England v New Zealand match thread

[quinsforever]

First topic message reminder :

2.30pm at Twickenham on Saturday.

Betfair has england 5:1 against. Sounds about right to me.

Are NZ wearing black this time? I hope so. don't think France or anyone else found the Haka quite the same performed in what looked like white gym T-shirts.

My prediction, fwiw (and i know that's not much), NZ to win by 6, england to dominate at scrums, lineouts 50:50, 60% possession England but Joubert tough (but predictable and consistent) on holding on means isolated possession gives NZ the scoring edge from penalties, and NZ classically more clinical with open/broken field possession.

Really looking forwards to it though.

Anyone going?

[Chjw131]

We'll see what comes to pass in this game. The one thing I am certain of however, is that what we'll see from England is a carbon copy of what we saw last year. There's two main problems with that:

1. New Zealand know what to expect.

2. What does it show we've learnt from the 6N and Summer Tour?

Now no-one can argue with the need to do the basics well and compete at the breakdown. The problem with the game-plan will be the predictability. No rugby in your own half, kick long and chase hard.

If we want to be the best team in the world where's the free thinking?

[No 7&1/2]

So why don't you think that Ashton was on form and who are the 2 or less players better than Wade (currently) in the world King? You doubted I was being serious about Ashton but come on, Wade looks good but it's potential at the top level as yet. You're also not trying to seriously say Lancaster hasn't given players a chance in the past can you?

I think SL yanked Sharples off the England stage before he could settle. The lad is on fire on the right wing for his club this season.

I suppose at that time Ashton was in much better form and nailing the right wing position so Sharples was played out of position on the left. He was picked out for poor defence and not offering much in attack and Strettle (a left winger) given a chance if I remember correctly. Of course since then Wade is probably pushing harder for the right wing. Just bad timing?

[beshocked]

So why don't you think that Ashton was on form and who are the 2 or less players better than Wade (currently) in the world King? You doubted I was being serious about Ashton but come on, Wade looks good but it's potential at the top level as yet. You're also not trying to seriously say Lancaster hasn't given players a chance in the past can you?

I think SL yanked Sharples off the England stage before he could settle. The lad is on fire on the right wing for his club this season.

With 1 try in the AP this season?

Sure.....whatever you say.....

Jamie George has more tries than Sharples and May.

[Chjw131]

So why don't you think that Ashton was on form and who are the 2 or less players better than Wade (currently) in the world King? You doubted I was being serious about Ashton but come on, Wade looks good but it's potential at the top level as yet. You're also not trying to seriously say Lancaster hasn't given players a chance in the past can you?

I think SL yanked Sharples off the England stage before he could settle. The lad is on fire on the right wing for his club this season.

With 1 try in the AP this season?

Sure.....whatever you say.....

Jamie George has more tries than Sharples and May.

Does that make him a better winger?

[hugehandoff]

lost a team squash match last night to someone less than half my age, which was annoying to put it mildly. My team mentioned to me about losing a bit of weight and getting fit might help. I replied that, "that is a good idea. Only 1 minor problem is I am out with old mates at the pub on Thursday, with another Dad and our two boys at the O2 for WWE event on Friday, with mates all day on Sat going to Twickers (in the unlikely event England win it could be a huge day), then with my younger son for an U11 festival hosted by London Irish and we are all then staying for the LI V Northampton match (coach booked so Dads can bond properly) and then a work night out on Monday.                 

Apart from that I should be firing on all cylinders for the next squash match.

[ChequeredJersey]

Do people think Yarde did enough v Aus to get a place in the starting line up?

Yes

yes

He blocked the linesman's view of Brown catching the ball/playing the ball back in from in touch, so yes, he basically won us the entire matchj

[Cyril]

Do people think Yarde did enough v Aus to get a place in the starting line up?

Yes

yes

He blocked the linesman's view of Brown catching the ball/playing the ball back in from in touch, so yes, he basically won us the entire matchj

Indeed. Good wingers are always in the right place at the right time.

[Rugby Fan]

I can understand why people want to see how a newish name will go when the familiar ones aren't setting the world alight.

It's worth pointing out, though, that England has a pretty poor record in getting consistent performances out of new players.

Robinson had almost no success at bringing through anyone who hadn't been capped under his predecessor. He's best known for hanging both Mathew Tait and Henry Paul out to dry.

