France v England, 22nd August

First topic message reminder :

 
FRANCE v ENGLAND
22 August 2015
KO: 20:00 BST (21:00 Local)
Stade de France, Paris

Sky Sports

Referee: Jaco Peyper (South Africa)
Assistant Referees: John Lacey (Ireland) & Marius Mitrea (Italy)
Television match official: Simon McDowell (Ireland)

A. Head to Head

100 Played 100
38 Won 55
7 Drawn 7
55 Lost 38
1,244 Points 1,572

B. Recent Form

15 August 2015
Twickenham, London
19-14 to England

21 March 2015
Twickenham, London
55 – 35 to England

1 February 2014
Stade de France, Saint-Denis
26 – 24 to France

23 February 2013
Twickenham, London
23 – 13 to England

11 March 2012
Stade de France, Saint-Denis
22 – 24 to England


C. Teams

ENGLAND

15. Mike Brown (Harlequins, 37 caps)
14. Jack Nowell (Exeter Chiefs, 8 caps)
13. Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 11 caps)
12. Luther Burrell (Northampton Saints, 12 caps)
11. Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby, 14 caps)
10. George Ford (Bath Rugby, 11 caps)
9. Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 47 caps)

1. Joe Marler (Harlequins, 31 caps)
2. Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 22 caps)
3. Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers, 50 caps)
4. Joe Launchbury (Wasps, 22 caps)
5. Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 38 caps)
6. James Haskell (Wasps, 59 caps)
7. Chris Robshaw (captain, Harlequins, 37 caps)
8. Billy Vunipola (Saracens, 13 caps)

Replacements

16. Jamie George (Saracens, uncapped)
17. Mako Vunipola (Saracens,21 caps)
18. David Wilson (Bath Rugby, 42 caps)
19. Dave Attwood (Bath Rugby, 21 caps)
20. Nick Easter (Harlequins, 51 caps)
21. Danny Care (Harlequins, 51 caps)
22. Danny Cipriani (Sale Sharks, 13 caps)
23. Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester Rugby, 21 caps)

FRANCE


Spedding; Huget, Bastareaud, Fofana, Nakaitaci; Michalak, Tillous-Borde; Arous, Guirado, Slimani, Pape, Maestri, Chouly, Le Roux, Picamoles.

Replacements: Kayser, Debaty, Atonio, Flanquart, Nyanga, Kockott, Tales, Fickou.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Scrum dominance on that surface though, I thought it was going to go to uncontested for a while. dreadful pitch.

You don't expect to see any improvement against ireland then fa? If we put in a good performance and beat them well are we then favourites for the cup?

What I don't expect is for them to go back to their dominance of 15 months ago. Hartley adds another dimension. Cole looked a bit more bulky. Certainly don't see them favourites for the cup. Ireland look quite good to be fair. Looking at the Wales game England need to dominate to put Wales off their game and stop their superior backrow. Got their own problems at lineout and scrum time but if they can reach parity and play 2 7s in Tipuric and Warburton England will be on the cusp.

Never thought England had dominance in the scrum for a long time though we did in the lineout. Not sure about this parity thing as this seems to be harking back to when England were dominating with their pack and people didn't think their backs were up to much. I've just seen 2 games where our pack has been outplayed and we've taken chances and relied on our backs. If Wales get parity and only parity I'd fancy our chances.

People need to remember it was only a warm up game, we had a few players coming back from injury, for most it was their first game of the season and for others it was hopefully the rocket up their ass they needed to eliminate complacency in the squad.

Don't panic just yet.

Beshocked - I don't have any issue with Youngs or George in the lineout. The throws were all pretty much on target. Someone in the camp is clearly a Morris dancing fan and had decided to incorporate it into the lineout calls. That is a much bigger problem. That and being unbelievably predictable. All it did was give France the time and opportunity to compete. They need to make it quick and simple so the opposition don't have time to get up, and vary the point of attack so they don't know what's coming. Agree that George should probably start vIreland, but no worries about either compared to Hartley.

On a more general note, for England to be in the best form come the world cup they should be doing punishing training sessions still, so the way they played may perversely suggest they are getting things right. If they still play that way against Fiji then it will be clear things have gone wrong. Until then I'm not going to worry, even if we are poor in the Ireland game as well.

beshocked, I know you are upset that Itoje wasn't included in the squad, but Lancaster hasn't put "so much emphasis on Robshaw". The England pack throughout his tenure has been based around shared responsibility for the breakdown which is why there isn't so much emphasis on having traditional open and blindside flankers. Youngs, Cole, Launchbury, Haskell and even Billy V are - usually - also good breakdown operators.

