Skip to main content

Day: 4 February 2016

Varsity 2016: American Football Preview

Written by Alex Whitcomb on . Posted in Sport.

This Sunday isn’t just about Super Bowl 50, as Manchester’s own American Football grudge match takes place at Burnage Rugby Club.

UoM are currently undefeated and top of the league and will go into the game with confidence high. With such an unblemished record it would be a disgrace to say that UoM aren’t the favourites, especially as MMU are currently sitting bottom of the league. However, that doesn’t mean you should write them off. MMU know that the Varsity status of the game will mean that there are bragging rights at stake as well as points, with the unique opportunity to embarrass UoM on home turf an extra motivation.

From a fan’s perspective, Varsities are events not to be missed. Those who were at the Rugby Union Varsity last October will know how exciting they can be, with Manchester beating Sheffield 18-17 in a tense encounter.

American Football also is a rapidly growing game in the UK, and the Tyrants will be hoping that an enthusiastic crowd can spur them on to victory. UoM freshman linebacker Dom Williams explained how the physicality of the sport makes it an exciting spectacle, adding: “I put in bigger hits than I ever did in rugby.”

It will also be a great opportunity to get some Sunday daytime drinking in, with kick off at 2pm and the bar open for the whole match. Entry is free and the venue is a 5-10 minute walk from the bus stop at Parrs Wood, served by the 142 and 42 buses to East Didsbury.

The Tyrants are also hosting an all American themed party at Revolution Fallowfield afterwards from 9pm for Super Bowl 50, with game being shown live from 11:30 pm. Entry for this is £2, with all proceeds donated to Manchester’s Cancer Research UK Society.

Visit the Facebook event for full event details.

 

Current Standings BUCS Northern 2A

1st   Manchester 10pts

2nd York              8pts

3rd  Bradford      4pts

4th  Leeds            2pts

5th  MMU            2pts

Review: Macbeth

Written by Hannah Foy on . Posted in Theatre.

“Is this a dagger which I see before me, its handle toward my hand?”

Currently finding myself at the beginning of a Shakespeare module, it seemed very fitting to find myself at Manchester’s HOME to see a modern take on Macbeth’s violent and power-hungry play.

I’m always intrigued to see how a reworking of Shakespeare can be transported to modern day, this production made it look effortless. As if Macbeth’s tale was written to be performed in a sort of dystopian underpass. It was clever, accurate and relatable. It gave the sense of the darkness of the play, both physically in the dungeon-like modern setting, and practically of the murderous rampage the tyrant goes upon.

Beginning, of course with the witches, or weird sisters, whose spirits appeared to move them, it was a clever incorporation of dance and choreography to form their many movements giving the three power in the effortless form they created. They helped move between scenes, flawlessly being both a part of and distanced from the production; it allowed their power to be felt through scenes without physical interaction required. I was, however, slightly disappointed that Hecate was removed from the play, I feel her scene allows the connection of the witches to be portrayed, adding determination to their part. Regardless, the three sisters appeared strong and feminine, mystical and alive, carrying the spirits of the play through them.

Equally the leads of John Heffernan’s Macbeth and Anna Maxwell Martin’s Lady Macbeth carried through the violence, manipulation and strength required by this play. Lady Macbeth may not have been quite the innocent flower she wished to depict; instead she was surely the serpent underneath, portraying her strength and ultimate madness Martin triumphed in her portrayal. Likewise Heffernan was equally strong and persuasive in the end, overcoming his previous fears to take on his name as tyrant. The two complimented each other, passing over the power, strength of their characters to form an unruly double act.

The production was a perfect retelling of this well-known tragedy, elegantly retold in a new setting; the stage clearly the battleground of power and determination. With a cast all holding equal power in their presentation of the story, the tale shone through the stage and transported the audience to the battle of Scotland’s sovereignty. Equally it was engaging to have the play going straight through, the lack of an interval kept the suspense and darkness of the play; allowing it to unfold at a quicker pace.

If you’re around Manchester, catch Macbeth at HOME until Saturday 6th February.

Album: Field Music – Commontime

Written by Jacob Nicholas on . Posted in Music.

