How will England look to play in SA?

Simple question really and one that i think follows on naturally enough after the selection of the squad and with the completion of the coaching team for this tour.

The lack of any heavyweight second rows concerns me as does the lack of depth at hooker and the lack of anything approximating a fetcher at 7 although of course i concede we can get by with a balanced back row.

South Africa will presumably play to their traditional strengths (which sort of happen to be ours also) - strong set peice and fairly conservative - particularly with a new team and a new coach. I think that the SA selections at 7 and 10 will tell us everything about their intentions on playing style.

How will we play though? More of the same from the 6N OR will we look to open up a bit more and get the ball into wider channels earlier? What exactly is Mike Catt's attacking/playing philosophy?

How much risk are we going to take for rewards of tries and potentially winning games?

Surely they will look to build on some of the success in the 6 Nations - A strong defensive line with a clear game plan and little risk and reward. The last thing they need to do in SA is to start throwing the ball around like a bar of soap

Yes but for e.g. i am not sure that without Croft we are equipped to play any kind of territory game - relying on lineout working well for us.

If England go toe to toe with a Meyer coached Bok pack then we'll be sending the plane home for replacement players after the first test. That Bok pack will be big, physical and very aggressive. They'll be no knuckle dragging forwards in there either they will be quick, organised and efficient. Expect them to have a working back division as well.

England need to protect the rucks (no stupid minimal number of players approach, get the bodies in and secure), they need to move the ball but play in the right areas of the pitch. Rapid wingers, strong centres and a half back combo with skill and flair.

we will look to score more tries than them and if they won't let us do that Farrell and Flood will kick em to death

If we play Farrell, we'll play not to lose. If we play Flood (assuming he's fit), we'll play to win. Either way, if we play with an aggressive confident pack we should match them. If we don't they'll hand our arrises back at the final whistle.

No doubting its a tough challenge for England. For me its about confidence. Englands resurgence has largely come about through a new coach and a marked sign of improvement in the 6N after the poor world cup effort.

Theyre now away again against a foe i would suggest is traditionally similar yet superior in style.

Lancasters ticked all the right boxes it seems so far and has a genuine plan in place for England and some core values have returned quickly in his short term.

SA are also looking to make changes and this series will let both teams know under know uncertain terms where they stand.

A continuation of what lancaster set out with at 6N time will see England competitive i believe. No tricks, sudden changes in direction, surprise selections or tactics. Just good hard work based on the groundwork laid at home.

This is going to be one of those tough, grind it out series possibly similar to the lions tour in 09 where chances have to be taken when offered. I expect a close first two matches based on sheer guts and simple brutality. Cant wait for this one.

I would like to think that under Lancaster England will want to carry on with how they left off in the 6ns. With a very disaplined and hard working squad that will grind out all the play untill the end.

I dont think it will be a throw the ball about, but more of a carry the ball and keeping the ball in hand.

Both SA and England are under new coaches with Lancaster having the 6ns under his belt. So it will be intersting to see how both teams play with both teams being different than the one that played in the RWC.

I agree, I think England will continue to play the same way at the moment (a game largely based on defence) but what I'd really like to see is a few younger players given opportunities. For example, possibly a bench place for Marler, and if we're lucky Wade on the wing.

I hope England will build on the good start that Stuart Lancaster has made in the Six Nations but I think we'll be lucky to come away with one test win.

If we can build upon our good start, overall I feel it will be a good tour.

Correct England will lose 3-0 to SA and one of those will be a thrashing.

We might steal one or both of the mid week games.

Perhaps those should be our focus.

If we play mostly defence based rugby then our thrashing will be compounded because we'll be inviting the boks on to us without giving them anything to worry about from us.

We haven't a hope.

It is going to be humiliating.

Triangulation wrote:Simple question really and one that i think follows on naturally enough after the selection of the squad and with the completion of the coaching team for this tour.

The lack of any heavyweight second rows concerns me as does the lack of depth at hooker and the lack of anything approximating a fetcher at 7 although of course i concede we can get by with a balanced back row.

South Africa will presumably play to their traditional strengths (which sort of happen to be ours also) - strong set peice and fairly conservative - particularly with a new team and a new coach. I think that the SA selections at 7 and 10 will tell us everything about their intentions on playing style.