What went wrong on Saturday? At the breakdown there are clear issues with how England adapt to Jaco Peyper. We've struggled in all the recent matches he's reffed, regardless of who has played. Not sure what the answer was there - though a couple of his calls were very odd (missing the ball being kicked out of Care's hands, penalising Cole for side entry when there were only two other players legally involved and so there wasn't a maul and therefore there wasn't an offside line).

The big tactical issue is one that's been brewing for a while: England are tending to arrive too late at the breakdown and with not enough force. It was noticeable how much it improved once Easter was on and started marshalling the forwards a bit more, so hopefully it's fixable. But until that point a lot of them were looking a bit clueless and seemed to be avoiding contact, except Haskell, who was industrious and clueless.

I wonder if Lancaster might try the 6. Vunipola, 8. Easter combination again. It looked to me like it worked and suited the new slimline Billy a bit better than being at 8.

We also need to remember that Marler, Youngs and Launchbury have all had time off with injury this year and were playing their first international (and in some cases their first game) for months away from home against a gnarled pack with a game already under their belts.

Lineout remains an issue. George has played himself into contention while others have played themselves out and probably deserves to start.

Big well I've never been impressed with T.Youngs in the set piece for England. Still has a lot to prove in my opinion.

punishing training sessions? Not sure if you're joking or not.

Some of these players have been playing so much rugby that running them into the ground is detrimental to their welfare.

Poorfour I am just worried that there's no effective Plan A let alone a plan B.


The emphasis has been on Robshaw - he's been Lancaster's captain and effectively his 1st name on the team sheet. He's just one player in the backrow but he's the embodiment of Lancaster's England.

You talk about England having so many great breakdown operators - well there should be no issues should there? If it's a reffing problem then someone needs to do their homework and adapt.

Adapt - should be the key word.

To be honest I don't know why Billy had to be slim line. He was one of England's best forwards in the 6 nations. Danger with a slimmer Billy is you risk taking away his power or at least enough to notice.

Some positives from the game:

Cipriani, Easter and Attwood looked decent when they came on.


Some negatives:

Cipriani, Easter and Attwood are unlikely to make the squad.


Joking aside, while an element of rustiness was to be expected, the forwards were a real concern, the lineouts and breakdown in particular. There is time to improve on both of those aspects, but sticking up Lawes every lineout and not competing at the breakdowns effectively will mean we will struggle to get out the group.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34036197

Ryan Jones' opinion is that we shouldn't read too much into Saturday's result but that he was surprised by England's weak forward showing. He also goes on to say that he expects a much better showing by Wales against Ireland on Saturday.

stub wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34036197

Ryan Jones' opinion is that we shouldn't read too much into Saturday's result but that he was surprised by England's weak forward showing. He also goes on to say that he expects a much better showing by Wales against Ireland on Saturday.

Yeah, I'd expect both Wales and England to improve on their previous game (which obviously wasn't good enough). Ireland will want to be a lot better than their game vs Scotland too where they were probably fortunate to win (with many expecting them to hand out a drubbing). Didn't see the Italy v Scotland game but sounded very close (pretty well-matched sides).

All NH sides (the French included who won't like the fact that England almost went on to win while playng so poorly) will want to improve.

The SH won't exactly be quaking in their boots yet!

I listened to the game on the radio and watched the highlights on the beeb, and I'm really not that worried to be honest.

Our forwards were well beaten by a good French pack. Given that most haven't played for ages I'm not too bothered. When France turn up like they did on Saturday they can beat anyone (including NZ). They were at home and played very well. I am disappointed that the England pack looked so rusty and offered so little but I think that they will have been given one hell of a wake up by that game. Ireland have a formidable pack in the loose. Let's judge our lot after they have played the Irish. If they do badly again then I will worry, but I have a funny feeling that they won't...

Actual issues from the game:

- Didn't adapt to the ref
- The lineout
- We were rusty

All should be fairly easy to fix, and 1 and 3 should really be fixed just by playing a bit more.

