England can mount a serious challenge for the No1 spot and the 2015 RWC

First topic message reminder :

As an England fan I'm happy that we're the highest ranking NH team, this is a huge achievement for such a new team and coaching set up.

But lets be honest we should have won the 3rd test.

As an England fan we should be aiming higher than 4th, we could mount a serious challenge for the No1 spot and the 2015 RWC IMO, Aus and SA are there for the taking and as Ireland showed NZ can be got at (well sometimes!)

As an England fan I want to see my team do all the performing on the pitch and not just talking a good game off which seems to satisfy some countries fans.

Every game, in every way, we're getting better and better.

roids is a subject many people think about but few mention...

Damnit Biltongbek what hope is there then?! We will need to steal the genetic code.

Scrum officionados please answer me this -

what is your assessment of the wallaby scrum - where it's at now and how it is progressing?

How do you think it will fare vs the NH packs come November? Will it be an issue or not?

The NZ girls tried it with England players 2010 ? tour. The England boys got disciplined by Jonno for conspiring to pass on their gene pool.

Triangulation wrote:Damnit Biltongbek what hope is there then?! We will need to steal the genetic code.

Scrum officionados please answer me this -

what is your assessment of the wallaby scrum - where it's at now and how it is progressing?

How do you think it will fare vs the NH packs come November? Will it be an issue or not?

The situation with the Wallaby scrum is in my view very much in line with French performances, just when you think you have bested them, they come back and gain parity, sometimes even dominate you for short spells, then add to that their guile and intelligence to negate stronger scrums.

So it is pretty much a mystery to me.

'Guile and intelligence to negate stronger scrums' is a good way of putting it. You don't need to win the scrummaging battle, you just need to make sure the opposition doesn't.

Triangulation wrote:Can i please have some informed comments on my analysis above!

We will beat Fiji.

We will beat the Aussies. see above.

We're odds even to beat Boks.

Hmmm,

I'd score England as having
99% chance of beating Fiji
55% chance of beating Aus
45% chance of beating SA
25% chance of beating NZ

0.99*0.55*0.45*0.25= a 6% chance of winning all 4. Or just a smidge under 16/1 at the bookies.

(It's worth noting that I did have $10 on Daryl Gibson to score the opening try in Super 12 1999 at 16/1, and it paid out)

biltongbek wrote:

Triangulation wrote:Damnit Biltongbek what hope is there then?! We will need to steal the genetic code.

Scrum officionados please answer me this -

what is your assessment of the wallaby scrum - where it's at now and how it is progressing?

How do you think it will fare vs the NH packs come November? Will it be an issue or not?

The situation with the Wallaby scrum is in my view very much in line with French performances, just when you think you have bested them, they come back and gain parity, sometimes even dominate you for short spells, then add to that their guile and intelligence to negate stronger scrums.

So it is pretty much a mystery to me.

Aye, thank you. While it is something that we English used to be able to rely upon particularly circa 2004/5. We can no longer. Even if you do dominate the scrum that will not necessarily translate into a victory e.g perth a year ago, but it might especially if it rains and everyone is plaing droppsies.

It doesn't help of course that ref and touchies seem to be completely clueless about what is going on and the applicable laws.

It doesn't help of course that ref and touchies seem to be completely clueless about what is going on and the applicable laws.

The lottery effect of scrum interpretations is part and parcel of their guile.

Example, I we have a weaker scrum than yours, how do I negate that.

Drop the scrum - referee has to guess
Don't take the hit and the opposition doesn't hold on to the bind - referee has to guess
Scrum in - referee has to guess.
pop out - referee has to guess.

There are very few games and this weekend was a prime example where two scrums were of similar strength (SA vs ENG) where scrum don't do the aove all the time.

I wonder if the new scrum laws will negate all this proverbial 'wool pulling' over the referees.

Many of the decisions in the games I saw were laughable.

And of course when the SH come over for the Autumn games the decisions will be different again.

Kiwireddevil wrote:

Triangulation wrote:Can i please have some informed comments on my analysis above!

We will beat Fiji.

We will beat the Aussies. see above.

We're odds even to beat Boks.

Hmmm,

I'd score England as having
99% chance of beating Fiji
55% chance of beating Aus
45% chance of beating SA
25% chance of beating NZ

0.99*0.55*0.45*0.25= a 6% chance of winning all 4. Or just a smidge under 16/1 at the bookies.

