England XV vs New Zealand First Test

First topic message reminder :

1. Joe Marler (Harlequins)
2. *Rob Webber(Bath)        Dave Ward (Harlequins)
3. Dave Wilson (Bath)
4. Joe Launchberry (Wasps)
5. Dave Attwood (Bath)
6. Tom Johnson (Exeter)
7. Chris Robshaw (Harlequins)
8. Ben Morgan (Gloucester)

9. Danny Care (Harlequins)
10. Danny Cipriani (Sale)
11. Jonny May (Gloucester)
12. *Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester) Kyle Eastmond (Bath)
13. Manu Tuilagi (Leicester)
14. Marland Yard (Harlequins)
15. Mike Brown (Harlequins)

16. Dave Ward (Harlequins)        Joe Gray (Harlequins)
17. Matt Mullan (Wasps)
18. Henry Thomas (Bath)
19. Ed Slater (Leicester)
20. James Haskell (Wasps)
21. Ben Youngs (Leicester)
22. Freddie Burns (Leicester)
23. Kyle Eastmond (Bath)        Henry Trinder (Gloucester)

*Injury concern...

Thoughts?

I am worried about next week though, as NZ if we are honest were really poor today. That match potentially could have been our best chance to beat NZ this series and we messed it up with a few inaccuracies and poor decisions. Considering their recent record of upping the ante in the 2nd test we could potentially see a heavier defeat and have a bit of a media storm as there will be some expectations of a victory if not an even closer game now going into the 2nd test.

Missed the match but seen the score, good effort England

formerly known as Sam wrote:First up hits on Manu are tough, Kia. Often teams look to double up on him to nullify his running threat but when you have a live wire with the footwork and passing ability of Eastmond at 12 it makes it very difficult to concentrate on the big man. Manu enjoyed considerably more space and one on one attacking opportunities today than is usual for him in an international fixture. That is a positive endorsement of Eastmond.

Yep have to agree Manu's usually given the ball from a standing start facing two or three players. Eastmond used him very well and afforded him a lot more space. Nice to see Eastmond using the grubber at times as well, he's got all the talent.

The only thing he really needs to add is a bit more understanding and a longer range kicking game.

For sure the little man did a great job and created that space so good point. But England were narrow in defence and nullified Nonu who is similarly difficult to tackle but NZ didn't exploit the space left out wide by that bunching England defence.

Manu's Boxing Coach wrote:I am worried about next week though, as NZ if we are honest were really poor today. That match potentially could have been our best chance to beat NZ this series and we messed it up with a few inaccuracies and poor decisions. Considering their recent record of upping the ante in the 2nd test we could potentially see a heavier defeat and have a bit of a media storm as there will be some expectations of a victory if not an even closer game now going into the 2nd test.

Agree they'll up the intensity but I think this team will be pumped. The key is not to make too many changes, bringing back players are too weary.

just sharpen up on tne handling is a must for both sides- both sides are so much better.

However Brown didnt have a great game today- He has been key and Man of the match for almost the last 10 england games..

So get a few key players back, improve handling and if Brown gets back to his recent form.. I think we can win the next.

I have a feeling our odds will have gone down to about 7/2 for the next game

It's true than NZ will up the ante, but England have a lot more to give too. I can't believe we'll drop as many balls as today either.

in regards to odds I just saw 12/1!! for an England win from 888!

the only other bookie offering odds is at 6/1

I cant be bothered to open a 888 account , but if I had one I would be all over it

I like Owens as a referee, but that was an inconsistent and inaccurate performance that probably cost England the game. There were two nailed-on yellow cards that were not given.

England also made a number of unforced errors, which I'm sure they will be disappointed with. The fact that I, and the England team, are gutted to have not won that Test shows how far English rugby has come.

What a rubbish game. Let's hope test 2 is better.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:bc I thought it was wrong to blame Dagg for a lot of his errors and being in Barrett on as a fullback. Some of those passes from Nonu et al were shockers. Ok, you expect players at that level to take them, but I think Cruden was not at his best and particularly on the counter attack kicked too many balls away instead of running it back. I still think he needs a few more games to get back to his best and test rugby is not an environment to do that. Maybe he felt Cruden's goal kicking was going well but Dagg was not the only one with a high error rate.