Released 5th February via Memphis Industries Records

9/10

You’d be forgiven for not expecting much from Commontime, the fifth album from the Brewis brothers, otherwise known as Field Music. The cover art is plain, the song titles are uninspiring at best (‘I’m Glad’, ‘Don’t You Want to Know?’, ‘How Should I Know?’) and the two brothers have spent the last few years working on their own projects as School of Language and The Week That Was, suggesting their collaborations are a spent force. But as soon as the lead single ‘The Noisy Days Are Over’ kicks off it’s clear the two are revitalised. It’s an absolute stormer, a taut, funky track that keeps its momentum over its six and a half minute run time, even erupting into a satisfyingly discordant saxophone solo. The brothers are singing about accepting middle age and living a quiet life, but they sound raucous and energetic as ever.

‘The Noisy Days Are Over’ showcases the whole of Commontime in a single track—the tight, trebly groove, the orchestral flourishes, the two brothers harmonising, and a slightly off-kilter drum outro. It’s by far the best song on the album, and the only truly essential track. However the rest of the album still manages to be really fucking great. ‘Disappointed’ starts off weirdly soft-jazz before erupting into an energetic plea to a lover to set their expectations low, before twisting yet again into a desperate ballad for the choruses. This hyperkinetic stream of ideas defines Commontime. ‘Trouble at the lights’ spends its first half as a slow lament, before erupting into an instrumental freakout. ‘They Want You To Remember’ starts out like a slower Talking Heads number, before disappearing into an orchestral bridge, before returning with full force, charging to the finish.

But really, the endless inventiveness isn’t the appeal here. Instead, what Field Music have managed to achieve is something only a certain few bands from the North of England can do. Like British Sea Power, the Arctic Monkeys (before they became impossibly dull) and of course Pulp, they take simple pop songs and create something occasionally genuinely transcending, brilliant and life affirming in a way that’s hard to describe. Commontime isn’t perfect by any stretch—at 14 songs and nearly an hour it’s too long, and it veers dangerously close to musical theatre on tracks like ‘The Morning is Waiting For You’, but Field Music have pulled a genuine blinder. But then again, Prince is a fan, so maybe it’s no surprise at all.

Review: The Nutcracker

Written by Georgina Gledhill on . Posted in Theatre.

A somewhat out-of-season performance of The Nutcracker from the Moscow City Ballet seemed like the ideal remedy for the post-Christmas blues and the long plight promised by the famously tedious month, January. I have been enchanted by ballets from being old enough to point my toes, and have thus obsessed over countless TV performances, perhaps earning me the status of an ‘amateur expert’, if you like.

Having never been fortunate enough to experience this Christmas classic live, it was an exciting prospect being swept into Clara’s whimsical world, especially by a Ballet Company from the homeland of the elegant practice: Russia.

The infamous ballet The Nutcracker began as ‘The Nutcracker and the King of Mice’, a book by E. T. A. Hoffmann, but is perhaps more famously known for its adaptation into the high-energy yet precise ballet, which features agile jetés and complicated pas de deux sequences that should resemble a piece of art for all present to admire.

This particular modern rendition of The Nutcracker features in the Company’s 25th Anniversary tour (which also includes renowned masterpieces such as Romeo and Juliet and Swan Lake); but for those slightly less familiar with the plot than us self-confessed ballet geeks, The Nutcracker is the tale of a young German girl, Clara Stahlbaum, who receives a Nutcracker as a Christmas present. However, during Christmas Eve night, her Nutcracker doll springs to life and engages in a fierce battle against the Mouse King with seven heads. The ethereal plot allows for the ballet to weave in elements of the enchanted as well as aspects of mystery, leaving the audience in awe of the prodigious dancers.

After the tense atmosphere peaked to a crescendo, the ballet opened with a vibrant party scene, where the stage was crammed with dancers, perhaps leaving room for errors in timing, and resulting in the appearance of a disordered and cluttered mis-en-scene. However, the audience’s attention was diverted to some extent by the meticulously hand-painted set that framed the stage, which indeed did capture the essence of the Christmas theme. The stage’s centre piece (a colossal, decorated tree), which dominated the stage, appeared to make the dancers look unimaginably small, compromising their athleticism. Likewise, the protracted onstage festivities resulted in a loss of the exuberant atmosphere and was dulled further by the audience witnessing flexed feet within dances that wouldn’t have looked out of place in a musical theatre production.

