But for the bounce of a ball here, or a different TMO decision there, Ian Ritchie would have had to rewrite his whole script from yesterday’s press conference. He branded England’s second place finish at the Six Nations “unacceptable” but the margins on the final day were so minuscule that it feels unbearably harsh to use a word that strong.
What if Stuart Hogg had grounded his try earlier in the day at Murrayfield? What if Noa Nakaitaci’s try had been ruled out for stepping over the dead ball line, as many thought it should have been? Rugby is a game of these tiny margins, and never has that been more obvious than this most super of Saturdays.
The climax of the Six Nations saw more momentum swings than a hyperactive Newton’s cradle, and in the end England couldn’t quite do enough to overcome Ireland’s points difference. So they finished second again, by six points. Had England finished top, would Ritchie still be so unhappy? Little would have changed other than a couple of numbers in a table.
To clarify, I am not arguing that England deserved to win the title. At the top end of professional sport, you need to be finding yourself on the right side of such small margins. To finish second for a fourth consecutive year suggests that England have not found a way to do that consistently yet, and when you look at the number of points they left on the pitch against Scotland, that sense becomes more acute.
But does all this make their campaign “unacceptable”? It’s a very strong word given how close the tournament ended. 10 points separated Ireland, England and Wales when the final whistle blew at Twickenham, a number which shows how even a keel all three sides sit on.
Ritchie is entitled to his opinions, of course – he is the CEO of the largest Rugby Union in the world; if he didn’t have have something to say about what went on on the pitch, it would be even more worrying. And as CEO he is essentially running a business, and has to think of it as such – but the RFU is the wealthiest union in the world, so it’s not like they’re failing in that regard.
Such comments in the media undermine Lancaster and his staff, especially at so crucial a time in the World Cup cycle. England would have been better served if he had made his feelings known in private – indeed, we are yet to see how the WRU or IRFU feel about their side’s Six Nations campaign. You would expect that they have plenty of opinions, but that they have been communicated to the relevant people behind closed doors.
Come World Cup time, finishing second in such a close Six Nations race will mean very little. If the Six Nations used bonus points – as the World Cup does, of course – England would have finished top. That’s not an excuse – and no-one within the England camps has said as much, either – but the point is that England are, at the moment, just as good as both Ireland and Wales.
It is especially baffling given the generous contracts handed out to Lancaster and his coaching staff last year. They have been contracted until 2020, after the next World Cup, in a move that was an obvious show of faith in what they have done with this England team. To so publicly slam them now completely contradicts that message.
To not hoist the Six Nations trophy for a fourth year in a row, for a country as well-resourced as England, is disappointing. It is far from “unacceptable”, however, when you look at the competition. With all that in mind, to publicly denounce the coaches and the squad in a World Cup year was a strange move. And hey, at least they’re not France.
By Jamie Hosie
Follow Jamie on Twitter: @jhosie43
16 replies on “Ritchie was wrong to denounce England so publicly”
I disagree. His comments were that 4 2nd places in a row is unacceptable, not failing to cross the line in this one. He’s highlighting the same problems we as fans are constantly harping on about. Lancaster has done a lot right, but seems blind to certain shortcomings in selection and tactics.
I agree, that’s not acceptable. The shortcomings and selection blindness aren’t acceptable. Favoritism isn’t acceptable.
Clive Woodward said much the same in the mail today. But I disagree with both of you.
4 tournaments, 4 decent showings but no wins. It’s not good enough, it really isn’t. We can talk about the bounce of the ball and the myriad of other factors that could have gone the other way, but the end result is all that matters and England are, again, trophyless.
The aim for England has to be to have more than a dice-throws chance of the Six Nations. Final day lotteries may be fun to watch, but if England could have beaten Ireland or put Scotland to the sword, we would have just needed a final day win. Yes, we finished JUST 6 points behind Ireland, but we should have finished 20 ahead and taken any last-day luck out of the equation. Or won the Slam.
You could say it’s a tough year for England, playing the other two top teams away, but we had 3 home games to build our points difference to an unassailable level and we left too much to do on the last day.
Lancaster hasn’t been able to get England to get it together for an entire series and deliver something meaningful. No Six Nations trophies, no win in SA/NZ (match or series) and no more than two wins in any given Autumn Series.
Our style of play may have evolved, but our results are no better than they were when he first started.
I disagree Jamie. I think his frankness is welcome if a bit confusing considering he gave the coaches an extension based on 3 runners up finishes.
I also disagree with the line “but for the bounce of a ball…” Ritchie ‘ s speech would not have been merited.
England were NOT unlucky. We made too many errors. Missed opportunities against Wales, Italy and Scotland compounded by poor discipline both against Ireland and Wales were to blame. These have been hallmarks of this team for the past 4 yeas and show no significant signs of improving.
We can bleat on about almost beating NZ away or how unlucky we were against France last year but in truth England only have themselves to blame and a bit of honesty would not be amiss.
I do think the tone of his statement all came across far too strong, however I think the general message of what he was trying to get across has come merit. England should have high expectations, as should any other tier 1 nation, but some of his comments border on arrogance as if he expects England should win.
That being said, I’m still not disheartened by this England side. We’ve won just as many 6 nations matches as Wales since the last WC, and more matches than Ireland.
I think it’s disappointing that 4 wins out of 5 for 4 years running hasn’t resulted in a 6 nations win; I don’t think it is unacceptable. England haven’t lost at home to a 6 nations or Australia side since 2012; so I think that leaves us in a pretty good place considering it’s a home WC. SA we’ve only played once since then and lost, and NZ is a different conversation (as it is with every other rugby playing nation).
