Northern | US

Eddie Jones likens Henry Pollock to Bok World Cup winner

Englands's Henry Pollock during the Guinness Six Nations 2026 match between England and Ireland at Allianz Stadium on February 21, 2026 in London, England. (Photo by Bob Bradford - CameraSport via Getty Images)
Comments
5 Comments

Former England head coach Eddie Jones believes his successor Steve Borthwick will look back on his decision to start Henry Pollock as one he got wrong in Ireland’s comprehensive 42-21 victory at Twickenham’s Allianz Stadium in round three of the Guinness Six Nations.

ADVERTISEMENT

Northampton Saints’ 21-year-old back-row made his first start for England against Andy Farrell’s side having earned his first seven caps for his country from the bench.

There was a smattering of occasions where Pollock flickered – a half-break in the first half and a burst down the right flank in the second half – but he was largely neutralised by the visitors, who dominated England at the breakdown.

VIDEO

Jones has since questioned the decision to start Pollock, saying he’s not a “grind player,” perhaps in contrast to Sam Underhill, who found himself on the bench after starting the opening two matches.

Speaking on the Rugby Unity podcast, the Australian likened Pollock to 2007 Rugby World Cup-winning Springbok Bobby Skinstad, suggesting they are both better suited to 20-minute cameos.

Fixture
Six Nations
Italy
23 - 18
Full-time
England
All Stats and Data

“Steve will probably look back a think ‘maybe I didn’t get a few things right,'” he said.

“Starting Pollock – Pollock, to me, is like Bobby Skinstad. Good looking, always got a sun tan and can play. But he’s one of those blokes who play for 20 minutes. He’s one of those players who finds himself in the right position but he’s not a grind player.

“To play a full 80 in the back-row, you’ve got to be prepared to grind, and maybe that’s not the best job for him. Maybe that’s not the best job for him.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Former Australia coach Ewen McKenzie shared the same opinion as Jones on the podcast, saying: “He play’s as a wider ranging player that can sniff opportunities, which has been really good in the last 20. That’s not so good in the first 20 because you can be a man short in the physical exchanges.

“You’ve got the likes of the Earl-type players who are the ones who needed to mix it with Ireland early on in the physical exchanges and you try and get some dominance there and then you get the right to play. They never got that, so guys like Ford are trying to play the game on the back foot and never got to their kicking game.”

Related

ADVERTISEMENT
Play Video
LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

5 Comments
P
Piston 90 days ago

I agree, you also have more time watching yourself on the Big Screen. Prem Rugby (and URC or Super Rugby isn't Test rugby mate, show ponies get shown up amongst the thoroughbred hard men.

T
Timmyboy 91 days ago

load of nonsense that is. Saints proves it

J
JoBe 90 days ago

Exactly. Jones is not the super coach he thinks he is.

T
Tom 91 days ago

I think that's doing him a disservice. It may be that he's best suited to an impact sub role but he's had many standout 80 minute performances for his club and u20s in his short career.

H
Hammer Head 91 days ago

Shots fired.

Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Long Reads

Comments on RugbyPass

c
cnw 6 hours ago
Sir Graham Henry is the All Blacks' new kingmaker - and lords of the scrum high on his agenda

NB I have stayed away from this dialogue about Razor because hey I am a bit tired of being the lone discordant voice in this chorus. I agree that his systems struggled under pressure. I also agree with your analysis last year that he needed to bring in some outside the tent expertise to help him reignite the open field attack (eg an O’Gara). But the theme here that he was directionless and lacked nous is wrong and revisionist in my view. He was clearly trying to bring to the ABs a structured power game and it was building momentum. The wins against good opposition, including the Boks, Ireland, Scotland, Australia (who at that stage had just beaten the Boks and the Lions) and Argentina showed this. The loses were bad - but hey who has not had shockingly bad losses in the last 12 months - the Boks, France, Ireland, Scotland, Argentina, Australia, and England all included. Yet the history now seems to be that Razor lacked the basic skills to be a good coach based largely on second hand reports of player reactions. Against this we have the inside view of NZ’s most astute coach ever, Smith, who was happy with the direction he was taking. Did Razor have his faults and was he struggling to get his message through - seems so. Did he need help - for sure. But he was the second most successful coach last year in the world with a team still transitioning from a dynasty that had well and truly had its day. Rennie has inherited that base - and I really look forward to what he will bring - but just don’t agree that Razor was the lost coach most are now making him out to be.

432 Go to comments
Close Panel
Close Panel

Edition & Time Zone

{{current.name}}
Set time zone automatically
{{selectedTimezoneTitle}} (auto)
Choose a different time zone
Close Panel

Editions

Close Panel

Change Time Zone

Close
ADVERTISEMENT
Copied to clipboard

Share Article close