Englands Summer Tour of NZ - The rugby

by Welly Wed 28 May 2014, 2:55 pm

First topic message reminder :

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.

by Taylorman Sat 31 May 2014, 2:20 am

If the AB's play as a team the way they are currently playing sxv individually it could easily be 30. I haven't seen AB individual form across the entire team like this pre first test in many years. All 3 Smiths have been sublime all year, Savea has added more and more to his game and would be first on the team sheet. Barrett, Slade and hopefully Cruden after tonight gives us the best 10 options in years bar DC. Aaron Smith is possibly the best 9 around on this years form.

Kaino, McCaw, Messam and now a solid 80 from Kieran Read last night means our loosie stocks are at peak to overflowing. Dagg was apparently injured last night (Shoulder) but we still have Jane, Savea and Ben Smith as good back three options. Nonu has been solid and a rising star in Fekitoa is one we are looking forward to.

If we are weak its at Lock if Whitlock or Retallick are injured and we'll put a useful if not world beating front row out.

Clicking as a team is more likely given they've all played together a number of times. There is potential for a blowout if this raw England side don't start well.

Agree with Twelvetrees and Tuilagi though. Cips and Brown added to that would give England some real flair.

by formerly known as Sam Sat 31 May 2014, 7:50 am

Carlos I'd take Slater over Attwood at the minute. Big Ed was hands down the best pock in the league for the second half of the season. He is also a proven leader who according to the local radio rugby show is capable of calling the line out. His discipline is a little better than Attwood as well.

The NZ options are ridiculous. Barritt has looked awesome for the 'canes and some of the back row options seem pretty frightening. No Andre Taylor though that's a shame as he is always a good watch, particularly alongside Jane and Savea. Not that the ABs will bat an eyelid when Ben Smith is available.

by ChequeredJersey Sat 31 May 2014, 9:10 am

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.

BMIs for guys who do sport are next to useless. Jamie Roberts has a BMI of 35 or something
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.

by mystiroakey Sat 31 May 2014, 9:20 am

bmi is just a weight to height calculation.

however if you have a body fat mass larger than say 20% and a bmi over say 28 which isnt even obese- you are not healthy and need to shift weight.

players like wilko will have a bady fat percentage of less than 10% so have no problem even if there bmi is too high.

BMI is misleading as people with a BMI of 25(supposedly the healthy range) can still have a high body fat percentage which is unhealthy.

The majority of rugby players may be completely healthy- but there are also many pros that arnt- you can see them wobbling about like a trifle.

by ChequeredJersey Sat 31 May 2014, 9:21 am

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.

Ironically where there is a deflate evidence base for BMI is that having a BMI under 18.5 (ESP under 17) is really quite bad for you

by mystiroakey Sat 31 May 2014, 9:27 am

ChequeredJersey wrote:
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.

Ironically where there is a deflate evidence base for BMI is that having a BMI under 18.5 (ESP under 17) is really quite bad for you

I have no idea how anyone can get to a BMI of under 20 let alone 17!!

at my thinnest adult weight i was still only a 22 BMI- and that's 11 and a half stone and 6 foot!!

I am currently 14- 10 and not happy- but my body fat is only 14% which is way below the national average and assumed very healthy. But my BMI suggest i am overweight- Which in fairness I am - but I am not what you would call Fat

by ChequeredJersey Sat 31 May 2014, 9:29 am

mystiroakey wrote:
ChequeredJersey wrote:
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.

Ironically where there is a deflate evidence base for BMI is that having a BMI under 18.5 (ESP under 17) is really quite bad for you

I have no idea how anyone can get to a BMI of under 20 let alone 17!!

at my thinnest adult weight i was still only a 22 BMI- and that's 11 and a half stone and 6 foot!!

I am currently 14- 10 and not happy- but my body fat is only 14% which is way below the national average and assumed very healthy. But my BMI suggest i am overweight- Which in fairness I am - but I am not what you would call Fat

Generally through deliberate or unintentional malnutrition (very deprived or anorexic, or cachexia)

by kingelderfield Sat 31 May 2014, 11:16 am

formerly known as Sam wrote:Carlos I'd take Slater over Attwood at the minute. Big Ed was hands down the best pock in the league for the second half of the season. He is also a proven leader who according to the local radio rugby show is capable of calling the line out. His discipline is a little better than Attwood as well.