Our backs looked fine (if a little rusty) when they actually got the ball. I think Cipriani played very well when he came on, whereas 12T showed that he needs to be left at home. Cips is one injury to a 15 or 10 away from a world cup call, so it is really good news that he is playing well.

The last 20 minutes sowed that we can play well, we just had a really bad day at the office (and still almost stole it at the death!). People whining about Lancaster should maybe remember 2008 and how woeful we were then. If Lancaster doesn't get us to the semi finals then his position is in doubt, but this was one warm up game, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater!

TightHEAD wrote:People need to remember it was only a warm up game, we had a few players coming back from injury, for most it was their first game of the season and for others it was hopefully the rocket up their ass they needed to eliminate complacency in the squad.

Don't panic just yet.

I agree - ultimately still just a practice game. Most of these players have played the top teams very well and most have been part of teams which defeated most of the top teams.

But (and you knew a 'but' was coming) the problem was England appeared so poor across the pitch. They simply did not appear ready to play, which is only 50% on the players, the other 50% belongs to the coaching. I am not sure about players appearing rusty as an excuse because they have been in training for a long time now. And the on-field leadership to grab the players by the scruff of the neck was absent. A few specific game skills, such as lineouts, were inexcusable.

Based upon the performances on Saturday, I wonder if anyone played themselves out of the 31 man squad. Who do you think?

Attwood and possibly Burrell for me.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Attwood and possibly Burrell for me.

Burrell's performance the other day is a bit weird. People thought he was either pretty good or pretty bad. Most of the newspapers thought he was on the pretty good side of the ledger, as did I. But just as many people thought he was not. Whether he makes the 31 or not, it is strange to see opinions about a player's performance so clearly divided.

For me he carried well and tackled strongly. This appears to be what Lancaster wants as an option hence he's possibly in. I still think he lacks a bit of vision, and is a little lacking in attack, teams know what he's going to do ie run straight at them.

doctor_grey wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Attwood and possibly Burrell for me.

Burrell's performance the other day is a bit weird.  People thought he was either pretty good or pretty bad.  Most of the newspapers thought he was on the pretty good side of the ledger, as did I.  But just as many people thought he was not.  Whether he makes the 31 or not, it is strange to see opinions about a player's performance so clearly divided.

The same was true of a number of players. I've seen differing fan and newspaper reactions to Haskell's and Brown's performances as well. I think the problem was that so many "team" aspects of the performance were lacking - people in the wrong place at the wrong time or making poor choices about what to do with the ball - that it's very hard to judge who was doing what well.

The difficulty for Burrell is that a lot of people want to see someone else - be it Burgess, Slade or even Barritt - in his place. So we get confirmation bias: people see what they want to see.

Burrell gave at least two stupid and unnecessary penalties away. You could say his 6 points lost the game. Robshaw should pounce on these players straight away on the field. One is bad two is a sacking offence.

englandglory4ever wrote:Burrell gave at least two stupid and unnecessary penalties away. You could say his 6 points lost the game. Robshaw should pounce on these players straight away on the field. One is bad two is a sacking offence.

Two obviously isn't a sacking offence, or Haskell wouldn't have 50 caps.

englandglory4ever wrote:Burrell gave at least two stupid and unnecessary penalties away. You could say his 6 points lost the game. Robshaw should pounce on these players straight away on the field. One is bad two is a sacking offence.

Reckon we should drop Burgess then?

I think Burrell has lost his spot to Burgess - 1-0 to the media campaign to get him in!

From the highlights, I thought Brown had a decent game - one conspicuous error when knocking on in a good attacking position (over-throrn long pass and him trying to change the angle), but a fantyastic try-saving take over his head, and otherwise he looked the second most dynamic player we had, after Nowell.

Haskell - a be 'meh' for me. So often feel that he should be more effective. It's an issue at the moment that whoever starts in certain positions (2, 6, 12) seems to make a strong case for someone else starting there...

Burrell - A couple of early penalties conceded, and I suspect looked worse on the highlights than he did over the course of the whole match, as much of what he dies is tackle and truck up poor ball; things that don't make many highlight reels... I suspect there are a couple of factors in play regarding the variance in people's opinion - his relatively poor performance in last year's 6Ns, and his lack of flashiness when at 12.

