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?

Unlucky lads, sounds like you came close without your best team on the field. Good luck for next week, you'll need it as there's potential for one of those NZ backlashes.

And nice to see you English keeping up the tradition of ref-blaming when you lose . I thought it was just a Welsh thing according to you lot?

yappysnap wrote:And just how good was Kyle Eastmonds break in the second half. If we had support runners that would have been sexual.

Although in fairness Eastmond should be good enough to produce a better pass than the one he managed.

Just back from Cornwall and had a quick catch up everyones response/thoughts etc.

I listened on a scratchy MW radio half way up Bodmin moor and dear old Robertson could't finish his sentences so you never knew who did what when......no complaints though as I've just listed to 6mins of Sky comment on Rdump and I would have had to watch sound off

It panned out pretty much as I predicted which didn't lesson the annoyance.

Anyway, anyway, the issues are;

Next test side/bench?

And does OFarrell walk on water into the side?

Marler
Webber
Wilson
Launchbury
Lawes
Robshaw
Morgan
Wood
Youngs
Cipriani
Ashton
Eastmond
Tuilagi
Yarde
Brown

Mullan
Hartley
Sinckler
Attwood
Vunipola(really really tough call on BrandH)
Care
Burns
Burrell

As a long-time Wales supporter, I switched on the tv for New Zealand v England expecting and, I admit, hoping to see a big All Blacks win.

But within 15 minutes I was rooting for England. What an excellent performance from an unfancied team. In certain key positions they outplayed their opposite numbers, e.g. Robshawe bettered McCaw.

If selection and motivation are the most important attributes of an international coach, Lancaster has turned out to be a coach of the highest order.

I'm just sorry that Nigel Owens, usually such a good ref, didn't perform to his usual standard.

The Saint wrote:Unlucky lads, sounds like you came close without your best team on the field. Good luck for next week, you'll need it as there's potential for one of those NZ backlashes.

And nice to see you English keeping up the tradition of ref-blaming when you lose . I thought it was just a Welsh thing according to you lot?

You almost got through an entire post without being a tool, keep going you'll get there eventually   

BamBam wrote:

The Saint wrote:Unlucky lads, sounds like you came close without your best team on the field. Good luck for next week, you'll need it as there's potential for one of those NZ backlashes.

And nice to see you English keeping up the tradition of ref-blaming when you lose . I thought it was just a Welsh thing according to you lot?

You almost got through an entire post without being a tool, keep going you'll get there eventually   

You always get really wound up by my posts . Stop being a ref-blamer Bam Bam.

The Saint wrote:Unlucky lads, sounds like you came close without your best team on the field. Good luck for next week, you'll need it as there's potential for one of those NZ backlashes.

And nice to see you English keeping up the tradition of ref-blaming when you lose . I thought it was just a Welsh thing according to you lot?

I don't think you can deprive the English guys from discussing the performance of the Welsh referee,purely on the grounds of their team coming second on the scoreboard. As a supporter of the All Blacks the following are just a sample of incidents that bewildered me:

Ben Smith was denied a try by Mr Owens, because the whistle was blown in the act of him (Smith) diving over the line, and why did Mr Owens blow his whistle? because he erroneously thought New Zealand had scored a try,How insane is that?

In the act of Aaron Cruden taking the conversion, a number of the English players charged before Cruden began his approach to the ball, the conversion missed, Yet Mr Owens did not allow Cruden the opportunity of retaking the conversion, now Mr Owens knows what the ruling is in this situation as it was explained fully to him last year by Richie against SA and Ireland.

We appear to now have a dispensation on the Tackling a player in the air provision, so long as the player doesn't actually take the ball. Did that amendment come into effect from last saturday morning?

I could go on for more, but I think you can see what I'm getting at.

mystiroakey wrote:That's a SH media post if there ever was one Lb.

I will be 17 hours behind and in mexico during that second game. I have no idea if I will be able to watch it. But I expect England to shock NZ again from the off. Then I expect NZ to go militant in reaction. Then start of the first half I expect it to be a grind and the last 20 will mean key subs. In England's case every player will be fighting for his place.

Some people feel as though NZ edge passion. Not the case. We couldn't make great impact subs yesterday. But we will be able to next week.

