than required.

Inside the safety of the 22 he can find touch, if not, a contestable ball will be launched.

The ideal landing spot is inside the 5m channel against the sideline between the 40m and halfway, where it can be contested or the recipient can be put over the sideline. Youngs has the ability to do this on a frequent basis.

He can overcook it at times but when Youngs kicks well, it goes a long way towards an England victory, with many possessions re-gathered around midfield setting up the next kick. Flyfhalf Owen Farrell (10) is often part of the kick-chase unit, not in the pocket as a kicking option, even at times getting up for the contest.

ADVERTISEMENT

This is a quite unique use of the flyhalf in a non-traditional way. Farrell, who is known for his aggressive contact, can get involved in the kick-return contact instead of being tasked with the responsibility of clearing.

If England are able to regain possession from Youngs’ kick, often they will look to drive another kick downfield targeting the depleted backfield instead of using the turnover opportunity to attack wide.

Against Wales, the ball bounces back directly to Ben Youngs who uses a ‘topspinner’ to kick it end-over-end over the touchline deep into Wales’ territory.

 

Again, against the All Blacks after winning a kick contest inside their half, Youngs gets a quick recycle and forces them back deep into their own 22 with a tight angle to clear from.

 

This results in huge ‘piggyback’ territorial shifts in a 15-20 second-time span, often flipping from their own pressure exit situation to the exact opposite with back-to-back kicks but comes at the expense of attacking off turnover ball.

The next kick zone is between each of the 40m lines on either side of halfway.

On this side of halfway, you will often see England send up another contestable kick. It is generally a bomb from Farrell dropping back into the pocket but could at times be another box kick by Youngs.

Despite the relative safety this area of the field offers, the number of phases they play in this area before kicking is low, ranging between 2-5 on average. A few carries or one wide shift may occur before Farrell or Youngs decides to send it to the air.

The distinct lack of structure is visible in the shot above after a few phases, with no other planned option but for Farrell’s kick. Even if they wanted to play running rugby, they aren’t in a position to do so.

Farrell’s bombs enable England another contestable ball, this time encroaching into the opposition half where points could be on offer should they regather.

The middle third is where Farrell’s kicking game really comes to the forefront, and it has been this area of the field where England have been vulnerable.

Gareth Davies (9) spies Farrell in the pocket and rushes off the line to pressure the kick. He moves Farrell off his spot and with a lack of any other bail-out passing options, Farrell still attempts the kick and is charged.

This is dangerous for England because this kick occurs like clockwork after the play breaks down, becoming predictable. Farrell often has a slow wind-up and at the same time is usually unprotected without players in front of him. It would be possible in this area of the field to put a ‘spy’ on Farrell and blitz him every time.

Players like Faf de Klerk and Ardie Savea who can get off the line quick would be a major threat to England’s kicking plan. One charged kick recovered could be a game-changing 7 points.

Between halfway and the opposition 40m, a continuation of the same strategy ensues. The bombs and box kicks are launched to land a bit further downfield, inches outside the safety of the 22.

Farrell and Youngs can do this with remarkable accuracy, forcing the retreating team to recover and secure the ruck in a position where a turnover would be costly.

The final kick zone is when England finally have possession inside or around the opposition 40m line as they start to press into deeper into opposition territory. Their play becomes more expansive, reaching the edges with more frequency.

However, if England start losing gain line or can’t open up the opposition, they complete another kick plugging the corners, attempting to force a 5m lineout or a very tight clearing kick.

At times even though they may have the ball pressing into the opposition 22 they will still kick into corner to force the opposition to exit, which is why often the outside backs like Jonny May and Jack Nowell or Henry Slade and Elliot Daly will grubber through.

Why do they kick away so much ball when already deep on attack?

It’s because England really want one specific situation to attack from, it is the one gun where they have all their ammunition loaded, an attacking lineout anywhere from 15-30m out with which they can run their set plays.

Once the opposition clears their lines they will usually receive their desired lineout platform.

They have become increasingly prolific from scoring off this situation using ‘slow-burning’ switch plays after strong first-phase carries from Tuilagi or Vunipola and a few phases of hammering the line around the corner. Against both the All Blacks and Ireland they scored in the first few minutes using these type of switch plays.

However, the number of times they receive these opportunities to craft tries is going to vary. It might only occur two or three times a half if that. If you are going to kick away the ball in every third of the field, patience is required. You must wait to win the ball back through your defence or opposition error, kick and wait again to advance to the next zone.

When you also consider that they will also nearly always take the three points on offer when receiving a penalty in range, England’s laborious grind of taking territorial chunks down the field becomes a game of aerial ping-pong with little actual running rugby.

By the end of the 2018 Six Nations, a tired England outfit was no longer winning with the frequency of the first two years under Eddie Jones. 12 months later, they found a way to rejuvenate the side.

A dominant defence feeds into a ‘winning-territory-at-all-costs’ strategy as you frequently giving the ball away. If you can’t hold or take it back then it becomes futile. England’s defence needed an upgrade.

The emergence of Tom Curry and Sam Underhill as twin world-class flankers was central to this, as was the addition of underrated Mark Wilson. The aging Robshaw and Haskell were replaced when Jones took a punt on Curry on the mid-year tour of South Africa.

The 20-year-old Curry has since emerged as one of the breakout stars of international rugby and brings a relentless motor, bruising defence and turnover ability to England’s already formidable pack.

England’s backrow became faster, more agile but with newfound aggression. Dylan Hartley was also left on the outer as part of Jones’ plan to kickstart his pack.

It was part of the juice required to reboot England’s system, along with a healthy Billy Vunipola. They emerged in the 2019 Six Nations with a ferocious defence able to dominate the gain line again, as well as take the ball off the opposition frequently.