Overall, I think it was one of those performances where Lancaster learnt quite a lot, but much of it wasn't what he wanted. Suspect Easter has played his way into the squad, but at the expense of who? could be 4th 2nd row or ahead of Morgan if Ben is still a bit short of form and fitness.
Cipriani is a dilemma - he certainly offers something as an impact sub late on, especially if given a fairly free role as on Saturday (so irrelevant of whether he replaces a 12 or a 15), but I'm not sure I'd want him starting at either 10 or 15. Is there room in the squad for him to play these 15 minute cameos?

dummy_half wrote:From the highlights, I thought Brown had a decent game - one conspicuous error when knocking on in a good attacking position (over-throrn long pass and him trying to change the angle), but a fantyastic try-saving take over his head, and otherwise he looked the second most dynamic player we had, after Nowell.

Haskell - a be 'meh' for me. So often feel that he should be more effective. It's an issue at the moment that whoever starts in certain positions (2, 6, 12) seems to make a strong case for someone else starting there...

Burrell - A couple of early penalties conceded, and I suspect looked worse on the highlights than he did over the course of the whole match, as much of what he dies is tackle and truck up poor ball; things that don't make many highlight reels... I suspect there are a couple of factors in play regarding the variance in people's opinion - his relatively poor performance in last year's 6Ns, and his lack of flashiness when at 12.

Overall, I think it was one of those performances where Lancaster learnt quite a lot, but much of it wasn't what he wanted. Suspect Easter has played his way into the squad, but at the expense of who? could be 4th 2nd row  or ahead of Morgan if Ben is still a bit short of form and fitness.
Cipriani is a dilemma - he certainly offers something as an impact sub late on, especially if given a fairly free role as on Saturday (so irrelevant of whether he replaces a 12 or a 15), but I'm not sure I'd want him starting at either 10 or 15. Is there room in the squad for him to play these 15 minute cameos?

The question should be Goode or Cipriani. Goode had a good game at HQ, good play maker reliable 15, no pace. Cips had two brief cameos and looked very good in the second, can be a play maker due to his position being 10 or 15, has good pace and appears to have learnt to tackle.

I would pick Cips, purely for his versatility, he offers the unexpected and with three wingers in the squad all capable of playing 15 and therefore covering an attacking fullback he would be allowed to attack.

Well past it

I'm coming round to the same opinion. Nothing Goode has done wrong, and I would keep him on standby in the event that Brown gets injured, but I think for a knock-out competition there is a good case for having a couple of 'impact' players who might make the difference in games where we are trailing.

Sure, Cips might not make a big difference in some games, and he might on occasion make mistakes that cost us, but he offers a potential upside that could make the difference in sneaking through a tough quarter final. May not be a guy I want to see on the field for 60 minutes a game, but sometimes the last 15 or 20 minutes are important...

I think I'd pick Cips as an impact player Goode offers a safe choice but I don't think this RWC is going to be won by a team making safe choices.

So annoying that finally we have some backs capable of causing problems and our forwards have gone soft and forgotten how to win and retain the ball.

I'll take Cipriani's deft passes putting people through gaps over Goode's ineffective mazy runs any day. Goode would not in a million years have saved that try Brown caught either, and Cipriani is a much more physical player than he used to be.

What Cipriani offers which the likes of Burrell and Twelvetrees don't is a natural rugby instinct. His try on Saturday looked quite simple and straight forward, but he picked the right angle and had sufficient speed to make the score. He didn't try to bulldoze his way over by running straight at a defender or take the tackle and throw a miracle offload, nor did he kill the space by trying to run around the defender.

He is far from perfect, but as an option at 10 and 15 (12 or 13 in an emergency) he does offer something different to the other backup contenders. I would also say that I think Easter is in that same mould. He doesn't have the power or pace (???) of Vunipola or Morgan, but he has a much sharper mind.

You can't beat a good rugby brain, just look at Haskell a fine physical specimen of a modern rugby player but he doesn't have a brain let alone a rugby one!

TightHEAD wrote:You can't beat a good rugby brain, just look at Haskell a fine physical specimen of a modern rugby player but he doesn't have a brain let alone a rugby one!

There have recently been experiments in which two rats connected by electrodes and a radio transmitter have been able to share sensory information and control each other's limbs while on different continents.

Sadly, this breakthrough has come too late for Nick Easter to be given remote control of James Haskell's body.

Poorfour wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:You can't beat a good rugby brain, just look at Haskell a fine physical specimen of a modern rugby player but he doesn't have a brain let alone a rugby one!