Have to admit the English supporters here are a little concerning...like the team they have a quiet yet unassuming confidence about them...far too respectful in my opinion so perhaps we shouldnt expect what we've usually got and its good to see that Hansen for one is playing his cards right.

What will likely keep the scoreline down is Englands abilities to apply pressure to our plays. Thats usually the way to get any NZ side. Get in our faces continuously. The other side of the coin is then getting over the line when it matters, and currently the AB's are doing that best, regardless of the Ifs and buts.

Like the English with their incoming players NZ has huge scope for improvement. The difference is that we will be looking for it from the same players. England will, from what we are hearing, expecting it from the incoming players. That is a different proposition. The incoming players are first up again, against a side that have already been put under pressure, so the pressure is all on them to back up what the second side has done.

For a long time we kiwis have said on these boards that the most likeliest win will come in the first test. That was regardless of the side we were playing but because the Abs with over 7 months since their last test won't be gelling as a team. That was certainly evident.

In both sides expecting improvement we know for a fact that we will get it, because the error level was that bad, it can't get worse. The English don't know that for a fact, too many dynamics in play to be as confident, obviously other than...belief. Simply put there is a job to be done. I'm not ruling out an English win, but I also see one of the two being a mid to large blow out- purely for reasons of consistency. Over three tests the ABs will fire at some point.

The Saint wrote:

BamBam wrote:

The Saint wrote:Unlucky lads, sounds like you came close without your best team on the field. Good luck for next week, you'll need it as there's potential for one of those NZ backlashes.

And nice to see you English keeping up the tradition of ref-blaming when you lose . I thought it was just a Welsh thing according to you lot?

You almost got through an entire post without being a tool, keep going you'll get there eventually   

You always get really wound up by my posts . Stop being a ref-blamer Bam Bam.

Please do find me a post where I have blamed the ref for Saturdays defeat

It won't be quite so difficult for me to find a post where you are being a tool

Taylorman- The kiwis have been saying they dont even know who the English players are(including the bigger names that are coming in this week). Thats just odd IMO. I admit to Knowing more about football and cricket preparations- but before each game in those sports - you learn about your opponents in training and video analysis even if you are the better side and at home..

That "we dont have to worry about the opposition" "its all about us" attitude could be there downfall.

Mystir, if a kiwi says he doesnt know who the opposition are or that he isnt concerned about the oppsition, then I think that you can reliably take it that the exact opposite applies.

Gatty did his apprenticeship down here.

A lot of us fans don't know them all. We don't follow NH club rugby so other than the normal bigger names through the 6N and only the Rugby channel takes in the club games- extra subscription here. We're kept busy by a deluge of Superxv and thats more than enough as it takes up the entire weekend across the 3 countries.

But you can bet the AB's will know them all, its their job after all. Smith had a dedicated process of video screening, analysis etc and no doubt that will continue.

So its different for us fans, we don't have a tangible need to know about the opposition to the nth degree- some will. and some follow the NH games for the kiwis playing.

I think we know enough as fans, and likewise, how much do you know about the form of our players? The majority are in stunning form in all honesty which makes the number of errors even more out of place. Thats will be because of the test environment, more pressure from the English and the fact they havnt played together recently- all battling each other more recently.

But thats also why we think they'll cause a blowout, because when they do click England just wont have the right answers. England would do well to prevent this happening but such is their current form across the board I cant see it happening. At some point during the next two matches the AB's will go into overdrive.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

The Saint wrote:Unlucky lads, sounds like you came close without your best team on the field. Good luck for next week, you'll need it as there's potential for one of those NZ backlashes.

And nice to see you English keeping up the tradition of ref-blaming when you lose . I thought it was just a Welsh thing according to you lot?

I dont think you can deprive the English guys from discussing the performance of the Welsh referee,purely on the grounds of their team coming second on the scorboard. As a supporter of the All Blacks the following are just a sample of incidents that bewildered me:

Ben Smith was denied a try by Mr Owens, because the whistle was blown in the act of him (Smith) diving over the line, and why did Mr Owens blow his whistle? because he erroneously thought New Zealand had scored a try,How insane is that?

Mate the whistle was blown quite a while before Smith picked the ball up and went, and plenty of players had heard it. He then blew the whistle again as Smith dived a few seconds later, but the play was over by that point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu0ZjPUdKdc

1:36:30 on the video clock.

