England Saxons vs Irish Wolfhounds

First topic message reminder :

The England Saxons face Ireland Wolfhounds at Irish Independent Park on Friday, January 30 in Cork. Given that the six nations are too bloomin far away and this is a big RWC year with many players battling over a place in international squads i'm looking forward to this one. Who do we think should be in both teams. This is my england team

Corbisiero
George
Brookes
Kitchener
Kruis
Croft
Kvesic
Waldrom

Wigglesworth
Cipriani
Yarde
Slade
Joseph
Rokodunguni
Foden

Thomas
Cowan-Dickie
Vunipola
Parling
Clark
Dickson
Burgess
Myler

quinsforever wrote:no they wouldnt. because the english defensive line was big, aggressive and effective. the worry was always going to be your lightweight backs. and so it was. no-one bought any dummies so you were never threatening.

englands lineout was poor, in other respects, ireland were poor.

I have to agree with that to some extent - not so much the power of the england defence but the organisation meant no gaps at all all game despite some clever plays and passes from ireland

poor game tho - England had very little to offer in attack either.

SecretFly wrote:All I saw was O'Brien looking like he was well off the pace for 80 but on the ball for a nicely timed return (WC).

I thought O'Brien looked pretty good actually, looked powerful and hungry for contact. He just needs a few games to build up the match fitness. Definitely one of the positives for Ireland. Likewise Henderson.

Conan was disappointing though after his recent good form - didn't really impose himself at all. Ryan and Diack looked much sharper but not convinced either have the physicality to go to a higher level than this.

rodders wrote:

SecretFly wrote:All I saw was O'Brien looking like he was well off the pace for 80 but on the ball for a nicely timed return (WC).

I thought O'Brien looked pretty good actually, looked powerful and hungry for contact. He just needs a few games to build up the match fitness. Definitely one of the positives for Ireland. Likewise Henderson.

Conan was disappointing though after his recent good form - didn't really impose himself at all. Ryan and Diack looked much sharper but not convinced either have the physicality to go to a higher level than this.

That's what I was saying.  He looked the part except for the part that wouldn't have lasted a full 80 - and wouldn't really be expected to (wasn't meant to infer he didn't play well for the minutes he was on).  'On the ball' means alert and ready and looking the part.  But I repeat, the old red mist stuff needs a slap down. It's nervous energy that we don't need because we kinda need him there again sooner rather than later.

I won't say who really didn't impress me because that's messy and not needed at this point.  It was a mess of a game with no structure and can't be even remotely regarded as close to how Ireland will try to win another Championship, because if it is - we're dead.  So reserved judgement on those who especially didn't impress me.

I actually thought England were ok. The disaster at the line out, coupled with a couple of mistakes at the scrum and a glut of second half penalties meant we couldn't build any momentum, but when we did have ball in hand I though we looked dangerous. The England pack looked physically strong, the defence worked well, and the breakdown was decent.

Burgess was poor, but otherwise I reckon SL has seen a large number of players who he could slot into the senior side without causing him any concern.

That was a horrible match to watch. I don't know if Ireland were just very good at spoiling and stealing but our lineout was truly shocking. We ought to have considered tapping a couple of our penalties - even with the defence all lined up - just to ensure we kept possession.

I liked it when the referee imposed himself on the match early, but liked it a lot less when I realized we were going to get that for the whole game.

lostinwales wrote:

quinsforever wrote:yeah. obviously no insights from this game to the 6Ns match. bigger gulf in quality between ireland and wolfhounds than england and saxons, and on the flipside, englands set pieces will be better. should be a good 'un.

Wolfhounds with 325 caps. Sigh...

Doesn't mean that much. Gordon D'Arcy had the most caps but was probably Ireland's weakest player in terms of quality.

Half that Ireland A squad are not first choice picks for their province.

I haven't seen the game yet, but when looking at the teamsheet it doesn't surprise me that saxons struggled at the line out

I don't see a recognised caller or established middle jumper anywhere, Christian Day was probably going to be that guy but injuries forced his call up to the main squad

Neither team played well at all, but the reason us english fans are happy is because that was a strong Wolfhounds side that we beat away. OUr defence was pretty solid and we were surprisingly clinical, in the past we never would have finished off those 2 chances.

Irish fans should be concerned about the defence, it seemed that all we had to do was have one strong run and then with front foot ball we'd score after a few phases, the realignment was poor.