(It's worth noting that I did have $10 on Daryl Gibson to score the opening try in Super 12 1999 at 16/1, and it paid out)

Those % are fairly close to the actual results except NZ, good shout!

Eng v Fiji at home P2 W2 D0 L0 Win% 100.00
Eng V Aus at home P21 W11 D1 L9 Win% 52.38
Eng v SA at home P18 W8 D1 L9 Win% 44.44
Eng v NZ at home P21 W4 D1 L16 Win% 19.05

That gives 4.43% chance of a clean sweep, so more like 45/2 shot

Kiwireddevil wrote:

Equo Troiano wrote:What are England's AI fixtures?

Fiji, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand

So win 0 = sack the coach, win 1 = disappointing, win 2 = par. win 3 = good, win 4 and even the Welsh admit you're #1

Saturday 10 November 2012
France v Australia, Stade de France, TBC
England v Fiji, Twickenham, 14.30
Wales v Argentina, Millennium Stadium, 14.30

Sunday 11 November, 2012
Scotland v New Zealand, Murrayfield, 14.30

Friday 16 November 2012
Wales v Samoa, Millennium Stadium, 19.30

Saturday 17 November 2012
England v Australia, Twickenham, 14.30
Scotland v South Africa, Murrayfield, 14.30
France v Argentina, Stade de France, TBC

Saturday 24 November
England v South Africa, Twickenham, 14.30
Wales v New Zealand, Millennium Stadium, 17:15
France v Samoa, Stade de France, TBC
Ireland v Argentina, Lansdowne Road, TBC

Sunday 25 November
Scotland v Tonga, TBC, 15.00

Saturday 1 December
England v New Zealand, Twickenham, 14.30
Wales v Australia, Millennium Stadium, 14:30

Ireland also play South Africa in the first week of fixtures.


The balance of the fixtures is interesting in respect to sides battling for higher ranking for the 2015 seeding that will occur at the end of the year.

England are the only side to face all of the big 3, so in theory (however likely) have the opportunity to gain the most rating points, but also face Fiji who are the lowest ranked of the touring sides and won't do much for us.

Wales face 2 of the big three (NZ & Aus) plus Samoa & Argentina who they would expect to beat, but are only a couple of places behind them in the rankings, so should offer them a safe bet in boosting their position.

Scotland face 2 of the big three (NZ & SA) plus Tonga who again is quite lowly ranked and won't offer many points.

Ireland face just Argentina & South Africa. They'll expect to beat Argentina, who at just half a rating point behind them they'll get a decent boost in points off. They also avoid NZ who are the most difficult to get any points off.

France face Australia, Argentina & Samoa. They also avoid NZ and the latter 2 again offer what should be a bankable boost in rating.

You are a funny little chap

Why are England not playing Argentina instead of .nz.....??? Silly people

anotherworldofpain wrote:

HERSH wrote:As an England fan I'm happy that we're the highest ranking NH team, this is a huge achievement for such a new team and coaching set up.

But lets be honest we should have won the 3rd test.

As an England fan we should be aiming higher than 4th, we could mount a serious challenge for the No1 spot and the 2015 RWC IMO, Aus and SA are there for the taking and as Ireland showed NZ can be got at (well sometimes!)

As an England fan I want to see my team do all the performing on the pitch and not just talking a good game off which seems to satisfy some countries fans.

Every game, in every way, we're getting better and better.

My mind is England made to look competent by a very poor South African springboks.

That is without doubt the truth of the matter. England are nothing more than a very ordinary side who as always are tough to beat but a side most top sides would expect to beat.

The SA and Aus teams this Summer were among the poorest I have seen for a while and only served to flatter the English and Welsh teams performances. If is possible to flatter series losing perfomances. Wales ahould be most disappointed as any team with pretentions of world class status should have beaten a weakened Australia 3 nil and not lose 3 nil. England did what they do well and put up a reasonable showing but it is unlikely that SA will be as poor again

The Rugby championship should be very interesting. Are NZ really as far ahead of the rest of the world as it would on the face of it appear or were Ireland just really poor

Dragon

Use commonsense. England are gonna be very competitive soon.

