Blueprints for the future? Ruminations of the fates of two English clubs in Heineken Cup round five
I only saw two games of this round. On Friday, I saw Ulster’s humiliating demolition of Leicester, as complete a thrashing as you can imagine. On Saturday I saw Harlequins squeak home past a fired-up looking Gloucester side. I’ll get around to watching some of the others at some point but in terms of the direction of English rugby, I found these quite thought-provoking just by their own. Judging from the comments in the media, I’m not alone, but the most pertinent article to the direction my thoughts are taking was by Paul Ackford in the Telegraph – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/9013380/Englands-famous-brand-of-hard-men-have-given-way-to-gym-conditioned-athletes.html
This is because I agree with the doubts raised about the decision making and mental fortitude of some of the young England players. The academy process seems to be bringing through some good players, some tremendous athletes often with great skills (although not always with rounded skillsets) but when faced with adversity, they’re raising questions.
Leicester faced a massload of adversity on Friday. Ulster have put together a fantastic first XV through clever recruitment and good developing, it was in fine form (the previous 5 games had yielded 4 bonus point victories) and are busy burnishing Ravenhill’s reputation as one of the citadels of European rugby. It was never going to be easy and Leicester walked right into the teeth of a perfect storm as Ulster finally put together one of the performances they’ve been threatening for some time. There is absolutely no shame in being beat by that, even being beat well, but in crumbling and conceding your new record defeat – there is plenty of shame in that.
For quite a while I thought Leicester was going to make a fight of it. Up until Twelvetrees missed one in front of the sticks and Pienaar promptly put one through, I felt nervous on Ulster’s behalf. Not that Leicester were anything but the second best side until that point. They were struggling to contain Ulster’s big runners and offloading. They were losing the breakdown. Leicester soldiered on without really attempting to solve the problems. After that, they fell apart. Cole went for dissent, Youngs probably should have gone for dissent, Slater should be banned for his punch and Tom Croft suffered the absolute indignity of being dump-tackled into touch by a guy nicknamed Mincer. Nevermind the reality of Paddy Wallace being a solid tackler, that’s the sort of moment that sticks. Actually reading that back, that’s a misleading nickname; Wallace got it because he used to mince in the tackle, not because he minces people in the tackle. Just so we’re clear.
Quins too suffered some awkward moments. Nick Evans had an unusually bad night with the boot, their slick handling game couldn’t quite get the final balls to hand and their defence got stretched far too easily by Gloucester. Harlequins however, held on and eventually got what they needed. Charlie Sharples made a mistake (bad timing with the 6N coming up) and Mike Brown popped over. They could, and possibly should have already been in front with a penalty, but the decision to look for a try made sense as Gloucester’s final roll of the dice sputtered out; the 3 points was on, but it wasn’t enough.
So – where is the difference? Is there a difference? As noted, Ravenhill is not an easy place to go, particularly not with key injuries, and a wise man is cautious about drawing too much from one-offs. However, I don’t think the nerves under fire and failure to adjust are a one off; this is the latest symptom of the disease. The disease can be encapsulated in a quote from Nigel Redman in the linked article:
‘‘I’ve lost count of the number of times coaches have complained to me that players aren’t decision makers while showing me their 84-page play book.”
Leicester look like a regimented side. They look like a side that go out there with a plan and if the plan doesn’t work, they wait to hear what the new one is. Or keep going with the old one. Players aren’t looking for the ball, they’re in their zones waiting for it to happen. Leicester didn’t react to their mullering at the breakdown by ordering the likes of Croft and Mafi to follow the ball, they just stood there, in a style eerily reminiscent of England. The only man there with a sense of initiative was Youngs and his decision making was shaky at times – and, also, I suspect under instructions at time too. In fairness, it’s going to be when he’s 22, it’s understandable. Twelvetrees is also going to have poor decision making when he rarely plays at fly-half. When the other side has Pienaar, Wallace and Terblanche pulling the strings, there will be a disparity. There shouldn’t be that much though. Basically, Leicester do not look like a team who make their own decisions, and when the pressure comes they react the wrong way. This brings me to Harlequins.
Harlequins, more than any other club in the country, look like a team where the players make the decisions on the pitch, and not the coaches in the dressing room. They play with a spontaneity and speed that is, when executed right, very difficult to stop. They play with a number of decision makers – Evans, Brown, Robshaw, Easter, Care – and seem to be bent on developing more. In particular, Harlequins develop forwards who are very comfortable ball in hand, yet still have a big physical edge. It’s still a work in progress, not least because they’ve got to get used to playing big matches as favourites, but they seem to be responding well to it. If they can keep the current personnel together, then in a year or two they could really be a force to be reckoned with. I really hope so as I see in Quins a model for English teams to emulate. Decision makers playing heads up rugby at pace with an emphasis on developing within to ensure there is a stream of players who understand the club’s needs. It is the way that the superteams of Europe, Toulouse and Leinster, are doing things. I just hope that an English club proves capable of following them.
Leicester will be back, in some shape or form. There is too much quality in their ranks for them to lay low for long. They’re a good team. They’ll probably win some stuff. But they won’t be great, not until they sort the mental cracks that appear to be forming. That won’t happen without players who take responsibility for what they do, starting with their decisions on the pitch. The same goes for England. If we want to be great, then we need to cast the shackles off the players and discover who’s got the brains and balls to win, and who doesn’t.
Which is why I hope the model for English club rugby going forwards is set up by Harlequins, and not Leicester.