Take a look at who debuted for him during his Sep 2004 - Nov 2006 tenure:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_England_national_rugby_union_players#2000-2009

Brian Ashton was a bit braver, and we all got excited when Geraghty, Strettle and Tait seemed to click but it didn't last. Cipriani shone brightly before fading.

Johnson has a better record at introducing talent but many of the players who looked good on their first outing went off the boil later. Ben Youngs, Foden, Lawes and Ashton fit that bill.

In truth, the England set-up has failed to discover players who have made themselves undroppable from a very early stage. Where are our Norths, Halfpennys, Folaus, Ben Smiths, Willie le Rouxs etc?

If you look at the list of first caps, the only players I think started their careers briskly and maintained high standards are Dylan Hartley, Riki Flutey, Nick Easter and Delon Armitage. In recent times, you'd probably add Tuilagi and Corbs.

It's all very well arguing for May and Sharples but we have to think about why we were unable to develop any of, say, Abendanon, Hipkiss, Abendanon, Allen, Sackey, Olly Morgan, Narraway, Varndell or Lund into regular internationals. Did we just cap the wrong players, or not know how to use them?

Mike Brown is winning plaudits now. I don't know whether he really is one of our best players but it's quite scary to realize we first capped him over six and a half years ago.

I have share many of the reservations about Lancaster's tactical and strategic strengths but I don't mind him trying to stick with players.

[yappysnap]

I can understand why people want to see how a newish name will go when the familiar ones aren't setting the world alight.

It's worth pointing out, though, that England has a pretty poor record in getting consistent performances out of new players.

Robinson had almost no success at bringing through anyone who hadn't been capped under his predecessor. He's best known for hanging both Mathew Tait and Henry Paul out to dry.

Take a look at who debuted for him during his Sep 2004 - Nov 2006 tenure:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_England_national_rugby_union_players#2000-2009

Brian Ashton was a bit braver, and we all get excited when Geraghty, Strettle and Tait seemed to click but it didn't last. Cipriani shone brightly before fading.

Johnson has a better record at introducing talent but many of the players who looked good on their first outing went off the boil later. Ben Youngs, Foden, Lawes and Ashton fit that bill.

In truth, the England set-up has failed to discover players who have made themselves undroppable from a very early stage. Where are our Norths, Halfpennys, Folaus, Ben Smiths, Willie le Rouxs etc?

If you look at the list of first caps, the only players I think started their careers briskly and maintained high standards are Dylan Hartley, Riki Flutey, Nick Easter and Delon Armitage. In recent times, you'd probably add Tuilagi and Corbs.

It's all very well arguing for May and Sharples but we have to think about why we were unable to develop any of, say, Abendanon, Hipkiss, Abendanon, Allen, Sackey, Olly Morgan, Narraway, Varndell or Lund into regular internationals. Did we just cap the wrong players, or not know how to use them?

Mike Brown is winning plaudits now. I don't know whether he really is one of our best players but it's quite scary to realize we first capped him over six and a half years ago.

I have share many of the reservations about Lancaster's tactical and strategic strengths but I don't mind him trying to stick with players.

Good qestion but then most of those players are only in their first or second seasons for their Int sides. So they've hardly shown a long period of good form have they. A lot of them could well go on to suffer the same dips that have effected England players as well.

Also it's pretty much pointless comparing any England newly capped player to an AB as they both go in to two totally different environments. One goes in to a winning culture surrounded by settled world class players in a system designed to maximise their potential. The other plays for England with little to no culture, potentially no team mates from your club, little direction and no lasting history to full back on and a total lack of settled world class players to make your life easier.

For what it's worth Cole has been consistently very good for a long time now. Lawes has come back to form as well. Most of the others are too new to judge.

There was though shockingly little succession planning in the last decade and a terrible lack/waste of talent. A lot of that I have to assume is down to the U20's though and Englands rise through the age grades. Could it be before that we just didn't the quality of player needed to break into an unsettled team and cement their place in a few games?

[Poorfour]

I can understand why people want to see how a newish name will go when the familiar ones aren't setting the world alight.

It's worth pointing out, though, that England has a pretty poor record in getting consistent performances out of new players.

