England v New Zealand - Test 2 (14 Jun 2014)

First topic message reminder :

NEW ZEALAND v ENGLAND
Forsyth Barr Stadium, Dunedin
Saturday 14th June, KO 19:35 local, 08:35 BST

TEAMS
New Zealand
1: Woodcock, 2: Coles, 3: O Franks, 4: Retallick, 5: Whitelock, 6: Messam, 7: McCaw (c), 8: Kaino, 9: A Smith, 10: Cruden, 11: Savea, 12: Nonu, 13: C Smith, 14: Jane, 15: B Smith
Bench: 16: Mealamu, 17: Crockett, 18: Faumuina, 19: Tuipulotu, 20: Vito, 21: Perenara, 22: Barrett, 23: Fekitoa
England
1: Marler, 2: Webber, 3: Wilson, 4: Launchbury, 5: Parling, 6: Wood, 7: Robshaw (c), 8: Morgan, 9: Care, 10: Farrell, 11: Yarde, 12: Twelvetrees, 13: Burrell, 14: Tuilagi (what was he thinking?), 15: Brown
Bench: 16: Hartley, 17: Mullan, 18: Brookes, 19: Lawes, 20: Vunipola, 21: Youngs, 22: Burns, 23: Ashton

OFFICIALS
Referee: Jaco Peyper (SARU)
ARs: Nigel Owens (WRU) & Jérôme Garcès (FFR)
TMO: George Ayoub (ARU)

I like all the complacency coming from the nzers. They actually believe they will never get beaten. If the home team carry on like that it will play nicely in to England's hands. I really feel England's time is coming.

Didnt know Marler was a NZer Englandglory4saturdayatleast?

blackcanelion wrote:

nathan wrote:

ebop wrote:Agree Tman. Right in the cross hairs. Some English are setting themselves up here. It's uncharacteristic

i think your trying to build it up so when we lose you can have a moan.

Nah. The English rugby propaganda machine is a thing of beauty and a wonder to behold. A sniff of victory and a team of super heroes instantly emerges, a unexpected loss and and the players have always been failures. Add in the standard questioning of referee competence and the integrity of the opposition. I always thought the English sports fan had it hard given the big swings in the media. I suggest a law requiring prozac be sold with every copy of the Times, Telegraph etc.

  questioning referee's competence….wasn't that a book written by the NZRFU

your arguments are creaking as much as Richie's knees   

Great to see Savea back. The back three has a much more balanced feel about it with his addition and Jane back on his familiar right side. Ben Smith at fullback will be interesting. Will we see less territorial kicking without Dagg's big punt? Home game for him along with Fekitoa and A Smith so hope to see them have strong games in front of their club fans.

Watching the game in a casa rural near Avila with an English friend and a horde of Spanish friends who will be either drowning their sorrows or still celebrating after the Holland opening match for their pool. I feel their kids are going to be neglected with all this sport this weekend.

blackcanelion wrote:

nathan wrote:

ebop wrote:Agree Tman. Right in the cross hairs. Some English are setting themselves up here. It's uncharacteristic

i think your trying to build it up so when we lose you can have a moan.

Nah. The English rugby propaganda machine is a thing of beauty and a wonder to behold. A sniff of victory and a team of super heroes instantly emerges, a unexpected loss and and the players have always been failures. Add in the standard questioning of referee competence and the integrity of the opposition. I always thought the English sports fan had it hard given the big swings in the media. I suggest a law requiring prozac be sold with every copy of the Times, Telegraph etc.

Not a rugby thing a media thing in general. 'Housing price boom' sells papers, 'housing price crash' sells papers, 'housing prices not doing much' doesn't sell papers.

Our sportsmen are either Heroes or villains. 'English rugby on rut of mediocrity' doesn't cut it as a headline.

Its predictable but at least its variety and not as one eyed and jingoistic as say, the Australian media.

England: Mike Brown, Manu Tuialgi, Luther Burrell, Billy Twelvetrees, Marland Yarde, Owen Farrell, Danny Care; Ben Morgan, Chris Robshaw, Tom Wood, Geoff Parling, Joe Launchbury, David Wilson, Rob Webber, Joe Marler.
Replacements: Dylan Hartley, Matt Mullan, Kieran Brookes, Courtney Lawes, Billy Vunipola, Ben Youngs, Freddie Burns, Chris Ashton.