How will we play though? More of the same from the 6N OR will we look to open up a bit more and get the ball into wider channels earlier? What exactly is Mike Catt's attacking/playing philosophy?

How much risk are we going to take for rewards of tries and potentially winning games?

Are you Paul Ackford?

England teams playing south africa always get sooo hung up on how physical they are...when you start focussing on the other team too much you forget what your meant to be doing and you end up with players doing stupid things trying to out macho guys like bakkies and co.

Of course the game is going to hurt but forget that and focus on englands game, we need to build on our strengths from the 6N which was low penalty count and amazing defense. If we bring this to south africa then start getting some phases of play togther then we have a good chance.

Northern hemisphere teams lose the games with the southern boys before we even step onto the pitch..we build them up and talk about them so much that we are overawed before we even get to the kick off. I doubt the southern boys know who most of northern hemisphere. coaches and players even are ! They focus on themselves.

We have to play in the right areas of the pitch first and keep the penalties down and defense tight (as before) and just pile on the pressure...dont give thier backline any space...with a players like youngs, flood, ashton foden, cole, corbs, hartley, haskell etc.... we have the spine of a team that knows eachother well and has beaten an inform australian team in australia...we then have number of stars like tuilagi and morgan in there and guys who will have recently played an AP final getting them ready for combat.

If our main men play to there potential then we can beat em ( at least once anyway)

Triangulation, how did your predictions about England's results in the 6N pan out?

Triangulation wrote:France are going to stuff us on Sunday and there is absolutely nothing that we can do about it. It will start with the restarts, scrums, lineouts and breakdown area and finish with a stuffing on the scoreboard.

France 22 - 24 England

Triangulation wrote:Let's focus on just how much of a schellacking your team (Ireland) is going to dish out to our collection of individuals.

We haven't a hope.

England 30 - 9 Ireland

The critical issue for me will be what Catt can bring to how 10, 12 & 13 orchestrate themselves.

The other area I want to see continued improvement on is our approach to offensive breakdowns.

The England pack looked pretty solid in the Six Nations. There are some exciting backline players in that squad too. Wade and Tuilagi will cause any team problems.

Care and Youngs are very strong scrumhalfs. Flood is a very good Flyhalf, and looked in great form. Foden and mike brown are good options at the back.

There is plenty of reason for hope.

Triangulation...

Your always a little ray of positivity arent you old bean.....

last time england played SA they simply lost in contact, when england players ran into sa defenders they often went backwards and when SA players ran into england defenders they often went forwards. Its a simple game, if you lose that contact battle it becomes very difficult to win.

SA's attack is direct, very powerful but simplistic. England need to be disciplined and organised in defence, they need to double team SA's big ball carriers ensuring they dont power their way through the tackle.

I believe the key for england is idtentifying potential turnovers and efficiently attacking the breakdown. If they can do this, the forwards can maintain decent set piece and the backs are brave and clinical when they do get front foot ball, then england have a chance.

its gonna be tough.

alcoombe wrote:Triangulation, how did your predictions about England's results in the 6N pan out?

Triangulation wrote:France are going to stuff us on Sunday and there is absolutely nothing that we can do about it. It will start with the restarts, scrums, lineouts and breakdown area and finish with a stuffing on the scoreboard.

France 22 - 24 England

Triangulation wrote:Let's focus on just how much of a schellacking your team (Ireland) is going to dish out to our collection of individuals.

We haven't a hope.

England 30 - 9 Ireland

I do like this...!

Look it doesnt matter what has happened before.

Look at it objectively in the cold hard light of day.

Man-o O Man-o

the saffas will better us all over the field.

Ask yourselves - when was the last time you saw an England side's pack come off second best while we scrapped a win?

It just never happens. It's rare in rugby. Incredibly rare for us.

Blind freddy, paul ackford and i can see that we dont have enough at second row or 7 to trouble the saffas and that past hartley we're stuffed at hooker.

Brace yourselves for 3 20 point + drubbings in the Tests and a hostile home and away press calling for Lancaster's head on a spike.

Tri, I think you are selling england short here.

ALthough I am hoping it will be three comfortable wins for us, I am not so confident.