It seemed that the first act was lacklustre in the grand nature of ballet, and it felt as if a tangible pang of disappointment was present within not only me, but what felt like the whole of the auditorium. Despite this, the memorable saviour of the first act was Talgat Kozhabaev—The Nutcracker, who exerted great strength and finesse, making fouetté turns appear utterly natural and landing grand jetés as quietly as you’d like. Yet Kozhabev also possessed the ability to become remarkably stoic, in true doll form, switching between fluid movement and mechanical marches seamlessly.

After the short interval, the second act opened in a forest occupied by the corps de ballet ‘flower fairies’, who were adorning wonderfully intricate tutus and were placed delicately in lines along the wings.The pastel pink coloured costumes complemented the scenery pleasantly, as well as highlighting Clara in her first solo. During this, Anna Ivanova (Clara) seemed like a changed ballerina, exerting pure elegance and inspiring the now mesmerized audience.

Clara’s dream continued into the haunting sphere of the Mouse King, where the live orchestra embodied the mood of danger and anticipation flawlessly, echoing Tchaikovsky’s beloved and charming score, which matched the sharp, contracted movements of the Mouse King’s loyal rodent companions. Again, the stage was saturated with the chorus dancers; however, this time the choreographic decision accentuated the overwhelmingly tense nature of the scene by awakening a sense of sheer horror within Clara. Once the heroic Nutcracker had defeated the Mouse King and rescued his Clara, we were escorted around the world in the form of short but exceedingly amusing trios. A particular favourite was the passionate, crimson clad dancers representing España!

Once the lively excitement had drawn to a close, Clara was transported from her dream world in the arms of her cherished Nutcracker and was laid down before the Christmas tree once more, where reality resumed, much to the audience’s dismay. Upon bows, we were treated to a display of the coruscating costumes for one final time, before the magic of The Nutcracker was sealed away for another night.

Palace Theatre, Manchester

14th January 2016

Revolution 2015/16: Team WIGGINS dominate round 5 and take the Elite Series Title

Written by Alex Whitcomb on . Posted in Sport.

A sell-out crowd witnessed a thrilling finale to the 2015/16 Revolution Series at the Manchester Velodrome, with Team WIGGINS taking the day and the title overall. Jon Dibben took his fine form from the fortnight before into the final round and dominated by winning two of the five events. Team WIGGINS topped the series standings by a sizeable margin with 440 points, followed by Team Pedalsure with 384 and Maloja Pushbikers with 362.

WIGGINS were consistently placed high up the order from race 1, with Dibben securing second in the flying lap time trial. He was beaten by just under 4 tenths of a second by Kian Emadi of ONE Pro Cycling; little surprise, since before turning his hand to endurance, he was a successful team sprinter and silver medallist at the 2014 Commonwealth Games.

Dibben then showed his class in the points race, with a display of physical and tactical dominance. The three-way battle between Dibben, Scotland’s Mark Stewart and Team Sky’s Vasil Kiryenka, went down to the penultimate sprint, ensuring an exciting race. Dibben had to lap the field twice to win the race, which is an impressive feat considering that Kiryenka is the World Time Trial Champion on the road, and is known for his strength in physical endurance and determination.

The evening session then started as the afternoon had left off, with Dibben once again triumphing, this time in the 15km scratch race. He beat Great Britain and Team Pedalsure rider Chris Latham into second place, and Mark Stewart came third. This was then followed by the Madison time trial, allowing the team aspect of the competition to come into play. Team Sky couldn’t take part in this particular event, as they only fielded Vasil Kiryenka for round 5. Once again, Team WIGGINS finished first, the expert partnership of Dibben and Doull guided them to a third win in as many races. Pedalsure came a close second again, and ONE Pro Cycling third.

The final race ended in controversy as there appeared to be confusion between the commissaries and the velodrome commentators over when the final sprint was meant to take place. Team WIGGINS won, but after protests from Team Pedalsure the event was declared void, and the final standings for the series taken after four races. This made no difference to the winners, with WIGGINS being more than 25 points ahead of Pedalsure, meaning that they needed not score any points at all to claim the prize.

Speaking afterwards, Jon Dibben said that the night had gone “almost perfectly”. He added, with a hint of understatement: “I knew we’d [Team WIGGINS] be going quite well. A lot of the lads here have just come from training camp and so we knew we’d be going alright.” He went on to say that the tough schedule before the World Championships in March would not be easing up any time soon, with more racing in Majorca the following week and then shortly afterwards some road action at the Tour of Dubai.