Based on the strength of this game, I think Kaino would be better off at 6 and Vito at 8. We lacked pace at the back and Read's absence would be better nullified by a more dynamic Vito. However, Hansen tends to be a loyal man and like the Ireland 2nd test, he won't change too much and will tell players like Messam this is last chance saloon for you so go out there and do some damage at the breakdown. Our intensity was way off and only came too late at the end of the match when we sniffed a try.

Jane for me had an anonymous match and it shows what we miss with Savea out. He had Dagg release him on the outside in the first half but didn't have enough pace to get past the cover and I didn't see his fend all day today. Tuilagi put 2012 into perspective and it wasn't novovirus today making him get those easy yards. We have to tackle him round the legs hard and get him to ground. Part of the problem is that NZ weren't nearly as effective as getting up forward in the defensive line and even when England were going backwards they could still get forward momentum in those hits. Too often NZ allowed Tuilagi to build up momentum and weren't effective in the first up tackle.

That intensity at the breakdown must return next week as we cannot allow England to dictate terms and control the game at the pace they're comfortable at. Credit to a very effective England defence and their go forward in attack today from both their forwards and their backs. SL says England are trying to model themselves on NZ play. It seems we have one or two things to learn from them.

Agree with a lot of what you say. My comments about Dagg are in comparison to his best. I think he was solid defensively (Even if he wasn't given much protection by Owens). Like you I think we're unbalanced with three fullbacks in the back 3. With Savea injured, Gear and Ranger in France, and league picking much of the cream, it'll be a year or 2 before we get another big bus.

I wasn't thrilled by some of the calls, but we showed a lack of precision when it came to finishing off chances. I'd like to put that down to players being unfamiliar with each other but we've had trouble on that front before with our first choices.

I'm sure our pressure contributed to some All Black mistakes but we'll have to assume they will get better so must more than match their improvement to have a chance of winning a Test.

It's up to the coaches now to lift the squad, and convince them they didn't just miss their best chance to win.

Well in fairness we have a big bus and with Piutau we have a player who has enough speed. It's just bad luck that both Savea and he are out but it's not such a bad thing to be reminded that someone else fitting that bill would help. Halai didn't rise to the occasion but there were opportunities out there tonight to have an overlap and we just didn't let the ball from hand do its work and relieved pressure on England by poor kicking. It didn't help our cause that we were tame in the cleanout and couldn't get front foot ball to give us more space.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

nathan wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: On the "two knock" incidents, I thought Owens had it right, yes the ball might have travelled backwards, but it came out of the front of the hand, while the hand was facing the opposition goaline?

But it hit his hand and went backwards, not forwards so for me they were not knock ons.

but dont you create the knock on by having your hand in front of the balls direction of travel?

It's almost as if Owens had confused the knock-on law with the forward pass law.

 Yes, and that is the crux of the issue, How can" forward" be something  in a pass, yet something again when the ball comes off the hand in other instances?

IIRC there is no Knock on or forward pass until the ball hits the ground or another player. In theory you can throw the ball forward to yourself as long as it doesnt touch the ground or another player, I believe Bod did this once, yet the ball goes forward when a player is going for a drop goal. The clarity of the Laws is what helps make this game so great.

Makes you wonder then why the player just didnt make more of an attempt to catch it, especially the second time?

In the squad first choice probably,Carter,Romano,Brother Grimm,Piatau,Read,Savae,Cruden
not match fit.
Hey Mysti play it for me,THAT result was exactly what I expected a close game a rusty side
versus one with nothing to lose.
Most June AI`s NZ are vulnerable,you think you`re hard done by.I don`t expect the SH
Super franchises are to chuffed with possible injuries to players at business end of there
season.

emack2 wrote:In the squad first choice probably,Carter,Romano,Brother Grimm,Piatau,Read,Savae,Cruden
not match fit.
Hey Mysti play it for me,THAT result was exactly what  I expected a close game a rusty side
versus one with nothing to lose.
Most June AI`s NZ are vulnerable,you think you`re hard done by.I don`t expect the SH
Super franchises are to chuffed with possible injuries to players at business end of there
season.

So, you are saying the problems for the Super XV teams are now just starting somewhat to equalise those of the Premiership clubs?  
Can't speak for every club, but Saints play 39 matches this season.