Robinson had almost no success at bringing through anyone who hadn't been capped under his predecessor. He's best known for hanging both Mathew Tait and Henry Paul out to dry.

Take a look at who debuted for him during his Sep 2004 - Nov 2006 tenure:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_England_national_rugby_union_players#2000-2009

Brian Ashton was a bit braver, and we all get excited when Geraghty, Strettle and Tait seemed to click but it didn't last. Cipriani shone brightly before fading.

Johnson has a better record at introducing talent but many of the players who looked good on their first outing went off the boil later. Ben Youngs, Foden, Lawes and Ashton fit that bill.

In truth, the England set-up has failed to discover players who have made themselves undroppable from a very early stage. Where are our Norths, Halfpennys, Folaus, Ben Smiths, Willie le Rouxs etc?

If you look at the list of first caps, the only players I think started their careers briskly and maintained high standards are Dylan Hartley, Riki Flutey, Nick Easter and Delon Armitage. In recent times, you'd probably add Tuilagi and Corbs.

It's all very well arguing for May and Sharples but we have to think about why we were unable to develop any of, say, Abendanon, Hipkiss, Abendanon, Allen, Sackey, Olly Morgan, Narraway, Varndell or Lund into regular internationals. Did we just cap the wrong players, or not know how to use them?

Mike Brown is winning plaudits now. I don't know whether he really is one of our best players but it's quite scary to realize we first capped him over six and a half years ago.

I have share many of the reservations about Lancaster's tactical and strategic strengths but I don't mind him trying to stick with players.

Three points:
1) It's harder to become undroppable in England than, say, Wales, because there are more players to choose from. There's more competition for places, and in truth there are now several positions where England have several players of similar quality.
2) Allowing for that, there have been a number of players who have broken into the EPS in the last few years and are now in contention to play in every game, even if they are not undroppable. From the top of my head: Corbisiero, T Youngs, Hartley, Cole, Launchbury, Wood, Croft, Robshaw, Morgan, B Vunipola, B Youngs, Farrell and Tuilagi have all consistently been in the XXIII when they've been fit and available. That's 12 players in the last 3 years, not counting some players in very competitive positions like Foden, Brown, M Vunipola and Marler.

What makes us all concerned is that we don't have a settled backline. To be honest, I think good wingers are largely interchangeable as long as they can defend and are in form - look at the list that Woodward used: Luger, Balshaw, Robinson, Lewsey, Cohen and I am sure there were others (probably Catt at some point). They all looked good for at least a season, because the midfield worked.

The problem remains finding a working 10-12-13 axis. It could be Farrell - Twelvetrees - Tuilagi, if we can get them all fit at the same time for long enough to settle. We also need some other players who can fit into the system. They all need game time with each other. I don't think it's fair to judge attacking players on the basis of a couple of games, because the kind of understanding you need to create a fluid attack takes some time. In last year's AIs the backline looked hesitant and fairly clueless against Australia, a bit better but lacking in composure against SA, and then world-beating against NZ. This year, they looked scrappy against Australia, had 40 good minutes against Argentina and who know what will happen on Saturday?

[kingelderfield]

Talk about succession planning, first and formost the RFU and the clubs should come to agreement about the English coaching pathway. There must be cooperation to enable the promotion and development of the very best coaches. There needs to be trust on both sides so atleast the coaches will be prepared to work with the RFU. Thankfully Baxter was taken to Argentina which has to be a very good first step.

[Hound of Harrow]

If  England want to get to the level that we were 10 years ago, who would you have from the current crop being better than their opposite numbers.

For me, Corbisiero would shade Woodman and Tuilagi is better than Tindall. You could also make a point for Launchbury over Kay.

The real difference over 10 years ago is that we do not have the same quality of character and leadership across the park.

This England team is nowhere near the sum of its parts, and there is no cohesive game plan from what I can see.

Harking back to 2003, Woodward wanted three players in every position that he would be happy to pick. Damn right - the 23 that beat Wales convincingly at the MS in the pre RWC warm up game contained ten players who didn't make the trip to Aus (initially).

We are still very much that old cliche - a work in progress.

[GloriousEmpire]

Look at you guys talking like you've already lost!

[Cyril]

Look at you guys talking like you've already lost!

Forum and life are not the same.

