England-NZ post match discussion

If only manu had been fit. England would have won today. This England team is on the verge of something special.

Here we go
 

I'll start it off: 'Ifs and Buts'

Hey, wrfc,
Do you mind if we point the match thread to here (it's full) and re-jig the title a bit?

"England-NZ post match discussions" or something?

Let us know what you want it called.  

Go ahead.

do you like it?  

wrfc1980 wrote:If only manu had been fit. England would have won today. This England team is on the verge of something special.

I see you've kept your sense of humour. So that's the main thing!

Pointless OP. England were only 9 points away from beating the No 1s. Anything else is pure invention.

But it was a great contest and augurs well for a young england side, particularly in the forwards.

It's true that Nz have to be on top of their game to beat that England team but it was still s huge disappointment. But beat us they did and at our place too. Our backline wasn't good enough and never will be until we find another 2 or 3 top class players.

Let him have his fun, quins.

Mate, your article reached maximum no. of posts. Well done!

Rather than create a new overflow thread - wrfc kindly agreed with my suggestion to point the punters to this thread to keep talking about the outcome of the game and both teams preparations for next week.

eng v nz thread was always going to be popular, unless my buddy GE started it

Manu, the finest center Samoa has produced.

I actually thought Hartley going off was a bit of a turning point, those lost lineouts really seemed to lose you boys momentum.
I honestly thought NZ would win by 20 points and after the start it could have been more. So have to say well played Eng, good game really especially as your midfield is average if we being generous.
Obviously congrats to NZ as usual, awesome side.

quin
just accept you lost and stop snapping at everyone else for once

We only just lost to South Africa, it happens. But they were better than us and New Zealand you, a new Zealand fan could easily say that if Conrad Smith players, no one in your backline would have even made a break (not even your great Tuilagi).
but at the end of the day South Africa and New Zealand are still better than Wales and England.
stop trying to make excuses
you look a fool mun

Yeah - well done NZ - class act. But very happy with the Eng performance. Lots to be positive about from my point of view and I think the team will take lots of confidence from the result. The start of the match cost Eng dear in the final reckoning and I agree that Hartley was missed when he came off.  

LeinsterFan4life wrote:Manu, the finest center Samoa has produced.

 He didn't even play though...

quinsforever wrote:eng v nz thread was always going to be popular, unless my buddy GE started it

How is GE doing? All well? Christmas drinks still on?

Does the OP also apply to France then?
In the end France proved the tougher of the two if we are being honest, a draw at the end on the cards with France hot on attack at the end.

So based on the two matches the 6N isnt going to be just the two horse race it was last year. But then France are France.

Admittely the AB's played a little better this round but we still had a lot of rough patches, this kicking is going to come under more scrutiny when they get home. Its pointless if regathering the ball or applying pressure isnt its primary goal.

Either Ireland were saving up for next week or their defence is particularly dire at the moment but at times Oz just waltzed through them at will, Coopers try so easy it was just silly.

Taylorman wrote:Does the OP also apply to France then?
In the end France proved the tougher of the two if we are being honest, a draw at the end on the cards with France hot on attack at the end.

So based on the two matches the 6N isnt going to be just the two horse race it was last year. But then France are France.

Admittely the AB's played a little better this round but we still had a lot of rough patches, this kicking is going to come under more scrutiny when they get home. Its pointless if regathering the ball or applying pressure isnt its primary goal.

Either Ireland were saving up for next week or their defence is particularly dire at the moment but at times Oz just waltzed through them at will, Coopers try so easy it was just silly.

Didn't see the French game Taylor but good to hear they pushed you even closer.

stub wrote:

quinsforever wrote:eng v nz thread was always going to be popular, unless my buddy GE started it

How is GE doing? All well? Christmas drinks still on?

Well I lost money today unfortunately. I'll hang on to the solace of an All Blacks victory, and a record set straight.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

stub wrote:

quinsforever wrote:eng v nz thread was always going to be popular, unless my buddy GE started it

How is GE doing? All well? Christmas drinks still on?

