Eddie Jones Not Out

[Kawazaki]

Your thoughts there being a CEO would be on the slow side and need more time? There is some evidence looking across many boards, but still

A competent CEO doesn't phone a subordinate immediately to discuss criticism of that subordinate he's just received off the record and in confidence.

In fact, you don't need to reach anywhere near CEO to know that's not a great idea.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Your thoughts there being a CEO would be on the slow side and need more time? There is some evidence looking across many boards, but still

A competent CEO doesn't phone a subordinate immediately to discuss criticism of that subordinate he's just received off the record and in confidence.

In fact, you don't need to reach anywhere near CEO to know that's not a great idea.

They wait 48 hours? 4 weeks?

Maybe you've just met some very different CEOs, the ones I've met have nearly all at times talked about stuff they've heard in the last couple of hours or even minutes

Also this is rugby, just how secret does stuff need to be? I can't say I'm a fan of the RFU executive but that they discuss stuff seems a very odd line of attack

[Kawazaki]

Your thoughts there being a CEO would be on the slow side and need more time? There is some evidence looking across many boards, but still

A competent CEO doesn't phone a subordinate immediately to discuss criticism of that subordinate he's just received off the record and in confidence.

In fact, you don't need to reach anywhere near CEO to know that's not a great idea.

They wait 48 hours? 4 weeks?

Maybe you've just met some very different CEOs, the ones I've met have nearly all at times talked about stuff they've heard in the last couple of hours or even minutes

Also this is rugby, just how secret does stuff need to be? I can't say I'm a fan of the RFU executive but that they discuss stuff seems a very odd line of attack

Either you're trolling, not very intelligent or you have failed to understand the timeline of what allegedly happened.

I'll assume it's the latter.

[Ymx]

What’s this about? Tldr;

Eddie hurt Clive’s feelings, and Clive told the teacher?

Or is this something about O’Shea.

[Kawazaki]

What’s this about? Tldr;

Eddie hurt Clive’s feelings, and Clive told the teacher?

Or is this something about O’Shea.

RFU CEO asked CW for his thoughts informally over a beer 4 days after 2019 final. Less than 1 hour after that meeting, EJ sent CW an abusive text message regards what he'd said in the meeting. EJ wasn't in the meeting.

[Ymx]

So something like this

Sweeneys PA: Clive called again
Sweeney: oh, ffs
Sweeneys PA: He said he had some important insights to share with you
Sweeneys PA: not sure we can put him off again, it’s the 5th time.
Sweeney: oh god, ok, make it a pub, and he’s paying
…
Clive: I’ve been studying the games and …
Clive: Eddie has lost the changing room …
Clive: I would ….
Clive: in 2003 ….
Clive: When we won the World Cup …
Clive: Eddie got it wrong …
Clive: I would never have …

Sweeney: I had to talk to that insufferable prick Woodward.
Eddie: what did he have to say mate?
Sweeny: he wasn’t too complimentary about you.
…
Clive on text: Hi Eddie, I was speaking to Bill and I’ve got some ideas to share with you.
Eddie: yeah mate, great. Or maybe …. just …. fuck … off.

[Kawazaki]

So something like this

Sweeneys PA: Clive called again
Sweeney: oh, ffs
Sweeneys PA: He said he had some important insights to share with you
Sweeneys PA: not sure we can put him off again, it’s the 5th time.
Sweeney: oh god, ok, make it a pub, and he’s paying
…
Clive: I’ve been studying the games and …
Clive: Eddie has lost the changing room …
Clive: I would ….
Clive: in 2003 ….
Clive: When we won the World Cup …
Clive: Eddie got it wrong …
Clive: I would never have …

Sweeney: I had to talk to that insufferable prick Woodward.
Eddie: what did he have to say mate?
Sweeny: he wasn’t too complimentary about you.
…
Clive on text: Hi Eddie, I was speaking to Bill and I’ve got some ideas to share with you.
Eddie: yeah mate, great. Or maybe …. just …. fuck … off.

Sweeney asked Woodward.

[Ymx]

Come on man. Who the fuck would ask Woodward?

I’m assuming Woodward made that interpretation.

Plus you’re ruining my narrative, and attempt at humour.

[Kawazaki]

Come on man. Who the fuck would ask Woodward?

I’m assuming Woodward made that interpretation.

Plus you’re ruining my narrative, and attempt at humour.

Sweeney hasn't got a clue about rugby, literally no idea. He's in his mid-60s. All he will know is Twickenham, Erica Roe, Johnny Wilkinson and Clive Woodward. That's it.

[JM2K6]

I'm not sure why we are so keen to take anything Woodward says at face value.