Cannot believe Lawes is not starting and Parling there instead and Twelvetrees back in......for the love of God why? Eastmond or Burrell at 12 would be way better. The rest is fine but those glaring errors really annoys me.

at least the bench looks much better and should help England towards the end of the match when we normally falter

Not sure about Tuilagi on the wing...

neither am I  

If Manu is on the wing then 36 needs to be at 12 as the ball needs to get quickly shipped out there, and as we saw on Saturday, we desperately needed a second kicking option from hand.

Not sure about Manu on the wing though.

Have to assume SL knows what he's doing with parling v lawes.

Bench does look really strong.

You have to assume Manu will come looking for work because to put your most potent line breaker in the 5m channel makes little sense. If England can get behind the defensive line he will be their main target.

strong bench, Lawes and Hartley will have their say.

England should win this

We are playing the All Blacks in Dunedin, "should win" is so far off the mark it's unreal. I would be absolutely delighted if we did, but it's not a game we "should win" like playing eg Italy is

Parling was excellent last week, and the lineout with webber was rock solid. They'll  double sub Hartley and lawes as a pair so just a question of for how long.

Manu on the wing is a bit of a risk but he likes 36 and Burrell as a combo and wants to get his biggest strike player on. He's obviously wanted to try it for a while, so hey, why not. The potential downsides have been talked about at length but our wingers haven't been pulling up trees ( arguably because many doesn't pass to them!), so I'm intrigued as to how it goes. Ashton on the bench if its not going to plan.

Personally I prefer billy v starting and Morgan coming on later, but I like them both so no big deal. A few guys can count themselves very unlucky to not make the squad but I guess that was always going to be the case.

BamBam wrote:We are playing the All Blacks in Dunedin, "should win" is so far off the mark it's unreal. I would be absolutely delighted if we did, but it's not a game we "should win" like playing eg Italy is

I disagree. After last week England should win this game. NZ were flailing up front and have lost their talisman Read. No Carter, an ageing mcCaw

England meanwhile have added 7 first choice players to the squad in Wood, Lawes, Harltey, Care, Farrell, 36 and Burrell. Keep their composure and with Care's extra attack option round the base England have every chance of a good win. It's time to be confident, enough of the NZ in Dunedin fear, the great thing about unbeaten sides is the pressure is all on them.

Scratch wrote:

BamBam wrote:We are playing the All Blacks in Dunedin, "should win" is so far off the mark it's unreal. I would be absolutely delighted if we did, but it's not a game we "should win" like playing eg Italy is

I disagree. After last week England should win this game. NZ were flailing up front and have lost their talisman Read. No Carter, an ageing mcCaw

England meanwhile have added 7 first choice players to the squad in Wood, Lawes, Harltey, Care, Farrell, 36 and Burrell. Keep their composure and with Care's extra attack option round the base England have every chance of a good win. It's time to be confident, enough of the NZ in Dunedin fear, the great thing about unbeaten sides is the pressure is all on them.

Stop trying to build up so you can tear down. Fans being confident doesn't mean Poopie. Players have to go out thinking they can win. But the most likely outcome is a New Zealand win and with a bigger margin than last week (7-14 points I'd say)

HammerofThunor wrote:

Scratch wrote:

BamBam wrote:We are playing the All Blacks in Dunedin, "should win" is so far off the mark it's unreal. I would be absolutely delighted if we did, but it's not a game we "should win" like playing eg Italy is

I disagree. After last week England should win this game. NZ were flailing up front and have lost their talisman Read. No Carter, an ageing mcCaw

England meanwhile have added 7 first choice players to the squad in Wood, Lawes, Harltey, Care, Farrell, 36 and Burrell. Keep their composure and with Care's extra attack option round the base England have every chance of a good win. It's time to be confident, enough of the NZ in Dunedin fear, the great thing about unbeaten sides is the pressure is all on them.

Stop trying to build up so you can tear down. Fans being confident doesn't mean Poopie. Players have to go out thinking they can win. But the most likely outcome is a New Zealand win and with a bigger margin than last week (7-14 points I'd say)

rubbish

more of a rubber mallett than a hammer

Tuilagi on the wing is a risk. He was the numero uno impact player vs the ABs from 12 in 2012 and was effective again from there last week.