Ireland are poor and .nz are the best. Ireland got .nz s back up. They got smashed for it. Wales will get smashed by England next 6ns

dragon

I agree that SA seem weak but I wouldn't say poor if you think of the cadre they have just lost and yet they still win 2 tests and draw the last. I am sure most teams would see that as a huge success if they had just lost the likes of Bakkies, Victor, Smit etc. SA rugby has such strength in depth that I think they will bounce back quickly. Likewise Aus without the likes of Cooper and Beale still won 3 and i think the Aussie backs are the world's best by a clear margin. As far as the Championship goes, I think as with most sports you raise your game depending on the opposition; I expect a close championship this year.

I agree Wales ought to be disappointed but they have taken a huge leap by even being in touch in all 3 tests. For them the issue is balancing expectation against reality; they have beaten Aus twice at home in recent years and if they can start winning at fortress millenium then i will start expecting them to go down under and take scalps. Right now i just hope for it and that is based on perhaps unrelaistic expectations; rather like the idea of England smashing them - that hasn't happened since 2007 and in my view is not on the cards for some time! What Wales really need to do is smash Samoa and Argentina in the Autumn then beat Aus in any way they can. Pu tin a performance against NZ then we are making progress and can start to look at tours down under as contests and not aspirations.

England are gonna start smashing all comers soon. Get ready ROW. Your feicked

When does the Olympics begin again?
I think you'll do very well there.

dragonbreath wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:

HERSH wrote:As an England fan I'm happy that we're the highest ranking NH team, this is a huge achievement for such a new team and coaching set up.

But lets be honest we should have won the 3rd test.

As an England fan we should be aiming higher than 4th, we could mount a serious challenge for the No1 spot and the 2015 RWC IMO, Aus and SA are there for the taking and as Ireland showed NZ can be got at (well sometimes!)

As an England fan I want to see my team do all the performing on the pitch and not just talking a good game off which seems to satisfy some countries fans.

Every game, in every way, we're getting better and better.

My mind is England made to look competent by a very poor South African springboks.

That is without doubt the truth of the matter. England are nothing more than a very ordinary side who as always are tough to beat but a side most top sides would expect to beat.

The SA and Aus teams this Summer were among the poorest I have seen for a while and only served to flatter the English and Welsh teams performances. If is possible to flatter series losing perfomances. Wales ahould be most disappointed as any team with pretentions of world class status should have beaten a weakened Australia 3 nil and not lose 3 nil. England did what they do well and put up a reasonable showing but it is unlikely that SA will be as poor again

The Rugby championship should be very interesting. Are NZ really as far ahead of the rest of the world as it would on the face of it appear or were Ireland just really poor

Dragonbreath

I am not sure that you can sensibly say that the Boks were anywhere near as dreadful as you try to make out. They are work in progress but they did produce 2 20min spells in T1s and T2 the third quarter of T1 and the first quarter of T2 that was Bok rugby at its best. It was rubgy that very few if any top tier sides would have been able to contain or stop. That power rugby might not be to your taste and it may be predictable from the boks but my god it is hard to stop.

The way the 'Boks started the second Test, no one could have withstood them, certainly not Wales.

They are work in progress but they did produce 2 20min spells in T1s and T2 the third quarter of T1 and the first quarter of T2 that was Bok rugby at its best. It was rubgy that very few if any top tier sides would have been able to contain or stop. That power rugby might not be to your taste and it may be predictable from the boks but my god it is hard to stop

Thank you for the recognition tri, as you say, dire, boring in the eyes of some, in my view the most beautiful rugby we have played since Nick Mallet.

Ah the physical battles are just as enthralling as anything else on a rugby field. Alludes to my point about being able to live with the Boks in the first 25, or also when they do get a roll on then catch them out when the game starts to lull. It's frightening to watch in full flow. Hopefully NZ can play as they did against Ireland in the 3rd test and SA can play like those spells. If so we're in for some great games.

Triangulation wrote:

dragonbreath wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:

HERSH wrote:As an England fan I'm happy that we're the highest ranking NH team, this is a huge achievement for such a new team and coaching set up.

But lets be honest we should have won the 3rd test.

As an England fan we should be aiming higher than 4th, we could mount a serious challenge for the No1 spot and the 2015 RWC IMO, Aus and SA are there for the taking and as Ireland showed NZ can be got at (well sometimes!)

As an England fan I want to see my team do all the performing on the pitch and not just talking a good game off which seems to satisfy some countries fans.

Every game, in every way, we're getting better and better.

My mind is England made to look competent by a very poor South African springboks.

That is without doubt the truth of the matter. England are nothing more than a very ordinary side who as always are tough to beat but a side most top sides would expect to beat.

