Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

Analysis: How fly-half Holly Aitchison has unlocked England's attack this Six Nations

By Will Owen
England's fly-half Holly Aitchison (L) is tackled by Scotland's flanker Rachel McLachlan (R) during the Six Nations international women's rugby union match between England and Scotland at Kingston Park in Newcastle upon Tyne in north-east England on March 25, 2023. (Photo by Paul ELLIS / AFP) (Photo by PAUL ELLIS/AFP via Getty Images)

For some reason, England came under fire for scoring too many tries through their pack in the Rugby World Cup. They have the best pack in world rugby, and they have no reason not to use it. A few months down the line, that criticism is null and void, as England’s back three scored a combined nine tries against Italy – and goodness knows how many more Claudia MacDonald would have notched up if she had stayed on the field. The moral of the story: you can defend their pack all you like, but if you leave space out wide, England will be lethal.

ADVERTISEMENT

In the middle of the action is fly-half Holly Aitchison. There were whispers of speculation over whether Aitchison would fit what England wanted in the 10 shirt – a centre by trade, Aitchison guided Saracens to Premier 15s glory as a fly-half.

With her clubmate Zoe Harrison, a terrific game manager, out injured, and England’s top baller Helena Rowland also out, Aitchison felt like the natural next choice. She hasn’t grabbed many headlines, but the scorelines of her first two tests wearing 10 speak for themselves. The England attack is working, and the Saracen has slotted in seamlessly.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Let’s examine Aitchison’s influence on the English attack so far in the fly-half position. First up, we’ll look at Jess Breach’s opening try against Italy.

As England enter the 22, Aitchison tells her immediate trio of forwards to carry, sliding out from the first receiver position to the “boot” – the space in behind the carrying forward. The benefit of playing in the boot is Aitchison can call for the ball from the rumbling Cokayne, change tactics and play wide last minute.

ADVERTISEMENT

But Italy are alive to England’s wide threat so they keep their defence spread. Aitchison, while remaining in a realistic position to call for the ball, asks Cokayne not to pass. Thanks to Italy’s stretched line, Cokayne gets a 1v1 run and England’s supporting forwards clear way beyond the ball, tying a couple of Italian jerseys into the breakdown area. Italy are unable to fold around the ruck and cover the wider threat.

Aitchison moves the ball wide and edge forward Sarah Bern carries up to the 5m line. Once again, Aitchison stands in the boot behind McKenzie Carson, but doesn’t ask for the ball. England are on the front foot and constantly moving forward with these carries, so Aitchison runs the same shape three more times consecutively. Eventually, Italy recognise they have to tighten up their defence and stop England from getting dominant carries.

ADVERTISEMENT

As soon as Italy narrow their defence, Aitchison finally calls for the ball. In the above image, you can see Italy’s only two defenders opposite Aitchison and the English backs. As well as Aitchison, Tatyana Heard and Lagi Tuima on-screen, England also have Breach, MacDonald and Abby Dow all waiting further outside. Aitchison starts incredibly flat to the line, meaning she doesn’t have to run to draw Veronica Madia in. She can simply catch the ball and throw it as wide as she wants for Breach to score.

On this occasion, Aitchison only touches the ball twice, but her triple threat on the ball (kick, run, pass) and her unpredictability mean Italy have no real choice but to mark her. It’s an unsolvable conundrum when England are moving forward.

Next, let’s look at how Aitchison’s patience and vision unlocked the Scottish defence in round one, resulting in a try for Sadia Kabeya.

Aitchison sits in the boot of another forward group here. She advises Carson to tip the ball on to Zoe Aldcroft, who is running at a weak shoulder.

Not only does Aldcroft make ten metres on the carry, but centre and defensive leader Hannah Smith has to enter the tackle to get her to ground. This means she isn’t there to organise the Scottish defence on the next phase, which Aitchison calls to herself.

As Aitchison catches the ball, Marlie Packer runs an inside line, with Cokayne and Sarah Hunter both running hard on her outside. Much like the last example, Aitchison starts extremely flat, this time jogging for two steps with the ball. This is enough to interest Lyndsay O’Donnell in front of her, then flicking the pass to Heard.

As Heard receives the ball, Leah Bartlett shoots out of line to shut the attack down. Bartlett initially does a really good job of reading the play, but unfortunately she doesn’t have the pace that a centre like Smith or Emma Orr would. Heard still has loads of time on the ball, and passes rapidly to Dow on her outside.

Bartlett is left in no man’s land, having inadvertently created a dog-leg in the Scottish defensive line. If Scotland had one more woman available to them, they may have shut this off – but instead, Dow accelerates into the gap created by Bartlett, rides O’Donnell’s tackle and offloads to Kabeya, who scores.

Make no mistake – this try isn’t necessarily Bartlett’s fault. She was left to defend out wide, which isn’t her job. It ultimately comes down to the split-second decision making of Aitchison at the start of the attack; deciding England were better off carrying first phase to draw more tacklers (and key decision makers) in.

Aitchison had enough time to call for it in the boot, play wide and go through the hands. England probably still would have made a good twenty metres if they did so, but Aitchison spotting a lonesome prop out wide and exploiting her is the difference between a half-break and a try.

People often spout clichés about fly-halves “taking the ball to the line”. In the age of strong defences, this isn’t really a thing anymore. There’s no use in a ten minimising her/his space in which to throw a good pass by running at the line. Instead, a good attacking fly-half like Aitchison will start flat before receiving the ball, then pick their options.

If they’re a genuine running threat, which we all know Aitchison is from her time playing in the centres, the nearest player will have to mark them, even if they’re stood totally static. So many players in this situation would be keen to do too much themselves, but not Holly Aitchison.

Don’t get me wrong, England could probably pick Hannah Botterman at 10 and still be one of the best attacking sides on the planet. But the way England’s attack is cruising through defences right now, you have to suspect even world-class operators like Harrison and Rowland will have to work really hard to win that 10 jersey back.

It has taken Holly Aitchison less than two games to go from “ball playing centre filling in at fly-half” to “top-end international playmaker”. Just when you thought England couldn’t possibly develop more outstanding options in the backline, Aitchison proves everybody wrong.

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 10 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.

39 Go to comments
A
Adrian 12 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

39 Go to comments
FEATURE
FEATURE Storm clouds gather over Biarritz with owner poised to bail out Storm clouds gather over Biarritz with owner poised to bail out
Search