Taylorman wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:That's a SH media post if there ever was one Lb.

I will be 17 hours behind and in mexico during that second game. I have no idea if I will be able to watch it. But I expect England to shock NZ again from the off. Then I expect NZ to go militant in reaction. Then start of the first half I expect it to be a grind and the last 20 will mean key subs. In England's case every player will be fighting for his place.

Some people feel as though NZ edge passion. Not the case. We couldn't make great impact subs yesterday. But we will be able to next week.

Have to admit the English supporters here are a little concerning...like the team they have a quiet yet unassuming confidence about them...far too respectful in my opinion so perhaps we shouldnt expect what we've usually got and its good to see that Hansen for one is playing his cards right.

What will like keep the scoreline down is Englands abilities to apply pressure to our plays. Thats usually the way to get any NZ side. Get in our faces continuously. The other side of the coin is then getting over the line when it matters, and currently the AB's are doing that best, regardless of the Ifs and buts.

Like the English with their incoming players NZ has huge scope for improvement. The difference is that we will be looking for it from the same players. England will, from what we are hearing, expecting it from the incoming players. That is a different proposition. The incoming players are first up again, against a side that have already been put under pressure, so the pressure is all on them to back up what the second side has done.

For a long time we kiwis have said on these boards that the most likeliest win will come in the first test. That was regardless of the side we were playing but because the Abs with over 7 months since their last test won't be gelling as a team. That was certainly evident.

In both sides expecting improvement we know for a fact that we will get it, because the error level was that bad, it can't get worse. The English don't know that for a fact, too many dynamics in play to be as confident, obviously other than...belief. Simply put there is a job to be done. I'm not ruling out an English win, but I also see one of the two being a mid to large blow out- purely for reasons of consistency. Over three tests the ABs will fire at some point.

Perfect analysis

BamBam wrote:

The Saint wrote:

BamBam wrote:

The Saint wrote:Unlucky lads, sounds like you came close without your best team on the field. Good luck for next week, you'll need it as there's potential for one of those NZ backlashes.

And nice to see you English keeping up the tradition of ref-blaming when you lose . I thought it was just a Welsh thing according to you lot?

You almost got through an entire post without being a tool, keep going you'll get there eventually   

You always get really wound up by my posts . Stop being a ref-blamer Bam Bam.

Please do find me a post where I have blamed the ref for Saturdays defeat

It won't be quite so difficult for me to find a post where you are being a tool

Do you live in the stone age 'BamBam' or do you just act like you're from that era?

  

aucklandlaurie wrote:

The Saint wrote:Unlucky lads, sounds like you came close without your best team on the field. Good luck for next week, you'll need it as there's potential for one of those NZ backlashes.

And nice to see you English keeping up the tradition of ref-blaming when you lose . I thought it was just a Welsh thing according to you lot?

I dont think you can deprive the English guys from discussing the performance of the Welsh referee,purely on the grounds of their team coming second on the scorboard. As a supporter of the All Blacks the following are just a sample of incidents that bewildered me:

Ben Smith was denied a try by Mr Owens, because the whistle was blown in the act of him (Smith) diving over the line, and why did Mr Owens blow his whistle? because he erroneously thought New Zealand had scored a try,How insane is that?

In the act of Aaron Cruden taking the conversion, a number of the English players charged before Cruden began his approach to the ball, the conversion missed, Yet Mr Owens did not allow Crudenthe opportunity of retaking the cionversion, now Mr Owens knows what the ruling is in this situation as it was explained fully to him last year by Richie against SA and Ireland.

We appear to now have a dispensation on the Tackling a player in the air provision, so long as the player doesnt actually take the ball. Did that amendment come into effect from last saturday morning?

I could go on for more, but I think you can see what Im getting at.

People can discuss the referee performance as much as they like. I just find it funny that when someone who's Welsh does that, everybody accuses the nation of blaming the ref. A few guys blaming the ref here have done just that, ironic huh?

This thread has nothing to do with Wales or the Welsh fans.

Report him for his windups.

Owens had an off day.

TJ wrote:Report him for his windups.

Sorry TJ but not everyone is a crybaby like you when it comes to having a different opinion.