I’m not a fan of the business comparison when it comes to results on the pitch – this is sport, not business, so luckily it is not as simple as the most money wins; otherwise I’d doubt many of us would watch!
I think his underlying message is right, if not the use of the word ‘unacceptable’, which comes across as arrogant. And ultimately, what does that even mean? He is not going to accept it and sack the coaching staff? Of course not..
I’ve said it before, of course England have no god given right to win the championship, but given the context of this year’s contest, we should be really disappointed that they didn’t win.
Yes, England had the two toughest games away, but given how close the top three teams are, I think it’s fair to think one win out of two is a reasonable target. However, England also had the three weakest teams at home this year, and therefore should have easily won on points difference (once Ireland weren’t going to win the GS). The fact is they stuffed it up against Scotland with so many missed chances.
As Richie says, this team is not in a development stage, and now it is competing quite evenly with Wales and Ireland, the particular set up of this year’s championship meant the title was there to be had. The fact they missed out is hugely disappointing.
What if my aunt had dangly bits? She’d now be my uncle. 4 years of “what ifs” are unacceptable. Lancaster has a lucrative contract to 2019, he shouldn’t and neither should the players be given an easy ride
Why do people insist on doing their talking through the media nowadays?
Yes from Ritchie’s point of view, it was unaccceptable and he has every right to believe that and to tell Lancaster et al. But for Christ’s sake do it behind closed doors instead of publically putting your team down a couple of months before a home world cup
Problem – as many people have pointed out – is that coming second 4 times is not so different from coming second 3 times. Why did he extend the coaching contract if he considered this sort of result ‘unacceptable’?
You are set a target(which you accept)to be rated in top 2 in the world by 2015.You achieve top 4.That is either acceptable to your boss or unacceptable.In business it is the latter.And professional rugby is a business.It needed saying as the coaches suffer from the illusion we are doing better than we are
Question – was this an aim or a requirement? To what extent did Lancaster “agree” to this? Did he get the job by saying he would achieve it? Was it a “target” that he suggested?
If Ritchie has said that the RFU is targeting this, and it is an RFU target, nto for sake of arguement Lancaster’s target then surely Ritchie must carry a fair weight of the can. It has beeen clear for 18 months that England were… unlikely (at best) to get to number 2 in the world going into the world cup. And yet Ritchie extended Lancaster’s contract…
My problem with Ritchie’s statement was that the timing and wording gives the impression that this is the fault of the players and coach, nothing to do with their boss.
Using a business analogy is faulty here. This is not the way it would be handled in a business. There would be progressive performance reviews unless there was a catastrophic event. you don’t “congratulate” or “reward” performance one day and then publicly rebuke the same performance the next.
Ritchie was absolutely correct in his comments-with all the players and resources available to England, coming second on 4 occasions must be considered a failure and therefore unacceptable
Surely if we have realistic pretensions about winning the World Cup, we should be these tournaments consistently, not even a 6 Nations title let alone a Grand Slam. Coming out publicly is both courageous for a normally fusty organisation and inspirational as a motivator. Otherwise the England squad may be tempted to relax in their comfort zone and accept second place mediocrity
I think he can see the writing on the wall but should have kept the comment for behind closed doors. The fact is in 2003 we were in a far stronger and consistantl position going into the tournament and ultimately won the top prize. This time round we are inconsistent, are lacking the luck in having world class players in every position ( remember how good Hill, Wilkinson,Robinson,Johnson,Dawson,Lewsey, Greenwood, Lol, to name a few, were )We’d also built up a winning habit and Wilkinsons kicking percentage never let sides pull away from us. The fact is we are not blessed as we were in 03.
To win world cups ( if your from the Northen Hemisphere )you need a settled, experienced, successful side and a generous helping of luck
Sharpy, I agree with what you’re saying but I think you have to remember that Lancaster hasn’t had nearly as long in charge as SCW had had in 2003. Remember, he was in charge at the 99 WC as well and was in charge of a much less experienced squad then. He was even derided for some of the decisions he made in that tournament.
I think 2019 will be England’s tournament. The core of this squad is still young enough to be around then, and should have enough experience to know how to win a world cup. Guys like Marler, Lawes, Billy V, Ford, Joseph and Watson could all be in the world class bracket by then. While I agree that this group is not as blessed as the one in 03, I think that has to be tempered by the fact they are at a different stage in their cycle as a squad.
I say fair play to the chap. He’s come out and agreed with what most England fans are thinking and many have said on this forum. He hasn’t hidden behind management speak or platitudes. We all wanted a 6N trophy going into the RWC. Beating Wales and finishing above them (just!) in the final table is handy as they are in our group, but really I wanted more and its good to hear Ritchie saying it. Personally I think that the press have gone a bit overboard on the word unacceptable, but then headlines sell papers, advertising, etc so probably not surprising.
Just realised that since 2003 6N won 4 times each by France and Wales and 3 times by Ireland.Given English budget and player base that is disgraceful and an inditement on the rfu board who are ultimately responsible.This is an even greater reason why a strong performance in rwc is esssential if we and the world are to believe English rugby is on its way back.For me the jury is stil very much out.
Don’t disagree with the gist of Ritchie’s comments to be honest – after all, it’s nothing the Celts don’t tell us after every game! 😛 – but it did seem an odd thing to say when he’s just handed the coaching staff contract extensions until 2020. If it’s not good enough, why reward them so?