Repeat after me

[Poorfour]

If  England want to get to the level that we were 10 years ago, who would you have from the current crop being better than their opposite numbers.

For me, Corbisiero would shade Woodman and Tuilagi is better than Tindall. You could also make a point for Launchbury over Kay.

The real difference over 10 years ago is that we do not have the same quality of character and leadership across the park.

This England team is nowhere near the sum of its parts, and there is no cohesive game plan from what I can see.

Harking back to 2003, Woodward wanted three players in every position that he would be happy to pick. Damn right - the 23 that beat Wales convincingly at the MS in the pre RWC warm up game contained ten players who didn't make the trip to Aus (initially).

We are still very much that old cliche - a work in progress.

I agree with that last sentence, but I thiink your comparison with 2003 confuses quality with experience. By 2003, Woodward had had 5 years to build his squad, the average age of the pack was something north of 30 (remember the "Dad's army" quips) and most squad members had 40-odd caps. Several of them were two-times Lions tourists. Of course they had more leadership and a more cohesive game plan. They'd had a lot more time to learn how to do it. It wasn't until 2003 that they actually found a bombproof game plan and it took several years of being found out to get there.

Lancaster by comparison has a first XV who collectively have around 250 caps, many of whom had no significant internatiional experience 2 years ago. A closer comparison would be the 99 or 2000 squad, and I would say that this squad is more promising than that squad was. Today's pack is more settled than the 2001 pack and has the potential to be as good or better given time together; the backline is less well developed but needs game time with a consistent line up,

[Hound of Harrow]

Look at you guys talking like you've already lost!

[doctor_grey]

Look at you guys talking like you've already lost!

I thought the concerns were about England winning by a closer margin than last year. Clearly this England team is not as good and has virtually untried players in the line-up. So, it is entirely possible we have a closer match than last year. Except, of course, if Chris Ashton suddenly gets a little petrol in his pocket in which case the sky's the limit. I'm sure you agree.

[Hound of Harrow]

poorfour - yeah, I know, but two years out from a RWC Woodward was pretty sure of 12/13 of his starting XV, plus their back ups. At the same stage we are a way off that imo.

[Cyril]

Hound, you've spent too much time with the Celtic posters.

Why are you so negative? This isn't Wales/Ireland/Scotland.

We've a decent chance.

[Hood83]

poorfour - yeah, I know, but two years out from a RWC Woodward was pretty sure of 12/13 of his starting XV, plus their back ups. At the same stage we are a way off that imo.

I'd agree, and Lancaster now needs to work out very quickly that Tomkins is not good enough and Farrell and 36 as a 10, 12, is far too easy to defend against. We also need to know if Wade can play at this level, because if Ashton's slump continues we're in trouble.

[GloriousEmpire]

Look at you guys talking like you've already lost!

I thought the concerns were about England winning by a closer margin than last year.  Clearly this England team is not as good and has virtually untried players in the line-up.  So, it is entirely possible we have a closer match than last year.  Except, of course, if Chris Ashton suddenly gets a little petrol in his pocket in which case the sky's the limit.  I'm sure you agree.  

you English and your humour!

[Hood83]

Look at you guys talking like you've already lost!

I thought the concerns were about England winning by a closer margin than last year.  Clearly this England team is not as good and has virtually untried players in the line-up.  So, it is entirely possible we have a closer match than last year.  Except, of course, if Chris Ashton suddenly gets a little petrol in his pocket in which case the sky's the limit.  I'm sure you agree.  

you English and your humour!

Combined with your AB illness post, is there anyone on either side who hasn't tried to get in their excuses early!  

[Luckless Pedestrian]

If Ashton scores a hat trick this weekend I'll take it all back.

But we've been waiting since 2011 for him to reach the high standards he set himself, the odd run in try from 5m out isn't good enough seeing as his defence and all round contribution to the team is pants, how long do we give him?

This is what I don't understand (as an outsider looking in, admittedly). People cite Wade's defensive weaknesses as a reason not to select him, as if defence is one of Ashton's strengths.

[doctor_grey]

Hmmmm. Ashton was a try scoring machine until he left Saints.
I wonder...........

[No 7&1/2]

If Billy, 36, Lawes, anyone bulldozers a hole through NZ tomorrow expect Ashton to be on their shoulder as that's his real strength. I still think he can be quality but he has to go looking for work tomorrow.

