England side vs NZ

First topic message reminder :

1. Corbs
2. Youngs
3. Cole
4. Launchbury
5. Parling
6. Wood
7. Robshaw
8. Morgan
9. Youngs
10. Burns
11. Tuilagi
12. Twelvetrees
13. JJ
14. Ashton
15. Goode

16. Paice
17. Vunipola
18. Wilson
19. Lawes
20. Haskell
21. Care
22. Farrell
23. Brown

Obviously this side will concede tries, apart from anything else they won't have time to master the defensive systems, but any team we put out would concede tries - at least this one might score some. If this team doesn't look dangerous, ball in hand, then we really can look at the coaches. I don't mind if we're well beaten, I want to see us looking like we'll one-day be a top side, and that means showing some creativity.

Also, apart from Paice and perhaps Wilson, I think the entire 23 will still be matchday squad contenders in two years time, and I think the starting 15 is the basis for the 2015 World Cup side.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:My point BS was that :

Its not unusual for hookers of any quality and experience to have wonky days on the throwing, so clealry its not that easy to throw staright ( ask the Ospreys)

Sometimes it doesnt matter how well you throw, the hooker has no control over the abilities of his receivers and the oppsotion spoilers

Englands lineout still wasnt as bad as it was last time despite youngs having a "shocker"

Its not to say he doenst need to do better in future, but to use it as an ecxuse to ban him for life is as silly as saying Farrell is done forever for England (which is where we agree right? We are arguing that we agree?)

You seem to make so many excuses. Just accept it was a poor performance at the lineout. I know hookers have bad days but will this really be an isolated incident? The hooker should communicate with his jumpers. The jumpers should know where and when the ball is going to go.

You seem to not have read correctly I said I would keep T.Youngs in the side. My point is: It was an awful performance at the lineout and Youngs must address this. There are positive aspects to his game. It's not all doom and gloom. He has potential but must work on his throwing.

LondonTiger wrote:

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Don’t buy that – T Youngs’ is in the unenviable position of absolutely having to do his main job. And he didn’t. He was good against Fiji – but they didn’t compete at the LO. He was ok against Aus – but they seemed more interested in defending the rolling maul. Against the 1st quality side that competed vigorously – he failed. We dropped Sharples because he couldn’t defend. I remember Hodgson being dropped because he couldn’t goal kick. Some people are even talking about dropping Manu because he can’t pass (too well). In a 1 point game, losing half our LOs killed too many attacking possibilities (and we had too few anyway). And the bad weather didn't worry SA too much. A hooker has to hit his LO man and help hold the front row together. The rest is secondary.

Firstly it was 5 of 13 missed - so 28%. (that may be dodgy as from ESPN) (Admittedly some of the successes - and one of the misses were Paice)

Secondly as I outlined earlier there were other factors other than Tom Youngs being carp. He did not have a great day but and he will have other bad days - perhaps why he is only 3rd choice hooker atm.

TBH I have no problem with Paice playing instead o fYoungs in a one off game. But Paice is not and never will be international quality. Youngs isn't but may become so.



PS Perhaps we should call up Lee Mears, Bath don't need him this weekend.

Sadly as he has retired, he will be staying with us thank you! Hopefully Lancaster doesnt do anything rash like drop any Tigers players, that would be the wrong call I think .


On the Tom Youngs issue, I think that really Paice isn't good enough to start against NZ so we will have to continue with him. Against one of the best lineouts in the world you might expect a couple of steals, but repeated not straight throws isn't really good enough, no excuses.

We all knew T Youngs LO throwing was iffy when he came in. We were all surprised that he did so well against Fiji. But he is back to his wonky ways. He actually could not throw a long ball straight. The ref was lenient it could have been much much worse with another ref.

Couple that with the fact that he is just way too small to hold an international front row together against the best in the world. We need another guy like Steve Thompson in there. Where are they FFS?

Ashton should have pinned his ears back and gone for the line or at least until he had fixed the last defender before passing to Brown. That was a very poor attempt by him and we know those chances come very infrequently.

Ashton is a weakness in defence, off form and has lost confidence in himself. He should be replaced. Its a great shame Monye is injured. (Not with shaky Sharples either. He is clueless in defence).