Thought that Slade, Ewers, Pennel, Kvesic and Simpson when he came on all showed good promise for the seniors. Pennell might be a bit lightweight though, which is a shame because his positioning and claiming the high ball were brilliant, can't believe he plays in the championship

What an awful game. No wonder the A team concept has died in every other country.

maestegmafia wrote:What an awful game. No wonder the A team concept has died in every other country.

Countries dont buy into it there is not enough games and no continuity in the squads. All makes for worse games when they do happen.

In other words if the A team concept hadnt died these games would be better

Bring back the Churchill cup.

Three big reasons for the poor quality of that match:

1) Saxons incompetence at the set piece. We could not win the lineout even when uncontested with Garvey knocking on regularly or webber then LCD missing men at will. We seemed to resort to generally lobbing it and hoping. At scrum time there was not a single strike for the ball. Webber had a real chance to pressure the main squad. He failed dismally.

2) Madigan's incompetence (excluding goal kicking). Easy to see why Gopperth plays 10 for Leinster when madigan is like this.

3) Ref's incompetence. So far out of his depth he could have been paddling in the Mariana Trench.


Concentrating on England team:

Impressed by Dickson and Simpson.
Some really good stuff form Ashton - shame he is such a tool.
Burgess poor, though commentators blamed him from everything - including a number of mistakes by Daly.
Some good charges by Ewers, but he disappeared for long periods. Kvesic excellent.
Garvey and Itoje desperately poor in the lineout and struggled at other times.
Webber worst performance from a man in white, LCD good ball in hand but poor at the basics.
Defence - generally impressive but some serious communication issues.

This game demonstrated why there is no more than one of them at this time of year. It is exactly like a pre-season friendly where the result is meaningless and is purely focused on individual programmes.

Joe will have taken a fair bit away from that game in his quest to cull the names for the RWC squad. The tight five showed they were good enough to make the final 30, except McCarthy who offers very little. Playing Diack again at lock shows that Schmidt is seriously considering him as a utility forward and giving him every chance to put his hand up. Nathan White also got a chance to see if he suits green. SOB got some gametime at a reasonable level and that will help his rehab. Marmion got some decent experience and will be on the plane. Madigan showed again he is no more than an emergency 10. D'Arcy is indeed past it. Earls is good with ball in hand, but frustratingly poor if he has to give it to someone else. Given Madser's poor kicking and the midfield's poor distribution, Joe won't have learned much about the back three.

Flippin missed the game lads, fell asleep and my alarm didn't go off to wake me up.

Anybody got a link? Sounds like a crap game but I'd like to see it and make a judgement call on bits and bobs.

Irish Scrum?
Ian Henderson?
O'Brien?
Kicking from hand from Irish players?
Earls?

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Flippin missed the game lads, fell asleep and my alarm didn't go off to wake me up.

Anybody got a link? Sounds like a crap game but I'd like to see it and make a judgement call on bits and bobs.

Irish Scrum?
Ian Henderson?
O'Brien?
Kicking from hand from Irish players?
Earls?

Irish Scrum was pretty solid, maybe less so when Bent and White came on in the second half.

Henderson was motm I believe and along with O'Brien one of the positives. O'Brien looks a few weeks away from starting but Henderson is probably pushing for a bench spot next week.

Kicking from hand was poor, Madigan really had a poor game given the context for him - couldn't find any range and kicked down the English back 3s throat.

Earls was Earls - made a nice half break early on and looked keen to run but as with the rest of the backs lacked cutting edge...although Madigan standing so deep and England dominating the breakdown area made it difficult for our smaller backs to showcase their ability. Defence in the backs generally not great either, where we conceded the gainline a lot.

If you haven't watched it pete...dont bother!

Henderson has been really impressive,if he keeps up this form I can see him pushing Toner to the bench for the WC.He has really added an extra level of aggression to his game,watching him manhandle one English lock in a maul was a pleasure.

Madigan really was poor in his kicking from hand,he made some nice decisions early on to grubber in behind the English defense but never executed very well and they always managed to collect and clear the ball,if those kicks had gone out we would have had some great chances to pressure their lineout deep in their half.

Agree ASLS - it's what makes Madigan a second rate ten for me. He should have realised the pressure the Saxons were under from the line and kicked to put the ball out rather than keep it in play. He has the physical ability but not the mental agility to be a top flyhalf.

A scrappy game but good to get the win.

Thought Ashton's kicking was very good, it's easily forgotten but I wonder if it'll help get him back into the senior side.