[Geordie]

Actually Wades defence isnt weak. His positioning isnt the best but thats improving.

I think we are building nicely..certainly the pack is looking very good. My concerns remain about what going on with the backs.

Is it the players making it fail...is the perceived lack of ability / creativity actually correct...or is it the coaching and system thats failing the players. Are players like Farrell, Youngs, Barritt, Ashton etc actually being hindered by game plans...restricting free thinking, risk etc?

What is Mike Catt getting paid for?

[Geordie]

If Billy, 36, Lawes, anyone bulldozers a hole through NZ tomorrow expect Ashton to be on their shoulder as that's his real strength. I still think he can be quality but he has to go looking for work tomorrow.

I think he has been looking for work alot to be fair, but he's living off scraps and not sure he has the skill set to create from nothing.
I think he's quality when the style suits him, but i dont believe that this system does.
People have mentioned his try scoring record as still not being that bad...but im beggining to think that certain other wingers might have scored more...

[maestegmafia]

If Billy, 36, Lawes, anyone bulldozers a hole through NZ tomorrow expect Ashton to be on their shoulder as that's his real strength. I still think he can be quality but he has to go looking for work tomorrow.

I think he has been looking for work alot to be fair, but he's living off scraps and not sure he has the skill set to create from nothing.
I think he's quality when the style suits him, but i dont believe that this system does.
People have mentioned his try scoring record as still not being that bad...but im beggining to think that certain other wingers might have scored more...

I thought that it was Ashton's lack of defence that was the biggest issue?

[doctor_grey]

Actually Wades defence isnt weak. His positioning isnt the best but thats improving.

I think we are building nicely..certainly the pack is looking very good. My concerns remain about what going on with the backs.

Is it the players making it fail...is the perceived lack of ability / creativity actually correct...or is it the coaching and system thats failing the players. Are players like Farrell, Youngs, Barritt, Ashton etc actually being hindered by game plans...restricting free thinking, risk etc?

What is Mike Catt getting paid for?

This is the million pound question.  We could/should start a thread on it.  With some players we do see a fair amount of commonality between their play for club and country.  Others seem to play very differently.  Clearly round pegs for round holes? no?    
And I just don't mean things like Foden on the wing.  For instance, is Lawes being used to play the same style as he plays so successfully for Saints?  Farrell is clearly in the same/similar system to Sarries.  Is Ben Youngs being put in position as the would be/should be starting 9 to take advantage of his strengths as he does at Leicester?   Does this overall England attack (oxymoron) take advantage of the running of our 8s? These are mostly coaching questions, though there are certainly questions across the board.

[Cumbrian]

If  England want to get to the level that we were 10 years ago, who would you have from the current crop being better than their opposite numbers.

For me, Corbisiero would shade Woodman and Tuilagi is better than Tindall. You could also make a point for Launchbury over Kay.

The real difference over 10 years ago is that we do not have the same quality of character and leadership across the park.

This England team is nowhere near the sum of its parts, and there is no cohesive game plan from what I can see.

Harking back to 2003, Woodward wanted three players in every position that he would be happy to pick. Damn right - the 23 that beat Wales convincingly at the MS in the pre RWC warm up game contained ten players who didn't make the trip to Aus (initially).

We are still very much that old cliche - a work in progress.

I suppose what you could say is that it is good that Lancaster is bringing in players so young.  If he is given another four years (to give him the same shake as Woodward) the key components of his squad will be experienced but still relatively young. In theory they should have longer at the top of their game together than the 2003 lot (Who were already starting down the spiral by the 2003 World Cup)

Pack:

Alex Corbisiero will be 28 and hopefully have around 50 caps (big worry this)
Joe Marler will be 26 and should have around 40 caps
Mako Vunipola will be 25 and should have around 40 caps.

Dylan Hartley will be 30 and should have around 80 caps (Despite his lapses he is turning into a leader).
Tom Youngs will be 29 and should have around 40 caps.

Dan Cole will be around 29 and should have around 80 caps.
David Wilson will be around 31 and should have around 50 caps (and Lancaster will be looking for his replacement).

