Englands Summer Tour of NZ - The rugby

GeordieFalcon wrote:Hows his lineout work going?

 Master at it prob the best jumper in Leicester including Parling imo, commands it so well.

 Well I think that anyway.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is he really 19st?

Heavier than Attwood? Although they say Lawes is up at 18 and a half at the moment after his bulking period a year ago.

So maybe it is right.

If it is ....then its scary to think blokes that tall and heavy, are yet seriously agile, athletic and fit.

Don't think he's heavier than Attwood. Attwood is a seriously large bloke- in both height and bulk. You can just tell from looking at him that he carries more muscle.

Found cockers Quote where he was talking about him.


"He is over 120kgs (19 stones) and he still looks lean. He is very powerful and, in the Grand Final last season, he was our best player.


Read more: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Kitchener-given-place-England-s-tour/story-20947534-detail/story.html#ixzz331DDSM4w

Our second row options are getting scary....

Lawes, launchbury, Kitchener, Kruis, Barrow, Slater, Attwood, Stooke

with others like Itoje and Will Witty younger and a bit more to develop.

Don't forget the largest man in the premiership- Will Carrick-Smith!

Thats quite some praise for Kitchener by Cockerill. Hes some unit...is he Ben Kay in disguise  

bluestonevedder wrote:Don't forget the largest man in the premiership- Will Carrick-Smith!

Is he the Exeter lock?

Is he actually playing Eddie?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Thats quite some praise for Kitchener by Cockerill. Hes some unit...is he Ben Kay in disguise  

 Has better handling at the try line

England finally having some very talented young players (25 and under) and have finally got some depth.

bluestonevedder wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is he really 19st?

Heavier than Attwood? Although they say Lawes is up at 18 and a half at the moment after his bulking period a year ago.

So maybe it is right.

If it is ....then its scary to think blokes that tall and heavy, are yet seriously agile, athletic and fit.

Don't think he's heavier than Attwood. Attwood is a seriously large bloke- in both height and bulk. You can just tell from looking at him that he carries more muscle.

Looks can be deceptive - poorfour jr looks like a skinny kid but is actually so heavy that if a doctor saw his height and weight without seeing him he'd be worried about him being overweight - which he's not, just muscular for his size. He's average height for his squad but weighs more than kids a head taller. There are certain physiques that are very deceptive in terms of how much muscle weight they can pack into the frame - sounds like Kitchener is one of those.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:Don't forget the largest man in the premiership- Will Carrick-Smith!

Is he the Exeter lock?

Is he actually playing Eddie?

Yeh, Exeter boy now after playing for Pirates.

Not sure if he's played yet though.....ESPN say one appearance from the bench, so maybe an LV cup game?

Hopefully gets some game time soon- he's a unit. Any chiefs fans got any analysis on him?

Poorfour wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is he really 19st?

Heavier than Attwood? Although they say Lawes is up at 18 and a half at the moment after his bulking period a year ago.

So maybe it is right.

If it is ....then its scary to think blokes that tall and heavy, are yet seriously agile, athletic and fit.

Don't think he's heavier than Attwood. Attwood is a seriously large bloke- in both height and bulk. You can just tell from looking at him that he carries more muscle.

Looks can be deceptive - poorfour jr looks like a skinny kid but is actually so heavy that if a doctor saw his height and weight without seeing him he'd be worried about him being overweight - which he's not, just muscular for his size. He's average height for his squad but weighs more than kids a head taller. There are certain physiques that are very deceptive in terms of how much muscle weight they can pack into the frame - sounds like Kitchener is one of those.

Yeh, maybe you're right. But I am sceptical about rugby stats sometimes. A little like NFL ones, they seem to often be exaggerated!

Love the poorfour jr mention. Is there a poorfour III too?

Poorfour wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is he really 19st?

Heavier than Attwood? Although they say Lawes is up at 18 and a half at the moment after his bulking period a year ago.

So maybe it is right.

If it is ....then its scary to think blokes that tall and heavy, are yet seriously agile, athletic and fit.

Don't think he's heavier than Attwood. Attwood is a seriously large bloke- in both height and bulk. You can just tell from looking at him that he carries more muscle.

Looks can be deceptive - poorfour jr looks like a skinny kid but is actually so heavy that if a doctor saw his height and weight without seeing him he'd be worried about him being overweight - which he's not, just muscular for his size. He's average height for his squad but weighs more than kids a head taller. There are certain physiques that are very deceptive in terms of how much muscle weight they can pack into the frame - sounds like Kitchener is one of those.