One plan fits all

England has used the same game plan against South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and every opponent in the Six Nations. It worked spectacularly against France but lead to effective stalemates against Wales, Springboks and the All Blacks with each result decided by a few points or less.

If England captures their second World Cup with this strategy, it will prove that rugby can still be won playing with traditional old school strategies although it won’t be a celebration of innovation and running rugby. They will, however, have to a great defence and that will be something to marvel at.

Former England fullback Ben Foden documentary:

Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 6

Sam Warburton | The Big Jim Show | Full Episode

Japan Rugby League One | Sungoliath v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Japan Rugby League One | Spears v Wild Knights | Full Match Replay

Boks Office | Episode 10 | Six Nations Final Round Review

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | How can New Zealand rugby beat this Ireland team

Beyond 80 | Episode 5

Rugby Europe Men's Championship Final | Georgia v Portugal | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 7 hours ago
Jake White: Are modern rugby players actually better?

This is the problem with conservative mindsets and phycology, and homogenous sports, everybody wants to be the same, use the i-win template. Athlete wise everyone has to have muscles and work at the gym to make themselves more likely to hold on that one tackle. Do those players even wonder if they are now more likely to be tackled by that player as a result of there “work”? Really though, too many questions, Jake. Is it better Jake? Yes, because you still have that rugby of ole that you talk about. Is it at the highest International level anymore? No, but you go to your club or checkout your representative side and still engage with that ‘beautiful game’. Could you also have a bit of that at the top if coaches encouraged there team to play and incentivized players like Damian McKenzie and Ange Capuozzo? Of course we could. Sadly Rugby doesn’t, or didn’t, really know what direction to go when professionalism came. Things like the state of northern pitches didn’t help. Over the last two or three decades I feel like I’ve been fortunate to have all that Jake wants. There was International quality Super Rugby to adore, then the next level below I could watch club mates, pulling 9 to 5s, take on the countries best in representative rugby. Rugby played with flair and not too much riding on the consequences. It was beautiful. That largely still exists today, but with the world of rugby not quite getting things right, the picture is now being painted in NZ that that level of rugby is not required in the “pathway” to Super Rugby or All Black rugby. You might wonder if NZR is right and the pathway shouldn’t include the ‘amateur’, but let me tell you, even though the NPC might be made up of people still having to pull 9-5s, we know these people still have dreams to get out of that, and aren’t likely to give them. They will be lost. That will put a real strain on the concept of whether “visceral thrill, derring-do and joyful abandon” type rugby will remain under the professional level here in NZ. I think at some point that can be eroded as well. If only wanting the best athlete’s at the top level wasn’t enough to lose that, shutting off the next group, or level, or rugby players from easy access to express and showcase themselves certainly will. That all comes back around to the same question of professionalism in rugby and whether it got things right, and rugby is better now. Maybe the answer is turning into a “no”?

35 Go to comments
j
john 9 hours ago
Will the Crusaders' decline spark a slow death for New Zealand rugby?

But here in Australia we were told Penney was another gun kiwi coach, for the Tahs…….and yet again it turned out the kiwi coach was completely useless. Another con job on Australian rugby. As was Robbie Deans, as was Dave Rennie. Both coaches dumped from NZ and promoted to Australia as our saviour. And the Tahs lap them up knowing they are second rate and knowing that under pressure when their short comings are exposed in Australia as well, that they will fall in below the largest most powerful province and choose second rate Tah players to save their jobs. As they do and exactly as Joe Schmidt will do. Gauranteed. Schmidt was dumped by NZ too. That’s why he went overseas. That why kiwi coaches take jobs in Australia, to try and prove they are not as bad as NZ thought they were. Then when they get found out they try and ingratiate themselves to NZ again by dragging Australian teams down with ridiculous selections and game plans. NZ rugby’s biggest problem is that it can’t yet transition from MCaw Cheatism. They just don’t know how to try and win on your merits. It is still always a contest to see how much cheating you can get away with. Without a cheating genius like McCaw, they are struggling. This I think is why my wise old mate in NZ thinks Robertson will struggle. The Crusaders are the nursery of McCaw Cheatism. Sean Fitzpatrick was probably the father of it. Robertson doesn’t know anything else but other countries have worked it out.

36 Go to comments
A
Adrian 11 hours ago
Will the Crusaders' decline spark a slow death for New Zealand rugby?

Thanks Nick The loss of players to OS, injury and retirement is certainly not helping the Crusaders. Ditto the coach. IMO Penny is there to hold the fort and cop the flak until new players and a new coach come through,…and that's understood and accepted by Penny and the Crusaders hierarchy. I think though that what is happening with the Crusaders is an indicator of what is happening with the other NZ SRP teams…..and the other SRP teams for that matter. Not enough money. The money has come via the SR competition and it’s not there anymore. It's in France, Japan and England. Unless or until something is done to make SR more SELLABLE to the NZ/Australia Rugby market AND the world rugby market the $s to keep both the very best players and the next rung down won't be there. They will play away from NZ more and more. I think though that NZ will continue to produce the players and the coaches of sufficient strength for NZ to have the capacity to stay at the top. Whether they do stay at the top as an international team will depend upon whether the money flowing to SRP is somehow restored, or NZ teams play in the Japan comp, or NZ opts to pick from anywhere. As a follower of many sports I’d have to say that the organisation and promotion of Super Rugby has been for the last 20 years closest to the worst I’ve ever seen. This hasn't necessarily been caused by NZ, but it’s happened. Perhaps it can be fixed, perhaps not. The Crusaders are I think a symptom of this, not the cause

36 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING 'Crikey': Son of league legend Martin Offiah picked by England U18s 'Crikey': Son of league legend Martin Offiah picked by England U18s
Search