Until Heyneke Meyer provides us a selected squad it is pretty much up in the air.

We won't dominate line outs without Matfield, our best two loose forwards (Burger and Smith) aren't available. Our best backline player Jaque Fourie isn't available.

Without, Matfield, Burger, Smith and Jaque Fourie we may have replacements, but the dynamics will change.

Triangulation

You have too little faith. Firslty the mid week sides will be walkovers... probable 20 point victories each for England. The Midweek SA teams will have zero Super rugby players in them... which means Vodacom Cup (SA's 3rd tier which is at best Championship level... at best).

I think ENG second string can deal with them easily enough... they aren't exactly the NZ Maori.

In terms of the tests... ENG won't be blown away even if they lose 3-0. They are a good side, have confidence, are taking a near full strength squad and have played together since Jan.

The boks have a number of retirements, many injuries and only will have 2 weeks to prepare added to them last being together 9 months prior.

The front 5 will be even spoils IMO. The backrow will have to contest with Brussow' guile at the breakdown but if they work as a unit they can compete esp. with no Smith, Alberts, Burger playing.

Backs, this is where the games will be won and lost. SA will have Morne, Frans & Lambie playing most probably, 3 tactical kickers with big accurate boots. ENG will have to be at their best to compete in the territorial battle.

The teams are far closer then you state and ENG have many advantages over this bok side.

biltongbek

beat me to the same comments... only read yours when I posted. I know you're just hedging your bets though to maximise your joy when the boks beat ENG!!!! Where is the real Saffa in you.... i.e. '50-0 in each test'... thats more like it!!!

alcoombe wrote:Triangulation, how did your predictions about England's results in the 6N pan out?

Triangulation wrote:France are going to stuff us on Sunday and there is absolutely nothing that we can do about it. It will start with the restarts, scrums, lineouts and breakdown area and finish with a stuffing on the scoreboard.

France 22 - 24 England

Triangulation wrote:Let's focus on just how much of a schellacking your team (Ireland) is going to dish out to our collection of individuals.

We haven't a hope.

England 30 - 9 Ireland

I think its going to be 2-1 ... to England


The defence will hold up mostly, the team will dig in like they did in the 6n but with one crucial difference... Catt will have the backs fired up and the centers on-message about providing decent ball and offloading into space.

our backs have class and their form will be directly effected by the decision making at 10 -13, this, is the next step for England, as they built on the basics during the 6N a defensive team effort and the set piece was paying off (yes, even charge downs).


of course, we could forget everything and be a total shambles and even then I'd expect individuals to shine through and get us points. But under the current team and coaching setup, if I were a saffer, I'd be worried.

fa0019 wrote:biltongbek

beat me to the same comments... only read yours when I posted. I know you're just hedging your bets though to maximise your joy when the boks beat ENG!!!! Where is the real Saffa in you.... i.e. '50-0 in each test'... thats more like it!!!

You're talking about the bulls supporters there mate. Oh and of course those that don't have an objective noe in their bodies.

We'll lose the collisions. Lose the breakdown battle. The breakdown is the game these days. Scrums and lineouts having reduced importance particularly in dry conditions. We'll lose the breakdown battle the penalties will come. Possibly yellows too as we struggle to cope. The saffas will kick their goals. We will be forced to chase games with risk taking by ill equipped backs. Turnovers will come. Well be picked off for a couple of counter attack tries. That is 20 point margin. Easy. Shut the gate.

Triangulation

2 of the 3 matches are played at sea level, in the SA winter, in towns where rainfall is higher than in SE ENG. Its a little different then playing in the heat of Bloem.

Set pieces will be very important.

triangulation, i suspect you secretly believe england can pinch one of the tests and all this down talk is simply designed to make that achievement all the more enjoyable.

HQ, I think you worked him out.

What's that old saying? "you doth protest too much"

biltong, you seem to want SA to play a more adventurous style than they did under de villiers and select players who perhaps take a few more risks.

Question, what happens if they do that and it doesnt work immediately and SA lose the series by taking too many risks in attack?

HQ matt, there are two types of risk. There is what the All Blacks tried to do against us in 2009. They ran from everywhere, inside their 22 etc. It was stupid and cost them.