Well I lost money today unfortunately. I'll hang on to the solace of an All Blacks victory, and a record set straight.

I'm sure the victory is most important GE. Good match though don't you think? Quite exciting on the whole. Did you go or watch on TV?

Jhamer25 wrote:quin
just accept you lost and stop snapping at everyone else for once

We only just lost to South Africa, it happens. But they were better than us and New Zealand you, a new Zeland fan could easily say that if Conrad Smith players, no one in you backline would have made a break (not even your great Tuilagi)
but at the end of the day South Africa and New Zealand are still better than Wales and England.
stop trying to make excuses
you look a fool mun

if you'd bothered to read my OP which just hit 1000 posts, you would see i predicted an england loss by 6, and said 5:1 against looked reasonable odds.

why dont you stick to 6N gloating as you dont have enough experience of what its like to beat SH sides to be able to comment without being blinded by the chip on your shoulder.

conrad smith - you mean the one who played against manu last year?  

Yeah I think they did overall, particularly in the midfield where Fofana really is a nuisance to our side- always plays well against us- he would have made a difference if England had himonside today-England kept themselves in this match mainly through grinding away and kicking the goals.

Agree with Doc in that Farrell is not ever going to light up a backline. Said this with the Lions and the same is true here. Does the basics- goals and defence was good, but those types of players stifle a backlines abilities from growing. Steyn of the Boks has done this to SA for years in the same way.

Like last years win until sides see that the backs have an equal importance in test rugby they will never be on par with NZ. NZ's losses over the years have usually come from key linebreaks making the difference. Englands backplay apart from individual efforts from Brown was poor, non productive meaning England had to win doing something else.

Only a tenner though, GE?
How did your work colleagues take it? Weren't you in a corporate box or something?

I tipped Italy on here but Fiji in another comp... just had a feeling it might be closer than people were thinking. At 20-3 it didn't look too promising for Fiji but they scored some good tries and came back strongly near the end and only lost by 6.

quinsforever wrote:

Jhamer25 wrote:quin
just accept you lost and stop snapping at everyone else for once

We only just lost to South Africa, it happens. But they were better than us and New Zealand you, a new Zeland fan could easily say that if Conrad Smith players, no one in you backline would have made a break (not even your great Tuilagi)
but at the end of the day South Africa and New Zealand are still better than Wales and England.
stop trying to make excuses
you look a fool mun

if you'd bothered to read my OP which just hit 1000 posts, you would see i predicted an england loss by 6, and said 5:1 against looked reasonable odds.

why dont you stick to 6N gloating as you dont have enough experience of what its like to beat SH sides to be able to comment without being blinded by the chip on your shoulder.

conrad smith - you mean the one who played against manu last year?  

Yea that Conrad Smith. How many do you know?
Im not wasting my time looking at your posts.
Yes you predicted a loose but do the manly thing and admit defeat and sop making stupid excuses.
Haha you are really making a fool of yourself. Keep making little jives i really don't care what you think.
Pathetic

Taylorman wrote:Yeah I think they did overall, particularly in the midfield where Fofana really is a nuisance to our side- always plays well against us- he would have made a difference if England had himonside today-England kept themselves in this match mainly through grinding away and kicking the goals.

Agree with Doc in that Farrell is not ever going to light up a backline. Said this with the Lions and the same is true here. Does the basics- goals and defence was good, but those types of players stifle a backlines abilities from growing. Steyn of the Boks has done this to SA for years in the same way.

Like last years win until sides see that the backs have an equal importance in test rugby they will never be on par with NZ. NZ's losses over the years have usually come from key linebreaks making the difference. Englands backplay apart from individual efforts from Brown was poor, non productive meaning England had to win doing something else.

Yeah, I think with a few other players available (mostly backs) to England we could have been even more competitive today and perhaps even have caused you to sweat more than you said you did against France... On today's performance I think England have plenty to be optimistic about.  