The NZ options are ridiculous. Barritt has looked awesome for the 'canes and some of the back row options seem pretty frightening. No Andre Taylor though that's a shame as he is always a good watch, particularly alongside Jane and Savea. Not that the ABs will bat an eyelid when Ben Smith is available.

Will be an interesting call between Slater and Attwood, either way it means we'll have power from the bench which will be crucial. Real competition for places is fantastic, though I'd be disappointed if Parling features (for which I feel quite guilty - genuine quality player).

Savea hobbled off against the Blues this morning/night, and Woodcock didn't come back after the break though I don't know if that was an injury?

I think Lancaster will have learnt a lot tonight and most of all what a huge ask it will be, especially T1.

Power, size, accuracy, speed and ambition.

If our injury concerns don't genuinely come through; Marler, Webber, 36 & Brown, then things will be tough.

All said and done I do have a good feeling about this, the fact that our backs are against the wall and yet individually there is so much to play for.....and ofcourse....England expects......

by kiakahaaotearoa Sat 31 May 2014, 11:18 am

aucklandlaurie wrote:
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.

I thought Dr Ropata was in Guatemala, Laurie...

It's a strange feeling for me. The buildup for this test has been appreciably long with great expectation but here we are, one week out, and I can't quite believe it's upon us.

England have arrived at an ominous time. The Chiefs didn't get the result they wanted and look out of the running but the individual NZ players for the NZ franchises are ranging from white hot to very good. The only 'passengers' you'll find are the ones returning from injury like Read and Cruden and the pleasing thing is that there is not only genuine cover for them but they too are in good form (Barrett and Kaino).

In a way this is unchartered territory for NZ. Normally there are a handful of players like Dagg, Nonu or A Smith who need bringing up to test match speed and form. I've never seen a situation with everyone, at least in the backs, putting up their hand in terms of form. It's going to be interesting to see if they can carry that form into the test match series. Will the players go in over-confident and find life tougher than they expected or will they continue their form and impose themselves on England? That's the intriguing setup for me.

You have to say this is ideal preparation for NZ and far from ideal for England. That can be potentially a boost for the latter and a double-edged sword for the former in terms of the motivational stakes. If one team senses weakness in the other, they must ruthlessly exploit it. You need to maximise what's working for you and minimise what's not. Let's bring it on like Donkey Kong!

by Taylorman Sat 31 May 2014, 12:08 pm

trouble with that Kia is our losses are always when theyre least expected. Everything says we'll win the first test comfortably...just watch out for that banana peel...

by nathan Sat 31 May 2014, 12:25 pm

i think you'll win all 3. First test will be close for 60 minutes then NZ will run riot. The last two tests will all be within 10 points.

by kiakahaaotearoa Sat 31 May 2014, 12:27 pm

That was precisely my point Tman. Individual form is a double-edged sword. It doesn't mean they'll perform well as a team and that's what I hope Hansen will be reinforcing like last year: play for each other as a team and don't think individual brilliance will get NZ home.

by formerly known as Sam Sat 31 May 2014, 2:14 pm

kibgelderfield wrote: I'd be disappointed if Parling features

I don't think he should be there. He's barely played and isn't in the best form or fitness. Kitchener on the other hand has been in form and is over his little niggle now. Kitchener would have provided substantially more power and pace than Parling as well.

by Chjw131 Sat 31 May 2014, 2:15 pm

I'd have money on a lock pairing of 4. J Launchbury 5. G Parling with 19. D Attwood for the first Test.

Lancaster has already tipped the fit Lions contingent to feature and dropped Parling's name as part of the core leadership group. He'll want him out there as a leader, especially with Marler and Hartley not there.

I also think hell opt for Johnson over Haskell. I think he's focused on Hask's disciplinary problems in games and Johnson is better in that regard. I think he sees Johnson as a better broken field runner and having a higher work-rate.

Thus a pack of:

1. M Mullan
2. R Webber
3. D Wilson
4. J Launchbury
5. G Parling
6. T Johnson
7. C Robshaw (c)
8. B Morgan

16. D Ward 17. N Catt 18. H Thomas 19. D Attwood 20. J Haskell

Looks the likeliest option to me. It's concerning overrall I feel. Mullan has gone well for Wasps but isn't standing out as exceptional, likewise Catt and Thomas aren't even first choice props for their clubs.

Both are good carriers but have question marks over their scrum ability. Johnson isn't someone i'd want in the 6 role particularly. With Wood out my preference would be Hask straight in there with Kvesic on the bench.