  

Scrumpy wrote:Owens had an off day.

Sounds like he did. Do you reckon Steve Walsh would have done better? I rate Walsh very highly.

Taylorman wrote:

Like the English with their incoming players NZ has huge scope for improvement. The difference is that we will be looking for it from the same players. England will, from what we are hearing, expecting it from the incoming players. That is a different proposition. The incoming players are first up again, against a side that have already been put under pressure, so the pressure is all on them to back up what the second side has done.

That neatly summarises my concerns. I'd sooner see Lancaster tweak the side for this match and then a bit more for the third, but sadly can see a very different team lining up on Saturday (I say sadly partly because of the disruption to the team as a unit, and partly because I think that certain players merit keeping their spot but probably won't). I can easily see New Zealand getting their best win of the series on Saturday, but it should be a different story the following week through a combination of England finally being settled and NZ having less motivation/maybe taking a more experimental approach (assuming that NZ have actually won the series by then).

Taylorman wrote:A lot of us fans don't know them all. We don't follow NH club rugby so other than the normal bigger names through the 6N and only the Rugby channel takes in the club games- extra subscription here. We're kept busy by a deluge of Superxv and thats more than enough as it takes up the entire weekend across the 3 countries.

But you can bet the AB's will know them all, its their job after all. Smith had a dedicated process of video screening, analysis etc and no doubt that will continue.

So its different for us fans, we don't have a tangible need to know about the opposition to the nth degree- some will. and some follow the NH games for the kiwis playing.

I think we know enough as fans, and likewise, how much do you know about the form of our players? The majority are in stunning form in all honesty which makes the number of errors even more out of place. Thats will be because of the test environment, more pressure from the English and the fact they havnt played together recently- all battling each other more recently.

But thats also why we think they'll cause a blowout, because when they do click England just wont have the right answers. England would do well to prevent this happening but such is their current form across the board I cant see it happening. At some point during the next two matches the AB's will go into overdrive.

I beg to differ.

I think you are looking at this from the AB side of the coin only. I can understand why. For most teams, a result like Saturday's against the ABs would have required them to play to the limit of their abilities. To know that the ABs can raise their game would be enough to predict a rout at some point in the series.

But I genuinely believe that this England team are different. For one, they were pretty much a scratch side, with unfamiliar combinations in every unit, and especially at 9 -13.

Secondly, although nearly everyone in that side made a case to be retained for next week, England can definitiely make improvements to the XXIII. The one almost certain change to the starting XV is to replace Youngs with Care, but whatever else happens the bench will be considerably stronger and it is likely that there will be more experienced combinations available, whether starting or closing out the game.

Thirdly, Lancaster's England have consistently shown that they can push the ABs to their limits. It's pretty one-eyed to assume that NZ's error count on Saturday was entirely of their own making. Just as NZ forced errors from England, England forced errors from NZ.

Finally, if NZ have yet to click, so have England. And while it's a slight oversimplification, the tale of all three games post-2011 has been that England have generally come out ahead on the basics, while New Zealand have been more ruthless at taking their chances. England showed more attacking flair in the 6N - using players who weren't involved on Saturday.

Yes, the ABs will raise their game. And if England don't raise theirs, then a drubbing is a distinct possibility - but there are plenty of reasons to believe that they can and will.

The Saint wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:Owens had an off day.

Sounds like he did. Do you reckon Steve Walsh would have done better? I rate Walsh very highly.

No, but Roman Poite would have done.

kingelderfield wrote:

It panned out pretty much as I predicted which didn't lesson the annoyance.

You mean a scratch England side competed extremely well with the best side in the world at the most difficult venue in the world, and SL and his coaching teams' reputation was further enhanced?

Taylorman wrote:
In both sides expecting improvement we know for a fact that we will get it, because the error level was that bad, it can't get worse. The English don't know that for a fact, too many dynamics in play to be as confident, obviously other than...belief. Simply put there is a job to be done. I'm not ruling out an English win, but I also see one of the two being a mid to large blow out- purely for reasons of consistency. Over three tests the ABs will fire at some point.

Well they haven't over the last 3 tests against England. England could easily have won all three games.