Then there is the method SA should play, control the game, control possession and territory, earn the position from where you attack. And then vary the attack.

I am not saying go balls to the wall, I am saying once you have all the pre requesites in place, then attack with more than just the same old predictability that we have been using over the past few years.

If we have Hougaard at 9, Lambie at 10, Frans steyn at 12, there are so much more we will do with ball in hand than the old 9, 10 12 passes, and bang the defence is on you.

Hougaard, Lambie and Frans Steyn are all players who has a vision for the gap, strong ball carriers(especially Steyn) and all hae the ability to offload in space.


If you were an english player, which combo would you rather not face?

How the games are going will depend a lot on what sa do more than how eng decide to play. Fact is that sa should be too good and controlling the games mostly.

I believe first that eng will continue to play style of lancaster so far. That being try not to loose by too many point and if still closest near end of the game only that point trying to win.

Sad true for my new homeland of england is that are not a force in the game at this moment but rebuilding and try to understand and get to pace of modernity. So this is why I saying that game will depend more on sa than eng.

Once was a time at about ten years ago when all teams would love to beating at eng because they were champion and so always playing the stronger player available. But now sadly is a true that better team look at eng as chance to experiementate and teaching the new players into the top level against who is now quite predicatable and limited side.

On top is eng must now bringing in the new players and could be quite painful experience.

Too many NH coaches had shyed away from bringing a full strength squad to the SH.. the last coach who did that was SCW.

If you want to be the best you have to beat the best and in their home grounds. Its no good saying... 'on our day, in our ground, with the right amount of luck and the perfect weather..... we can perhaps sneak a victory'.

ENG are consistently better than everyone bar NZ right up to U20 level. They are the same players which come through to the senior squad... yet after that they drop off.

Take last years JRWC for instance

There were 3 young talented flyhalves.

Ford of England
Anscombe of NZ
Goosen of SA

Ford went on to take his inferior ENG side past Goosen's SA to the final where whilst he ended up on the losing side was by far the best player of the tournament and subsequently won Junior world player of the year.

Fast forward 12 months and whilst Ford has been playing limited domestic cup rugby in ENG, Anscombe has played SR for the blues (with a great record breaking debut vs. the bulls) and Goosen has taken the tournament by storm (albeit now injured).

Ford has been left in the blocks and I'm in no doubt this is half to do with him not getting the first class rugby exposure he needs. This is where the problems ENG face begin.

Its nothing to do with talent... its how ENG harness their talent which is the problem.

fa0019 wrote:Too many NH coaches had shyed away from bringing a full strength squad to the SH.. the last coach who did that was SCW.

If you want to be the best you have to beat the best and in their home grounds. Its no good saying... 'on our day, in our ground, with the right amount of luck and the perfect weather..... we can perhaps sneak a victory'.

ENG are consistently better than everyone bar NZ right up to U20 level. They are the same players which come through to the senior squad... yet after that they drop off.

Take last years JRWC for instance

There were 3 young talented flyhalves.

Ford of England
Anscombe of NZ
Goosen of SA

Ford went on to take his inferior ENG side past Goosen's SA to the final where whilst he ended up on the losing side was by far the best player of the tournament and subsequently won Junior world player of the year.

Fast forward 12 months and whilst Ford has been playing limited domestic cup rugby in ENG, Anscombe has played SR for the blues (with a great record breaking debut vs. the bulls) and Goosen has taken the tournament by storm (albeit now injured).

Ford has been left in the blocks and I'm in no doubt this is half to do with him not getting the first class rugby exposure he needs. This is where the problems ENG face begin.

Its nothing to do with talent... its how ENG harness their talent which is the problem.

Your argument is sound, cant really disagree with it. England dont have a great conversion record from age grade levels to test squad. The club structure of the game in england doesnt lend itself as well to producing test players as, perhaps, the franchise systems used by other nations.

But there are some good players in this england squad and as a fan i am always hopeful that a good side will emerge, capable of beating the best.
I think summer tours should be taken seriously also, NH teams should always select the best players available and aim to win.

fa0019 wrote:Too many NH coaches had shyed away from bringing a full strength squad to the SH.. the last coach who did that was SCW.

If you want to be the best you have to beat the best and in their home grounds. Its no good saying... 'on our day, in our ground, with the right amount of luck and the perfect weather..... we can perhaps sneak a victory'.