Burgess promoted to Seniors with 1 quiet game in the Saxons, wow England, still the same old Next Best Thing approach when what is needed is to cement a pair of existing centres with a flat playing 10. BY RWC I predict Burgess will have been tried and fried like so many other fill ins in what is becoming a bit of a band aid management style for Stewie.

In for 2 days before returning to Bath.

No 7&1/2 wrote:In for 2 days before returning to Bath.

Shush, don't let the truth get in the way of an anti English rant.

LondonTiger wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:In for 2 days before returning to Bath.

Shush, don't let the truth get in the way of an anti English rant.

Not anti English at all- the assumption seems to be self evident if a poster is Welsh - in fact as constructive an observation as those 'anti' welsh posters who correctly say Gatlandball is predictable and easy to defend against …point is Burgess is not the solution to the RWC centre problem and it is clear Lancaster is fast tracking a player who by his own admission doesn't understand the line out…how then will he understand the drift defense, one out, choosing a shoulder to attack, the blitz, etc etc….the midfield is one of the most intricate aspects of the modern game and not only how will he get to grips with that, but how will he do it at the highest level and within what, 10 internationals if he played every minute between now and Ocotber?

The solution for the RWC is to get manu fit and find his partner! IMO it honestly isn't Burgess though i , as much as anyone, wanst to see him partner Manu at some point

It would be stupid not to help someone with as much potential as Burgess though.

Gwlad wrote: wow England, still the same old Next Best Thing approach

Cut that bit out and it is reasonable to apply some latitude. By including a nationalistic dig - why should we?

LondonTiger wrote:

Gwlad wrote: wow England, still the same old Next Best Thing approach

Cut that bit out and it is reasonable to apply some latitude. By including a nationalistic dig - why should we?

Fair enough, wan't mean't that way…i get frustrated with it though and i'm not an english fan…surely one thing to learn from Gatlandball is that it has evolved just as much from picking the same players in the same positions as it has as a style in itself….when Mallett talk about a style of rugby he is right, what style do England want to play….and what strikes me is that bar Manu, England seem to have little option than to play 10 man because they don't have an established centre partnership. I would love to know that stats on players tested out there…...Brown and May are potent but with no real clue in midfield England only seem to see them at their most potent returning kicks. I have always felt England have too many options to chose from and seem to be looking for the golden goose - hence my reference to the Next Best Thing - when what we need to see pre RWC is consistent selection of a TEAM. Tine has run out now added to the fact the attrition rate is horrible so perhaps best to lay to strengths, monster pack, win the set pieces and play for territory.

Gwlad wrote:...what we need to see pre RWC is consistent selection of a TEAM...

If players are fit, Lancaster is very consistent. You can argue that he's bet on the wrong men, but injuries have forced his hand on almost all occasions, not capriciousness.

And the English back line actually worked very well last 6N with the 'makeshift' partnership of 36 and Burrell.

Cracks me up how obviously jealous and afraid of burgess people are. Barnes is the ringleader for the anti-burgess campaign.

12 is not a complicated position. See the man, tackle the man, occasionally take crash ball at pace. All of those are second nature to burgess.

No conincidence that baths record with burgess in the field has not suffered at all. He preoccupies defenders and that creates space and options elsewhere. Adds a whole new threat to Attacking options vs 36, barritt et al.

Of course it is worth fast tracking him in terms of training with the seniors.

quinsforever wrote:Cracks me up how obviously jealous and afraid of burgess people are. Barnes is the ringleader for the anti-burgess campaign.

12 is not a complicated position. See the man, tackle the man, occasionally take crash ball at pace. All of those are second nature to burgess.

No conincidence that baths record with burgess in the field has not suffered at all. He preoccupies defenders and that creates space and options elsewhere. Adds a whole new threat to Attacking options vs 36, barritt et al.

Of course it is worth fast tracking him in terms of training with the seniors.

Lets face it that's all you're ever going to get from Burgess and i think it's clear the simple nature of League is better suited to his route 1 style.

You have clearly never played at 12!! You aren't Janie Roberts are you?

Yeah I'm pretty sure there is a lot more to 12 than that..

There will be more to come but Burgess is a mile from the finished article, we are just doing our best to get him there. There is a high chance he will be at 6 in time anyways

There is always a tendency to get a fixed picture of how someone plays from the most limited evidence, and to refuse to understand that players develop and their form goes up and down.