I know the feeling. At 6' and 16 stone my BMI is 30ish and I am apparently clinically obese. I should exercise more but obese I am not.

I think a lot depends on when they're measured as well. Is it updated every year on the club website? Start of the season? Part way through? End? What about on the RFU website? When they first joined the training camps? Updated every year?

Poorfour jnr would have to have been going some for there to be a poorfour III - he's only 9! And I can empathise with lostinwales - at 6'4" and 16 1/2 stone I also trouble the BMI scorers. They don't use BMI for children in quite the same way but poorfour jnr is close to the 85th centile for children's BMI, but still wears jeans he had when he was 6 or 7.

Methinks we take BMI too seriously. I doubt that many professional sportspeople outside of distance runners and cyclists have "healthy" BMIs.

Yeah BMI are a load of tosh...

Im like LIW, 6'1 and 16st. And i have a six pack...(of six speckled hen waiting for when i get in tonight   )

Seriously, I train 6 x times a week i would not class myself as out of shape by any means.

Poorfour wrote:Poorfour jnr would have to have been going some for there to be a poorfour III - he's only 9! And I can empathise with lostinwales - at 6'4" and 16 1/2 stone I also trouble the BMI scorers. They don't use BMI for children in quite the same way but poorfour jnr is close to the 85th centile for children's BMI, but still wears jeans he had when he was 6 or 7.

Methinks we take BMI too seriously. I doubt that many professional sportspeople outside of distance runners and cyclists have "healthy" BMIs.

I was thinking maybe you had another son who would be Poorfour III! I never suspected you to be a grandad!

BMI is a load of rubbish generally, I know a prop from a championship club who's BMI has him as pretty much dead. But he can run a mile faster then most people a third of his weight.

GeordieFalcon wrote:
Im like LIW, 6'1 and 16st. And i have a six pack...(of six speckled hen waiting for when i get in tonight   )

Speckled Hen's a good choice, but i'd always favour a selection pack over just one ale, by the fourth or fifth you'll want a different flavour in there.

Yeah i see your arguement.

I normally do get a selection, but i love Speckled hen so just got a few of them   

Well I have Ms Poorfour Maj and Ms Poorfour Mi. The elder one has had her first taste of tag an liked it - she has the build to be a No 8 (opinion is divided on whether jnr is a 13 or a 7). The younger is only 3 but has all the hallmarks of a scrum half - she's small, quick, bossy, punches above her weight and never listens to anyone.

Poorfour wrote:Well I have Ms Poorfour Maj and Ms Poorfour Mi. The elder one has had her first taste of tag an liked it - she has the build to be a No 8 (opinion is divided on whether jnr is a 13 or a 7). The younger is only 3 but has all the hallmarks of a scrum half - she's small, quick, bossy, punches above her weight and never listens to anyone.

  

Ha, good stuff. Sounds just like a scrum half.

kingelderfield wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:The last thing Corbisiero needs is a tour to NZ. The coaches and himself need to make the decision to best ensure his long term fitness not a quick fix.

Agreed, however if we're starting Mullan T1, who to be fair has been 2nd choice at Wasps for most of the season, well you have to agree that its all a bit of a farce - no disrespect to MM who I'm sure will relish the opportunity.

kingy - Mullan has definitely been 1st choice lh for Wasps this season. McIntyre is the back up. Who do you think is our 1st choice lh out of interest?

Hound of Harrow wrote:

kingelderfield wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:The last thing Corbisiero needs is a tour to NZ. The coaches and himself need to make the decision to best ensure his long term fitness not a quick fix.

Agreed, however if we're starting Mullan T1, who to be fair has been 2nd choice at Wasps for most of the season, well you have to agree that its all a bit of a farce - no disrespect to MM who I'm sure will relish the opportunity.

kingy - Mullan has definitely been 1st choice lh for Wasps this season. McIntyre is the back up. Who do you think is our 1st choice lh out of interest?

Good call HoH, getting my Loose and Tight heads confused......was thinking Cooper-Woolley  

No worries.

lostinwales wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

bluestonevedder wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Is he really 19st?

Heavier than Attwood? Although they say Lawes is up at 18 and a half at the moment after his bulking period a year ago.

So maybe it is right.

If it is ....then its scary to think blokes that tall and heavy, are yet seriously agile, athletic and fit.

Don't think he's heavier than Attwood. Attwood is a seriously large bloke- in both height and bulk. You can just tell from looking at him that he carries more muscle.