Playing players out of position purely to allow for someone else? - the 'gotta have him on the field' somewhere syndrome. Is that what this is, or is Manu actually a better wing than 12?

Big call.

I'm sure as a Leicester supporter my views will seem biased but I think moving Manu to the wing is madness. Not just because I think he is a much better 13 than Burrel (or any other English OC) but also I feel like he's not really a good winger.
Although he's faster than he's given credited for, he's still well short of pace for an international 14. You can probably count the number of high balls he's caught in his career on one hand and I wouldn't trust him with his positioning either. Play him where he is at his best - and better than the alternatives - not shove him in elsewhere.

Just incase you think Cockerill has discovered how to use the internet, Care in ahead of Youngs is absolutely the right call and I'd have had Lawes in for Parling. The fact that I'd have Slater in ahead of both of them is beside the point  

I think its a tacit admission that he is not very good at using his winger and is a battering ram, though a very very good one. Personally i think now is not the time to test this theory by introducing a new centre partnership v a NZ that have had a timely reminder that they are sitting on their unbeaten perch waiting to get booted off it.

Good to see....Hansens not a happy chappy:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/10149256/All-Blacks-coach-Steve-Hansen-says-shape-up-or-ship-out

"If you turn around and say so and so shouldn't play because he played badly, we wouldn't have anyone on the park - that's how bad the performance was," Hansen said.

"We know some of the reasons we played poorly, and one of them was a lack of preparation time, so there's no point recreating that whole thing again by putting new faces in.

"It's about us working hard on our skill sets, understanding how we want to play and going out and delivering that.

"The group has faith in what we're trying to do; it's just a matter of getting it right on the night."

"There is an expectation of where the standards should be, and if they're not there they get told about it," Hansen said.

"There are not too many times All Black teams play poorly and don't respond in some fashion, but don't forget we're playing a very good side and they'll respond as well, and they'll improve."

too right!

and Manu at hookers not a bad idea either...

My take on the English selection:
1. He's got 3 tests and he want's to asssess a lot of players.
2. reward for the players who played last week.
3. the bonus of bringing on good, hungry players as replacements (e.g. Vunipola and Lawes).
4. Power. A lot of big units in the backline.

milkyboy wrote:

blackcanelion wrote:

nathan wrote:

ebop wrote:Agree Tman. Right in the cross hairs. Some English are setting themselves up here. It's uncharacteristic

i think your trying to build it up so when we lose you can have a moan.

Nah. The English rugby propaganda machine is a thing of beauty and a wonder to behold. A sniff of victory and a team of super heroes instantly emerges, a unexpected loss and and the players have always been failures. Add in the standard questioning of referee competence and the integrity of the opposition. I always thought the English sports fan had it hard given the big swings in the media. I suggest a law requiring prozac be sold with every copy of the Times, Telegraph etc.

Not a rugby thing a media thing in general. 'Housing price boom' sells papers, 'housing price crash' sells papers, 'housing prices not doing much' doesn't sell papers.

Our sportsmen are either Heroes or villains. 'English rugby on rut of mediocrity' doesn't cut it as a headline.

Its predictable but at least its variety and not as one eyed and jingoistic as say, the Australian media.

Agreed with all but the last comment (in terms of rugby).

blackcanelion wrote:My take on the English selection:
1. He's got 3 tests and he want's to asssess a lot of players.
2. reward for the players who played last week.
3. the bonus of bringing on good, hungry players as replacements (e.g. Vunipola and Lawes).
4. Power. A lot of big units in the backline.

Yes we are definitely missing Savea so thank goodness for that- Piautau as well.

Jane needs to up his game, hes not looking as quick. I would have put Fekitoa on instead of Jane but I know that wasn't gonna happen. Still think Jane rode in on the back of some late sharp Canes backline plays.

Ben Smith I think will respond big time- at home and in his best position.

This test sure is heating up...

After Lawes' performances for England and Saints I can't for the life of me see how he can possibly not be starting unless he was more beaten up in the Premiership final than we realise. Same goes for Vunipola I guess.

A very narrow England side will be playing against the best wide game in world rugby......

Questionable selections;

Farrell, 36, ?