[duke]

This is the man who thinks Joe Marchant was playing inside centre against Ireland. He may have had a clue 20 years ago, not so much now

[Hal Jordan]

For all the impact Slade has had at 12 this 6N, Marchant may as well have been playing both positions at once...

[Sinkers]

This is the man who thinks Joe Marchant was playing inside centre against Ireland. He may have had a clue 20 years ago, not so much now

Probably still confused by Will Greenwood’s jersey number

[eldanielfire]

I'm not sure why we are so keen to take anything Woodward says at face value.

Any resason to believe it is untrue. We may think Clive's rugby opinions are not worth it, but he doesn't seem to have any reason to not believe this event and I assume he has the text messages to back himself up.

[Kawazaki]

I'm not sure why we are so keen to take anything Woodward says at face value.

Any resason to believe it is untrue. We may think Clive's rugby opinions are not worth it, but he doesn't seem to have any reason to not believe this event and I assume he has the text messages to back himself up.

That's my take on it. It's a very specific incident he refers to rather than an opinion.

[JM2K6]

I'm not sure why we are so keen to take anything Woodward says at face value.

Any resason to believe it is untrue. We may think Clive's rugby opinions are not worth it, but he doesn't seem to have any reason to not believe this event and I assume he has the text messages to back himself up.

He's an absolute weather vane and his opinions are reliably garbage. The grandstanding about England's World Cup campaign is typical Clive post hoc bullshit. We only have his word to go on that things happened with that chat the way he says they did. With literally no evidence to go on, I don't understand why people who every other day of the week are rightly cynical about everything Clive says are suddenly treating it as the gospel truth with no way it could've happened differently.

[Slick]

I'm not sure why we are so keen to take anything Woodward says at face value.

Any resason to believe it is untrue. We may think Clive's rugby opinions are not worth it, but he doesn't seem to have any reason to not believe this event and I assume he has the text messages to back himself up.

He's an absolute weather vane and his opinions are reliably garbage. The grandstanding about England's World Cup campaign is typical Clive post hoc bullshit. We only have his word to go on that things happened with that chat the way he says they did. With literally no evidence to go on, I don't understand why people who every other day of the week are rightly cynical about everything Clive says are suddenly treating it as the gospel truth with no way it could've happened differently.

On the other hand you'd expect Eddie to be all over this if it wasn't true.

[Kawazaki]

I'm not sure why we are so keen to take anything Woodward says at face value.

Any resason to believe it is untrue. We may think Clive's rugby opinions are not worth it, but he doesn't seem to have any reason to not believe this event and I assume he has the text messages to back himself up.

He's an absolute weather vane and his opinions are reliably garbage. The grandstanding about England's World Cup campaign is typical Clive post hoc bullshit. We only have his word to go on that things happened with that chat the way he says they did. With literally no evidence to go on, I don't understand why people who every other day of the week are rightly cynical about everything Clive says are suddenly treating it as the gospel truth with no way it could've happened differently.

It's not an opinion. It's quite specific regards the detail. Revealing it opens CW up to specifics that are either true or not true. Offering an opinion doesn't do that. I also don't think CW is stupid.

[JM2K6]

Any resason to believe it is untrue. We may think Clive's rugby opinions are not worth it, but he doesn't seem to have any reason to not believe this event and I assume he has the text messages to back himself up.

He's an absolute weather vane and his opinions are reliably garbage. The grandstanding about England's World Cup campaign is typical Clive post hoc bullshit. We only have his word to go on that things happened with that chat the way he says they did. With literally no evidence to go on, I don't understand why people who every other day of the week are rightly cynical about everything Clive says are suddenly treating it as the gospel truth with no way it could've happened differently.

On the other hand you'd expect Eddie to be all over this if it wasn't true.

I don't think that's true. He rarely lets himself be baited that way unless he can control the narrative. The Streisand effect would be pretty strong here - the smart and professional thing to do is to just ignore it.

Just strange to me that two of the people who've spent the most time over the years slagging off Clive for every single thing he's ever said and done are now treating him like a saint. I appreciate the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", but all I'm saying here is a little caution would probably be warranted before we start treating what he says as the solemn truth.

[Kawazaki]

He's an absolute weather vane and his opinions are reliably garbage. The grandstanding about England's World Cup campaign is typical Clive post hoc bullshit. We only have his word to go on that things happened with that chat the way he says they did. With literally no evidence to go on, I don't understand why people who every other day of the week are rightly cynical about everything Clive says are suddenly treating it as the gospel truth with no way it could've happened differently.

On the other hand you'd expect Eddie to be all over this if it wasn't true.

I don't think that's true. He rarely lets himself be baited that way unless he can control the narrative. The Streisand effect would be pretty strong here - the smart and professional thing to do is to just ignore it.