ENG are consistently better than everyone bar NZ right up to U20 level. They are the same players which come through to the senior squad... yet after that they drop off.

Take last years JRWC for instance

There were 3 young talented flyhalves.

Ford of England
Anscombe of NZ
Goosen of SA

Ford went on to take his inferior ENG side past Goosen's SA to the final where whilst he ended up on the losing side was by far the best player of the tournament and subsequently won Junior world player of the year.

Fast forward 12 months and whilst Ford has been playing limited domestic cup rugby in ENG, Anscombe has played SR for the blues (with a great record breaking debut vs. the bulls) and Goosen has taken the tournament by storm (albeit now injured).

Ford has been left in the blocks and I'm in no doubt this is half to do with him not getting the first class rugby exposure he needs. This is where the problems ENG face begin.

Its nothing to do with talent... its how ENG harness their talent which is the problem.

I agree but I'm sure Ford will get far more gametime next season at Leicester. Leicester's other flyhalf, Staunton is leaving at the end of the season and Twelvetrees is off to Gloucester so will free up the flyhalf bench spot. I think Cockerill will try and rotate Flood and Ford next season so I hope to see Ford in the England squad soon!

England have historically struggled a bit with turning a strong pipeline of U20 talent into senior players.

There are a couple of reasons for that. Go back a decade and we didn't have a systematic pipeline; the academies and the role that Conor O'Shea and then Stuart Lancaster played at the RFU have addressed that. Then there was the problem of selection. Successive England managers failed to bring new players through and integrate them into the more experienced playing group.

Lancaster seems to be intent on addressing that - he's assembled a core of players who will be young but experienced in 2015, and doesn't seem afraid to bring new players through. There are now also a lot of good young players in the squad - Corbs, Marler, Cole, Morgan, Farrell, Tuilagi and potentially Joseph, Wade etc to come. Several others (Care, Youngs, Lawes etc) came into the squad at an early age.

Ford's time will also come, but it's been agreed that he should have a full preseason to build up his size and resilience. Seems like a sensible choice to me.

fa0019

Although you are right about England's previous bringing through of its youth, I think you are wrong about the current handling of Ford. He featured in the same tournament as Anscombe & Goosen, but he's 2 years younger than Anscombe, a year younger than Goosen, and noticeably smaller than both.

An agreement was reached between club and country that he would be better served sitting this summer out and working on his still quite boyish dimensions so that he can stand up to the demands of a season in which he is expected to feature more heavily (incidentally, he's played 14 times for Tigers so far this season, which will be a similar number of games that Anscombe & Goosen end up playing for their franchises).

I think proving this point that the player's best interests have dictated the selectors' decisions is that 4 of last year's U20 squad have made the England squad set to tour, Farrell, Launchbury, Joseph & Wade. They, along with at least half of last year's U20 side have been regulars with their club sides this season.


Also, I think it's pretty unjust to suggest Ford carried an inferior team in the beating of SA at last year's JWC, England were competitive all over the field with a high quality side that proved better on the day. Here are the highlights to remind you:

https://www.rfu.com/News/2011/June/News%20Articles/180611_Eng_SA_JWC_MR.aspx

fa0019 wrote:Too many NH coaches had shyed away from bringing a full strength squad to the SH.. the last coach who did that was SCW.

If you want to be the best you have to beat the best and in their home grounds. Its no good saying... 'on our day, in our ground, with the right amount of luck and the perfect weather..... we can perhaps sneak a victory'.

ENG are consistently better than everyone bar NZ right up to U20 level. They are the same players which come through to the senior squad... yet after that they drop off.

Take last years JRWC for instance

There were 3 young talented flyhalves.

Ford of England
Anscombe of NZ
Goosen of SA

Ford went on to take his inferior ENG side past Goosen's SA to the final where whilst he ended up on the losing side was by far the best player of the tournament and subsequently won Junior world player of the year.

Fast forward 12 months and whilst Ford has been playing limited domestic cup rugby in ENG, Anscombe has played SR for the blues (with a great record breaking debut vs. the bulls) and Goosen has taken the tournament by storm (albeit now injured).