The SA and Aus teams this Summer were among the poorest I have seen for a while and only served to flatter the English and Welsh teams performances. If is possible to flatter series losing perfomances. Wales ahould be most disappointed as any team with pretentions of world class status should have beaten a weakened Australia 3 nil and not lose 3 nil. England did what they do well and put up a reasonable showing but it is unlikely that SA will be as poor again

The Rugby championship should be very interesting. Are NZ really as far ahead of the rest of the world as it would on the face of it appear or were Ireland just really poor

Dragonbreath

I am not sure that you can sensibly say that the Boks were anywhere near as dreadful as you try to make out. They are work in progress but they did produce 2 20min spells in T1s and T2 the third quarter of T1 and the first quarter of T2 that was Bok rugby at its best. It was rubgy that very few if any top tier sides would have been able to contain or stop. That power rugby might not be to your taste and it may be predictable from the boks but my god it is hard to stop.

I am not sure that a couple of 20 minute spells would satisfy most SA supporters. They were very average BY THEIR STANDARDS but as has been said were missing a significant number of first choice players. Had Morne Stein not had one of the poorest games I have seen in a while from a player at this level (even Priestland has not sunk to this level) SA despite being seriously depleted would have been out of sight. It was an understrength underperformimg SA, that allowed England the illusion of being competitive.

The same could be said of Wales. A full strength Aus side AT HOME is probably 10points better than Wales at the moment, and potentially more if we habitually and carelessly continue to botch restarts, lineouts and give away brainless penalties. What NZ would have done to us with that amount of gifted turnover ball, generally poor kicking game, and generously conceded field position doesn't bear thinking about.

Look Wales have come a long way in the past 12 months but national self delusion is pointless. England has not improved at all. They have some new personnel (Most of it pretty limited. People seem to be coming around to my day one conclusion that Farrell surprise surprise is not Jonny), but are actually no better than at the WC. What they do have is a more positive and professional set up which is more condusive to building success, but world beaters they are not and nor are they likely to be.

dragonbreath wrote:

Triangulation wrote:

dragonbreath wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:

HERSH wrote:As an England fan I'm happy that we're the highest ranking NH team, this is a huge achievement for such a new team and coaching set up.

But lets be honest we should have won the 3rd test.

As an England fan we should be aiming higher than 4th, we could mount a serious challenge for the No1 spot and the 2015 RWC IMO, Aus and SA are there for the taking and as Ireland showed NZ can be got at (well sometimes!)

As an England fan I want to see my team do all the performing on the pitch and not just talking a good game off which seems to satisfy some countries fans.

Every game, in every way, we're getting better and better.

My mind is England made to look competent by a very poor South African springboks.

That is without doubt the truth of the matter. England are nothing more than a very ordinary side who as always are tough to beat but a side most top sides would expect to beat.

The SA and Aus teams this Summer were among the poorest I have seen for a while and only served to flatter the English and Welsh teams performances. If is possible to flatter series losing perfomances. Wales ahould be most disappointed as any team with pretentions of world class status should have beaten a weakened Australia 3 nil and not lose 3 nil. England did what they do well and put up a reasonable showing but it is unlikely that SA will be as poor again

The Rugby championship should be very interesting. Are NZ really as far ahead of the rest of the world as it would on the face of it appear or were Ireland just really poor

Dragonbreath

I am not sure that you can sensibly say that the Boks were anywhere near as dreadful as you try to make out. They are work in progress but they did produce 2 20min spells in T1s and T2 the third quarter of T1 and the first quarter of T2 that was Bok rugby at its best. It was rubgy that very few if any top tier sides would have been able to contain or stop. That power rugby might not be to your taste and it may be predictable from the boks but my god it is hard to stop.

I am not sure that a couple of 20 minute spells would satisfy most SA supporters. They were very average BY THEIR STANDARDS but as has been said were missing a significant number of first choice players. Had Morne Stein not had one of the poorest games I have seen in a while from a player at this level (even Priestland has not sunk to this level) SA despite being seriously depleted would have been out of sight. It was an understrength underperformimg SA, that allowed England the illusion of being competitive.

The same could be said of Wales. A full strength Aus side AT HOME is probably 10points better than Wales at the moment, and potentially more if we habitually and carelessly continue to botch restarts, lineouts and give away brainless penalties. What NZ would have done to us with that amount of gifted turnover ball, generally poor kicking game, and generously conceded field position doesn't bear thinking about.