And by the way, the way I look at it is that England lost, and should only take that as an opportunity lost. Not a feel-good thing, but losing at the death is a feel-bad thing. That is the right attitude. Both teams had opportunities missed and were mostly equal on the day - just that the ABs were a bit more equal at the end.......

But England must close out these things
Their forwards must take the darn ball at some kind of pace, especially at or inside the 22. Not standing and picking their noses first.
Their forwards must catch the kickoffs.
They must get faster ball from the breakdown
They must realise running straight at Mccaw and Nonu is effective, going around them get people tackled. Hard.
They must be better under the high ball.
This is just the start.

My views:-

- Good effort by England but somehow I always expected NZ to win it. They had the better chances and their subs had a much bigger impact than ours, as you would expect given the inexperience on ours
- Although we did well, some silly mistakes cost us dear. Ben Youngs mistake letting them run 80 yards before Yarde was sin binned; Marler being so isolated when giving away that late penalty (I was shouting at the screen!); plenty of handling errors (though plenty from NZ as well)
- Some great performances (Webber, Parling, Robshaw and Morgan really stood out)
- Credit to Lancaster as some of his key calls (Parling, Haskell, Burns and Eastmond) all came good - maybe he does know what he's doing
- Enjoyable game but would expect both teams to be better next week
- Fair play to NZ as they never give up; the decision to run the penalty was gutsy but potentially stupid - only answer when you do something like that is to score, which they did

As for Owens, I thought he made loads of odd decisions all the way through (both sides suffered) and he seems to think that if he explains a bad decision it makes it ok. I thought Robshaw should have been in his ear when he didn't card their man for killing the ball on the line and at least saying "ok, fair enough but I expect the same if it happens down that end" - put some doubt into his mind.

Plenty of positives but, much like the France game in the 6Ns, I can't help thinking it is a real opportunity missed. I doubt we will no the value of this performance until the end of the series. If we build on it and can win one of the remaining games then it will be a good series but we could easily lose momentum and go backwards by the end of the series.

Changes for me for next week

Hartely on bench as not fully match fit and Webber deserves to start
Lawes in but not sure who for as Parling was outstanding today and Launchbury less effective but we know how good Lawes and Launchbury can be
Wood in for Haskell - just because he's that good
Vunipola - on bench instead of Johnson, Morgan deserves to start
Care for Youngs - better from Youngs but big mistake cost us dearly
Farrell - on bench for Cipriani as you can't fault Burns after today
Burrell for Eastmond - harsh call but think we need to keep taking the game to them

jelly wrote:

As for Owens, I thought he made loads of odd decisions all the way through (both sides suffered) and he seems to think that if he explains a bad decision it makes it ok. I thought Robshaw should have been in his ear when he didn't card their man for killing the ball on the line and at least saying "ok, fair enough but I expect the same if it happens down that end" - put some doubt into his mind.

I thought McCaw should have been doing the same in 1st 5 minutes. I wonder if the fact that neither captain appeared to question the referee was the result of pre match discussions or analysis of Owens.

jelly wrote:My views:-

- Good effort by England but somehow I always expected NZ to win it. They had the better chances and their subs had a much bigger impact than ours, as you would expect given the inexperience on ours
- Although we did well, some silly mistakes cost us dear. Ben Youngs mistake letting them run 80 yards before Yarde was sin binned; Marler being so isolated when giving away that late penalty (I was shouting at the screen!); plenty of handling errors (though plenty from NZ as well)
- Some great performances (Webber, Parling, Robshaw and Morgan really stood out)
- Credit to Lancaster as some of his key calls (Parling, Haskell, Burns and Eastmond) all came good - maybe he does know what he's doing
- Enjoyable game but would expect both teams to be better next week
- Fair play to NZ as they never give up; the decision to run the penalty was gutsy but potentially stupid - only answer when you do something like that is to score, which they did

As for Owens, I thought he made loads of odd decisions all the way through (both sides suffered) and he seems to think that if he explains a bad decision it makes it ok. I thought Robshaw should have been in his ear when he didn't card their man for killing the ball on the line and at least saying "ok, fair enough but I expect the same if it happens down that end" - put some doubt into his mind.

Plenty of positives but, much like the France game in the 6Ns, I can't help thinking it is a real opportunity missed. I doubt we will no the value of this performance until the end of the series. If we build on it and can win one of the remaining games then it will be a good series but we could easily lose momentum and go backwards by the end of the series.