Hi ya LB. What do you think of Irelands chances next week after that match. Didnt watch it all but the tries looked soft and Irelands defence looked diabolical, almost like they didnt have the right numbers on the field.

I'm not so sure. England have pretty much mastered what they're trying to achieve. Which is to shut down the game completely. They flood the breakdown. Try to cut off the ball from the opposition backs. But also are reluctant to use their own. They're again relying on basing a win around rumbling mauls from set piece line-outs and milking penalties from scrums.

But like SA before them, I think they will come to learn it takes more to win than just the 2003 style of 10 man rugby. Farrell is a Wilkinson cookie-cutter clone. He can kick his 3-pointers but offers little else. The tight unit are all very impressive, but at the end of the day what does all that huffing and puffing achieve when you find your score again incrementing in 3's, whilst the opposition is going up in 7's.

Take a look at how Wales dismantled Argentina today. Now that's the kind of rugby that won them the 6N last year.

England are progressing alright, but I think, in the wrong direction.

Jhamer25 wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

Jhamer25 wrote:quin
just accept you lost and stop snapping at everyone else for once

We only just lost to South Africa, it happens. But they were better than us and New Zealand you, a new Zeland fan could easily say that if Conrad Smith players, no one in you backline would have made a break (not even your great Tuilagi)
but at the end of the day South Africa and New Zealand are still better than Wales and England.
stop trying to make excuses
you look a fool mun

if you'd bothered to read my OP which just hit 1000 posts, you would see i predicted an england loss by 6, and said 5:1 against looked reasonable odds.

why dont you stick to 6N gloating as you dont have enough experience of what its like to beat SH sides to be able to comment without being blinded by the chip on your shoulder.

conrad smith - you mean the one who played against manu last year?  

Yea that Conrad Smith. How many do you know?
Im not wasting my time looking at your posts.
Yes you predicted a loose but do the manly thing and admit defeat and sop making stupid excuses.
Haha you are really making a fool of yourself. Keep making little jives i really don't care what you think.
Pathetic

it was the post that appears at the top of every page, as it started the thread  

good to know that you don't read the original thread post before you wade into a discussion windmilling  

admit defeat? england lost as i predicted. so ok i admit england lost as i predicted.

for you to put a team that has never beaten NZ into the same bracket against SH opposition as Eng and Fra is the joke, my young friend. Wales were woeful against SA. bereft of ideas, creativity and threat. Eng and Fra really stepped up and both had a decent shot against an unbeaten NZ.

France v NZ was not on the same level as today T'man.

Hi Taylorman.
It will be a tougher test for them I'd say. NZ must keep their cool and play their game.
They were well off their game, Sexton went off and they seemed to lose cohesion and scramble and fumble more.

The penalty count was heavily against Oz in 1st half... but a few ones our way in the last qtr, especially, relieved pressure situations on our line and our forwards grew in confidence in the 2nd half, upped the workrate being a player in the bin (Hooper) and later with the sending off of Kudriani.

GloriousEmpire wrote:I'm not so sure. England have pretty much mastered what they're trying to achieve. Which is to shut down the game completely. They flood the breakdown. Try to cut off the ball from the opposition backs. But also are reluctant to use their own. They're again relying on basing a win around rumbling mauls from set piece line-outs and milking penalties from scrums.

But like SA before them, I think they will come to learn it takes more to win than just the 2003 style of 10 man rugby. Farrell is a Wilkinson cookie-cutter clone. He can kick his 3-pointers but offers little else. The tight unit are all very impressive, but at the end of the day what does all that huffing and puffing achieve when you find your score again incrementing in 3's, whilst the opposition is going up in 7's.

Take a look at how Wales dismantled Argentina today. Now that's the kind of rugby that won them the 6N last year.

