Top Stories
Rugby-England’s replacements policy under fire after latest blown lead
Global Banking & Finance Review®
Company
By Mitch Phillips
LONDON (Reuters) – While South Africa’s “Bomb Squad” has become a key factor in their recent success, England’s replacements are starting to look more like a “Suicide Squad” as Steve Borthwick’s changes repeatedly help his team snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Last Saturday’s 24-22 home defeat by New Zealand at Twickenham was just the latest occasion when England let a late lead slip after emptying their bench and then seemingly going into their shells and hoping to “see out” a match.
South Africa scored 10 tries and conceded one in the final 20 minutes of their Rugby Championship matches this year but England’s statistics show the opposite pattern, going back to the ultimate “caught in the headlights” moment in the 2023 World Cup semi-final.
On Saturday England scored their last points on the hour to open a 22-14 advantage but lost. In Auckland it was the 49th minute to lead 17-13 before losing 24-17, while the week before in Dunedin England’s last score came after 47 minutes to open a 15-10 advantage that turned into a 16-15 defeat.
Even in the 52-17 win over Japan in June they were outscored 14-7 in the final quarter.
England lost the final game of the Six Nations 33-31 to France despite grabbing a 31-30 lead with five minutes to go and, of course, in the World Cup semi-final they failed to add to their 15-6 lead after 56 minutes and were pegged back as the Springboks triumphed 16-15.
Borthwick of course can point to a couple of occasions when it went the other way, finishing strongly to beat Wales and most notably when Marcus Smith’s drop goal at the death downed Ireland by a point, but even in that game their previous score came after an hour and Ireland had forged ahead.
Borthwick and captain Jamie George spoke before Saturday’s game about learning the lessons from the two July defeats, when they recognised they had “stopped playing”, yet having done almost exactly the same thing on Saturday, they still somehow seemed to feel they had progressed.
“We kept attacking, that’s the thing that we made sure that we focused on, and learned from New Zealand in the summer,” George said.
The defeat led to widespread questions about Borthwick’s seemingly pre-ordained replacements policy.
With the scrum doing well – in contrast to the July tests – he changed the entire front row after 52 minutes. Smith had kicked all his penalties and was running things, only to be replaced after 62 minutes by a ring-rusty George Ford, while scrumhalf Ben Spencer was also replaced by Harry Randall.
In the baldest of terms, England’s scrum then struggled, Ford missed a tackle for New Zealand’s match-winning try, then hit the post with a penalty and sent a last-kick drop goal wide after a sub-optimal pass by Randall.
England’s 2003 World Cup-winning coach Clive Woodward described the changes as “absolute madness.
“Taking off Spencer and Smith was a daft decision. The same applies to the front row, because New Zealand’s replacement props got on top,” he said.
“Coaching is about feel. If the key to winning Test matches was replacing certain players at certain times, then anybody would be able to do it. International coaching cannot be — and will never be — about premeditated replacements.”
Former England flyhalf Stuart Barnes said taking Smith off was “a grave error” and Matt Dawson, the scrumhalf who played all 120 minutes of the 2003 final, had the same view.
“Spencer and Smith had managed the game really well. There were threats everywhere and they were playing a great style of rugby,” he said, despite England’s only try coming via an 80-metre interception.
“The game was nowhere near won … I just think it took out the momentum.”
England are back at Twickenham on Saturday to face an ailing Australia, before taking on South Africa and Japan, and Borthwick’s bench tactics will be under intense scrutiny.
(Reporting by Mitch Phillips, editing by Ken Ferris)
A financial crisis is a situation where the value of financial institutions or assets drops significantly, leading to a loss of confidence in the financial system.
Investment refers to the allocation of resources, usually money, in order to generate income or profit over time.
Economic growth is the increase in the production of goods and services in an economy over a specific period, usually measured by GDP.
Financial stability refers to a condition where the financial system operates effectively, with institutions able to withstand shocks without significant disruption.
Explore more articles in the Top Stories category