England have been extremely consistent over the last couple of years. Of course anything could happen, but I think England will be extremely competitive this weekend.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Mystir, if a kiwi says he doesnt know who the opposition are or that he isnt concerned about the oppsition, then I think that you can reliably take it that the exact opposite applies.

Gatty did his apprenticeship down here.

Retallick didn't know Courtney Lawes' name.

Ratallick doesn't know England players' names

This seems to me to be arrogant and disrespectful. I bet he knows his name after Lawes tackles him.........

Poorfour wrote:

Taylorman wrote:A lot of us fans don't know them all. We don't follow NH club rugby so other than the normal bigger names through the 6N and only the Rugby channel takes in the club games- extra subscription here. We're kept busy by a deluge of Superxv and thats more than enough as it takes up the entire weekend across the 3 countries.

But you can bet the AB's will know them all, its their job after all. Smith had a dedicated process of video screening, analysis etc and no doubt that will continue.

So its different for us fans, we don't have a tangible need to know about the opposition to the nth degree- some will. and some follow the NH games for the kiwis playing.

I think we know enough as fans, and likewise, how much do you know about the form of our players? The majority are in stunning form in all honesty which makes the number of errors even more out of place. Thats will be because of the test environment, more pressure from the English and the fact they havnt played together recently- all battling each other more recently.

But thats also why we think they'll cause a blowout, because when they do click England just wont have the right answers. England would do well to prevent this happening but such is their current form across the board I cant see it happening. At some point during the next two matches the AB's will go into overdrive.

I beg to differ.

I think you are looking at this from the AB side of the coin only. I can understand why. For most teams, a result like Saturday's against the ABs would have required them to play to the limit of their abilities. To know that the ABs can raise their game would be enough to predict a rout at some point in the series.

But I genuinely believe that this England team are different. For one, they were pretty much a scratch side, with unfamiliar combinations in every unit, and especially at 9 -13.

Secondly, although nearly everyone in that side made a case to be retained for next week, England can definitely make improvements to the XXIII. The one almost certain change to the starting XV is to replace Youngs with Care, but whatever else happens the bench will be considerably stronger and it is likely that there will be more experienced combinations available, whether starting or closing out the game.

Thirdly, Lancaster's England have consistently shown that they can push the ABs to their limits. It's pretty one-eyed to assume that NZ's error count on Saturday was entirely of their own making. Just as NZ forced errors from England, England forced errors from NZ.

Finally, if NZ have yet to click, so have England. And while it's a slight oversimplification, the tale of all three games post-2011 has been that England have generally come out ahead on the basics, while New Zealand have been more ruthless at taking their chances. England showed more attacking flair in the 6N - using players who weren't involved on Saturday.

Yes, the ABs will raise their game. And if England don't raise theirs, then a drubbing is a distinct possibility - but there are plenty of reasons to believe that they can and will.

I'm not going to actively enter the debate over whether there'll be a blow out. I suspect it'll be close.

But I think the posts raise some points that have been discussed by AB's management and players since the test. So I'll post them in.

There's a couple of issues Aaron Smith discussed as issues they had on the day. Key issues were developing multiple phase play and the kick chase. he felt they let themselves down in these areas. They felt a better kicking game would have given them better field position and put pressure on England and that when they push multiple phases past 3 rucks with speed and width England struggles. A key issue both he and coaches identified was backing up from serious local derbies in the weekend. Essentially the issue was giving the players too much information given that they were mentally thinking in their franchise systems. In otherwise their minds were cluttered (their words not mine) and it affected their game. They're looking to remedy that this weekend.

That's not to say other things didn't as well (e.g. how well England played).

DaveM wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Mystir, if a kiwi says he doesnt know who the opposition are or that he isnt concerned about the oppsition, then I think that you can reliably take it that the exact opposite applies.

Gatty did his apprenticeship down here.

Retallick didn't know Courtney Lawes' name.

Ratallick doesn't know England players' names

This seems to me to be arrogant and disrespectful. I bet he knows his name after Lawes tackles him.........

Really. Of course he'll have known the names of many players, given he's played them. It's a throw away line taken out of context by the media. By the way Radio Sport NZ spent a morning phoning people and organizations in the midlands prior to the test. It was surprising the number of rugby fans who couldn't name players in their own team.

blackcanelion wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

Taylorman wrote:A lot of us fans don't know them all. We don't follow NH club rugby so other than the normal bigger names through the 6N and only the Rugby channel takes in the club games- extra subscription here. We're kept busy by a deluge of Superxv and thats more than enough as it takes up the entire weekend across the 3 countries.