Look Wales have come a long way in the past 12 months but national self delusion is pointless. England has not improved at all. They have some new personnel (Most of it pretty limited. People seem to be coming around to my day one conclusion that Farrell surprise surprise is not Jonny), but are actually no better than at the WC. What they do have is a more positive and professional set up which is more condusive to building success, but world beaters they are not and nor are they likely to be.

Dragonbreath

I get you. You are a slippery operator. You concede now that those spells were good but say "what about the rest?" the spells were fantastic and the rest was pretty damned good! They are very difficult to break down defensively and are solid at set piece.

You mention the players SA were missing....but rather conveniently fail to mention to the players England were missing.

Look mate no one will ever take you seriously if you put your arguments like this. It just doesnt fly and its a bit insulting to the intelligence on people on here to even try it on.

I am not saying England are world beaters but neither are we anywhere near as poor as you attempt to portray us.

I will leave it at that and dragonbreath when SA win all of their home games in the Chamionship i hope that you will have the good grace to credit those performances and admit that you were wrong on this analysis here also.

Triangulation

Don't really know what your point is here. SA were missing significantly better and more highly regarded players than England. Name one who would have significantly improved England and transform them from anything other than workmanlike.

SA by their standards were poor and unable to muster even a 40 minute performance. England are not progressing they are no better as a team than at the World Cup. This is not meant to be a WUM. By the same measure Wales have regressed. England are not a poor side but like us are nowhere as near to SA or Wales Aus as recent results would delude us into believing.

Sure England have the room to improve. Personally I don't think they have the personnel to do so in key positions

I agree with your sentiments Dragon. Although I would say the gap isn't that big.

Dragon

Although I disagree with parts of that, as In I don't think England and Wales are far behind SA and Aus at all, and that I firmly beleive players like Lawes, and Croft would've made a difference.

But I agree that Englands personell is lacking, and Lancaster is doing a good job with what he has on offer!

Dragon, I partly take your points, but is it not a bit soon to write off the younger England players as beyond improvement ? For example as a Glaws fan, I will be keenly watching young May's future development. Other players are v young, few caps so far, ie in early career.
A green young squad held a much capped RSA squad at bay for the last 1 1/2 games. (yes, we were destroyed in 2nd game first half, but recovered some). You also insult RSA in your dismissive comments. I agree England have some positional issues to sort out as a squad (don't we all ?) but your write off of England's chances is like the reported death of Mark Twain. That is to say, rather premature.

gregor I don't take that as dismissive, apart from our 20 minutes bursts of rugby, we were poor, we missed a lot of tackles, allowed england to dominate the breakdowns, Morne steyn was pedantic and kicked a lot of possession away in the later stages of the last test.

So after unofficially winning the 6 Nations and getting an epic draw with SA, are England now up there with the All Blacks in world rugby?

Linebreaker Billtong

Just for the record, I don't agree with morgs views on English rugby, but his comments are on par with the likes of this HERSH article, if not as subtle. How come he's being rocked and others not?

Biltong, then we (teams) need to both to sign up for a self improvement programme.

gregortree wrote:Biltong, then we (teams) need to both to sign up for a self improvement programme.

I kinda agree with you gregor.

dragonbreath wrote:Triangulation

Don't really know what your point is here. SA were missing significantly better and more highly regarded players than England. Name one who would have significantly improved England and transform them from anything other than workmanlike.

SA by their standards were poor and unable to muster even a 40 minute performance. England are not progressing they are no better as a team than at the World Cup. This is not meant to be a WUM. By the same measure Wales have regressed. England are not a poor side but like us are nowhere as near to SA or Wales Aus as recent results would delude us into believing.

Sure England have the room to improve. Personally I don't think they have the personnel to do so in key positions

Its a question of degree. Croft and Lawes would have made a significant difference to us i believe. Perhaps not a winning difference. We will never know.

Fact is it was 187 caps v 485 in T1 and not much different through the series.

It is you who dont make sense. You have said that we havent improved on our RWC side? Which side has ?

I thought the idea was to peak at the RWC and then rebuild afterwards?!??!!?!?

Then to write us off like that is offensive and puts you into the wum territory.

Dragon does get anxious about England and that IRB + / - 0.50 margin.
Way too close for a Dragon's decent comfort.

well then i think england should just pull away and i would put money on it as well after next 6n's

we have to play the big 3 soon so it may be a bit tough this year