Away from the men’s series, Great Britain’s Laura Trott—the headline rider of the final round—was consistently at the business end of the action, winning three of her four events, and came second in the scratch race. Her win in the points race showed her dominance, taking it with two sprints to spare, and by a margin of 38 points. As the pre-eminent female endurance rider in the world, it is hard to see Trott not being selected for GB at the Olympics this year, especially based on the form shown at Revolution.

The crowd were also treated to a selection of great sprint races, with the track comeback of Dutch sprint great Theo Bos the main attraction.  The five-time world champion was victorious in both the match sprint and the Keirin—impressive considering that he is still in transition after switching to the road after Beijing 2008. The Dutchman is trying to stake a claim to be in the Netherlands team in Rio this summer, and his current form doesn’t seem to be betraying that ambition.

British interest came in the form of current national champion Lewis Oliva and local favourite Matthew Rotherham. Oliva was consistently at the top of the standings, winning the 200m time trial, coming second in the match sprint and fourth in the Keirin. Meanwhile, Bolton’s Rotherham carried good form from six-day racing into Revolution, and was gleefully playing to a vocal home crowd. The second placed rider from the Six Days of London came third in the Keirin and individual sprint, and was visibly buoyed by jubilant support from the grandstands.

German track star, Robert Forstemann also made an appearance in the sprints. The rider known as “Quadzilla” for his 29 inch thighs had a less than impressive day on the boards, but was a welcome draw, since he is one of the most popular track cyclists on social media.

A final bit of stardust was added to the event by Chris Hoy who was there to present the prizes and promote the Future Stars series, which is sponsored by Hoy bicycles. The youth event has been won by many riders who have gone on to represent GB at international level. Lewis Stewart and Jessica Roberts have joined a list of winners that includes Peter Kennaugh, Simon Yates and one of this year’s senior winners, Owain Doull.

The climax of Revolution 2015/16 marked the last major event in the British track season before the world championships return to British shores. The UCI Track World Championships run at the Lee Valley Velodrome in London from March 2nd to 6th, and they will be the final international opportunity for riders to break into their national teams before this summer’s Olympic Games.

Elite Series Final Standings

1.     Team Wiggins                        440

2.     Team Pedalsure                    384

3.     Maloja Pushbikers RT         362

4.     JLT Condor p/b Mavic        252

5.     Orica Greenedge                   233

6.     ONE Pro Cycling                   227

7.     Team Sky                                 210

8.     Scotland Burness Paul         199

9.     Telegraph Allstars                 191

10.   Team USN                               158

11.   VCUK-Champion Systems   139

12.   The Nab Racing                      136

Sports’ governing bodies are misbehaving

Written by James Haughton on . Posted in Sport.

On the first day of the 2016 Australian Open, the first Grand Slam event of the season, the thoughts of the tennis world were dominated not by on-court matters, but by off-court ones instead. This was because BuzzFeed News and the BBC unveiled evidence they had received alleging that match-fixing in tennis is prevalent and is not being investigated properly. Sixteen players who were at one point ranked in the world’s top fifty—including one Grand Slam champion—were named as potential match fixers.

In the past, abnormal betting patterns, involving bets totalling to hundreds of thousands, and even up to millions of pounds were placed on the results of tennis matches, have been detected. A famous example occurred in 2007, when Martin Vassallo Arguello beat the highly ranked Nikolay Davydenko, who retired hurt in the third set, after losing the first set 6-2. More than $7 million was bet on the match, and Betfair even refused to pay out on wagers and reported the match to the authorities.

An investigation into the match was commissioned by The Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) after the match, but neither Davydenko nor Vassallo Arguello were ever charged with match-fixing. The investigation grew beyond just the Davydenko versus Vassallo Arguello match. Leading to the creation of a Tennis Integrity Unit (TIU), who now investigate reports of match-fixing, and identifying 28 players who were involved in suspicious matches, and as a result were to be investigated. The following year, a new anti-corruption code was introduced by the tennis authorities, but they could not retrospectively charge players with breaching this code. According to the BBC and Buzzfeed News, the TIU was informed again about suspicious betting patterns on matches involving approximately one third of the players named on the report, yet no further was taken.

This apparent lack of action by the authorities has been scrutinised extensively, and so too has the lack of transparency in which these organisations operate. The TIU only publicly comment on their investigations to announce the outcome of an investigation that results in disciplinary action being taken. Anti-corruption expert, and member of the panel examining match-fixing in 2007, Ben Gunn stated: “The transparency of the Tennis Integrity Unit leaves something to be desired… It’s difficult to gauge how successful they are because we don’t know what they’re doing.”