Changes for me for next week

Hartely on bench as not fully match fit and Webber deserves to start
Lawes in but not sure who for as Parling was outstanding today and Launchbury less effective but we know how good Lawes and Launchbury can be
Wood in for Haskell - just because he's that good
Vunipola - on bench instead of Johnson, Morgan deserves to start
Care for Youngs - better from Youngs but big mistake cost us dearly
Farrell - on bench for Cipriani as you can't fault Burns after today
Burrell for Eastmond - harsh call but think we need to keep taking the game to them

Re: Burns

Don't think you can fault him but you definitely can't praise him. I don't know, maybe better ball from the pack + 9 would help, but he offered no running threat and the only invention in our backs was from Eastmond. He doesn't run a game better than Farrell, so Farrell should be back in to start. Cipriani showed more running threat than Burns in the 10 minutes he was on, so I think he should continue on the bench in case we need a gamebreaker to come on.

Yeah maybe - though it could also be that he explains every single decision (whether it was right or wrong) so they maybe don't get a chance to get a word in!

blackcanelion wrote:

jelly wrote:

As for Owens, I thought he made loads of odd decisions all the way through (both sides suffered) and he seems to think that if he explains a bad decision it makes it ok. I thought Robshaw should have been in his ear when he didn't card their man for killing the ball on the line and at least saying "ok, fair enough but I expect the same if it happens down that end" - put some doubt into his mind.

I thought McCaw should have been doing the same in 1st 5 minutes. I wonder if the fact that neither captain appeared to question the referee was the result of pre match discussions or analysis of Owens.

Yeah, Usually Richie points out to Owens that if the opposition charge early when Cruden is taking a conversion, then the referee is to allow the kick to be retaken, if the first attempt fails, hedidnt say boo to him.

mystiroakey wrote:Another dodgy decision from the ref. not a knock on

Yep - I'm just watching the recording now and I think someone needs to remind him of the knock on laws - I'm sure I heard him say "it hit his hand, the fact that it went backwards is irrelevant" …. eh? did they change the laws? That was just one of a few highly suspect ones called against England. I think he also needs reminding of what the sanction for a cynical pull back should be - did he forget his cards today? I always thought he was a good ref but some of his decisions today were bemusing ….

England deserved to win, right?

BamBam wrote:Frak me Eastmond that was disgusting

And yet again NZ obstruct Eng off the ball - Manu clearly impeded ...

Cumbrian wrote:England destroyed the All Black scrum twice there but got no reward, surely must have been a penalty?

Clear foot up and crooked feed ignored too ...

Dodgy NH refs

nathan wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:Man in front from the knock on!

was just thinking the same, Owens is having a bad day. ish

By his standards a bit of a shocker I would say ...

Just imagine how much better that game would have been with another top neutral referee, someone like Steve walsh.

Poor display from Owens. Yarde definite yellow card but two or three minutes earlier he gave a penalty against NZ for same offence closer to the line. As for Nonu in the first minute that was an appalling decision.

brennomac wrote:Owens gets all the plaudits when he does his usual good riffing, but he has had a shocker today, clear yellow when AB killed the bal on the line, knockons by May and Burns that went backwards and then the yellow for Yarde when AB didn't get yellow 10 mins ago.....awful display of reffing

Owens should be made to explain himself after that performance - worst I've seen from him ever

Owens was dissapointing, maybe he isn't the ref he's made out to be huh. Let's hope we have a better ref in charge for test II so that we have a fair contest.

No9 wrote:All Blacks wake up...

All banter aside. England played really well and should be proud of that. Upset yes, but proud...

Just like against the Irish last year, even down to last few mins, you just believe the Blacks will find something to win.

They found a ref on their side - that's how they won ...

Eden park mate, you didn't have a sh*t show in hell of winning even with the best ref on the planet reffing the game

It's fair to say that the commentators are the most bias and clueless commentators out there. Barnes is a joke.

