I've been gathering my thoughts after the past few days since England lost to Wales, reading as much media coverage as I can to get an angle on the defeat and to be as impartial as I can be. It's proven difficult, but here goes.
Well done Wales.
Ok, now that's the impartiality out of the way, let's move on to why England lost, because Wales did not win that match. They were not the better side. The game should have been beyond them after the fist half. What is with this England team and their inability to play the full forty minutes of a half. They seem to get to thirty and then give up, as if they've already won! It happened in the first half with very little consequence but then it happened again, with disastrous results.
Last year, I went to Twickenham and watched England beat Wales in a fairly one sided affair. This is not a 'great' Welsh side. It's good, but not Grand Slam potential. England, however, are nearly there. In Chris Robshaw they have a captain who has the highest work rate of any player I've seen for a long time and fantastic decision making. I've read a lot of articles explaining why England should have kicked the penalty at the end of the match rather than aim for touch. They're all wrong.
The argument for three points bases itself on the guarantee that Farrell (or Ford who had come on at 12) would have made the kick. Admittedly, I cannot fault Owen Farrell's kicking on Saturday, it was very impressive, but that's a big if from that position far out on the right hand side of the pitch. The decision to go for touch shows Robshaw to be a winner. No matter the outcome, he did not want to take a draw or a defeat. He wanted to push for the victory. This is why he's a good captain.
England were shambolic for twenty minutes on Saturday and it cost them the match. If they can string together eighty minutes of solid rugby rather than take their eye off the proverbial ball against Australia then they just might be in with a chance of a win.
Might