Geoff Parling will  be 33 and should have around 50 caps (again a new line out lock will need to be found/ developed).
Joe Launchbury will be 25 and should have around 40 caps.
Courtney Lawes will be 27 and should have around 50 caps.
Dave Attwood will be 29 and should have ??? caps-  He is on the radar but not getting selected,  by the time he gets established his time could pass.

Tom Wood will be 30 and should have around 50 caps.
James Haskell will be 31 and could have 60-70 caps.
Tom Johnson will be 34 and will probably have less than 20 caps.
Tom Croft will be 31 and could have around 50 caps.  Will he get back to his best?  Will he be able to force his way back into the team?
Chris Robshaw will be 30 and should have around 50 caps.
Ben Morgan will be 27 and should have around 40 caps. (Assuming he stays 'fit').
Billy Vunipola will be 24 and should have around 30 caps.

Looking at that, you'd think that Lancaster really needs to start looking at bringing in some fresh blood on the flanks. In about 4 years you can see a big hole in the squad developing if the younger lads in the Saxons like Matt Kvesic, Calum Clark and Will Fraser don't get a crack at the main team. We'll be forever be playing catch up in the experience stakes.

[Poorfour]

poorfour - yeah, I know, but two years out from a RWC Woodward was pretty sure of 12/13 of his starting XV, plus their back ups. At the same stage we are a way off that imo.

Yes and no. I think we actually have about the same number of players settled. Woodward didn't know his front row or back 3 until after 2001 (IIRC he was still tinkering with the front row until 2003); Lancaster has a full pack with established replacements in most positions.

Problem is, at the same stage before 2003, Woodward had been develping a system around Wilkinson, Greenwood and Catt for several years. Lancaster's equivalent is probably Farrell, Twelvetrees and Tuilagi, but they've had no more than a couple of games together.

Relative to where he started, I think Lancaster has made faster progress than Woodward (i.e. the 2013 England is better than the 99 or 2000 England), but he started closer to the RWC and with less in place, so yes, they are some way behind the 2001 England. I think I have seen enough to suggest that with a bit of continuity the attack will come together. The question is where they will get that continuity from.

[Geordie]

Cumbrian,

Good post...i think this is where we fall behind the SH teams. They are the masters of development.

No player outlives their use by dates...and when they do start to make their way out of the team they already have a replacement to come straight in who has a decent level of international experience.

Of course the other benefit of this is that when a new player comes in, he is the only new player as such and they are in a quality settled, experienced team and can be helped along by the other guys.

Currently Englands team is very inexperienced in itself...so any new guy coming in doesnt get that arm over the shoulder by a Johnson or a Smit or a McCaw etc keeping them composed...

[beshocked]

So why don't you think that Ashton was on form and who are the 2 or less players better than Wade (currently) in the world King? You doubted I was being serious about Ashton but come on, Wade looks good but it's potential at the top level as yet. You're also not trying to seriously say Lancaster hasn't given players a chance in the past can you?

I think SL yanked Sharples off the England stage before he could settle. The lad is on fire on the right wing for his club this season.

With 1 try in the AP this season?

Sure.....whatever you say.....

Jamie George has more tries than Sharples and May.

Does that make him a better winger?

Nope but it's just an observation.

I just find it strange you say that Sharples is on fire this season when he clearly isn't.

Strettle has 6 tries in the AP this season but I wouldn't pick him ahead of Ashton,Wade or Yarde.

Geordiefalcon not sure that's necessarily true that other wingers would score more.

How many world class finishers are there?

[gregortree]

Sharples scored 3 tries against Japan on Tuesday.. kind of international tries... ok so only Japan.
You could argue his case vs Ashton, maybe not vs the sickbay boys Wade and Yarde.
But fair enough, Gloucester pack has been pants in AP this season, so not giving the lad a chance to shine in AP tries.
Despite this he is looking good on the ball that he does get and the Japan performance was razor sharp.

[nathan]

poorfour - yeah, I know, but two years out from a RWC Woodward was pretty sure of 12/13 of his starting XV, plus their back ups. At the same stage we are a way off that imo.

I'm sure theres more than one blue print for winning a world cup, not just the one that Woodward used.

[sirtidychris]

If so many players in the gloucester team are the saviours of english rugby, then why are they soo poor! Are their front 5 that useless that all the other amazing 10 players in the backrow/backline don't stand a chance or are they overated? out of form? poorly coached ? TBH The ozzies backline usually shines with a powderpuff front 5..i dont buy it, the gloucester players seem to be out of confidence and none of them would make my fully fit starting england team at the moment.