Ben Youngs kicking was way too deep and easy to defend. He did not have a good game but Care and Youngs are pretty much identical.

beshocked wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I would stick with Youngs, his loose work has been what we've needed and he's learning all the time. Throwing was off against SA but they have the best defensive lineout in world rugby.

I'd leave the pack as they pretty much bettered SA for the majority of the game and they need time to gel. In the backs:

9. Youngs
10. Burns
11. Brown
12. Tuilagi
13. JJ
14. Ashton
15. Goode

21. Care
22. Twelvetrees
23. Monye

Why Youngs at 9?! Tuilagi at 12? Yup that worked really well.

Youngs offers a lot more than Care imo, the tempo just slows as soon as Care comes on as he takes so long to pass.

Tuilagi/JJ has the potential to work and is worth a go. Didn't we draw with SA with that centre combo(maybe not).

I'm a big Barritt fan but as this AI has dragged on he's just showing up to be not at the level we require.

Youngs offers a lot than Care? For me he's jekyll and hyde. Unfortunately recently his hyde persona is making more appearances. Neither Care or Youngs have performed well.

Actually could you say any England back has been any good? Probably not.

Tuilagi is not a 12. He's a good raw player with plenty of potential but he needs to develop at 13.

If you want a more natural centre combo England should pick Saint Billy at 12 and partner him with either Tuilagi or Joseph at 13.

bluestonevedder wrote:Am I the only one that would keep Tom Youngs at hooker? I thought bar a few wobbly lineout throws in torrid conditions, he was very good. His carrying was hard and powerful, breakdown work very good, and tackled very well too. I think he's a good physcial presence on the field. When Paice came on, and was completely man-handled by the Springboks. I saw him carry twice- once he was picked up, and the other time he was driven back. I'd persist with Youngs all day.

me too, I thought he was good, yes the conditions were crap, but I think we ought to persist with him and tell him ...'y'know you're tackling stats could be better? guess who we're playing on Sat?'

If that doesn't get him to man-up nothing will

beshocked wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:My point BS was that :

Its not unusual for hookers of any quality and experience to have wonky days on the throwing, so clealry its not that easy to throw staright ( ask the Ospreys)

Sometimes it doesnt matter how well you throw, the hooker has no control over the abilities of his receivers and the oppsotion spoilers

Englands lineout still wasnt as bad as it was last time despite youngs having a "shocker"

Its not to say he doenst need to do better in future, but to use it as an ecxuse to ban him for life is as silly as saying Farrell is done forever for England (which is where we agree right? We are arguing that we agree?)

You seem to make so many excuses. Just accept it was a poor performance at the lineout. I know hookers have bad days but will this really be an isolated incident? The hooker should communicate with his jumpers. The jumpers should know where and when the ball is going to go.

You seem to not have read correctly I said I would keep T.Youngs in the side. My point is: It was an awful performance at the lineout and Youngs must address this. There are positive aspects to his game. It's not all doom and gloom. He has potential but must work on his throwing.

Your the one who hasnt read correctly, you missed off the entire last paragraph before ranting on at me about not wanting to drop Youngs just blame him for everyting thats Parlings responsiblity as well as his own.

Ill throw you a bone...Englands lineout has suffered since Borthwick went.

beshocked wrote:Youngs offers a lot than Care? For me he's jekyll and hyde. Unfortunately recently his hyde persona is making more appearances. Neither Care or Youngs have performed well.

Actually could you say any England back has been any good? Probably not.

Tuilagi is not a 12. He's a good raw player with plenty of potential but he needs to develop at 13.

If you want a more natural centre combo England should pick Saint Billy at 12 and partner him with either Tuilagi or Joseph at 13.

Again with the agreeing! Sheesh youll get a reputation for being sane at this rate

Beshocked,

we are not trying to make excuses for tom Youngs - and both PSW and I have said that his throwing was not good. Just trying to point out that not just the hooker is at fault when a lineout mis functions. (and note we both also blame Parling another one of ours).

Compare it with your defence of Barritt. While he has struggled to create anything - it was harsh for people to heap all the blame for a misfiring backline on him. You were right to point out the quality of ball he was getting was poor, and the lack of options outside him limited.