Ford has been left in the blocks and I'm in no doubt this is half to do with him not getting the first class rugby exposure he needs. This is where the problems ENG face begin.

Its nothing to do with talent... its how ENG harness their talent which is the problem.

Whilst I agree with some of your points it must be noted that Ford only turned 19 in March, played in that tournament at the earliest he could've and as yet is to undertake a full pre season of development. Goosen on the other hand is 20 in July and has already benefited from a full pre season with the Cheetahs from after the junior world championships to the start of this seasons Super Rugby campaign.

Ford should benefit greatly from a full preseason of development, both physically and technically. Yes he's talented, but he is only 19 and still has a lot of maturing to do. I think Cockerill is taking the right approach to his development and should be applauded for this, too often we see young tyros thrown in at the deep end only not to succeed and then be discarded.

You are right about the discarding of previous talent though, previous coaching regimes have done too little to nurture the younger players. It should never have taken so long to regularly involve the likes of Robshaw, Allen, Brown, Mullen, Doran-Jones (I appreciate he may have been in spuads but he's been overlooked by the like of Stevens, Wilson and Payne in the past) etc in the elite setup. I do think Lancaster is intent on rectifying this though, and this has been shown with the likes of Launchbury, Farrell, Burns, Wade and Goode all being called up the extended tour squad.

You beat me to it niwatts

ENG are consistently better than everyone bar NZ right up to U20 level.

But our success at U20 level is only a fairly recent phenomenon. Whether we can bring that success to the full squad remains to be seen, but to say we consistently squander successful age-grade talent isn't quite true – we've not really had the talent before; we'll have to wait and see what happens to it.

fa0019 wrote:Triangulation

You have too little faith.

Faith should play no part in the assessment of a team's chances. The thread isn't about who you want to win, but who you think will win.

Faith has nothing to do with want... its more to do with believe and the talents of the players compared to the opposition.

I'm neither English or South African... although I live in SA and am married into a Afrikaner family (which I accept gives me potential bias against those pesky bokke ) so my feelings on ENG chances have nothing to do with wanting either side to win/lose etc.

So you think Triangulation's selling England short?

What the assumption that ENG will suffer a 3-0 drubbing by 20 points each way??

Yes.

Luckless Pedestrian

I assumption from your location that you are from Wales.... quick question, Wales are going to Aus and confident of winning at least 1 match and possibly the series if they stay injury free from now on.

Now Aus are in most peoples eyes a more complete side then SA, are higher ranked and do not have the same injury levels or recent retirements that SA have experienced this year.

If Wales were going to SA I assume you'd be more confident then if you were playing AUS.
Given there is marginal difference between ENG & WAL at this moment is it so crazy to believe that ENG stand a decent chance out in SA???

I think we will

2-1

Nothing wrong with a bit of faith for crying out loud! If a 3rd tier team were to play the All Blacks, would you tell all their countrymen not to cheer their team on because the result is pretty much a forgone conclusion? No.

Some people are optimists, some are pessimists, but to say you shouldn't have faith is silly.

I think it's clear to all who the optimists are and who the pessimists are on this thread!

Not sure I agree faa019.

I think certain sides match up well against each other. I believe England will struggle more than South Africa than they would with the Aussies.

I still believe South Africa are stronger than Australia. Also South Africa have an excellent recent record vs England I think it's 6/7 wins in a row.

Psychologically it's harder against teams you have poor records against. It's why Ireland struggle with France,England struggle with Ireland and France struggle with England.

fa0019 wrote:If Wales were going to SA I assume you'd be more confident then if you were playing AUS.

You'd be wrong to assume that. Not that we've had much success in either country, but I'd say that South Africa is a much tougher place to tour than Australia.

bluestonevedder wrote:Nothing wrong with a bit of faith for crying out loud! If a 3rd tier team were to play the All Blacks, would you tell all their countrymen not to cheer their team on because the result is pretty much a forgone conclusion? No.

Some people are optimists, some are pessimists, but to say you shouldn't have faith is silly.

I think it's clear to all who the optimists are and who the pessimists are on this thread!

The point is that optimism and pessimism should play no part in assessing a team's chances, because neither optimism nor pessimism on a fan's part will make the slightest bit of difference to his or her team's chances.