Likewise i'm not so sure keen on the likely lock pairing. It's been done and proven to be too underpowered at this level. Great work-rate but far too much emphasis on Morgan as the primary carrier.

by kingelderfield Sat 31 May 2014, 2:56 pm

Parling and Johnson would be a massive step backwards. Earlier in this thread i'd even considered Launchbery, Attwood with Slater at 6 (though am comfortable with BrandH who's just played the game of his season).

To play both Parling and Johnson leaves us desperately underpowerd.

by Chjw131 Sat 31 May 2014, 3:02 pm

kingelderfield wrote:Parling and Johnson would be a massive step backwards. Earlier in this thread i'd even considered Launchbery, Attwood with Slater at 6 (though am comfortable with BrandH who's just played the game of his season).

To play both Parling and Johnson leaves us desperately underpowerd.

I concur. I'd have a score on it right now though!

by king_carlos Sat 31 May 2014, 3:54 pm

formerly known as Sam wrote:
kibgelderfield wrote: I'd be disappointed if Parling features

I don't think he should be there. He's barely played and isn't in the best form or fitness. Kitchener on the other hand has been in form and is over his little niggle now. Kitchener would have provided substantially more power and pace than Parling as well.

Sam following on from the previous post re Attwood vs Slater.

I'd agree with you Slater has been the form lock of the season and an exceptional leader for the Tigers. However given Attwood's good showing from the bench during the 6N and consistent form this season I'd say he's earned that starting berth with Lawes away. Both would offer good options with Slater better with ball in hand and Attwood IMO a bit stronger in defence. Slater is also a better bench option for my money given his ball carrying and versatility.

I'd also agree with the above on Parling. I'm a big fan but with limited game time and little to no chance to find form I feel it would be a mistake to select him with Launchbury, Attwood and Slater all in excellent form. Given Lancaster's liking for a pecking order I'd be very surprised if we didn't see:

4.Launchbury
5.Attwood

19.Slater

by formerly known as Sam Sat 31 May 2014, 4:25 pm

Slater was in the England camp for the 6N so it may depend on what the England camp told him he needed to improve on. Given his form and lack of any real weakness compared to Attwood's tendency to give away penalties it should see a jump in the pecking order but you're right Lancaster doesn't often go for big changes.

by sickofwendy Sat 31 May 2014, 4:59 pm

I have a feeling he will pick parling to start,although if webber does start I feel it would be beneficial to start attwood

by formerly known as Sam Sat 31 May 2014, 5:03 pm

Good point re line out consistency. Might be a reason Lancaster Is looking TO Johnson as well. Give the hooker another quality option. NZ aren't really known for the set piece defence at present though. The breakdown is a far greater threat.

by sickofwendy Sat 31 May 2014, 6:18 pm

So who will be on the plane?
Waller
Hartley
Sinkler
Lawes
Wood
Clark?
Billy v
Foden
Burrell
Dickson
Myler
Goode
Ashton
Barrett
Barrington?
George?
Kitchener?
Watson?
Farrell
Wigglesworth?

by kingelderfield Sat 31 May 2014, 7:29 pm

Lawes, Wood, Burrell all had good games, Dickson added somthing when he came on. Vunipola appeared to injure himself early on and was circumspect nursing himself for the following hundred odd minutes which was some accomplishment. Myler played well but showed his limitations kicking too much and often poorly as did Farrell who quite literally looks out of salts. I would leave Farrell at home to rest up. I thought the Farrell Barrett combination offered little to nothing interms of creative back play and should not appear again internationally, whereas Burrell made the most of his opportunities. Foden and Goode where both quite flat and won't really worry many from deep, which puts everything on Mike Brown's shoulders to offer the cutting edge from 15.

