Manu Tuilagi- the real difference between the two sides

First topic message reminder :

Surprising how little praise is being heaped on Tuilagi for the England result. In what probably ranks up there with THE best single individual back effort against an All Black side strangely not a lot being said his way.

He single handled proved the difference in all 3 tries at the crucial period- highlighted by the swans try by running inside Nonus line to shove Carter off with a fend then leave Nonu, McCaw and Aaron Smith falling off him.

Sure others played their part- Farrells goalkicking and other bits and pieces, the forwards etc. But the real difference, at 15-14 came in a 10 minute burst from Tuilagi. I specifically questioned him before the match several times as I saw him as the key to Englands chances in the backs. I summarised that he wouldnt be up to it, and have been proven completely wrong.

Easily the best individual display from a back against the ABs I can recall- ever.

Just to add...I rewatched the match and at 15-14 after the second of the two All Black tries I asked two questions:

If Tuilagi had left he field at 15-14,

1 Would England have won by the margin they did?

Definitely not.

2 Would England have won at all

Possible, but given the ABs had gained the momentum at that point, probably not. What England did in a whole half without a lot from Tuilagi the AB's all but made up for in a few minutes.

Said all year this game needs line breakers to make the difference- and thats what happened today.
Its all conjecture but in going forward England can not ignore the impact Tuilagi had on this match.

No its just ''Manu wins a game and decides by how many''

When he first got picked for England I claimed, against the opinions of many here and locally, that he could pass. For he next ten games he spectacularly failed to do so, and bleating, "But he can pass! I promise!" didn't, understandably, cut much ice. Just recently he showed he could - and how! That backhand to Barritt to score was beautiful!

But to apportion credit fairly we have to start with Lancaster and his no fear policy, I think.

I also wonder about the Novovirus. One suspects it must have had some effect though I don't think it explains the result alone and in itself. One thing is sure: The ABs are REALLY going to want to win the next encounter. Should be interesting...

Against France.

Is it really? Chuckle. I hadn't realised

I was thinking of OUR next encounter with the ABs.

Great post Taylorman. Manu Tuilangi has been labelled as a potential great for at least a year or so now and i think that yesterday we saw the flashes of brilliance that he will mature into.

The issue with talking about X or Y player, or who received man of the match is that yesterday there could easily have been 23 men of the match if you will (ok, that an exaggeration but you get my point ). England fans saw what Lancaster/Farrel/Rowntree/Catt have been aiming towards, a good ball in hand game but not afraid to play the numbers if necessary or go for the territory/kick game and great application of pressure. More to the point Lancaster and Co. have been lambasted as naiive and green, or inexperienced but i've always stuck up for him because they all 'want' it, the pride in the England jersey; the self belief which i always thought was more than just lip service to the vultures.

This translates to the players and their game in that environment, to have that pride, that self belief, nuture that potential and we see performances out of England that no one would have imagined - that counts for Manu Tuilangi, and all the other players on the field yesterday. Its the one thing that the AB's have always had in spades, this bedrock of nigh on intractable self belief and pride in the All Black jersey. For me it was a great sight to see some of that in The Rose; the first time in years actually.

I think there is a fair chance he will be wearing a centre shirt for a long long time.

Came of age and showed what he can do if utilised properly... for much of the AIs he's been cleaning up other less potent carriers rucks rather than bursting tackles of his own. If people are still unconvinced.... take note, he gets very good press in the SH.... given that only about half a dozen UK & IRE modern "greats" have a similar reputation it shows how well he's respected in the hotbeds of rugby in the SH.

If managed correctly he has a decade in him.... Nonu burst the scene in 03 if I recall and he's still the best 12 in world rugby. Tuilagi could match his career with the right players and coach behind him.

He's England's ace card for sure.

The first time I ever saw him was on Supersport when the boks played Leicester in 09. Think he was 19 and he dominated Maisiekind & co.... you just knew instantly that this kid was something special.

He opens up the field for others just by his presence.... Conrad Smith the great reader of backline play was so worried about Tuilagi he left a gap that even Barritt could run through.

He has a decent right hook too... just ask Ashton

doctor_grey wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Surprising how little praise is being heaped on Tuilagi for the England result. In what probably ranks up there with THE best single individual back effort against an All Black side.........

Wow, mate. That's a hell of a statement! He really played great, and to me, his best in an England jersey. And that was an awesome ten minute burst in the second half. He clearly changed the match.

I do agree that a lot of the hard work had been done earlier in the match. I don't like an individual award such as Man of the Match for such a team sport like Rugby, but it showed how much of the platform was laid by players like Tom Wood and the othe forwards. The right to go wide.