May
Sharples
Trinder
Twelvetrees
Burns
Kvesic
Morgan

[beshocked]

Gregortree you mean a 2nd string Japan side. Japan's 1st team took on Scotland.

I wouldn't too much into that result.

You can't even argue his case vs Ashton.

Sharples didn't score many tries last season either.

Sirtidychris well said.  

[Triangulation]

We're going to get absolutely stuffed tomorrow and deep down in places that we do not talk about at dinner parties we all know that.

Arguing the merits of Sharples v Ashton is frankly risible.

Shuffling the deckchairs on the titanic chaps.

We're going down bigtime.

I can almost see Hansen's smug jowly face now.

[fa0019]

We're going to get absolutely stuffed tomorrow and deep down in places that we do not talk about at dinner parties we all know that.

Arguing the merits of Sharples v Ashton is frankly risible.

Shuffling the deckchairs on the titanic chaps.

We're going down bigtime.

I can almost see Hansen's smug jowly face now.

Didn't you also say that Australia and Argentina were going to beat England too? You need to step away from the ledge Tri.

[gregortree]

We're going to get absolutely stuffed tomorrow and deep down in places that we do not talk about at dinner parties we all know that.

Arguing the merits of Sharples v Ashton is frankly risible.

Shuffling the deckchairs on the titanic chaps.

We're going down bigtime.

I can almost see Hansen's smug jowly face now.

Triangle, so right, sorry but I allowed myself to get distracted.
Too many preferred choice backs are out on sicklist (Tui, and some decent wingers)
A courageous, but non humiliating defeat is the best I can feel myself hoping for.
Respectble loss, I think that is it.

[Bathman_in_London]

Sadly you may have a point Tri, as you say frankly neither Sharples or Ashton are as good as their counterparts, so its pretty irrelevant who plays.

I don't know about stuffed though, I think England will raise their game but we will end up with a similar sort of result to last weekend in Paris (maybe with a few more points for NZ and the majority of England's points coming from Faz's boot).

Either way I'm glad to say I am going, last year it was pretty special to be there with my old man and 2 brothers, so karma says I shouldn't expect much this time round.

[mystiroakey]

Is there not one poster other than me that thinks we will win tomorrow?

[Nachos Jones]

I don't see why England cant beat the AB's. England are a team that really pushes the SH teams. Personally I believe that the AB's will win but it would be no shock if England won.

[Pal Joey]

Is there not one poster other than me that thinks we will win tomorrow?

No. It seems like you are on your own there, pal.

or just you and Duty...

[sirtidychris]

Is there not one poster other than me that thinks we will win tomorrow?

No. It seems like you are on your own there, pal.

Maybe you and Chris Robshaw, but then Robshaw may post under the name "mystiroakey" in which case just you

[nobbled]

Is there not one poster other than me that thinks we will win tomorrow?

I would like to believe it, but no.
If we had Corbs, Manu and Wade, maybe. But please please please prove me wrong England!

[Cumbrian]

I'd consider a win to be keeping it under 30 points,  so... in a way... er... We are going to stuff them, get in!  

[Pal Joey]

OK. Let's make a list then, oakey.

1. You
2. Duty
3. Chris Robshaw
4. Mike Catt
5. Mick Jagger
6. Sir Ian Botham

anyone else?

[ChequeredJersey]

As long as we make NZ fight and doubt for their victory I can handle a loss. I do think we can win, I don't think we will.

[beshocked]

mystiroakey unfortunately not.

gregortree it's just strange to advocate Sharples for England when he has done so little to warrant a call up.

bathman in london you talk about Ashton not being as good as his counterparts. Do you want to throw Wade in for his first cap vs NZ?

Ashton gets a royal kicking but he has 18 tries for England in 36 caps. He's vastly more experienced than Wade and Yarde combined.

Yarde and Wade are still unproven yet both are praised so highly.

Yarde only got 3 tries last season in 22 matches. Wade has scored a lot of tries but needs to prove himself at a higher level - e.g. the HC and internationally.

Kingelderfield even thinks Wade is world class already.

[Sponsored content]