Looks can be deceptive - poorfour jr looks like a skinny kid but is actually so heavy that if a doctor saw his height and weight without seeing him he'd be worried about him being overweight - which he's not, just muscular for his size. He's average height for his squad but weighs more than kids a head taller. There are certain physiques that are very deceptive in terms of how much muscle weight they can pack into the frame - sounds like Kitchener is one of those.

I know the feeling. At 6' and 16 stone my BMI is 30ish and I am apparently clinically obese. I should exercise more but obese I am not.

I am 6'4", 110kg and as the others considered techicaly obese, but I only have a 31" inside leg, so very long in the trunk, broad (my wife says "child bearing") hips and legs like tree stumps. I cannot say I still have a 6 pack (how many 60 year olds do), but I am trim, only 2" bigger round the waste than when I was in my prime and still have the heqavy shoulders of an Deano style No. 8.

My doctor still says I need to lose weight when she looks at her tables and not at me.

What about Tom youngs 5ft 9 and 16 stone. bet his are off the charts.

Welly wrote:What about Tom youngs 5ft 9 and 16 stone. bet his are off the charts.

Throw in Thomas Domingo and Nicolas Mas, and you've got the BMI brigade. Absolute medical miracles.

Wilkinson is obese - by BMI anyway

Health professionals have been saying for years that BMI is only one factor in determining a person's healthy weight.

Well if BMI is going to determine the outcome of this tour then what we really need is dwarves. And lots of them.

It was those pesky dwarves that did for us last time - don't encourage them.

Barney McGrew did it wrote:It was those pesky dwarves that did for us last time - don't encourage them.

Couldn't resist.

Who can resist a dwarf or two?

The mistakes of the past will surely not be repeated. Hopefully SL can handle the NZ media better than the management did in 2011.

Achondroplasiaphobics

Hound of Harrow wrote:The mistakes of the past will surely not be repeated. Hopefully SL can handle the NZ media better than the management did in 2011.

He did last night when coming off the plane. Lancaster is shrewd and is NZ savvy, possibly too savvy, in that I'd like him to see him put the
boot in to Kiwis when he should rather than play the diplomatic line.

Englands in good hands in that respect and NZers respect what he's achieved so far I'd say.

Chatting to a couple of mates last night I can actually see the first test being well fought on England's side. No one expects us to win and players looking to impress.

A loss by less than 10 points could be on the cards or a complete stonking I can't make up my mind.

Well im thinking a 10 - 20 point margin.

Dont forget we will have a core of the 1st team / 6n team
1 Marler
3 D.Wilson
4 Launchbury
7 Robshaw
9 Care
12 Twelvetrees
14 May
15 Brown

That leaves 2, 5,6,8,10,13,11

2 - Ward has been great all season but was nullified by Sarries. Be interesting to watch
5 - Attwood, off the bench in the 6n. A man mountain, will take it to the Kiwis
6 - ?? This is an area of concern. Haskell will bring sheer physicality. Johnson would not be my choice.
8 - Morgan, challenging for the starting 8 spot anyway.

10 - Cipriani, played in the S15, showed maturity this season. Plenty of time with the squad learning the tactics.
13 - Manu, need i say more
11 - Marlon Yarde , a quality, pacy winger with power and strength, would have started the 6n if fit anyway

So whilst we lose some first teamers...we gain considerably aswell. The likes of Attwood or Morgan coming in is not a negative in my eyes.

It will be a fascinating game.

Geordie, isn't Marler a doubt for the first test?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/10859218/Joe-Marler-injury-deepens-Englands-front-row-crisis-ahead-of-three-Test-tour-to-New-Zealand.html

Looking at the spine of the team it's not bad at all in terms of who makes it from the 6Ns and, as you say, Tuilagi and Yarde coming back is a big plus.

I'd go for Haskell at 6 too. Playing well, experienced in the SH and generally knows his way around the squad. With 50 caps he's a good guy to bring in.

That's not great news, although ChequeredJersey was pretty sure that Marler would be fit ..

Interesting that the article mentions Webber set to start, that would be my choice too. I like Ward's game, but he was a bit snuffed out by the Sarries pack and we are talking about the All Blacks here. Especially given that Attwood will be calling the lineout

BamBam wrote:That's not great news, although ChequeredJersey was pretty sure that Marler would be fit ...

Ah, that's good. We're building some depth at loosehead and I was worried they were all going to be injured!

Yeah i thought Marler had come through. If not...i guess that leaves us with Mullan v Catt to start the 1st test on a tour of NZ...baptism of fire!

But Catt has been getting praised highly for his recent form, and he has some very good forward coaches at Bath who know about making tough forwards.

And Mullan has been 1st choice for Wasps all season and played ok.