Hi ya doc, yeah for a 10 minute burst havnt seen any better than that from an individual- and I mean ball in hand- not cheeky little kicks, drop goals or penalties- straight out direct running- seeming a lost art in todays game with all this one up drivel.

I posted last week that the AB's key to gaining the dominance in the backline was to gang up on Tuilagi- I think I quoted Get Tuilagi and the backline will fold, and he'll not handle it or something like that.

The AB's paid no attention to him and let him run riot and that really annoyed the hell out of me. Of all sides the ABs know what a linebreaker can do to a sides hopes and allowing him to line up on DC and have 3 fall off him because they were wrongfooted really gets me. In that respect they deserved what they got.

Overall though I thought the energy of the English side as a whole was like an unstoppable train you could feel it coming off every player. The ABs arent really used to that either other than from SA and Oz perhaps. Its something you normally see from our side. So if we're going to lose its really good for once to be beaten at our own game- strength and skill at speed.

Loved it, and don't care too much that we lost that way, as World rugby needed a good shot in the arm from someone other than us its been so dull this year in some parts.

T man

Have to disagree he was over marked and a direct result of this was 2 England tries!!!

fa0019 wrote:The first time I ever saw him was on Supersport when the boks played Leicester in 09. Think he was 19 and he dominated Maisiekind & co.... you just knew instantly that this kid was something special.

Played 12 that day of course.

Just saying.

Taylorman wrote:Hi ya doc, yeah for a 10 minute burst havnt seen any better than that from an individual- and I mean ball in hand- not cheeky little kicks, drop goals or penalties- straight out direct running- seeming a lost art in todays game with all this one up drivel...........

Couldn't agree more - about Tuilagi and about the drivel! Seems so many players are getting cute and trying to show off all kinds of skills but the basics are getting lost. Good, solid, straight ahead running should be the starting point. When I coach my sons youth sides, I have to fight with other coaches about chip kicks, grubbers, those dreaded cross-kicks, behind the back passes, and so on. They are great skills to have in the quiver, but only after the fundamentals.

I also agree it seemed Tuilagi was not marked as I (or you) would have done. The one bloke who is a serious threat to break the gain line, especially when the game was on the line. I think one of the keys is he had players tracking him closely when he made his breaks. Don't remember seeing that in other matches.

I also agree it seemed Tuilagi was not marked as I (or you) would have done.

Problem is if the Kiwi's thought like that they would no longer be the entity they are!!

And I maintain he was closely marked. It's just he was able to outperform those marking him, Carter was ran over, and Jane didn't have the pace to keep with him, even Smith covered him and allowed Barrit a 50 yarder!!!

Yeah but I mean real marking. He had a 5 yard run straight at carter. Should have had someone in his face when he got the ball, before if needed. The others fell off because they were off to his sides by then. Tuilagis pass to Barrit was very good but he'd been given the time by then.

Still, made for a good change to watch it (speaking outside my AB fan persona before my fellow kiwis jump on me!). I'd say his value has just gone up a few cents.

His stats make for good reading - beat loads of defenders, made loads of breaks. In those ways he certainly was the standout player and the difference between the sides as he was the only guy to do so

Taylor,
That's exactly how I would have been defending Tuilagi. I appreciate your lads not doing so the other day. I feel a bit for Carter. Stopping Tuilagi with a full head of steam ain't a walk in the park. I'm sure things will be different the next time.

Isn't the point about defense also just as fundamental as good solid straight up running? If the opposing team has a real line breaker, then get up and stop him before he gets started, right?

TJ,
Where do you go to see statistics? I admit that I am not a huge stat guy, but in many cases they help reinforce what we see (or debunk my failed observations). I'd appreciate a link. Thanks!

Well the All Blacks said earlier in the tour that they don't look much at the opposing sides. So it makes sense they didn't mark Tuilagi in any special way. They play assuming everyone can do their job. To be fair if they had examined England I don't think it would have helped them much.

the crazy thing is.... I would say 2 of his brothers were/are better ball carriers then Manu is at the moment.... obviously Manu is young but just imagine if the Tuilagi's had played for one of the tier 1 rugby nations!

Taylorman wrote:

Poorfour wrote:Tuilagi had a great game yesterday, but he was able to do so because of a team performance that pulled NZ out of shape and created enough space for him to have half-gaps to aim at rather than men. Also, he made far better choices in his passing and offloading than I've seen from him before. In the previous two matches he tried the same lines but got gang tackled and repeatedly failed to pass.