But you can bet the AB's will know them all, its their job after all. Smith had a dedicated process of video screening, analysis etc and no doubt that will continue.

So its different for us fans, we don't have a tangible need to know about the opposition to the nth degree- some will. and some follow the NH games for the kiwis playing.

I think we know enough as fans, and likewise, how much do you know about the form of our players? The majority are in stunning form in all honesty which makes the number of errors even more out of place. Thats will be because of the test environment, more pressure from the English and the fact they havnt played together recently- all battling each other more recently.

But thats also why we think they'll cause a blowout, because when they do click England just wont have the right answers. England would do well to prevent this happening but such is their current form across the board I cant see it happening. At some point during the next two matches the AB's will go into overdrive.

I beg to differ.

I think you are looking at this from the AB side of the coin only. I can understand why. For most teams, a result like Saturday's against the ABs would have required them to play to the limit of their abilities. To know that the ABs can raise their game would be enough to predict a rout at some point in the series.

But I genuinely believe that this England team are different. For one, they were pretty much a scratch side, with unfamiliar combinations in every unit, and especially at 9 -13.

Secondly, although nearly everyone in that side made a case to be retained for next week, England can definitiely make improvements to the XXIII. The one almost certain change to the starting XV is to replace Youngs with Care, but whatever else happens the bench will be considerably stronger and it is likely that there will be more experienced combinations available, whether starting or closing out the game.

Thirdly, Lancaster's England have consistently shown that they can push the ABs to their limits. It's pretty one-eyed to assume that NZ's error count on Saturday was entirely of their own making. Just as NZ forced errors from England, England forced errors from NZ.

Finally, if NZ have yet to click, so have England. And while it's a slight oversimplification, the tale of all three games post-2011 has been that England have generally come out ahead on the basics, while New Zealand have been more ruthless at taking their chances. England showed more attacking flair in the 6N - using players who weren't involved on Saturday.

Yes, the ABs will raise their game. And if England don't raise theirs, then a drubbing is a distinct possibility - but there are plenty of reasons to believe that they can and will.

I'm not going to actively enter the debate over whether there'll be a blow out. I suspect it'll be close.

But I think the posts raise some points that have been discussed by AB's management and players since the test. So I'll post them in.

There's a couple of issues Aaron Smith discussed as issues they had on the day. Key issues were developing multiple phase play and the kick chase. he felt they let themselves down in these areas. They felt a better kicking game would have given them better field position and put pressure on England and that when they push multiple phases past 3 rucks with speed and width England struggles. A key issue both he and coaches identified was backing up from serious local derbies in the weekend. Essentially the issue was giving the players to much information given that they were mentally thinking in their franchise systems. In otherwise their minds were cluttered (their words not mine) and it affected their game. They're looking to remedy that this weekend.

That's not to say other things didn't as well (e.g. how well England played).

Yes I was wondering how much the intensities of the franchise matches would affect their cohesion. the Abs are spread across all 5 franchises fairly evenly and all 5 are still in with a chance of the playoffs with 3 rounds to go and it is very much local derby time lately. It does mean that individually and within their franchise they really are playing to high levels but it also means to suddenly join together and unite will upset their very familiar patterns.

This might not seem a lot to English fans but it does explain why a lot of things went awry, particularly when put under the English pressure. And again its why many thought the first test was always the most likeliest of the 3 to be won, regardless of the opposition. The ABs aren't the Abs until they're the ABs, and for 7 months they havn't been. They have now, for a week, and that should help to get rid of the franchise mentality.

Still think the biggest risk for both teams is in England changing its players. I mean if they genuinely should have won...why not play the same side again, rather than risk someone that hasnt already fronted vs the AB's yet this year. Its a big call.

blackcanelion wrote:

Really. Of course he'll have known the names of many players, given he's played them. It's a throw away line taken out of context by the media. By the way Radio Sport NZ spent a morning phoning people and organizations in the midlands prior to the test. It was surprising the number of rugby fans who couldn't name players in their own team.

