England vs South Africa November 15th 2014

First topic message reminder :

Courtney Lawes is a doubt, since he is going through concussion protocols. That would see Kruis start and Kitchener on the bench, unless Lancaster wants to do something funky with Clark. Luther Burrell not in contention, and Stephen Myler still out with a hamstring problem. Haskell is there.

England team to face South Africa:

Mike Brown (Harlequins)
Anthony Watson (Bath)
Brad Barritt (Saracens)
Kyle Eastmond (Bath)
Jonny May (Gloucester)
Owen Farrell (Saracens)
Danny Care (Harlequins)
Joe Marler (Harlequins)
Dylan Hartley (Northampton)
David Wilson (Bath)
Dave Attwood (Bath)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton)
Tom Wood (Northampton)
Chris Robshaw (Harlequins)
Billy Vunipola (Saracens)

Replacements

Rob Webber (Bath), Matt Mullan (Wasps), Kieran Brookes (Newcastle), George Kruis (Saracens), Ben Morgan (Gloucester), Ben Youngs (Leicester), George Ford (Bath), Marland Yarde (Harlequins)

South Africa

15 Willie le Roux,
14 JP Pietersen,
13 Jan Serfontein,

12 Jean de Villiers,
11 Bryan Habana,
10 Pat Lambie,
9 Cobus Reinach,
8 Duane Vermeulen,
7 Schalk Burger,
6 Marcell Coetzee,
5 Victor Matfield,
4 Eben Etzebeth,
3 Jannie du Plessis,
2 Adriaan Strauss,
1 Tendai Mtawarira

Replacements:

16 Bismarck du Plessis,
17 Trevor Nyakane,
18 Coenie Oosthuizen,
19 Bakkies Botha,
20 Teboho “Oupa” Mohoje,
21 Francois Hougaard,
22 Handré Pollard,
23 Cornal Hendricks

England have gone without a win in their last eleven Tests against the Springboks. Their best recent result was a draw in Port Elizabeth in June 2012. The match on Saturday will be almost eight years exactly since England's last victory. England have lost their last four Twickenham encounters.

This is the third time Lancaster has taken England through a round of Autumn Internationals. In 2012, his team beat New Zealand. In 2013, it was Australia. He has never beaten South Africa; his record reads one home loss, two away losses and one away draw.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:last week, strauss got binned for touching the jumper in the air. Twickenham crowd very fair for not going mad. habana's touch on watson was identical to strauss's on kearney. neither of which should have been yellows.

Strauss got binned for cumulative penalties,ref said it to the captain as he was issuing the yellow.

so it should only have been a penalty on its own then?

Walsh....just get on with the feckin game!!!

Yellow??! Aw your kidding!

this is a joke. if hartley gets yellow for that i am seriously disgusted

Correct decision in the end.  Hartley sin binned. Deliberate stamp on a joint.

Barritt finally gets to play his real position

As I thought regarding Walsh..

TJ wrote:Correct decision in the end.  Hartley sin binned.  Deliberate stamp on a joint.

wrong. they were moving forward. etzebeth was on the wrong side. end of.

Fair yellow for me

Don't make me laugh TJ

Looked like a deliberate stamp on a prone player's leg - IMO he's lucky just get get a yellow

Oh Farrell!

Frak Farrell!!!

Ben Morgan has been top class. With the ball and his tackling.

RDW_Scotland wrote:Looked like a deliberate stamp on a prone player's leg - IMO he's lucky just get get a yellow

the maul was walking forward. he didnt stamp, he stepped. its in the rules. cant be a yellow if there is forward momentum. what is hartley supposed to do, fall over?

Get him off now

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:Correct decision in the end.  Hartley sin binned.  Deliberate stamp on a joint.

wrong. they were moving forward. etzebeth was on the wrong side. end of.

Wrong - you are not allowed to deliberatly stamp on a player. Hartley clearly did so - he slapped the leg first then stamped

Farrell has now given Watson 2 hospital balls

Come on Ford show us what you can do

quinsforever wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Looked like a deliberate stamp on a prone player's leg - IMO he's lucky just get get a yellow

the maul was walking forward. he didnt stamp, he stepped. its in the rules. cant be a yellow if there is forward momentum. what is hartley supposed to do, fall over?

No - he is supposed to step over him as Walsh called for him to do. Absolutely correct decision. Obvious yellow. Its a deliberate stamp. If a SA player had done that you would be screaming for a card

Farrell should not play in the next game.

I keep hearing in every game that eng are building and developing but i'm just not seeing it.

I saw a good Ireland side take this team apart last week, now I see an Eng team just struggle again, and again.

They definitely just aren't that good anymore, proves Ireland are at the top anyway.

