The real knock on Lancaster is that we have the players but not the team. He has the raw material to certainly deliver a semi-final, maybe a final and, on a good day, winning the Cup. Only the ABs are demonstrably better and in a one-off game, anything can happen. But he's done a poor job, since initially sorting out the mess he inherited (and we all agree he did that very well), of exploiting the resources at his disposal.

As last week proved, there's no real tactical plan, there's no adherence to building in a clear direction, a commitment to players based on preference rather than ability and so on. It's all come to reek of the usual English sporting myopia and mediocrity. If we learned anything from 2003, surely it was have a plan two years before the RWC, prepare thoroughly to execute it and don't change it. At this level, Bomber is starting to resemble a rabbit caught in the headlights. And even though I don't want SCW back, why are the RFU not at least using him in an advisory role? He does know what it takes.

As far as Robs***e goes, saying he and not Bomber is responsible for the Wales loss is laughable. Who picked him, after all? The captain is the coaches voice on the pitch. For a start, Robs***e shouldn't be in the side and he's only there because of Bomber's absolute intransigence, blind loyalty and refusal to pick his best available openside (Fatty) because he plays in France. Second, Saturday was the THIRD (count 'em) time Robs***e made that call and the third time it's failed (Hint to Robs***e: it's not a very good call). So surely the coach should have nipped that idiocy in the bud long before the game and told him "never do that again on my watch." And thirdly, his unnecessary substitutions and not the penalty call cost us the game anyway. As to how Wigglesworth even got into the squad we can only wonder.

This week's selection against Australia will speak volumes. Bomber is damned if does and damned if he doesn't. If he reverts to Ford, he looks clueless. If he sticks to Farrell, he looks obstinate. If he picks Robs***e he looks desperate. If he doesn't pick him, he looks disloyal. I'm hearing a lot of rumours that there are divisions in the camp with the pack not happy with Wiggy (they look amazingly under-prepared for a scrum at World Cup time) and quite what Faz Senior is doing there I have no idea. He wasn't even a good Union player. Is the committee still just trying to get a return on its original investment in him? And why does he seemingly have so much influence?

The biggest thing we have going for us on Saturday is Poite. In recent years the Australian scrum has had major problems when he's been teacher. That said, if Marler spends another match boring in every time there's a set-piece, sooner or later someone is going to start pinging it. I can't believe he's got away with what he's been doing so far.

BTW Dylan played for us yesterday in the "friendly" at Sarries. Time for one of the squad to get injured I think.

Two things:

1. Remember the key moment in 2003 (Jonny's RWC-winning drop goal)? The lineout that set it up was thrown to the back. So much for going to 2 at the key moment because it's "safer." A team confident in its ability, with a plan, properly coached and that knew what it was doing sticking to a pre-conceived strategy. What do England do on the training ground if not cover eventualities like this? Or do they make the wrong decisions there, too?

2. Actually, lol, Luther scored two tries for us at Allianz Park yesterday. Rather underlining our point! Out of the squad, bang in form.

Edited by sydtheeagle (28 Sep 2015 3.36pm)

Up to a point, yes. But neither SCW or GH were burdened by blind loyalty or a lack of vision. Their early mistakes were clear, but they were "progressive" mistakes. Both trusted their own judgment even when things went wrong, a quality Lancaster clearly lacks. Lastly, Woodward played international rugby and Henry came to the ABs job with vast international coaching experience. Bomber had neither before he took the job, perhaps one reason why he doesn't trust his own judgment and is constantly deferring to the likes of Faz. Don't get me wrong, he was the right coach at the right time four years ago and he did a fine job of pulling us back together. But I see nothing to convince me he's the right man for the next stage of the job. Look at it this way: explain to me what is Lancaster's tactical vision? We have no idea. Nor, Saturday showed, has he. That is a question we never needed to ask of SCW. Even if we disagreed with his selections, we knew what he was trying to do. A balanced midfield, a highly mobile back row, etc.

Edited by sydtheeagle (28 Sep 2015 7.57pm)

Edited by sydtheeagle (28 Sep 2015 7.57pm)

Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.