Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

Love him or loathe him, Jones played the perfect hand against Australia

By Alex Shaw
Eddie Jones and Steve Borthwick confer ahead of England's game with Australia in Oita. (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images,)

It is fair to say there were plenty of raised eyebrows when Eddie Jones announced his England team to play Australia, as in-form fly-half George Ford found himself relegated to the bench and Henry Slade, who had just 11 minutes of rugby under his belt since coming back from injury, was promoted to the starting XV.

ADVERTISEMENT

It broke up England’s dual-playmaker – and dual-kicking threat – of Ford and Owen Farrell at the heart of the midfield, as Farrell moved inside to 10 and Manu Tuilagi also shuffled along the line, coming in from outside centre to inside centre. For a team that had kicked from hand more than any other side at the Rugby World Cup, the move was an interesting one.

Despite registering a morale-boosting 40-16 victory, a typically prickly Jones was still in bullish form over the selection at the post-match press conference. When asked if the ‘dropping’ of Ford was vindicated by the result and performance, Jones replied that Ford had not been benched or dropped, simply that his role had been changed for the contest and that rugby is now a 23-man game. It was a more than fair point from the Australian and though we can all debate the terminology, the performance clearly was a vindication of the coach’s decision.

Having averaged 29 kicks from hand per game in their first three games of the Rugby World Cup, they recorded just 20 against Australia in Oita on Saturday. With the Wallabies bossing possession and territory in the game, enjoying 64% and 62% respectively, England’s defensively shored up midfield had to deal with 13 carries from powerhouse Samu Kerevi and deal with him they did.

The Queensland Red had run riot through defences throughout the pool stage, however against England he was marshalled. He had gain-line success and did break a number of tackles, though not with the proclivity that he revelled in against other teams earlier in the competition. Both Farrell and Tuilagi held up well to his physicality and frequently one of the Mordor Two, Sam Underhill or Tom Curry, was on hand to help.

In fact, where Australia had more joy was with Jordan Petaia at outside centre, with the 19-year-old regularly able to find space outside of Slade and punish any sort of disconnect in England’s defensive line. He was contained then at the second level of the defence and for the most part, Jones’ move to bolster the inside of his midfield defensively was richly rewarded on Saturday.

When Ford arrived in the second half for Slade, and England reverted to their previously seen combination of Ford-Farrell-Tuilagi, the Leicester Tigers playmaker was able to bring some extra control and find space in the backfield with his cultured boot. Soak up pressure, nullify the dangerman and then exploit a tired team. Jones’ plan worked to perfection.

ADVERTISEMENT

The other two selections which were under the microscope were those of Mako Vunipola, who was returning from injury, and Courtney Lawes, who was replacing George Kruis, a man whose chemistry with Maro Itoje and Jamie George is beyond question at this point.

After coming under pressure at the first couple of scrums, Vunipola rebounded and repaid all faith that Jones had in him. The set-piece then evened out – before England took control later in the game – and the loosehead put in an incredible shift in the loose, particularly when you take into account the lack of top-level rugby he has had in recent months. He combined with Underhill to make a game-high 20 tackles, although his impact went beyond that figure, with a number of dominant tackles and precise clear-outs that provided England with quick and clean ball.

Similarly, Lawes excelled on the defensive side of the ball as Australia dominated possession, particularly in the first half. The Northampton Saints lock delivered a masterclass of tackling on a number of Australia’s power carriers, stopping them dead in their tracks. He was also efficient in his technique, frequently leading the defensive line and going low and chopping down Wallabies, rather than risk missing or being penalised on a higher hit.

Neither Lawes nor Vunipola had the attacking influence that both players are capable of, but they did the job that was asked of them with aplomb. They took the life out of the legs of the Australian pack and their energy, along with that of the flank pairing and Itoje, was perfectly suited to chasing down and containing the eager-to-run Wallabies.

ADVERTISEMENT

And then we come to that flank pairing. It may not have been a selection which was questioned, such have been their performances alongside one another over the last couple of months, but this game was a huge test for Curry and Underhill, as they went up against two of the very best flankers in the world in Michael Hooper and David Pocock, players who have become masters of their craft.

Impossible to completely contain, Pocock had one or two moments of fetching brilliance, though the physicality and mobility that England’s flanks brought was impressive throughout their time on the pitch. They were part of that all-energy English defensive performance in the first 50 minutes that nullified Australia, as well as interspersing their tackling and contact area work with a couple of moments of class, such as Curry’s draw and give for Jonny May’s first try and Underhill’s athletic aerial take when under pressure from multiple gold-cladded jumpers.

Whether you love him or loathe him, there’s no denying that Jones got his tactics and approach to the game with the Wallabies spot on. His selections countered Australia’s strengths and though it was far from the most ‘flashy’ of English attacking performances, it was ruthlessly clinical, the one thing which you could have argued England were missing in their admittedly one-sided wins over Tonga, USA and Argentina.

Continue reading below…

Watch: Eddie Jones and Owen Farrell face the press in Oita after qualifying for the semi-finals

Video Spacer

A new challenge looms on the horizon, though, and it is one which looks to be a perilous one.

As good as England’s performance against Australia was, the All Blacks blew it out of the water with their 46-14 dismantling of Ireland. It was not an outing befitting of Joe Schmidt’s last game in charge of the northern hemisphere side, as Ireland struggled to generate any sort of continuity in possession, but it was also a masterclass all-round performance from New Zealand.

The question now is what aces, if any, does Jones have up his sleeve for the unique challenge that New Zealand will pose? They will undoubtedly go hard at England early, just as Australia did, but they are unlikely to punch themselves out in the same fashion. If England opt to try and weather that early storm, rather than attempting to force their own style of play on the game, they risk giving the All Blacks an unassailable lead. New Zealand will, almost without a shadow of doubt, prove to be more clinical in attack than Australia were.

Jones could return to his combination of Ben Youngs, Ford and Farrell and attempt to control field position and make sure that if the All Blacks are going to get over the try line, they’ll have to go that bit further to get there. It also returns Tuilagi to perhaps his most potent offensive position on the pitch at outside centre, a man that New Zealand are very wary of and will pay particular attention to.

Or he can continue as he did against Australia, with that threat of Ford – and the subsequent change in style – available off the bench if needed. He may not pack quite the punch that Kerevi does, but Anton Lienert-Brown is no lightweight carrier in that 12 channel and Farrell and Tuilagi have shown their value as a defensive pairing. If that combination is retained, Jonathan Joseph offers an intriguing variable, with his lateral mobility and defensive nous welcome in the 13 jersey, a position where Petaia exploited England on a number of occasions.

Regardless, these are the decisions that make or break coaches and although the All Blacks represent arguably the best team in world rugby at the moment, this is a scenario that Jones would have bitten your hand off for had it been offered to him prior to the Rugby World Cup. It’s the biggest game that Jones has coached since the 2003 Rugby World Cup final and the biggest England have been involved in since the 2007 final.

Whatever happens on Saturday in Yokohama, Jones will want to ensure his team come off the pitch not wondering about what could have been and confident that they fired all the shots they possibly could have.

Joe Cokanasiga in the 23, anyone?

Watch: Michael Cheika and Michael Hooper face the press after Australia’s quarter-final loss to England

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 6 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 8 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.

34 Go to comments
A
Adrian 10 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

34 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