England are progressing alright, but I think, in the wrong direction.

pretty clear to me that it was NZ killing off the ball, lying on top of it, not releasing the tackler, especially in the first half. joubert agreed to apparently. but NZ to be fair totally cleaned up their breakdown act in the 2nd half.

realistically though, losing the last 4 lineouts out of 5 once youngs came on was what cost england any chance at victory.

i think england played to their strengths today. with more dangerous options in the backs i would hope they play a more expansive game.

wales whole stategy is much more limited than englands. chronically slow ball from philips mean its all to predictable and they will never beat SA or NZ with that strategy with this personnel. their style of win against argentina is a canard.

stub wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Yeah I think they did overall, particularly in the midfield where Fofana really is a nuisance to our side- always plays well against us- he would have made a difference if England had himonside today-England kept themselves in this match mainly through grinding away and kicking the goals.

Agree with Doc in that Farrell is not ever going to light up a backline. Said this with the Lions and the same is true here. Does the basics- goals and defence was good, but those types of players stifle a backlines abilities from growing. Steyn of the Boks has done this to SA for years in the same way.

Like last years win until sides see that the backs have an equal importance in test rugby they will never be on par with NZ. NZ's losses over the years have usually come from key linebreaks making the difference. Englands backplay apart from individual efforts from Brown was poor, non productive meaning England had to win doing something else.

Yeah, I think with a few other players available (mostly backs)  to England we could have been even more competitive today and perhaps even have caused you to sweat more than you said you did against France... On today's performance I think England have plenty to be optimistic about.  

yes the returning backs will make a difference. I'd like to know how kiwis rated this performance in comparison with the RC as the last 3 tests we've struggled to get continuity for very long periods let alone dominance. We've now won something like 23 from last 24 in the AIs but despite that it does seem to be geting harder each year. Its good to win ugly but neither this week or last week were anywhere near the ABs best performances of the year and Hansen now has a dilemma for the England tour next year.

Linebreaker wrote:Only a tenner though, GE?
How did your work colleagues take it? Weren't you in a corporate box or something?

I tipped Italy on here but Fiji in another comp... just had a feeling it might be closer than people were thinking. At 20-3 it didn't look too promising for Fiji but they scored some good tries and came back strongly near the end and only lost by 6.

Yeah. To be honest it's uncomfortable and I don't like it. Rugby is for enjoying and not biting your lip and saying pleasant things. SOunds like Fiji v Italy was very similar to Eng v NZ then?

quinsforever wrote:

Jhamer25 wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

Jhamer25 wrote:quin
just accept you lost and stop snapping at everyone else for once

We only just lost to South Africa, it happens. But they were better than us and New Zealand you, a new Zeland fan could easily say that if Conrad Smith players, no one in you backline would have made a break (not even your great Tuilagi)
but at the end of the day South Africa and New Zealand are still better than Wales and England.
stop trying to make excuses
you look a fool mun

if you'd bothered to read my OP which just hit 1000 posts, you would see i predicted an england loss by 6, and said 5:1 against looked reasonable odds.

why dont you stick to 6N gloating as you dont have enough experience of what its like to beat SH sides to be able to comment without being blinded by the chip on your shoulder.

conrad smith - you mean the one who played against manu last year?  

Yea that Conrad Smith. How many do you know?
Im not wasting my time looking at your posts.
Yes you predicted a loose but do the manly thing and admit defeat and sop making stupid excuses.
Haha you are really making a fool of yourself. Keep making little jives i really don't care what you think.
Pathetic

it was the post that appears at the top of every page, as it started the thread  

good to know that you don't read the original thread post before you wade into a discussion windmilling  

admit defeat? england lost as i predicted. so ok i admit england lost as i predicted.

for you to put a team that has never beaten NZ into the same bracket against SH opposition as Eng and Fra is the joke, my young friend. Wales were woeful against SA. bereft of ideas, creativity and threat. Eng and Fra really stepped up and both had a decent shot against an unbeaten NZ.

Deeper and deeper

Keep babbling. You seem to be a bit full of yourself really.
I'm not wasting my time on you anyway. I will just sit back and watch the rubbish your posting instead  
Deal

I love how everything changes when its England.