Manu is a powerful weapon, but too often in the past he's been a blunt instrument. Yesterday showed how effective he can be, but now he and England need to consolidate and learn to play like that consistently

Yes, being a carefree Samoan he'll be prone to moments of brilliance then completely the opposite. They generally play off instinct and he'll go through ups and downs probably his whole career. But that brings unpredictability and in todays game thats a vital weapon to have- to keep the other side guessing. If theres one thing about a couple of the NH sides, its predictability. Today was a breath of fresh air.

Careful he's as Samoan as Umaga, Jones, Mealamu, Olo Brown.

doctor_grey wrote:Taylor,


TJ,
Where do you go to see statistics? I admit that I am not a huge stat guy, but in many cases they help reinforce what we see (or debunk my failed observations). I'd appreciate a link. Thanks!

http://www.espnscrum.com/new-zealand-tour-2012/rugby/match/153977.html

The stat have been revised since I said that tho.

TJ wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:Taylor,


TJ,
Where do you go to see statistics? I admit that I am not a huge stat guy, but in many cases they help reinforce what we see (or debunk my failed observations). I'd appreciate a link. Thanks!

http://www.espnscrum.com/new-zealand-tour-2012/rugby/match/153977.html

The stat have been revised since I said that tho.

Excellent find TJ! Sometimes stats for me take the 'magic' out of a game, so i try not to look at them too hard if you will. These certainly make for interesting reading though.

indeed - the stats never tell the whole story

nganboy wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Poorfour wrote:Tuilagi had a great game yesterday, but he was able to do so because of a team performance that pulled NZ out of shape and created enough space for him to have half-gaps to aim at rather than men. Also, he made far better choices in his passing and offloading than I've seen from him before. In the previous two matches he tried the same lines but got gang tackled and repeatedly failed to pass.

Manu is a powerful weapon, but too often in the past he's been a blunt instrument. Yesterday showed how effective he can be, but now he and England need to consolidate and learn to play like that consistently

Yes, being a carefree Samoan he'll be prone to moments of brilliance then completely the opposite. They generally play off instinct and he'll go through ups and downs probably his whole career. But that brings unpredictability and in todays game thats a vital weapon to have- to keep the other side guessing. If theres one thing about a couple of the NH sides, its predictability. Today was a breath of fresh air.

Careful he's as Samoan as Umaga, Jones, Mealamu, Olo Brown.

I grew up and around Samoans all my life in South Auckland, family, school and especially rugby and am very familiar with their way of life. On the sporting arena theyre naturally gifted and generally more athletic at a young age than most Europeans at the same age. They're not as familiar with routine and structure than they are their instinctive abilities on the field. They're a very passionate and proud people and Manu is no exception. Although hes in the English team he'll be clinging to everything he can Samoan in his ways and general nature so I dont know but I'm guessing he'll be very close to his family and brothers over there if not living with them.

Its obvious his rugby comes from his Samoan bloodlines and the influence of his brothers despite learning his rugby in England. I mean England aren't churning players out like him through the same channels. By being instinctive in the main he'll be prone to errors at the international level is all I meant which maybe why hes struggled to date. I think his brothers will have had a very big say in what he did the other day.

Oh come on taylor man- he jumped of a boat- You cant get mroe neglish than that

mystiroakey wrote:Oh come on taylor man- he jumped of a boat- You cant get mroe neglish than that

A throw back to the Illegal immigrant charge he dodged eh?

Exactly what I meant- instinctive, without thinking...ha ha. Nothing wrong with a swim to these fullas. More likely did it as a dare from his team mates.

Theyre a joy to play with though. 80% of my school and club sides were Samoan, Tongan, Raro and Maori. Fearless and talented, many just didnt have the ambition to drive themselves to higher grade so we'd lose some real talent. Nowadays its a real option for them. The thought of Samoans making their home in snowy old England is a really weird difference from my day- no way would they have lived there for the cold. Lovely people though. Being in and around their mostly very large families was one of the joys of growing up.

they seem lovely peops tbh.. certainly an asset to rugby!

Yes from a tiny population they sure have produced some amazing talent. Like Manu we have many arriving here young from Samoa but from about the 1960's onwards there were large numbers migrating here so many are now 2nd and 3rd generation NZers. So even though they come up through the NZ structure theres no denying their bloodline having an influence on their abilities. From B G Williams, Michael Jones, Bunce, Stanley, Umaga, Olo, the bachops through to the Tuilagis and Saveas of today, thy sure are a talented lot.

One of the older Tuilagi's kids are supposed to be involved in the Leicester academy. It'll be interesting to set what happens to them as I assume they were over here at a younger age than Manu was.