Doesn't sound like a throwaway line to me, just sounds like he can't be bothered to learn about the England team. I guess it's just not worth learning about NH opponents when you've won that many tests in a row.

I don't think it is relevant that fans can't name players in their own team - Retallick isn't a fan, he's a player who is just about to play a 3 test series against England. Imagine the fuss if Lawes had been unable to name an AB.

Taylorman wrote:...This might not seem a lot to English fans...

I think English fans will be only too ready to sympathize. Saracens and Saints players were smashing into each other the same weekend as Super Rugby and have had less time in camp to get back into the national mind-set.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Taylorman wrote:...This might not seem a lot to English fans...

I think English fans will be only too ready to sympathize. Saracens and Saints players were smashing into each other the same weekend as Super Rugby and have had less time in camp to get back into the national mind-set.

Yes thats true...we did know that. I suppose not being a fan of either makes it seem less a factor.

So that kind of makes it worse this week. The AB's have all had a match to get rid of the club habits. Now you have a whole new bunch having to make that switch when others that played have already done so, plus they had to travel over.

Still think its a big ask bringing in the 'new' guys given the first test effort- especially if you unwittingly replace someone who just needed that first test to really fire this week. Lancaster will need all his wits about him this week. Very big calls to make...

Taylorman wrote:...Yes thats true...Now you have a whole new bunch having to make that switch when others that played have already done so, plus they had to travel over...

I find it interesting that Lancaster isn't moaning (publicly, at least) about the hand he's been dealt. It's us supporters and members of the media who are looking for the excuses.

In a way, it is a sign of weakness to bang on about such issues because it almost betrays that we harbour a suspicion that close run defeat might have been our best bet. We've got three more games against the All Blacks this calendar year, if we really are building for the Cup then we ought to be able to show we can get better.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Taylorman wrote:...Yes thats true...Now you have a whole new bunch having to make that switch when others that played have already done so, plus they had to travel over...

I find it interesting that Lancaster isn't moaning (publicly, at least) about the hand he's been dealt. It's us supporters and members of the media who are looking for the excuses.

In a way, it is a sign of weakness to bang on about such issues because it almost betrays that we harbour a suspicion that close run defeat might have been our best bet. We've got three more games against the All Blacks this calendar year, if we really are building for the Cup then we ought to be able to show we can get better.

He doesn't strike me as a moaner. Which is why he's appreciated outside of England, more than some previous coaches. I also this there was a silver lining. Once he knew Saracens and Northampton players wouldn't be in the first test he actually got sufficient time to prepare a team for the first test.  He gets to test the whole squad in adverse conditions (i.e. against a good side away from home), without worrying excessively about criticism in the first test. At the same time although he's playing the AB's away, who are coming of local derbies in the weekend, with Hansen having very limited preparation time. In terms of the strategy building to the world cup I think it's not a bad place to be.

I was disappointed in that England performance, certainly not terrible, but probably one of our worst of the year (the degree Brown was below his usual standards serving as an indicator).  Players' effort levels were good, as were certain aspects of play and certain performances, but final stage execution, discipline, critical juncture decision making, forwards' handling, restarts, composure and exit strategy when down to 14 players were all short of what we've come to expect over the last year or so.  The team can play better than that and they'll have to because so can the ABs.

I trust the coaches and the players to iron out the majority of those issues and feel most of those brought into the team for the first test showed enough to keep hold of the shirt and show improvement.  The players from the 2nd wave that I would draft in to the starting XV are Care to add pace and precision, Lawes for the extra offensive component he brings to our defence, and probably Ashton as I think he would thrive feeding off the Eastmond/Tuilagi partnership (Eastmond's lively running threat and zippy passing game at 12 paired nicely with Tuilagi and I'd like to see how that develops), offering the support to their breaks and half-breaks that wasn't there at the weekend.  Webber/Hartley, Haskell/Wood, Morgan/Vunipola and Burns/Farrell are all difficult calls where I think the incumbent deserves the opportunity to back up their performance but I would look to training to inform the final decision.  It feels criminal not to select Burrell or Twelvetrees but for the moment I think it's the right option.

blackcanelion wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

Taylorman wrote:...Yes thats true...Now you have a whole new bunch having to make that switch when others that played have already done so, plus they had to travel over...