There have recently been experiments in which two rats connected by electrodes and a radio transmitter have been able to share sensory information and control each other's limbs while on different continents.

Sadly, this breakthrough has come too late for Nick Easter to be given remote control of James Haskell's body.

Arguably there are enough money obsessed posers in the world already.

Poorfour

Surely you'd really want to hook Haskell's body up to Dean Richards brain...

dummy_half wrote:Poorfour

Surely you'd really want to hook Haskell's body up to Dean Richards brain...

Or Tom Wood's body to Lewis Moody's lack of self preservation and Danny's Grewcock's sense of fair play.

Poorfour wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:You can't beat a good rugby brain, just look at Haskell a fine physical specimen of a modern rugby player but he doesn't have a brain let alone a rugby one!

There have recently been experiments in which two rats connected by electrodes and a radio transmitter have been able to share sensory information and control each other's limbs while on different continents.

Sadly, this breakthrough has come too late for Nick Easter to be given remote control of James Haskell's body.

I thought the electrodes were stuck up the bum of each of the mice. Made it very entertaining after eating when one mouse tried to do its business and it come out the other one.

Kind of like Haskell trying to score and not realising the posts are solid material.

doctor_grey wrote:

nathan wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:It might be easier to list who actually played well.  Amongst the starters:
Nowell was fine
Burrell was fine
Joseph was fine, but only from 65 minutes on
Billy V.  was fine from 65 minutes on
Lawes was generally passable throughout, but was fine from 65 minutes

Most disappointing?  That was most of the team.  However, my most disappointing from the great mass  of the dissappointing:
Ben Youngs needs to show a lot more
George Ford needs to show a lot more
Tom Youngs was atrocious in the lineouts
Chris Robshow - he is supposed to be the leader.  So lead, sonny.  The measure of a leader is when things are going off the rails to grab people by the neck and get them moving.  He didn't do squat.  And didn't play well.

We need to start with having an actual platform for the backs to play from - last night we were expecting them to create with slow ball or even no ball at all. it was only the 10 or so minutes at the that we had a platform to play from which is where we actually performed better.

I agree with you.  What do you think was Robshaw's culpability with all this?  I didn't see much leadership on the pitch.  

Agree those players had bad days as did Marler, surprised you think Billy V, Lawes or Burrell were fine, thought they were poor at best.

Brown, though far from excellence, I thought had a decent game. Cips, Attwood, Care and Easter did well but France were out of it then. JJ perked up late on. I agree Nowell was passable. Haskell arguably the best forward, but still played mediocrely, frankly

Also does anyone know exactly WHY the Stade de France has such consistently awful turf? As a side issue? I don't get it

nlpnlp wrote:What Cipriani offers which the likes of Burrell and Twelvetrees don't is a natural rugby instinct.  His try on Saturday looked quite simple and straight forward, but he picked the right angle and had sufficient speed to make the score.  He didn't try to bulldoze his way over by running straight at a defender or take the tackle and throw a miracle offload, nor did he kill the space by trying to run around the defender.

He is far from perfect, but as an option at 10 and 15 (12 or 13 in an emergency) he does offer something different to the other backup contenders.  I would also say that I think Easter is in that same mould.  He doesn't have the power or pace (???) of Vunipola or Morgan, but he has a much sharper mind.

And delightful hands and support play.

Mairs in the Telegraph thinks Slade is line for selection, and the debate now is over Burgess or Burrell at centre. He also thinks Nick Easter has pushed his claim, so that he is now being considered as the fourth lock or even ahead of Morgan, who is still short of fitness.

Like everyone else, he doesn't think Cips has done enough to be more than first choice back up in the even of an injury at fly half or full back.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11821945/Rugby-World-Cup-2015-England-poised-to-select-Henry-Slade-leaving-Sam-Burgess-and-Luther-Burrell-sweating.html

Someone mentioned it above, but haven't seen it discussed much. What is Ford's goal kicking range? He slotted some nice ones at the weekend, especially that late conversion. His attempt from halfway fell short, though, in contrast to the comfortable points France took through the long-range effort from Scott Spedding.

I was surprised to see Robshaw point to the posts, because I haven't seen Ford take those on. Was he being optimistic, or can Ford kick from halfway?

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:..........I would pick Cips, purely for his versatility, he offers the unexpected.......

I saw him make a tackle once. That was unexpected!