Just strange to me that two of the people who've spent the most time over the years slagging off Clive for every single thing he's ever said and done are now treating him like a saint. I appreciate the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", but all I'm saying here is a little caution would probably be warranted before we start treating what he says as the solemn truth.

You realise that two things can be true at the same time don't you? This is child level logic you're displaying here.

[JM2K6]

On the other hand you'd expect Eddie to be all over this if it wasn't true.

I don't think that's true. He rarely lets himself be baited that way unless he can control the narrative. The Streisand effect would be pretty strong here - the smart and professional thing to do is to just ignore it.

Just strange to me that two of the people who've spent the most time over the years slagging off Clive for every single thing he's ever said and done are now treating him like a saint. I appreciate the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", but all I'm saying here is a little caution would probably be warranted before we start treating what he says as the solemn truth.

You realise that two things can be true at the same time don't you? This is child level logic you're displaying here.

I'm saying it's weird you're now ride or die on the word of a guy you were pathologically incapable of believing for a second or giving a single ounce of credit to in the past, just because you now hate Eddie more. That's not child level logic.

Based on your years and years of banging on about Clive, any normal person would expect you to show a measure of caution when it comes to anything he says, but....

[Kawazaki]

I don't think that's true. He rarely lets himself be baited that way unless he can control the narrative. The Streisand effect would be pretty strong here - the smart and professional thing to do is to just ignore it.

Just strange to me that two of the people who've spent the most time over the years slagging off Clive for every single thing he's ever said and done are now treating him like a saint. I appreciate the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", but all I'm saying here is a little caution would probably be warranted before we start treating what he says as the solemn truth.

You realise that two things can be true at the same time don't you? This is child level logic you're displaying here.

I'm saying it's weird you're now ride or die on the word of a guy you were pathologically incapable of believing for a second or giving a single ounce of credit to in the past, just because you now hate Eddie more. That's not child level logic.

Based on your years and years of banging on about Clive, any normal person would expect you to show a measure of caution when it comes to anything he says, but....

What part of two things can be true at the same time don't you understand?

I've qualified the difference between how an opinion and an event a different things.

You should be disappointed with yourself. You're smarter than this.

[JM2K6]

You realise that two things can be true at the same time don't you? This is child level logic you're displaying here.

I'm saying it's weird you're now ride or die on the word of a guy you were pathologically incapable of believing for a second or giving a single ounce of credit to in the past, just because you now hate Eddie more. That's not child level logic.

Based on your years and years of banging on about Clive, any normal person would expect you to show a measure of caution when it comes to anything he says, but....

What part of two things can be true at the same time don't you understand?

I've qualified the difference between how an opinion and an event a different things.

You should be disappointed with yourself. You're smarter than this.

Dude, he's giving his uncorroborated version of an event, one that to absolutely no one's surprise ticks all the boxes: it makes him look important, it provides the evidence for his current line of attack, it makes the organisation he has beef with look bad, and it makes the guy he hates more than anyone in rugby look even worse. It's classic Clive.

So opinion or event, it's still coming through the Clive Filter. It's just all a little bit too fucking convenient.

[Kawazaki]

If you think the CEO of the RFU shares the same view of Clive Woodward as we do then yes, calling him for an informal chat after the RWC final might seem odd but I guarantee you he won't have the same opinion. In fact, he'll have the opinion that the vast majority of the middle-aged fans who inhabit Twickenham do. It would arguably be more strange if he didn't seek an off the record conversation with the last, and so far only, coach of England to have won a RWC.

And it's worth repeating until the penny eventually drops that believing Woodward had a meeting with Sweeney on the Thursday after the RWC19 final is not inconsistent with a concurrent belief that much of his views on rugby are bollocks.

[JM2K6]

We definitely both agree they had that meeting. What was discussed, what the status of it was, what was agreed about it, what was passed to Eddie, and what Eddie said about it are all up for some debate given we have a single unreliable source.

There's just too many stories of ex players contradicting Clive's view of various events in the past to take him at his word.

[Kawazaki]

We definitely both agree they had that meeting. What was discussed, what the status of it was, what was agreed about it, what was passed to Eddie, and what Eddie said about it are all up for some debate given we have a single unreliable source.

There's just too many stories of ex players contradicting Clive's view of various events in the past to take him at his word.

At least you now agree the meeting actually happened.

As for what was discussed, we kind of have a good idea what Woodward would have said already don't we. The only thing that might not have happened is that Jones texted him a message within an hour of the meeting ending but it's a very specific detail that makes the meeting notable. Given what we now know about Jones after 6+ years of micromanagement I'm given to believe it's true.

[JM2K6]

I've never said the meeting didn't happen. Many posts ago I used these exact words:

"We only have his word to go on that things happened with that chat the way he says they did"

which clearly is casting doubt on Clive's version of events being the exact truth, not that it's all a total fabrication.