Tennis is certainly not the first sport in which governing bodies are alleged to have acted improperly. Take the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) for example. The findings of the second part of a commissioned World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) report into doping in athletics were announced at a press conference in Berlin. The first part of the report described the state sponsored doping programme in Russia; but the second part examined potential corruption in the IAAF and to what extent it had known about, and covered up, Russia’s systematic doping.

The report was damning. It found that the IAAF Council, of which elected President Lord Sebastian Coe has been a member since 2013, must have been aware of Russia’s activities. The report states: “The corruption was embedded in the organisation. It cannot be ignored or dismissed as attributed to the odd renegade acting on his own.” According to the report, Lamine Diack—Coe’s predecessor as IAAF’s president—was able to renew sponsorship deals of his own accord, and when confronted by Huw Roberts—the IAAF’s legal chief, about Russia’s systematic doping, Diack is alleged to have said that he would resolve the problem by speaking to Vladimir Putin personally. Papa Massata Diack, Lamine’s son, was found to have asked Qatar, who will host the 2019 Athletics World Championships, for $5 million while working for the IAAF.

While what remains of the IAAF’s credibility was trodden upon by the report commissioned by WADA, Coe’s beleaguered tenure as president was strengthened, at least temporarily, by the press conference, during which commission head Dick Pound supported Lord Coe and backed him to reform the IAAF. Pound went on to absolve Coe of criticism that he should have been more alert to the Russian doping scandal, saying that: “I don’t want to lay the failures of an entire council at the feet of one individual.”

Despite this show of support, Lord Coe has been embroiled in controversy ever since taking over the IAAF presidency in 2015. After becoming president, he had to resign from an ambassadorial role with Nike after initially refusing to step down from the position. Furthermore, Nick Davies, an ally of Coe, was the subject of an investigation by the IAAF ethics committee after Le Monde leaked an email to Papa Massata Diack that he had sent while working as the IAAF’s deputy general secretary. The email suggested ways to stifle Russian doping allegations ahead of the 2013 World Championships in Moscow. Davies’ actions were criticised both in the report into the IAAF and by Dick Pound.

Initial responses by tennis and athletics’ governing bodies concentrated on defending the sport by sidestepping the allegations—rather than by accepting them or refuting them with solid evidence. Chris Kermode, head of the ATP, bemoaned the timing of the match-fixing story, coming as it did on the first day of the Grand Slam, but that paled into insignificance to Lord Coe who called allegations of widespread doping made by The Sunday Times in August 2015 as a “declaration of war”, and said that to protect athletics’ reputation, it was time to “come out fighting.” As time has passed on, and the controversies surrounding himself, the IAAF and athletics have persisted, his position has softened, appearing contrite in public and eager to reform the IAAF.

If there was one sporting organisation that had a worse 2015 than the IAAF, it was The Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). In February 2016, elections will be held to determine who will succeed Sepp Blatter as FIFA’s president. The favourite, currently, is Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim al-Khalifa, a member of the Bahraini royal family. But allegations about his role in the crackdown of pro-democracy protesters in 2011 have circulated since he announced his candidature last year. In particular, Sheikh Salman has been forced to deny any involvement in the identification and torture of footballers and other athletes who participated in the protests. The Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy have written to FIFA’s sponsors about their concerns regarding Sheikh Salman. In their 2014-2015 report, Amnesty International stated that Bahrain was a place where: “The authorities continued to clamp down on dissent.”

Electing a man accused of being complicit in the torture of footballers as the new president of FIFA is deeply unsettling, but still a very real possibility. The other candidates do not inspire confidence in driving the complete structural form that Fifa needs, either. Prince Ali Bin Al Hussein of Jordan—who finished second to Blatter in the last presidential election—has stated that he would not reopen the bidding process for the next two World Cups were he to be elected. Gianni Infantino is the current Union of European Football Associations’ (UEFA) general secretary and only announced his candidature after Michel Platini had been provisionally suspended by the FIFA ethics committee. In fact UEFA have confirmed that they are still paying Michel Platini, despite his recent eight-year ban from football, and will continue to do so “until further notice.”