So whilst its far from ideal, its not like the days we had to roll out Payne!

yappysnap wrote:Who can resist a dwarf or two?

naughty naughty boy?

yappysnap wrote:Who can resist a dwarf or two?

To$$ers can't.

  

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well im thinking a 10 - 20 point margin.

Dont forget we will have a core of the 1st team / 6n team
1 Marler
3 D.Wilson
4 Launchbury
7 Robshaw
9 Care
12 Twelvetrees
14 May
15 Brown

That leaves 2, 5,6,8,10,13,11

2 - Ward has been great all season but was nullified by Sarries. Be interesting to watch
5 - Attwood, off the bench in the 6n. A man mountain, will take it to the Kiwis
6 - ?? This is an area of concern. Haskell will bring sheer physicality. Johnson would not be my choice.
8 - Morgan, challenging for the starting 8 spot anyway.

10 - Cipriani, played in the S15, showed maturity this season. Plenty of time with the squad learning the tactics.
13 - Manu, need i say more
11 - Marlon Yarde , a quality, pacy winger with power and strength, would have started the 6n if fit anyway

So whilst we lose some first teamers...we gain considerably aswell. The likes of Attwood or Morgan coming in is not a negative in my eyes.

It will be a fascinating game.

Bookies are giving England +19pts on the handicap and basically no chance in the match prices (7/1-15/2 with the all blacks between 18-20/1on!)

Depends on whether the All blacks hit the ground running IMO. If they click and get ahead early, it could turn into a blow-out. If they start slowly, the rafts of subs later on will disrupt flow and the +19 on England may be good value.

EDIT: Ive backed em with the Handicap, so now expect the blow-out will happen :-(

i at least agree with the bookies. untested team who havent played together. 25-30 points would be my guess vs a fairly strong NZ team.

Yesterday I saw Manu Tuilagi and a couple of team mates walking up Shortland street, and must say they looked pretty relaxed and enjoying them selves, and theyve still got a weeks prep time before the first game.

quinsforever wrote:i at least agree with the bookies. untested team who havent played together. 25-30 points would be my guess vs a fairly strong NZ team.

I don't have a sense of what supporters would see as a minimum acceptable result. I suspect most of us have written off the match while simultaneously harbouring an outrageous hope that we can pull off a surprise.

If it's to be a 30 point gap, I don't want us to be nilled, but can't imagine enjoying a 50-20 or 60-30 scoreline either. On balance, I'd rather keep them from scoring at will.

Anything over a forty point gap will be a disappointment, because it will be a raging certainty that no player will have done himself any favours. That would raise real doubts about whether we have the class to win a Six Nations, let alone a World Cup.

I accept that with untried combinations we can't expect miracles up against this NZ side but some of the predictions of a 30-40 point gap are pretty ridiculous!

Whilst the scheduling debacle and increasingly detrimental injuries mean new combinations have to be tested, let's also give some credit to Bomber etc for the set-up they've developed for players to come into. Pretty much everyone coming in has been around at least the Saxons with most in the EPS. A fair few guys on top of that have shown some great touches when coming on from the bench and in Argentina. The likes of Attwood and Webber aren't first choice but I'm certainly not worried about them starting a test.

If Webber and Twelvetrees get fit - and I mean fully fit, let's not accentuate the existing problems!

1.Marler
2.Webber
3.Wilson
4.Launchbury
5.Attwood
6.Haskell or Johnson
7.Robshaw
8.Morgan

9.Care
10.Cipriani

11.Yarde
12.Twelvetrees
13.Tuilagi
14.May
15.Brown

Looking at that I'm not going to pretend I see a side likely to turn over this NZ team in their back yard but it doesn't fill me with the same dread it seems to give many. In there we have:

Marler, Robshaw, Launchbury, Care and Brown - 5 of our most impressive players from the Six Nations

Morgan, Attwood, Webber, Wilson - Guys who whilst not first choice have all played well for England in the past and definitely look International players

Twelvetrees and Tuilagi - The partnership many have been crying out for

11.Yarde 14.May 15.Brown - Yarde when fit is SL's first choice, Brown has been exceptional and May whilst derided still has huge talent. It's one of the most exciting back threes I've seen us name for a while!

The points that worry me are 6 and 10. Whoever plays at 6 is up against an already excellent back row with Kaino returning to compliment it.

Cipriani or Burns at 10 are being thrown into the deep end to say the least but if 36 is fit they will have our establish SH and IC either side of them.

I'm not expecting miracles and there will no doubt be some errors due to fresh combinations but a 30 point drubbing is not in the pipe-line. 10-20 points would be my prediction.