The exact details of the system are not entirely clear to me, as in who goes where and when - to be honest they didnt seem to be clear to the player, which may have been one of the reasons why it was deemed unsuccessful.  However I imagine that from a shortened lineout for example you would play wide initially with a set of fwds supporting wide.  I imagine you would work a couple of front rowers with a decent ball carrying lock into the middle of the field leaving the balance of the fwds forming the remaining pod where the lineout occured.  It is not as clear to me at this stage what would happen at a scrum as the front row would be initally less mobile.  If anyone knows of the variations I would greatly appreciate some more colour?

The player also alluded to the fact that it was pretty obvious what England were doing and therefore it was easy to defend - overcoaching and too much structure rearing its ugly head again.  Dropping the system for the NZ game clearly led to the team playing more heads up and they reverted to a standard 2 pod - default 'same way' style.

I think there are valuable lessons to be learnt here - especially in light of Dallaglio's criticsm of the current management regime i.e. players being in awe of / afraid of Jono.  It is in complete contrast to the joue joue approach of the French and it will be very interesting to see which style succeeds over the coming months and ultimately the world cup.

I personally think as coaches we should be giving the players the freedom to play what they see and not restrict them with a formulaic / complicated approach - however again if anyone knows more of the system I would love to hear?

I believe that a similar approach was adopted by Gloucester a few years back called 'day and night' and again would be interested if any fellow coaches could shed some more specific light on the structure.

Cheers

www.havant-rfc.co.uk