It is not original nowadays to describe FIFA as a morally bankrupt cesspit that not even the finest satirists or tragedians could have dreamt up. Its reputation has been shattered as more details of the tawdry, corrupt bidding processes for the World Cup and a succession of questionable backroom deals and bloc-voting by an exclusive elite that constitute elections nowadays have disseminated publicly. Its an organisation that seems unperturbed by the lead investigator into the bidding processes for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups resigning his position, after declaring that the version of his report released to the public was “erroneous.”

And, most importantly of all, the evidence about the deaths of hundreds and thousands of migrant workers does not seem to warrant action. Human suffering became seemingly inconsequential compared to the platitudes executives spout about how “the World Cup is being shared around the globe”—even if, in the process that workers have to die, there is evidence suggesting voters may have been bribed, and the winning bid was won on false pretences (who remembers the floating clouds).

Sport captivates billions of people who watch it for the spontaneity and the unpredictability of world-class athletes competing against one another. Those organisations who regulate these sports are ever-increasingly seeking to profit from these audiences, but we must demand that they are transparent and held accountable if they fail to investigate—and ultimately stamp out—cheating or corruption. Currently, these governing bodies are too concerned with trying to discredit or dismiss negative press in the hopes that the outcry doesn’t become too loud to ignore. Even then, the organisations that issue proclamations of rigorous investigations and structural change rarely—if ever—follow through with action. For sport to prosper in modern society, this cycle of events must simply stop.

Universities look to address medicine degree bias

Written by Paul Scott on . Posted in News.

It is no secret that at university as a whole underprivileged students are under-represented, however medicine in particular has been highlighted as a degree that exemplifies this uneven trend. Financial constraints play a big factor, especially as an undergraduate medical course lasts at least five years.

Another significant issue that has been pointed out is the application process and the level of preparation of that students have to do for the rigorous tests and interviews they face. Over 90 per cent of applications to medicine degree courses were rejected in 2014, and many of these unsuccessful attempts are seen to be down to the lack of support offered by some schools to the students applying.

The University of Manchester’s School of Medicine is one of the largest in the country, with over 6,000 undergraduates. On its website, the university stipulates its requirements at A-level, “grades AAA (after successful interview)” and, at GCSE, “at least seven subjects at grade C or above; at least five must be at A or A*”.

Despite this high entry criteria for its five-year course, the University of Manchester is one out of a handful of universities that offer a foundation or “pre-clinic year” as part of the Access to Medicine programme.

According to the university’s website, this scheme “is specifically designed to prepare students from diverse educational backgrounds for entry to the five-year Medicine MBChB degree.”

Access to Medicine states that “access courses provide a route for learners wishing to study medicine or dentistry who do not have formal qualifications in A-level Biology and Chemistry.

“These routes can help to widen participation in medicine and dentistry by providing an entry route to those with different experiences and backgrounds to those who are eligible for standard entry and graduate entry medical and dental programmes.”

In spite of such access programmes in place, according to a recent report 65 per cent of trainee doctors have at least one parent with a degree qualification or higher and “a lack of support and guidance for applying to medical school is a major barrier for many students from less advantaged backgrounds.”

A third year Manchester medical student from Gloucestershire, whose parents are both artists, said the application process was “fairly lengthy and time-consuming.” She added that she can appreciate the difficulties people may have in applying with limited help and resources from their school.

Initiatives like the Access to Medicine programme are an acknowledgement that there is a great need for diversity amongst medical students, but there is certainly still a long way to go in making the course an opportunity for all.

Six Nations 2016: The Waiting is Nearly Over

Written by Toby Webb on . Posted in Sport.

This coming week has been a long wait for anyone connected with the England rugby team. While the wounds of their utterly dismal World Cup campaign are still fresh in the minds of fans and players alike, finally we have rugby again: a chance to begin the healing process. The imminent Six Nations could have suffered from a World Cup hangover. However, with England boasting a brand new coaching team, it will be an intriguing tournament for all involved. For England fans, a new chapter is finally upon us.

First, let’s talk about the new coaching team. I experienced an immense sense of vindication following the appointment of Eddie Jones as head coach, Steve Borthwick as forwards coach and Paul Gustard as defence coach. In my post-mortem of England’s World Cup campaign, I demanded that the RFU appoint a head coach from the Southern hemisphere and splash the cash on a high calibre support team. My prayers were answered.