All in all very end of season fare, 46 knackered blokes..... lets just hope they come through it.

by sickofwendy Sat 31 May 2014, 8:00 pm

Might be a good idea to leave Farrell at home,let's him get refreshed and gives us an opportunity to build more depth,which is something we need at fly half after Toby did an armitage

by quinsforever Sat 31 May 2014, 10:13 pm

just watched the top14 final. johnny, delon and steffon were impressive. johnny and delon more than steffon today.

we HAVE to take steffon towards RWC2015. he is the best closer out of rugby matches in the world when combined with a good kicker. He turns over the strongest ball carriers when isolated. it's that simple. billy v is a stronger carrier, but steffon needs to be brought in when england have their noses in front. that is proper tactical use of a player's strengths.

by sickofwendy Sat 31 May 2014, 10:42 pm

Hope to see Jackson wray and Jamie Elliot involved with the Saxons next year

by thomh Sat 31 May 2014, 11:08 pm

quinsforever wrote:just watched the top14 final. johnny, delon and steffon were impressive. johnny and delon more than steffon today.

we HAVE to take steffon towards RWC2015. he is the best closer out of rugby matches in the world when combined with a good kicker. He turns over the strongest ball carriers when isolated. it's that simple. billy v is a stronger carrier, but steffon needs to be brought in when england have their noses in front. that is proper tactical use of a player's strengths.

There's no way Steffon Armitage is an international 8 anyway, so I wouldn't have him in competition with Vunipola. He'd be up against Robshaw.

by DaveM Sun 01 Jun 2014, 12:50 am

It seems pretty unlikely Steffon Armitage will be involved for England again. That's his fault for deciding not to come back to the Premiership.

Also I'm not sure there is particular lack of depth at FH. Farrell, Ford, Cipriani, Burns and (the hugely improved) Myler, with Slade coming through - this is the best English rugby has had it for a long time.

by yappysnap Sun 01 Jun 2014, 8:39 am

Myler looked pretty average in the final to me. His kicking and game management for long periods were poor and helped to keep Sarries well in it.

He's a very good club player but still should be no where near the England team.

by **Ozzy3213** Sun 01 Jun 2014, 8:47 am

sickofwendy wrote:So who will be on the plane?
Waller
Hartley
Sinkler
Lawes
Wood
Clark?
Billy v
Foden
Burrell
Dickson
Myler
Goode
Ashton
Barrett
Barrington?
George?
Kitchener?
Watson?
Farrell
Wigglesworth?

Hartley
Waller
Sinckler
Lawes
Kitchener
Wood
Dickson
Myler
Burrell
Barritt
Ashton
Watson
Foden
Goode

Clark is not an international for me, and Wigglesworth is not the present or future. George and Barrington are not ready, and Billy V and Farrell I would leave a t home. Billy is on his last legs, let him rest and see what others can do. Also Farrell needs to sort that ankle.

by yappysnap Sun 01 Jun 2014, 8:49 am

I'm not sure if Barritt is an international either to be honest, or if Watson is ready for the step up, Myler as well I have a lot of question marks over. But I guess we have to fill those plane seats some how.

by **Ozzy3213** Sun 01 Jun 2014, 8:57 am

Watson probably isn't ready, but he's a very talented kid and I would have him out there for the experience. He could well be the wild card/bolter for RWC2015 if he really shines at Bath in the early part of next season, so I would have him on the plane.

by kingelderfield Sun 01 Jun 2014, 9:06 am

Will Watson be fit, he's obviously not playing today?

by sickofwendy Sun 01 Jun 2014, 9:38 am

Ozzy3213 wrote:
sickofwendy wrote:So who will be on the plane?
Waller
Hartley
Sinkler
Lawes
Wood
Clark?
Billy v
Foden
Burrell
Dickson
Myler
Goode
Ashton
Barrett
Barrington?
George?
Kitchener?
Watson?
Farrell
Wigglesworth?

Hartley
Waller
Sinckler
Lawes
Kitchener
Wood
Dickson
Myler
Burrell
Barritt
Ashton
Watson
Foden
Goode

Clark is not an international for me, and Wigglesworth is not the present or future. George and Barrington are not ready, and Billy V and Farrell I would leave a t home. Billy is on his last legs, let him rest and see what others can do. Also Farrell needs to sort that ankle.

Leaving billy at home leaves us short in the back row unless you're thinking if converting brad barrit.

by sickofwendy Sun 01 Jun 2014, 9:40 am

Recall for Easter ?

by kingelderfield Sun 01 Jun 2014, 9:57 am

Billy Vunipola collapsed with cramp in the in goal yesterday, looking quite sorry for himself. I thought he made another huge effort yestrday.

I would definitely take him, specifically as IMPACT!!!! from the bench.

by yappysnap Sun 01 Jun 2014, 9:58 am

We'd have Haskell, Kvesic, Johnson, Morgan, Robshaw with Wood to come in as well. Launchberry can cover too.