Tuilagi on the wing......extra running practice for OFarrell's imaginative kicking game....

Well chaps the die is cast and I believe Stewie has bombed it.

Lancaster's selection is close to what Woodward proposed in the Daily Mail. The only difference is that he would have started Lawes and Billy Vunipola.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2652302/SIR-CLIVE-WOODWARD-Its-time-Stuart-Lancaster-Co-shake-world.html

Looking at our injury replacement options, I see Burns is down for cover at full back. Anyone know how he can handle that role? It's become so common to see at least two or three full backs in the match day squad, it's genuinely surprising to think we might see a non-specialist in the role if Brown gets injured.

If Tuilagi turns out to be a liability on the wing, we know Ashton can come on but I wonder who Lancaster would take off. It seems unlikely Tuilagi himself would depart, unless he looks mentally broken, so it would have to be 36 or Burrell. If Burrell was angry at being subbed during the Italy game, i wouldn't want to see his reaction if he was given the hook at the weekend

If Tom Wood got hurt early, I wonder if Lancaster would consider sending Lawes on rather than Billy, on the basis that he might get more from the Saracens man by switching him with Morgan later in the game.

I really don't know about this selection. Tuilagi on the wing worries me because I've never seen it. I can live with the other changes while being concerned about the fitness of Care, Farrell and 36.

Lawes is a surprise, but Lancaster clearly likes what Parling did, and probably prefers him to be showing leadership from the off. I wonder whether the selection would have been different if Hartley was chosen to start.

Manu's defensive skills will be tested. Positional, catching high balls and kicking skills worry me. Apart from that I think the overall selection could take England to the next level. This is a very powerful squad from 1 to 23. The Nz pack will need a good night's sleep before kick off if they are to contain them.

I'm happy to go with whatever Lancaster think best barring one question: who's covering full back as the only one guy I can see who possibly could is Yarde. Not sure he's ever played there but there seems no other realistic option?

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm happy to go with whatever Lancaster think best barring one question: who's covering full back as the only one guy I can see who possibly could is Yarde. Not sure he's ever played there but there seems no other realistic option?

It's supposed to be Burns, which is why I asked above if anyone knew how he can handle that position.

Sorry. Teaches me to read other posts and not jump the gun! I'm quite excited by this selection and the bench looks strong for the first time in God knows (as long as Burns is decent at full back if required).

Not sure about Ashton on the bench either, just start him or don't play him. Manu would have been better off on the bench with Ashton starting.

Hope Vunipola, Hartley, Farrell, Care and 36 are all fit, it'd be a shame to have rushed them back only for them to not be 100%

Oh and congrats to Brookes for getting the bench spot, lets hope he gets a chance at the end.

Surprised Cips isn't the 22 as he has a lot of experience at fullback

nathan wrote:

ebop wrote:Agree Tman. Right in the cross hairs. Some English are setting themselves up here. It's uncharacteristic

i think your trying to build it up so when we lose you can have a moan.

Noooo, don't be silly Nathan, shesh. Nah, you guys are alright, just jiving. We'll be on here congratulating you if you win T2 or T3. Don't worry about that. We'll be p1ssed off if we lose and we didn't play well. But we'll give credit where it's due or admit it if we got lucky like the last game 

 

ebop wrote:

nathan wrote:

ebop wrote:Agree Tman. Right in the cross hairs. Some English are setting themselves up here. It's uncharacteristic

i think your trying to build it up so when we lose you can have a moan.

Noooo, don't be silly Nathan, shesh. Nah, you guys are alright, just jiving. We'll be on here congratulating you if you win T2 or T3. Don't worry about that. We'll be p1ssed off if we lose and we didn't play well. But we'll give credit where it's due or admit it if we got lucky like the last game 

You surely mean you be here congratulating people if we win T2 and/or T3

Launchbury could cover 6 following a Tom Wood injury...and Billy played there quite a bit for Saracens this season aswell.

Ah im with most of your guys im not happy seeing Manu on the wing.

Lancaster obviously likes the Farrell, Twelvetrees, Burrell combo and is just trying to get Manu in whereever he can.

I do agree with the above in that he is obviously trying out a few different players against this level of opposition.

It will be interesting to see the game.

EDIT:

Also that thing from Hansen....the old we played badly...not the opposition actually played well.   