The appointment of Eddie Jones has been almost unanimously praised. At last, England will be headed by someone with international coaching experience (the last two coaches, Lancaster and Johnson, had none), someone brought up on the Southern hemisphere diet of fast, flowing, full of flair rugby. Furthermore, he will be supported by two quality coaches. Borthwick was part of Jones’s coaching team with Japan, and Gustard’s efforts have resulted in Saracens being a dominant force in this year’s Premiership.

Although his first taste of international coaching was deemed a failure, heading the Australia team between 2003 and 2005 and being sacked as a result of poor performances, the rest of Jones’s CV will get England fans excited. He was technical advisor during South Africa’s triumphant 2007 World Cup campaign. His next foray into international coaching was with Japan. Taking over in 2012, Jones changed the face of Japanese rugby. He implemented an attractive, fast-paced style of rugby that culminated in the Japanese performances during the 2015 World Cup. No one will forget their much-deserved triumph over South Africa. Jones has proven pedigree as an international coach.

In the build up to the Six Nations, Jones has talked well. He has outlined his desire to implement a new English style, one that maintains the traditional qualities of good set-pieces, scrums and line-outs, while incorporating more modern aspects of offloading, utilising space and speed. Here, he has covered his bases. Telling us what we want to hear without committing himself to any specific style.

The squad announcement for the Six Nations was Jones’s first meaningful contribution as England boss. Household names like Geoff Parling, Tom Wood and Tom Youngs were left out, deemed too old to fit the long-term planning towards the 2019 World Cup. There was re-call for Manu Tuigali, someone tossed aside by the old regime. Seven uncapped players have been named, including the exciting prospects Maro Itoje and Elliot Daly. The prodigy Danny Cipriani was also left out, much to my dismay. While containing some intriguing decisions, the announcement was well in-tune with Jones’s rhetoric about the new chapter of English rugby.

Although it has been forecast, the decision to make Dylan Hartley England’s captain for the Six Nations is contentious. Hartley has an appalling disciplinary record, part of the notorious off-field antics during the 2011 World Cup, and around 54 weeks of suspension in his career. There are big question marks over his composure and ability to lead by example. However, in Jones’s defence, he has named him captain for the Six Nations only. This is a shrewd move, not only because of his questionable temperament but because his position as starting hooker is under threat from Jamie George and Luke Cowan-Dickie. Jones is avoiding a problem the old regime had, Chris Robshaw being in the team because of his captaincy role rather than his form. The tournament will be a trial of Hartley’s captaincy qualities.

The team for Saturday’s crunch game in Scotland will be announced later in the week. Jones faces a dilemma: does he select a team boasting youth, and risk an opening game loss to a Scotland side buoyant from a brilliant World Cup campaign? Or does he go with more experienced players, more likely to secure a first victory for the new coach? Jones’s first few games will inevitably be judged as experiments, whatever the results. However, one can not underestimate the value of getting victories under the belt. A victory should be the priority, using whatever players necessary. Jones has suggested he will err on the side of caution for the Scotland game, filling his 23 man squad with largely experienced players. However, uncapped players Ollie Devoto, Paul Hill and Jack Clifford are selected, and will be expected to play some part on Saturday.

Given this, my squad prediction, assuming that everyone stays fit in the run up to the game, is as follows:

15. Mike Brown, 14. Anthony Watson, 13. Jonathan Joseph, 12. Owen Farrell, 11. Jack Nowell, 10. George Ford, 9. Danny Care.
1. Mako Vunipola, 2. Dylan Hartley (c), 3. Dan Cole, 4. George Kruis, 5. Joe Launchbury, 6. Chris Robshaw, 7. James Haskall, 8. Billy Vunipola.

Owen Farrell gets the nod at 12. Jones sees him as a versatile player who can play both inside centre and his natural position of fly-half. His experience and precision from the kicking tee could be crucial in a tight game. Dan Cole gets the nod due to lack of a better option; if fit, Kieran Brookes would certainly be starting ahead of him. Chris Robshaw, relieved of captaincy duties, is in the team as a result of good club form. Finally, Danny Care beats Ben Youngs to the 9 jersey on form as well.

I expect Saturday’s game to be very tough. Scotland are fresh off the back of a great World Cup, narrowly losing out to Australia in the QFs; playing at home against the old enemy under a new coach will undoubtedly get them fired up. Despite this, I predict, after soaking up a lot of early pressure, England will be victorious by 6 points.