Then there's Wallace playing today who could travel and there's always Fearns back at Bath.

by kiakahaaotearoa Sun 01 Jun 2014, 10:07 am

I hope Wigglesworth gets picked. That's an amusing name!

by DaveM Sun 01 Jun 2014, 10:10 am

I thought Myler played well. He's the FH for the Premiership champions, and his game has come on a lot. He deserves a chance with the England squad.

by sickofwendy Sun 01 Jun 2014, 10:14 am

Is the announcement after today's game or tomorrow to assess who is still standing

by BamBam Sun 01 Jun 2014, 11:04 am

Think it's tomorrow bud

by formerly known as Sam Sun 01 Jun 2014, 11:15 am

Ewers could be called up or Slater could cover 8 in an emergency.

I don't see the value in selecting Myler. Not good enough to be first choice and at an age where all his competition are younger players still developing.

by Poorfour Sun 01 Jun 2014, 11:41 am

yappysnap wrote:I'm not sure if Barritt is an international either to be honest, or if Watson is ready for the step up, Myler as well I have a lot of question marks over. But I guess we have to fill those plane seats some how.

Yeah, I mean it's not as if Barritt's played in any notable international victories, is it? If he'd, say, been part of a team that had become the only one to beat the ABs since the last RWC, that'd be a different matter, but sadly.... oh, hang on.

Barritt might not be best current option for England at 12, but to suggest he's not international standard is over the top.

by kingelderfield Sun 01 Jun 2014, 11:44 am

Lancaster has already said Farrell and Myler are on the plane (I guess barring injury).

There are teams in the AP that have the confidence, ability and knowledge. to play with the ball in hand. Yesterdays default kick the leather of off it approach was an indictment of our game. Yes the players are beyond exhausted and very much down the performance curve however AP final or not to revert to such an approach tells you all you need to know about Myler and Farrell. Thankfully Charlie Hodgson offered a point of difference.

Ultimately the players skills have to improve - NZ shows us year after year - there are NO excuses.

by DaveM Sun 01 Jun 2014, 12:12 pm

I think most people thought the final was a good game. It's not surprising there was a lot of caution and a lot of kicking in the first 20 minutes - that's what happens in finals in most sports.

by sickofwendy Sun 01 Jun 2014, 1:35 pm

BamBam wrote:Think it's tomorrow bud

Cheers

by DaveM Sun 01 Jun 2014, 3:01 pm

formerly known as Sam wrote:
I don't see the value in selecting Myler. Not good enough to be first choice and at an age where all his competition are younger players still developing.

The reason for picking him is that he's been one of the best FH's in the league this season, and he's young enough to play in 2015. I thought FH was a real weakness for Saints last season, but Alex King seems to have done wonders for him.

There are arguments for leaving Farrell and Vunipola at home, but the flipside is I think SL is probably assuming that they will be starters in 2015, and touring NZ is a unique development opportunity for them. Perhaps they should go, but only be considered for the final test as starters. 3 weeks is a lot of recovery time for a professional athlete.

by robbo277 Sun 01 Jun 2014, 5:03 pm

So after the Barbarians game, who gets added to the 30 already out in New Zealand?

From the Premiership final I would have thought (givens):

Hartley, Lawes, Wood, Dickson, Myler, Burrell, Billy Vunipola, Farrell, Barritt, Ashton, Goode.

That puts us up to 41 and quite a bloated squad already. But is there room for any more?

It looks like another loosehead is needed, so Alex Waller may get the shout.

We are light on the wing, so Foden may get called up as wing/full-back cover. Sharples scored today so could also go, while Rokoduguni didn't really impress.

But then we're getting up to a squad of around 43 which I think is obscenely big for a 4 match tour.

by sickofwendy Sun 01 Jun 2014, 5:26 pm

I'd rather take foden or even varndell over sharples.no offence I just think he comes up a bit short for an international wing

by WELL-PAST-IT Sun 01 Jun 2014, 5:34 pm

yappysnap wrote:Myler looked pretty average in the final to me. His kicking and game management for long periods were poor and helped to keep Sarries well in it.

He's a very good club player but still should be no where near the England team.

Hmmmmm. I was there and Myler fully deserved his MotM award, showed the upstart Farrell how to play a final.

by doctor_grey Sun 01 Jun 2014, 9:18 pm

More I think about it, this tour serves zero purpose whatever.
I know there are commercial and business agreements so these stupid things which will never go away, but they should.

by Sponsored content