England beat Australia but don't play particularly well and they are slated for it. Yet any other team in the same position and its classed as playing badly and winning is the sign of a good team.

Lose to NZ playing ferociously up front taking the game to them having them on the ropes for a large part of the game and we're slated for boring 10 man rugby with no flair and a stain on the game...yet if it was any other team it would be a heroic proud performance that took the Abs to the brink...

Pah im getting fed up with this site...

if you do us the favour of popping off back to the wales thread where you can wax lyrical about your victory, then you have a deal

 

There's no shame in losing to NZ by only 8 points.
England must be doing something right to score 22 points. They just have to dust themselves off and get ready for the next time they play.

England doing well in the RLWC. 28-6 over France... who are one or two players away from being No.3

Na I will keep posting where I want actually. Read my posts you might learn something  

But Deal though
 

GloriousEmpire wrote:
Take a look at how Wales dismantled Argentina today. Now that's the kind of rugby that won them the 6N last year.

That's the rugby that won them one game in the Six Nations last year. Their games against France, Italy and Scotland were absolute garbage.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I love how everything changes when its England.

England beat Australia but don't play particularly well and they are slated for it. Yet any other team in the same position and its classed as playing badly and winning is the sign of a good team.

Lose to NZ playing ferociously up front taking the game to them having them on the ropes for a large part of the game and we're slated for boring 10 man rugby with no flair and a stain on the game...yet if it was any other team it would be a heroic proud performance that took the Abs to the brink...

Pah im getting fed up with this site...

Geordie - I'm sure you've been around here for a while and I know exactly what you mean BUT you've just got to filter out the knee jerk reactions to England performances. England did very well today (although NZ did better!) and everyone on some level knows that IMO.

It's pretty much implausible that anyone will ever learn anything on this forum, unless it's about themselves.  

GeordieFalcon wrote:I love how everything changes when its England.

England beat Australia but don't play particularly well and they are slated for it. Yet any other team in the same position and its classed as playing badly and winning is the sign of a good team.

Lose to NZ playing ferociously up front taking the game to them having them on the ropes for a large part of the game and we're slated for boring 10 man rugby with no flair and a stain on the game...yet if it was any other team it would be a heroic proud performance that took the Abs to the brink...

Pah im getting fed up with this site...

it's pretty tragic, but hardly new GF.

I'm just rather pleased that had Hartley not had to go off (and we then lost 4 out of 5 of our own lineouts thereafter), England would have won vs the ABs, and all that with a rather weakened back line. Am really quite excited about how this team is going to evolve over the next 18 months.

as for the petty people, its fear and envy.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I love how everything changes when its England.

England beat Australia but don't play particularly well and they are slated for it. Yet any other team in the same position and its classed as playing badly and winning is the sign of a good team.

Lose to NZ playing ferociously up front taking the game to them having them on the ropes for a large part of the game and we're slated for boring 10 man rugby with no flair and a stain on the game...yet if it was any other team it would be a heroic proud performance that took the Abs to the brink...

Pah im getting fed up with this site...

But thats why England actually lost- the back did not reciprocate the forwards effort. If you'd prefer to take only the positives from the match then thats ok. Some would just like to know where they lost. The Boks have been losing to the ABs for the past 3 years for exactly the same reason- the forwards keep having to pick up the tab.

In saying that England do have the backs..they just werent on the field. If theyre there in June then I'd say a series win is a good possibility, and it seems the ABs are more vulnerable at the beginng and end of the season. We do ok by the time the RC rolls around.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:Manu, the finest center Samoa has produced.

Thats original, we'll done.

   

GloriousEmpire wrote:I'm not so sure. England have pretty much mastered what they're trying to achieve. Which is to shut down the game completely. They flood the breakdown. Try to cut off the ball from the opposition backs. But also are reluctant to use their own. They're again relying on basing a win around rumbling mauls from set piece line-outs and milking penalties from scrums.