TJ wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:Correct decision in the end.  Hartley sin binned.  Deliberate stamp on a joint.

wrong. they were moving forward. etzebeth was on the wrong side. end of.

Wrong - you are not allowed to deliberatly stamp on a player.  Hartley clearly did so - he slapped the leg first then stamped

he didnt stamp, he had to step over him. they were moving forwards. cannot be a stamp if they he is stepping over.

quinsforever wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Looked like a deliberate stamp on a prone player's leg - IMO he's lucky just get get a yellow

the maul was walking forward. he didnt stamp, he stepped. its in the rules. cant be a yellow if there is forward momentum. what is hartley supposed to do, fall over?

Come on now - are you seriously claiming that was a 'step'? From the replays there was clear intent in there - it was a stamp.

Is that not competing in the air?!

Got to agree it was a yellow on Hartley

So you can't compete for a lineout. No wonder SA are so good in that area.

didn't think it was a stamp - more like a scrape as his foot went down as he stepped over the player that was grabbing illegally at England's players legs

It was an obvious deliberate stamp. Hartley slapped his leg then stamped on the knee joint. clear and obvious

RDW_Scotland wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Looked like a deliberate stamp on a prone player's leg - IMO he's lucky just get get a yellow

the maul was walking forward. he didnt stamp, he stepped. its in the rules. cant be a yellow if there is forward momentum. what is hartley supposed to do, fall over?

Come on now - are you seriously claiming that was a 'step'? From the replays there was clear intent in there - it was a stamp.

he barely makes contact. it was a glancing blow. and he is being pushed by a player behind. if its a maul then people on the wrong side might get walked on. how come its okay to ruck someone but not try to step over them?

I don't have a problem with the yellow. You can't even blame Walsh this time because he saw it but was prepared to play on. The TMO suggested a second look and it clinched the deal.

TJ wrote:It was an obvious deliberate stamp.  Hartley slapped his leg then stamped on the knee joint.  clear and obvious

go away tj. was neither clear nor obvious. was very very marginal, very subjective. commentators didts agree, and barnes is usually the first to castigate hartley.

I just heard the name Jonny May.. I didn't even realise he was playing. what does that say about the way eng are playing?

GeordieFalcon wrote:So you can't compete for a lineout. No wonder SA are so good in that area.

inconsistent - as I've said before SA spent the entire first half pulling on Lawes arms in the line-outs

Rugby Fan wrote:I don't have a problem with the yellow. You can't even blame Walsh this time because he saw it but was prepared to play on. The TMO suggested a second look and it clinched the deal.

I'll have to look again. If he deliberately stamped on a joint then probably hard to say a yellow not fair.

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:It was an obvious deliberate stamp.  Hartley slapped his leg then stamped on the knee joint.  clear and obvious

go away tj. was neither clear nor obvious. was very very marginal, very subjective. commentators didts agree, and barnes is usually the first to castigate hartley.

I think yo will change your mind when you see the replay again.

Rugby Fan wrote:I don't have a problem with the yellow. You can't even blame Walsh this time because he saw it but was prepared to play on. The TMO suggested a second look and it clinched the deal.

tmos should NOT be allowed to introduce slowmos that the ref saw in real time. everything looks worse in slow mo. everything. do we want tmos to run the game in hindsight, and see multiple yellows for nothing infringements?

look at the yellow for strauss last week.

Come on Keiron. Smash them

Come on Keiron. Smash them

Excellebt steal

Sounds like we're never going to agree - to me it was an obvious stamp and I can't understand how people can't see that, and to you it wasn't that serious an incident and you can't understand how it can be seen in a different light.

As a 'neutral' I'll claim the moral high ground!

What on earth has Lawes been penalised for there

Walsh can't ref a maul shocking.. And he's let Sa get away with things in the lineout.

This seems familiar

Not good enough

quinsforever wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:I don't have a problem with the yellow. You can't even blame Walsh this time because he saw it but was prepared to play on. The TMO suggested a second look and it clinched the deal.

tmos should NOT be allowed to introduce slowmos that the ref saw in real time. everything looks worse in slow mo. everything. do we want tmos to run the game in hindsight, and see multiple yellows for nothing infringements?

look at the yellow for strauss last week.

you crack me up quins. Hartley niggles Coles who kicks out without looking and youre all over it. Now Hartley lines the guy up and then stomps on him and its now nothing. Common ingredient? Hartley. take yer medicine pal. looks like his negligence will cost them the match? karma? looks like it...

so how long until they accept Lancaster isn't getting it done?

and they lose again. utter guff.

Bugger!

BamBam wrote:What on earth has Lawes been penalised for there

Came straight round the maul after it was formed. Offside