My only concern is the weather. If it rains then the game will be much closer for both teams. If its dry bring it on. C'mon Engeerlaand.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Lawes is a surprise, but Lancaster clearly likes what Parling did, and probably prefers him to be showing leadership from the off. I wonder whether the selection would have been different if Hartley was chosen to start.

Most likely, I'm sure to some degree he sees them as pairings... on that logic you'd think the hartley, lawes club connection would be favoured, but webber and parling clicked last week. I suspect the growing understanding we've seen between care and farrell, two of our best players in the 6N, helped cement farrell's inclusion over burns at 10 also.

Good point about cips... foden/goode instead of ashton would be the alternative i guess. He seems to have gone more for specialists rather than all rounders on the bench though, which is positive, but maybe higher risk if the wrong player gets injured.

This time around a quizzical, concerned eyebrow will be raised Down Under when perusing the strength of the English bench.

Good side to do the biz (apart from bringing back 36 (vision and defence) and Farrell (vision and creativity) who can count themselves very lucky imo).
(I cant stay schtum can I?)

Is Eastmond unlucky?

I wonder if Lancaster is building everything up for a right go in the final test?

Farrell makes sense to me. Despite Burns playing well we were suffering with playing in our own half too much in the second half and Farrell is normally very good in getting field position. 36 is more rounded than Eastmond though I'm disappointed for him in not gtting another chance. I guess he'll start against the Crusaders with a point to prove. If the Tuilagi experiment works we could be in for a very good game (albeit a big if).

Is this first time Tuilagi plays on the wing? Makes even less sense than having Fofana there. Guess you have to deal with injuries though. Good luck England   

Glory. I'll guarantee it will be 100% dry.

As long as the pitch holds up better than the one in Cardiff, even when the roof has been closed.

I like the look of the team and, particularly, the bench. If we are in the game after an hour, the prospect of Hartley, Lawes and Billy V coming on should lift the whole team.

There are risks with playing Tuilagi on the wing but if he isn't going to try it now, then when? There are huge potential rewards as well, he should get plenty of opportunity to run at the opposition and will hopefully get a few one on ones.

Ashton on the bench is an odd choice and smacks of looking to move Tuilagi if that experiment hasn't worked. Think Foden or May, who can both cover full back or wing, would have made more sense.

Still not over confident, despite all of the above, but I didn't give us much of a chance in our last three games against NZ so maybe at some point I'll start to have a bit more belief in the team.

ebop wrote:Glory. I'll guarantee it will be 100% dry.

Looks like someone else knows that the roof will be on   

Damn, I thought I was the only one that knew that

have similar feelings to those expressed re eastmond and 36. I've never been that sold on twelvetrees but he did seem to improve in an england shirt as the 6n progressed... and i guess to some degree he's one of those players whose all round play is appreciated by coaches and those around him more than by fans - who like the bit of flair an eastmond can provide.

Squad looks very strong, but I'm not sure about a few of the selections- most of which are being echoed by everyone else.

Tuilagi on the wing is going to be bombed all day with high balls. Can he handle them?

England have a terrible tendency to defend narrow, and even out-and-out wingers like Yarde struggled to rectify that when the ABs did finally go wide. How will a centre who's used to having support players in a drift defence cope when he's the widest defender? Add to that fact that he will be up against Savea and it could turn into a long day for Manu.

I like the centre combo of 36 and Burrell. I did all the way through the Six Nations so I'm looking forward to seeing them again.

Ashton to start or not at all. Why not use May as the bench option? He covers wing, fullback, and centre competently, and has that x factor.

Good to see Wood back but harsh on Haskell.

Looking forward to seeing Vunipola off the bench ready to stake a claim for what was his jersey a few months ago.

Bold selections and calls by Lancaster. I trust him, but we'll see how the Manu experiment goes.

Gf do you see SL say this is what NZ did well to us and where we looked weak? Of course Hansen is not going to highlight where England did well and is only concerned how he can get NZ to improve and will be telling the players in private where England dominated them.

You can only worry about what you can control. Not what the opposition does or how well they execute it. If you worry about what the opposition could do you lose sight of what you can do.

ebop wrote:Damn, I thought I was the only one that knew that

We both should have kept quiet and made some money!

Give him sweet odds and he'll probably still put money on it.