But like SA before them, I think they will come to learn it takes more to win than just the 2003 style of 10 man rugby. Farrell is a Wilkinson cookie-cutter clone. He can kick his 3-pointers but offers little else. The tight unit are all very impressive, but at the end of the day what does all that huffing and puffing achieve when you find your score again incrementing in 3's, whilst the opposition is going up in 7's.

Take a look at how Wales dismantled Argentina today. Now that's the kind of rugby that won them the 6N last year.

England are progressing alright, but I think, in the wrong direction.

You have to give them a break mind Glorious
They did fight hard today and showed self belief which is what every team should have.
They conceded two early tires and many other teams would have given up but they played on and upped there game.
So, just unlucky England but well done they shouldn't be ashamed at all; thy will be gutted but they can take a lot of positives into next week from this game

Jhamer25 wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:I'm not so sure. England have pretty much mastered what they're trying to achieve. Which is to shut down the game completely. They flood the breakdown. Try to cut off the ball from the opposition backs. But also are reluctant to use their own. They're again relying on basing a win around rumbling mauls from set piece line-outs and milking penalties from scrums.

But like SA before them, I think they will come to learn it takes more to win than just the 2003 style of 10 man rugby. Farrell is a Wilkinson cookie-cutter clone. He can kick his 3-pointers but offers little else. The tight unit are all very impressive, but at the end of the day what does all that huffing and puffing achieve when you find your score again incrementing in 3's, whilst the opposition is going up in 7's.

Take a look at how Wales dismantled Argentina today. Now that's the kind of rugby that won them the 6N last year.

England are progressing alright, but I think, in the wrong direction.

You have to give them a break mind Glorious
They did fight hard today and showed self belief which is what every team should have.
They conceded two early tires and many other teams would have given up but they played on and upped there game.
So, just unlucky England but well done they shouldn't be ashamed at all; thy will be gutted but they can take a lot of positives into next week from this game 

Thanks Jan  

Tman England forced us into mistakes much like France did last week. I think Aaron Smith has regressed on this tour and TKB's stock has improved so go figure!

I was disappointed with the breakdown today. I think we made life difficult for ourselves allowing too many England players around the ruck area. They once again disrupted ball and the penalty count hurt us. We just didn't have the ball for large parts and when we did have it, our kicking game was often woeful.

And yet here we are after two wins. I wondered today how different this tour would be if we had lost at Ellis Park. I'd think we would be hungrier to prove a point whereas trying to preserve a consecutive streak seems a lot more difficult to motivate the team.

The start was ideal. Credit must be given to England to fighting their way back into the game. That final quarter was as decisive as it was pleasing and equalled the first quarter and that essentially proved the difference.

The OP title is inaccurate in that the number one ranking was never in doubt regardless of the result. Roll on the June series but one more game to close off the year. Ireland probably won't play as bad as they did today so Australia have done us no favours. Would like to see a few changes like Luatua starting, Barrett coming on for Cruden and perhaps Romano coming on sooner than today and taking A. Smith off if he isn't performing.

On a slightly different note. The ABs are on track to fulfil a 100% winning year for 2013.

The pick and go rugby site records the 4 point win plus bonus point for 4 tries/ loss within 7 for every match.

After the England match NZ are at 58 points and 2 (bonus points) against. The two bonus points were SA's 4 tries at Ellis and Frances 7 point loss last week.

NZ scored 4 try bonus points in 6 of the 13 matches, with 3 tries in 3 others.

So although it might appear that some gap is closing in terms of pure results the opposite is actually true. Truly amazing results, even for this side for only one match- and a draw at that, at risk at the final whistle for the whole year.

No need to take the OP too seriously, kia.

It's just a throw away line I created to stir the pot a little and keep the discussion bubbling along. Apologies if it offends anyone.

wrfc mentions Manu in his OP, you know, so I just added some interest in the title in the spirit of silly, unsubstantiated banter. Sorry wrfc!

It's the sort of thing you hear said in a pub when you're walking by a group of fans (talking nonsense) carrying some beers... and you spill a little froth from one glass upon hearing it.