Andy Robinson: Inside the 2007 Rugby World Cup

England were awful. They must find some passion – and then begin playing as a team

Before this competition started, I stressed the importance of teamship – the single most essential ingredient in winning a World Cup. What do I mean by teamship? It is best described by the phrase "playing for each other", and if you want to see an example, rerun the tape of the game between South Africa and England at Stade de France eight days ago. The Springbok display was, to my mind, a definition of teamship. The really distinctive quality was the full part played by each member of the side, from one to 15. They had specific roles, they understood those roles and performed them effectively.

By contrast, England were lamentably short of teamship. They played as individuals, a fact highlighted in the game against the United States in Lens and rammed home in St-Denis. Tom Rees was isolated and left to fend for himself in pursuit of the loose ball, and believe me, it is no fun hunting alone against the Springboks. Jason Robinson caught the eye with some terrific running in broken field, but where was the close support? It wasn't there. If ever England needed a collective effort, they needed it last Friday. By operating in ones and twos, they almost asked to receive a hiding.

I worry that people are doing their own thing without recourse to the group. There has been no sign of a team performance in the tournament to date, and if the problem is not rectified the champions will find themselves in trouble even more serious than that being encountered now. Losing is hard to accept at the best of times, but if a side have pulled together and come up short against outstanding opposition, it is possible to swallow the disappointment. When the performance delivered is fragmentary, and the defeat is heavy as a result, it's pretty much unbearable.

There was no sense of urgency about England in Paris. Why do the top teams look so impressive? They play with intensity. Why are we in love with the Georgians, who went to close to beating Ireland, and glorying in the resurgence of the Canadians, who have turned in some excellent performances in defeat? Because of their enthusiasm for the fight. That intensity and enthusiasm comes back to teamship. There is a desire and a yearning about these teams that do not seem to have been a part of England's displays, which deeply surprises me. After all, these players have been together since the end of June.

When we won in 2003, teamship was at the heart of the project. Everyone, from Clive Woodward down to the baggage man, came together with one objective. England need to start growing very quickly – and a team doesn't grow when the coaching staff start questioning players' ability in public or put out mixed messages concerning a relative newcomer like Andy Farrell. Without a sense of common cause, no side can hope to reach the later stages of a World Cup.

So what went wrong on the game front? Quite a bit. England were looking for a strong start, but the early line-outs summed up their approach. It was almost as if they ran up the white flag in that department, which was always going to be crucial. There was no contest on the Springbok throw. Why? It was essential for England to make a statement, to get themselves into the game. They dominated the collisions, out-thought England in the kicking game and secured important turnovers that allowed their runners to break the defensive line. If that happens for 40 minutes, the team on the wrong end of it are in big trouble.

What about half-time, you say? Shouldn't words have been spoken and things put to rights? Let's be honest here: at 20-0 down, the game had gone. There would have been a lot of anger and frustration in the dressing room – at least, I hope there was – but I don't know what was said. I know what I'd have said, I'd have demanded that we go back out with a determination to win the second half.

It wouldn't have been recorded in the history books, and it might not have earned England so much as a bonus point. But in terms of feeling good about the rest of the competition, a strong 40 minutes would have been worth its weight in gold. When the final whistle blew, people were scouring the record books. Was this our worst World Cup result ever? All things considered, it was a depressing night.

Jonny and Olly have a job to do in defence

What, then, of today's meeting with Samoa? The islanders are dangerous, and if we play as 15 individuals rather than a collective, they'll make us pay for our folly. But if they get it right, England have the beating of them, just as we had the beating of them four years ago. The Samoans are not strong at the set piece, they struggle in the line-out and their kicking game can be fragile. England can make hay in all these areas.

However, they need to do more than scrummage and drive. They need to get some pace into their game, to address their lack of dynamism at the breakdown and start generating quick possession. The problem has been a technical one: players are running in ones, getting themselves double-tackled and finding it difficult to free the ball in contact. This is why the clearing of the tackle area is proving so laborious. Today's fixture is an opportunity for them to iron out some kinks, get their support runners going and play with some width.

Mind you, there will be a heavy price should they get it wrong, for the Samoans are masters are picking off isolated runners and turning over possession. And once they have that turnover ball, they can be as dangerous as any side in the world. I'll be particularly interested to see how Jonny Wilkinson and Olly Barkley, joined together in midfield for the first time, manage the game, both in attack and defence.

At some point, they will find themselves up against the Tuilagi boys, Henry and Alesana, and it is then that we'll see how well they work as a defensive duo. Jonny will throw himself into the tackles, as usual, so Joe Worsley, restored to the open-side flank to give the Samoans a taste of their own medicine, will be an important figure. I want to see him alongside Jonny, helping him out and protecting him. As I keep saying, we don't need people doing things on their own. Least of all against Samoa.

Captains deserved to see red

After my comments last week on the tackling style of the South African flanker Schalk Burger, I was alarmed to see a couple of shocking incidents during the Wales-Australia game. Gareth Thomas, the Welsh captain, hit Berrick Barnes, the young Wallaby outside-half, with a shoulder-charge after the pass. Stirling Mortlock, the Wallaby skipper, then clattered Thomas with an off-the-ball hit that seemed to me to be even worse.

To my mind, these were straight red-card offences, and worthy of long suspensions. Thomas should have been cited. So too should Mortlock. That they escaped without punishment was shameful.

Player to watch Alesana Tuilagi

There is something of the Jonah Lomu about the exciting Samoan wing. He is freakishly powerful, unusually quick for a man of his bulk and he has a step that can wrong-foot the best defences