Cyril wrote:

stub wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/34036197

Ryan Jones' opinion is that we shouldn't read too much into Saturday's result but that he was surprised by England's weak forward showing. He also goes on to say that he expects a much better showing by Wales against Ireland on Saturday.

Yeah, I'd expect both Wales and England to improve on their previous game (which obviously wasn't good enough). Ireland will want to be a lot better than their game vs Scotland too where they were probably fortunate to win (with many expecting them to hand out a drubbing). Didn't see the Italy v Scotland game but sounded very close (pretty well-matched sides).

All NH sides (the French included who won't like the fact that England almost went on to win while playng so poorly) will want to improve.

The SH won't exactly be quaking in their boots yet!

Well said c c c Cyril..

Rugby Fan wrote:Mairs in the Telegraph thinks Slade is line for selection, and the debate now is over Burgess or Burrell at centre. He also thinks Nick Easter has pushed his claim, so that he is now being considered as the fourth lock or even ahead of Morgan, who is still short of fitness.

Like everyone else, he doesn't think Cips has done enough to be more than first choice back up in the even of an injury at fly half or full back.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/11821945/Rugby-World-Cup-2015-England-poised-to-select-Henry-Slade-leaving-Sam-Burgess-and-Luther-Burrell-sweating.html

Someone mentioned it above, but  haven't seen it discussed much. What is Ford's goal kicking range? He slotted some nice ones at the weekend, especially that late conversion. His attempt from halfway fell short, though, in contrast to the comfortable points France took through the long-range effort from Scott Spedding.

I was surprised to see Robshaw point to the posts, because I haven't seen Ford take those on. Was he being optimistic, or can Ford kick from halfway?

Never seen him have that range. Maybe a test in a pressure environment to make sure? TBF not many people have that range. Slade has a huge boot.

Ford made a mistake trying to kick from the halfway line. Its not so much about what his range is in absolute terms but more about knowing what your range is. Trying to kick beyond your range is stupid. Either another kicker should step up who has definitely got the range or he should kick for touch which he is normally excellent at. Poor decision making.

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:..........I would pick Cips, purely for his versatility, he offers the unexpected.......

I saw him make a tackle once.  That was unexpected!

Yeah Doc, but that was BUS

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:..........I would pick Cips, purely for his versatility, he offers the unexpected.......

I saw him make a tackle once.  That was unexpected!

Yeah Doc, but that was BUS

Funny.

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:..........I would pick Cips, purely for his versatility, he offers the unexpected.......

I saw him make a tackle once.  That was unexpected!

Yeah Doc, but that was BUS

Funny.

Not for the bus, rumour has it that it was in shock for days.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:..........I would pick Cips, purely for his versatility, he offers the unexpected.......

I saw him make a tackle once.  That was unexpected!

Yeah Doc, but that was BUS

Funny.

Not for the bus, rumour has it that it was in shock for days.

Can't blame the thing if it was corralled by Cipriani.
You really want to bring Cipriani as Fly Half and Fullback cover? Shame Foden doesn't have his legs back quite yet.

Well I haven't seen any of the game but has seen a few reviews..

The only positive we should take is that despite everyone playing so horrifically poor (by all accounts and the verdicts on here) we still only lost by a few points.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well I haven't seen any of the game but has seen a few reviews..

The only positive we should take is that despite everyone playing so horrifically poor (by all accounts and the verdicts on here) we still only lost by a few points.

Unfortunately we have two teams better than France in our group though.

And surely we wont play nearly as bad as we have done in that game?

We have to hope.

GeordieFalcon wrote:And surely we wont play nearly as bad as we have done in that game?

No, I can't see England playing that bad again. The talent has proven itself over and over that it is better than that mess.

Of course, leading up to the last RWC England were playing better than that and went off the rails..........

Well the last time England lost to France in a world cup warm-up game, they went on to make the final (2007). And...um....the last time England lost to France by a solitary score in a world cup warm-up game, they went on to conquer the world (2003).

Yeah I agree Dr.

I have been quite critical recently of Lancs, selections. I feel he has picked some wrong ones over the last year and not trialled a few that he should of.

However (again, I haven't seen the game just the reviews) I don't think we are as bad as that performance would suggest.

But they need to come out the blocks firing against Ireland. Another defeat to them and the confidence will be smashed...and then we have a problem.