Before the SA game, we were told that Youngs offers more of a kicking game. Frankly over hit box kicks were what I was concerned about and that seemed to be exactly what we got. I'm sure either of them have eactly earned the right to start against NZ though, just toss a coin and give them both a half!

I can't see how Tuilagi at 12 would work. What we need to do is focus on getting him into the game more and really attacking the gain line. He barely got the ball on saturday apart from the inception. Seeing as we have 2 large centres, I'd like to see them both running more angles off the flyhalf (whoever plays on saturday). Attacking-wise you would barely know Barritt was playing on saturday, the only time I noticed him going forward was when he was hit just after passing and required treatment. I like him as a player, but he has to get into the game more.

This is probably partly a coaching issue, but surely it wasnt too hard to think that getting a big running going at Lambie down the 10 channel might have been worth trying. At least once or twice to keep the backrow nearer to the ruck before spinning out a wider pass to Manu. Surely some simple school level tactics like these would be better than either a Flood half break with no support or lateral passes to the wing allowing the defence to just drift across?

I was unable to see an attacking plan on Saturday. That has to be coaching issue.

It was worrying that Manu was typically stood as the first guard over an England ball carrier who had gone to ground, and the best pass he got all day was from a Saffer. For a man who normally shows so much enthusiasm (and at tigers runs good lines off Flood) that is worrying.

The thing about Tom Youngs is that he doesn't know his role.

He's 100kg and 5'9. If he carries the ball will he burst through tackles and at the same time be able to pass the ball before hitting the ground???

Doubtful.

Brian Moore was the same, and therefore he generally stayed away from carrying.

Rather Moore was the first in on rucks and mauls... hence the name Pitbull, hence why he's remembered as one of the best hookers of all time.

Youngs is an excellent prospect for clearing up rucks though, he's very strong and short, he has a low centre of gravity... just like Pocock.

So rather than being one of ENG most used ball carriers... why not hold him off so that he can be first at the breakdown, and clear up rucks quickly.

Instead we had Manu doing the above when it should have been the opposite.

In terms of his throwing I blame Lancaster a bit for that.

How many games he played at Hooker? He's played with Johnson 2 games in a row prior to that... he's quite a bit shorter than Wood, add arm length and 6-8 inches diff. Tricky for a 6 day turnaround for a guy who has played hardly any games at Hooker. Why wasn't Wood used beforehand?

When a coach changes 6 players in a week the team ain't going to have the same fluidity as the week before. 1 or 2 is fine... 6 is a big ask... esp. for an inexperienced team.

Lancaster confirms Toby Flood's toe injury is "not as bad as feared" but he won't make NZ. Freddie Burns likely to be in match day 23

Couple that with the fact that he is just way too small to hold an international front row together against the best in the world. We need another guy like Steve Thompson in there. Where are they FFS?

England 4 Ever,

Had i seen evidence on Saturday that this was true, i would agree...but aside from his throwing i thought Youngs was excellent. Him and Morgan were the main two trying to get us going forward...with Parling doing some good work also.

I some some realy pluses from this pack...compared to the set up of last weeks pack v OZ.

damage_13 wrote:Lancaster confirms Toby Flood's toe injury is "not as bad as feared" but he won't make NZ. Freddie Burns likely to be in match day 23

Aw god...that means we start an international game v the best in the world with Farrell at 10.

Might not bother watching the game....

I agree GF, Youngs carried better than Hartley every could.

damage_13 wrote:Lancaster confirms Toby Flood's toe injury is "not as bad as feared" but he won't make NZ. Freddie Burns likely to be in match day 23

Mixed emotions. I just hope NZ don't completely run us over and ensure Burns never plays again. What a game to earn your first cap.

someone needs to do a SCW pre-match, at training and write

4 Tries Minimum

on the whiteboard.

Make sure there are steady heads in Defence, but lets give these young guys the chance to run out and play heads up all-or-nothing attacking rugby against the best side in the world.

sure... it'll be carnage in the changing room at half time, but it'll be glorious start to England playing with aggression and confidence before the 6N

Not so with you on Morgan though. He needs to take up more work in the tight and around the fringes. I'd like to see him coming in at pace of 1st or 2nd ball and seeing if he can get through. Most of his runs seem to be from deep which although are great don't help us when we have static ball.