Rugby Fan wrote:That was a horrible match to watch. I don't know if Ireland were just very good at spoiling and stealing but our lineout was truly shocking. We ought to have considered tapping a couple of our penalties - even with the defence all lined up - just to ensure we kept possession.

I liked it when the referee imposed himself on the match early, but liked it a lot less when I realized we were going to get that for the whole game.

Problem was the players didn't adapt their game. Ref was right - layers were wrong.

In some ways they did adapt tho - we saw a lot less illegal actions at the breakdown after the first 20 mins

LondonTiger wrote:Three big reasons for the poor quality of that match:

1) Saxons incompetence at the set piece. We could not win the lineout even when uncontested with Garvey knocking on regularly or webber then LCD missing men at will. We seemed to resort to generally lobbing it and hoping. At scrum time there was not a single strike for the ball. Webber had a real chance to pressure the main squad. He failed dismally.

2) Madigan's incompetence (excluding goal kicking). Easy to see why Gopperth plays 10 for Leinster when madigan is like this.

3) Ref's incompetence. So far out of his depth he could have been paddling in the Mariana Trench.


Concentrating on England team:

Impressed by Dickson and Simpson.
Some really good stuff form Ashton - shame he is such a tool.
Burgess poor, though commentators blamed him from everything - including a number of mistakes by Daly.
Some good charges by Ewers, but he disappeared for long periods. Kvesic excellent.
Garvey and Itoje desperately poor in the lineout and struggled at other times.
Webber worst performance from a man in white, LCD good ball in hand but poor at the basics.
Defence - generally impressive but some serious communication issues.

I didn't watch the game but set piece woes is not surprising when bearing in mind that these players haven't played much together. Also having two 5.5s in the lineout (one whose been playing 6 for most of the season, the other who hasn't been playing AP rugby except for a handful of minutes here or there). Though you would expect Garvey and Webber to have some sort of understanding - afterall they play at the same club!

Ashton's good form doesn't surprise me. I said before the game that the Wolfhounds shouldn't kick to him (from what Yappysnap said sounds like he kicked well again).

beshocked wrote:
Ashton's good form doesn't surprise me. I said before the game that the Wolfhounds shouldn't kick to him (from what Yappysnap said sounds like he kicked well again).

They kicked to him without 'Hounding' him I guess there'll be a heck of a lot more serious hounding of kickers come the real contest.

TJ wrote:
Problem was the players didn't adapt their game.  Ref was right - layers were wrong.

Well to me thats only partially true. I think there needs to be some appreciation for letting the game flow - especially in an 'a' game like this.

I think he was just too quick at times with the whistle to allow any sort of continuity - albeit it was mostly to the letter of the law.

I guess that's the difference between a good kick chase and a poor one but still it's nice of you Irish to build up Ashton's confidence with the boot! Actually to be honest Irish sides have helped Ashton's confidence in general. Thank you.

beshocked wrote:  I guess that's the difference between a good kick chase and a poor one but still it's nice of you Irish to build up Ashton's confidence with the boot! Actually to be honest Irish sides have helped Ashton's confidence in general. Thank you.

Delighted to serve the cause beshocked. I guess it's all a plan to keep getting Ashton onto the English side Get him in there, get his and his coach's confidence levels up and then................................. Plan 62B-AX1 is bubbling nicely

http://www.rugbyworld.com/countries/england-countries/england-saxons-player-analysis-maro-itoje-42517

Great analysis of Maro Itoje - 14 tackles and doing his bit in the two tries... not bad for a young lad.

I haven't really seen Itoje play for Saracens, so the last time I really saw him play was for the U20s. The thing that impressed me about him though is that he seems to be on an upward curve. I'm probably not explaining this very well, but he seemed to simply do what he did for the U20s at the next level up and I can see him doing the same thing for the seniors in a couple of years time. He has looked at home and in command at whatever level I have seen him play at. To me it speaks of a calmness and maturity that could lead to captaincy one day.

I agree Cumbrian he looks like a really excellent prospect.

I haven't seen him much either at Saracens but I saw him in the LV cup vs Quins - he got man of the match and was outstanding - he had a 20 minute spell when it seemed he was basically everywhere.

With Hamilton and Kruis expected to be away with Scotland and England respectively surely it means Itoje might start for Saracens in the 2nd row hopefully.

I wonder if he is an outside bet for the RWC.

In the big scheme of things I'd say there is too much danger of breaking him if he is pushed too far too early (like what happened with Lawes). But I do wonder if he may be a special case