Anyway I've already said where the doubt can lie so there's no need to repeat myself.

[eldanielfire]

I'm not sure why we are so keen to take anything Woodward says at face value.

Any resason to believe it is untrue. We may think Clive's rugby opinions are not worth it, but he doesn't seem to have any reason to not believe this event and I assume he has the text messages to back himself up.

He's an absolute weather vane and his opinions are reliably garbage. The grandstanding about England's World Cup campaign is typical Clive post hoc bullshit. We only have his word to go on that things happened with that chat the way he says they did. With literally no evidence to go on, I don't understand why people who every other day of the week are rightly cynical about everything Clive says are suddenly treating it as the gospel truth with no way it could've happened differently.

His opinions may be crap and blows with the wind, I'll add a raging ego as well, but is taht any reason to believe he would lie about and event where he met up with the head of English rugby and the headcoach of the nation side texted him afterwards?

[SaintK]

So Jones is moonlighting in Japan again. Just wish he'd stay there and not come back!!!

To borrow a trademark tautology from Yogi Berra, the beloved baseball icon, it’s like déjà vu all over again.
Eleven months since Beauden Barrett trumpeted the “little pieces of gold” that Eddie Jones was imparting during Suntory training sessions, we are hearing about another working excursion for the England head coach.
Again, the news is emerging on the back of a disappointing Six Nations campaign. Again, a chief justification seems to be that to share knowledge – even with Samu Kerevi, the explosive Australia centre who could face England as soon as July – is completely healthy and mutually beneficial.

[url] https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=htt ... paying/ [/url]

[OomStruisbaai]

Eddie brought England close to a victory today. Not easy to beat the Wallabies at home

[sockwithaticket]

Eddie brought England close to a victory today. Not easy to beat the Wallabies at home

Henry Arundell playing his natural game in the few minutes he was given off the bench nearly brought the victory today. England doing the things Eddie told them to do for most of the game resulted in staring down an embarassing loss. Regardless of the scoreboard much of that performance was trash from England.

[OomStruisbaai]

As a neutral I thought the ref was hard on England or England didn't played the ref well specifically at the rucks in the red area..

At least England show big character at the end to come within 2 points.

Personally think the 2nd Test will be much more challenging for England.

[Deepsouth]

As a neutral I thought the ref was hard on England or England didn't played the ref well specifically at the rucks in the red area..

At least England show big character at the end to come within 2 points.

Personally think the 2nd Test will be much more challenging for England.

Considering the circumstances it was a very good win full of character from a young Wallaby team.

Bloody bonza boys......

[OomStruisbaai]

As a neutral I thought the ref was hard on England or England didn't played the ref well specifically at the rucks in the red area..

At least England show big character at the end to come within 2 points.

Personally think the 2nd Test will be much more challenging for England.

Considering the circumstances it was a very good win full of character from a young Wallaby team.

Bloody bonza boys......

They struggled last year in the first Test against the Springboks but then they beat us with ease in the 2nd one.

[Deepsouth]

As a neutral I thought the ref was hard on England or England didn't played the ref well specifically at the rucks in the red area..

At least England show big character at the end to come within 2 points.

Personally think the 2nd Test will be much more challenging for England.

Considering the circumstances it was a very good win full of character from a young Wallaby team.

Bloody bonza boys......

They struggled last year in the first Test against the Springboks but then they beat us with ease in the 2nd one.

Good on you mate. We need Quade back. The conductor.....

[Happyhooker]

Eddie brought England close to a victory today. Not easy to beat the Wallabies at home

Henry Arundell playing his natural game in the few minutes he was given off the bench nearly brought the victory today. England doing the things Eddie told them to do for most of the game resulted in staring down an embarassing loss. Regardless of the scoreboard much of that performance was trash from England.

Nearly bought what sodding victory? The game was over as a contest when he and VP scored

[sockwithaticket]

Eddie brought England close to a victory today. Not easy to beat the Wallabies at home

Henry Arundell playing his natural game in the few minutes he was given off the bench nearly brought the victory today. England doing the things Eddie told them to do for most of the game resulted in staring down an embarassing loss. Regardless of the scoreboard much of that performance was trash from England.

Nearly bought what sodding victory? The game was over as a contest when he and VP scored

Got sucked into Oom's phrasing. Should've said saved our blushes and brought us close on the scoreboard.

[ASMO]

Oom is trolling

[FalseBayFC]

Why is George Ford not considered for the England no.10 jersey? Suits the England game better.

[JM2K6]

Why is George Ford not considered for the England no.10 jersey? Suits the England game better.

He's broken, and Eddie's decided we should make a kid run everything without the benefit of any attacking structure or coaching worth a damn.