He's a top player but very much a work in progress still.

I think the side is now fairly obvious - same pack, Farrell at 10 and JJ in the starting line up. I think the only uncertainty is which of JJ and Tuilagi is on the left wing, and which is playing OC.

DaveM wrote:I think the side is now fairly obvious - same pack, Farrell at 10 and JJ in the starting line up. I think the only uncertainty is which of JJ and Tuilagi is on the left wing, and which is playing OC.

and why you wouldnt want to consider adding someone who can pass into the side

With Farrell at 10 I guess it wont be such an issue though, the ball wont even get to Barrit

With Flood in doubt Farrell is the likely starter at 10 and keeping the scoreboard ticking over essential in the next Match.
4 Tries Minimum on the chalkboard good idea I expect that will be the All Blacks
minimum target.
A lot will depend on the All Black side picked much has been read into Hika Elliott
and Tom Taylor being added to the mix.
A lot of Bruised and sore bodies in the AB camp BUT they will be up for one last HALLO.This is the one they`ve targetted Pressure and territory won`t phase them one bit.
There Defence has coped with every thing so far light training this week then a mud bath will suit them fine.Best Wet weather team on the Planet keep ball in hand do the basics take points as they come.
Maybe a surprise Taylor starting at Full Back ,Dagg on a wing,Carter back but Taylor goal kicking is his forte.
Mealamu may start or Coles with the other on the bench who knows?just looking forward to another great game.
Hopefully this one without con troversy.

Carters 50/ 50 at the moment but his wife is 100%
according to our news...hapu that is...

Flyhalf debate

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/9704299/England-v-New-Zealand-What-became-of-the-new-Jonny-Wilkinsons.html

Lancaster has said hes picking Farrell.

That being the case the debate about Barrits passing is nulled...he wont see the ball anyway.

Lancaster has released players back to their clubs leaving just the 23 man squad he expects to line up on Saturday (+Nick Wood).

Burns replaces Flood while Lawes is in for Botha.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/20488881

Assume it'll be the same side with Lawes (so much for having to earn your shirt back) and Burns coming onto the bench then.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Assume it'll be the same side with Lawes (so much for having to earn your shirt back) and Burns coming onto the bench then.

Yeah I expect that only injury will see any changes to last week's starting 15 - Farrell in for Flood and maybe Corbs out.

When Hartley and Croft return we're seeing a really good pack developing. But that backline is as bad as the dark days of Noone/Tindall and worse than the best Jonno had (which included Hape/Tindall fgs). Little guile, pace or handling prowess. I really hope NZ aren't up for an end of term romp.

Interesting to see that MattTait ,who always seemed to me to get a roughdeal.
Picked to young then constantly messed about by used as a utility player then dumped.Varndell seems to be a try scoring machine at present he was always in and out.
Care or his current rival?at 9 sorry both have a fatal flaw crabiing sideways several paces before passing.Care tends to run to much rather than pass a 9`s primary role.
Farrell yesterday had a very good game IRB man of the year?there were hints on the Rugby Club midweek all about this weekends matches.
Whats happened to Ben Foden,and the Armitages both of them?Burns looks to be a very good prospect at 10.

Tait gother injured too much and is just working his way back to club level now..but struggles with the physical ity of rugby now 16 stone backs are the norm.
Darnell is a pure sprinter...that's it. Poo at everything else. Also had a habit of getting injured at the wrong time. He was sniffed around by England and sense to the 7s world cup but didn't really justify the hype. He does well at club level with the space and way his side plays but I don't see him replacing Ashton.he also had a year or so suffering from "personal issues" around the time tigers had a coke problem.
Farrell...again limited but a big game player and does what he does well. A 2003 wilko when the injuries were beginning for hamper his running but we're yet to ruin him.
Arimtage fullback played in the world cup which means Lancaster won't go near him. His brother is doing well in France but that makes him very hard for pick for England due to release issues.
Benfoden is long term injured.
Burns has sniffed the edges of the squad for a while now...he was part of the world cup shortlist squad. Highly rated and the standout flyhalf in the Jeff this year