This week we will mostly be concerning ourselves with England and bonus points\u2026<\/p>\n
England\u2019s problems are more touchline than pitch<\/p>\n
It\u2019s inevitable that Steve Borthwick<\/a> is the one under scrutiny after England<\/a>\u2018s deep regression this Six Nations<\/a>. But it will be important to ask the question: the blame for all of the aspects, or just some? Decisions? Philosophy? Management? Everything?<\/p>\n This one doesn\u2019t feel like the players\u2019 fault. \u201cThe coaches set us up, we have to take responsibility,\u201d said Maro Itoje<\/a> in the post-match in Rome. Considering he was pretty knackered, it\u2019s unlikely there was any deliberate lurking meaning below the face value of the statement.<\/p>\n But what the coaches set up has become England\u2019s biggest problem and if you frame Itoje\u2019s words in that way, he is absolutely delivering that message. He did as he was told. He didn\u2019t do it well enough. But the ability to adapt was shackled by that set-up.<\/p>\n There were seven minutes to go in Rome and England had a decent attacking position 10 metres into the Italy half. Probe a few phases? Run a couple of shapes with varied lines and try to tear a hole? Give some talented individuals a shot?<\/p>\n England legend suggests that RFU are now in Ardie Savea territory with Steve Borthwick but former teammate insists \u2018he can turn this around\u2019<\/a><\/p>\n Of course not. Up went the ball from Ben Spencer. Through went the chasers. A contest in the air. Loose ball. Italy wanted it more and they got it. Another attacking platform blown. Death by non-adventure.<\/p>\n So what was Itoje talking about? How well have the coaches set it all up? Who polices and leads what the team does? What feedback is given from whom? How can an attack marshalled by Lee Blackett, whose Bath team were one of England\u2019s finest purveyors of exploited gaps and space, be so mechanical?<\/p>\n When England were awarded the penalty on 53 minutes which should have put them unassailably ahead, Ellis Genge and Sam Underhill were visibly having a bit of an argument about something, the former very much the one seeming to voice his unhappiness with something. Three minutes later Underhill was lucky not to see red for some pretty lazy tackle technique. Coincidence or dissent among the ranks spilling over?<\/p>\n Itoje\u2019s yellow card seven minutes later was unforgiveable. There was no more obvious transgression the entire game, no greater momentum-shifter. After that, England\u2019s unity was gone. Was it Itoje being over-competitive? Or just frustration spilling over?<\/p>\n When players are not delivering to their full potential, or \u2013 and especially this bit \u2013 being over-coached, your problem is upstairs, but it manifests itself on the pitch as unfathomable errors and frustrated indiscipline. That\u2019s been England all over these past four weeks.<\/p>\n Exclusive: Eddie Jones\u2019 frank assessment of England, their \u2019emotion killer\u2019 and Steve Borthwick<\/a><\/p>\n Nor does this team look anywhere close to fit. We wrote a fortnight ago about the loss of gas Marcus Smith suffered during a breakaway against Ireland, one you\u2019d have put the house on him finishing. Tom Roebuck\u2019s energy levels during the move for Italy\u2019s killer try were close to zero, as were Elliot Daly\u2019s for Italy\u2019s first try. They were the most obvious examples, but there were plenty of others.<\/p>\n The picture painted is of a team with more to offer being strait-jacketed, over-drilled and worn out by its own targeted intensity, losing its temper when under pressure because of it. Even the leaders are either crotchety or downright cross. Players are painting by numbers without knowing even what the finished article looks like, becoming too tired to paint properly. And that is down to the coaches.<\/p>\n In a tournament in which almost every coach has been in the spotlight, the glare on Borthwick is now brightest of all.<\/p>\n An entry into the bonus point debate<\/p>\n It has been 10 years since bonus points were introduced into the Six Nations. You can haggle over whether it has made differences to the run of play in individual matches, but in terms of the final standings: only in 2021 have bonus points counted in the final reckoning, when France finished above both Ireland and Scotland where otherwise they\u2019d have finished fourth.<\/p>\n Gregor Townsend can rightly be proud of the win this weekend past, but had Scotland<\/a> stayed the full course and denied their opponents that fourth try, they would now be ahead of Fabien Galthie\u2019s men and heading into the final weekend knowing that a bonus-point win would guarantee them the tournament victory.<\/p>\n Comment: The \u2018line in the sand\u2019 moment that changed \u2018airtight\u2019 Scotland as Gregor Townsend silences doubters<\/a><\/p>\n Instead they now have to get that and then hope that England\u2019s defence pitches up in Paris. Meanwhile, all France have to do is get that four-try win (and assume Scotland\u2019s winning margin is less than 59 points better than theirs, which is perhaps a less forlorn hope).<\/p>\n Ireland have a word or two to say in all this too of course, but at two championship points behind, their equation is somewhat simpler. They win if they win and others lose.<\/p>\n Anyway, the point, as it were, is that the Six Nations \u2013 and indeed the Prem and URC \u2013 still implement the old four tries bonus point, whereas getting it by scoring three or more tries than the opponent has become de rigueur in the Top 14 and is now the rule in Super Rugby as well.<\/p>\n It fits better. When Thomas Ramos cantered over for France\u2019s fourth try in minute 74, the game was clearly won and both teams had a bonus point and that was that. France perhaps had the distant ambition of getting an extra bonus for losing by fewer than seven, but otherwise, those final minutes were always likely to be little more than lukewarm champagne.<\/p>\n