New Zealand just didn't play well today and England did and England were very unlucky. But NZ have the ability to score when every they need to.
Retallick was immense for New Zealand, put pressure on the English every time form the kick off. great around the park, my man of the match.
Geoff Parling was immense as well and he proved that he is England's leading lock in my eyes; can not drop him next week.
The thing is now NZ are going to step up a gear next week now and will be much much better. England do nee to make changes but not too many. For me i would really consider leaving Tuilagi out of the game. Not because he is a and player or even payed bad today, it's just Conrad Smith and Richie Mccaw were all over him (because they know he is your biggest threat) and he only got into the game twice really. I would keep with Eastmond and Burrell personally.
Hartley for webber
Burrell for Tuilagi
Care for Youngs
Back row were great no changes there and props were great as well

Great to see the world's best o/s on the pitch again.

McCaw could learn a lot from him when he gets back.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Just imagine how much better that game would have been with another top neutral referee, someone like Steve walsh.

Good joke

I'm starting to calm down now ...

NZ didn't play well, England played better for much of the game.  Neither team took chances when they came.  

Turning point for me was when at 15 all England tried to play in their own half.  Twice they ran away from support with Marler getting penalised the second time. Stupid, all they had to do was get up field and put pressure on the Blacks. Owens made no difference either way imo.

NZ get out of jail yet again.  England lacked composure when it mattered most.  Nice game for the neutral though.

Owens had a poor game but England had enough chances to win that game and given that most people didn't give them a rat in hells chance they must be really gutted.

I don't think I have ever seen a NZ pack munched like they were in a few scrums and if only one of their chances had stuck then who knows.

No other NH side could have gone there with the amount of 1st team players out that England had and put up that sort of performance, I know Lancaster has come in for some stick but surely they are heading in the right direction and come the WC next year will be serious contenders.

After the match SCW and others said that the 1st team players who were missing will come straight back in which I guess will happen but I think its very harsh on the likes of Parling, Haskell, Morgan and Burns if they do.

I have to disagree offload - I think if NZ had been shown yellow on the two occasions that certainly warranted it or Yarde hadn't been yellowed it may well have affected the result … his odd interpretation of the knock-on laws also meant England lost possession/field position on a number of occasions.

Bedford - I agree I think that those that played today should be in with a fair shout rather than just automatically replacing them with the other players coming back - for me Burns is an interesting call ...

Heaf wrote:I have to disagree offload - I think if NZ had been shown yellow on the two occasions that certainly warranted it or Yarde hadn't been yellowed it may well have affected the result … his odd interpretation of the knock-on laws also meant England lost possession/field position on a number of occasions.

Bedford - I agree I think that those that played today should be in with a fair shout rather than just automatically replacing them with the other players coming back - for me Burns is an interesting call ...

Heaf - I'm not saying Owens had a good game, I just don't think he affected the result. Englands' lack of composure with five to go definitely did. I still think this was a very good performance by England, particularly considering the number of second choice players.

Does anyone else think twelvetrees may not start a test this tour.

 Considering he has been injured for a bit, and with the likes of Eastmond starting to show his class and Burrell playing well for England and Saints @ 12, and NZ again seeming to struggle at stopping Manu with ball in hand. Depending how the 2nd test goes, could he be feature just in the midweek game?

I agree they lost some composure but I also think playing with 14 players for 10 minutes at the end didn't help and conversely not having the advantage of having an extra player for 20 minutes as they should have also didn't … NZ clearly committed YC offences twice to stop try scoring opportunities (one on their line) and got away with it. To YC England when they were a long way from the line and hand NZ a 10 minute advantage at the end of the match surely must have had an effect?

England were within a few metres of their line. Without Yarde lying all over the ball deliberately NZ would almost certainly have scored a try. It was almost worth a npenalty try it was that blatent. Yes it had some effect for sure - and quite rightly so. I didn't see the early pull back so cannot comment on that but the pen at the other end was much less obviously a yellow card to this neutral viewer.

Total rubbish - they were just inside the 22 and there were plenty of England defenders back - talk of a penalty try is pure fantasy … not sure about your neutrality claim if that's really what you believe.

I think when yo see it again in the cold light of day you might see it differently.

Yarde was a definite yellow the other 2 would see yellow more often than not. England made some bad individual errors that cost them far more though. Really need to build on this next week or it counts for nothing.

I agree they made errors - but all 3 were yellow - Yarde plus the other 2 - the pull back the most blatant of all … the question is how can Owens have only yellowed England?

TJ wrote:I think when yo see it again in the cold light of day you might see it differently.

No matter what time of day I see it just inside the 22 will never be a few yards from the line … and pulling a supporting runner back by his shirt to prevent a potential try will always be a yellow.