I find it interesting that Lancaster isn't moaning (publicly, at least) about the hand he's been dealt. It's us supporters and members of the media who are looking for the excuses.

In a way, it is a sign of weakness to bang on about such issues because it almost betrays that we harbour a suspicion that close run defeat might have been our best bet. We've got three more games against the All Blacks this calendar year, if we really are building for the Cup then we ought to be able to show we can get better.

He doesn't strike me as a moaner. Which is why he's appreciated outside of England, more than some previous coaches. I also this there was a silver lining. Once he knew Saracens and Northampton players wouldn't be in the first test he actually got sufficient time to prepare a team for the first test.  He gets to test the whole squad in adverse conditions (i.e. against a good side away from home), without worrying excessively about criticism in the first test. At the same time although he's playing the AB's away, who are coming of local derbies in the weekend, with Hansen having very limited preparation time. In terms of the strategy building to the world cup I think it's not a bad place to be.

No Lancasters certainly not seen as a moaner here. If anything his style and manner are very similar to what we are used to here. He doesn't get sucked in to the us them thing, he sticks to what he knows and not what he doesn't and hes shrewd. He's a players coach and is all about the on field rather than off. In terms of his media savvy less is more for BL and I'd say he's highly respected by the average kiwi fan, mainly because we can't quite work him out. Some coaches you can read like a book- not BL.

Thats why his selection and team management (potential fallout etc) this week makes it very interesting viewing on our part. I think we'll see a bit more of what makes him tick.

I really liked the approach that England took against the AB's on Saturday. It was very positive and very much put the AB's on the back foot.

I would like to see Lancaster put out the same team myself (with the exception of Care in at 9) as I think that they can more than compete and may even get a win next test.

Lancaster has suggested they'll move Tuilagi to the wing this Saturday to accommodate one or both of Twelvetrees and Burrell coming back in. I've been pretty strongly against the idea that that's where Manu belongs in the past, but given how well the midfield went in the Six Nations I wouldn't be entirely against giving it a shot. Lancaster seems confident that he's fast enough.

Yeah, I would not put Tuilagi on the wing myself. He is much more needed in the midfield. I thought that his partnership with Eastmond was very good so I cant see why they would change it. Does that mean Farrell will also be back at 10?

He said he'll make more changes than usual, but not specified which ones.

I just think that if he is considering moving Tuilagi to the wing then he is trying to get Twelvetrees in the centre and for that to work, he will need Farrell at 10 as those two work well together.

My only concern about Tuilagi playing on the wing is that he'll be targeted all day with the boot. I don't know how he is under the high ball, and although he came through the academies as a winger, I think it's totally different on the international stage. He was making great dents in the AB line, so I'd be tempted not to move him to be honest. However, if he can still do that from the wing, defend against high balls, and we can have a 36-Burrell centre partnership, then I'd give it a go.

My concern about this talk of Tuilagi on the wing is that it is something which could have been tried out before this! Is the second test of a three test series *really* the time to try this out??

It may pay off. It may be a stroke of genius. I'd just like to have tried it in advance.

Anyone notice the leg trip by Yarde on Smith at 55 minutes as Smith was running to regather the ball for the certain try? That would have changed things.

It was Kaino going for the pick up before knocking on. If it was just Yarde and Smith it would have been an interesting decision.

ebop wrote:Anyone notice the leg trip by Yarde on Smith at 55 minutes as Smith was running to regather the ball for the certain try? That would have changed things.

Pretty sure he was going to kick the ball out of play from behind Smith.

ebop wrote:Anyone notice the leg trip by Yarde on Smith at 55 minutes as Smith was running to regather the ball for the certain try? That would have changed things.

Haha, I did think that was a bit on the dodgy side but he got away with it

I didn't think there was anything in the Yarde challenge, going for the ball I thought and made contact (?) with it....sounds a bit like football! But he was so close to Smith there was no need for a trip so, rationally, I don't think he intended to trip.

Kaino fluffed it big time!

I'm not trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill and it could well have been an attempted clearance from Yarde. But when I watched the game again, and given the spotlight has been on Owens' performance (unfairly I think), it just stuck out a bit as one of those marginal could go either way moments. Didn't even notice it during the game to be honest.