Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

'Dinosaur tactics': Eddie Jones' tactical substitutions under the microscope after loss

By Sam Smith
(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

Marcus Smith’s first start in the Six Nations as England’s flyhalf looked on course to be a successful one after he had scored all 17 of his side’s points with a quarter of the game to go.

ADVERTISEMENT

A penalty goal to take the lead out to 17-10 would be Smith’s last involvement in the match, as Eddie Jones took off his starting 10 in favour of George Ford finishing the match.

The decision was just one of a few puzzling substitutions, with Smith a proven match-winner in the Autumn after he orchestrated one last England possession into kicking range before getting the penalty to kick the winning goal against South Africa.

Video Spacer

RugbyPass Offload | Episode 19

Video Spacer

RugbyPass Offload | Episode 19

Eddie Jones also left reserve scrumhalf Harry Randall on the pine and substituted Jack Nowell into the game just for the final play, which confused fans.

When Luke Cowan-Dickie was in the sin bin, prop Joe Marler had to make a lineout throw without reserve Jamie George yet the pitch, who was brought onto the field once a scrum was required.

With Ford on the field, England turned down a longer range three point attempt that would have drawn the game with three minutes to go from 40-metres out near the touchline. Instead, the kicked to touch around the edge of the 22 and lost the ensuing lineout contest.

On the final scrum which had to be reset multiple times, a final penalty wasn’t forthcoming forcing England to play with the ball. It was turned over quickly by Darcy Graham and kicked into the Murrayfield stands to end England’s chances of coming away with a draw or last chance win with a try.

ADVERTISEMENT

England fans were perplexed with the management of the bench in the aftermath, calling Jones’ decisions ‘dinosaur tactics’ with ‘weird ideas’. Another fan said the decision to substitute Smith with Ford had ‘zero logic’.

ADVERTISEMENT

On the decision Eddie Jones explained that he thought a fresh George Ford could lift England at that point in time.

“We just thought George could lift the game a little bit. Marcus played well and we’re really happy with his performance but it is a 23-man game,” he said.

“We are massively disappointed we have lost,” he added, adopting a more serious reflection on the round one loss.

“Scotland deserved to win but I thought we dominated a lot of the game… but if you dominate you have got to get points and you have got to get enough ahead of the opposition.

“The result is the result. It is tough for us to start the tournament like that. We had a really good preparation and played with a lot of purpose, a lot of drive and a lot of determination.”

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.

37 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

37 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Diamond demands law change while accusing Tigers of illegal activity Diamond demands law change while accusing Tigers of illegal activity
Search