England vs Australia, 3 October

First topic message reminder :

    
ENGLAND v AUSTRALIA
3 October 2015
KO: 20:00
Twickenham, London

Live on [tbc]

Referee: Romain Poite (France)
Touch judges: George Clancy (Ireland) & Marius Mitrea (Italy)
Television match official: Shaun Veldsman (South Africa)

A. Head to Head

43 Played 43
18 Won 24
1 Drawn 1
24 Lost 18
661 Points 907

B. Recent Form

29 November 2014
Twickenham, London
26 – 17 to England

2 November 2013
Twickenham, London
20 – 13 to England

17 November 2012
Twickenham, London
14 – 20 to Australia

13 November 2010
Twickenham, London
35 – 18 to England

19 June 2010
Telstra Stadium, Sydney
20 – 21 to England

12 June 2010
Subiaco Oval, Perth
27 – 17 to Australia

7 November 2009
Twickenham, London
9 – 18 to Australia

15 November 2008
Twickenham, London
14 – 28 to Australia

6 October 2007
Stade Vélodrome, Marseille, France
10 – 12 to England

C. Teams

ENGLAND

15. Mike Brown (Harlequins, 41 caps)
14. Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 13 caps)
13. Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 14 caps)
12. Brad Barritt (Saracens, 25 caps)
11. Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby, 18 caps)
10. Owen Farrell (Saracens, 33 caps)
9. Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 51 caps)

1. Joe Marler (Harlequins, 35 caps)
2. Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 26 caps)
3. Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers, 54 caps)
4. Joe Launchbury (Wasps, 26 caps)
5. Geoff Parling (Exeter Chiefs, 27 caps)
6. Tom Wood (Northampton Saints, 40 caps)
7. Chris Robshaw (captain, Harlequins, 41 caps)
8. Ben Morgan (Gloucester Rugby, 30 caps)

16. Rob Webber (Bath Rugby, 15 caps)
17. Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 25 caps)
18. Kieran Brookes (Northampton Saints, 14 caps)
19. George Kruis (Saracens, 8 caps)
20. Nick Easter (Harlequins, 52 caps)
21. Richard Wigglesworth (Saracens, 25 caps)
22. George Ford (Bath Rugby, 15 caps)
23. Sam Burgess (Bath Rugby, 4 caps)

AUSTRALIA

1. Scott Sio (12 Tests)
2. Stephen Moore (c) (97 Tests)
3. Sekope Kepu (58 Tests)
4. Kane Douglas (18 Tests)
5. Rob Simmons (55 Tests)
6. Scott Fardy (25 Tests)
7. Michael Hooper (vc) (47 Tests)
8. David Pocock (51 Tests)

9. Will Genia (61 Tests)
10. Bernard Foley (22 Tests)
11. Rob Horne (28 Tests)
12. Matt Giteau (97 Tests)
13. Tevita Kuridrani (25 Tests)
14. Adam Ashley-Cooper (vc) (109 Tests)
15. Israel Folau (34 Tests)

*Reserves to be confirmed

If Burgess had started then that would've been fine with me. I actually think he did well against Wales and is playing better than Barritt. If he is not starting then he shouldn't be in the 23.

There's a good article in The Guardian by Dean Ryan which I feel perfectly sums up Bomber http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/sep/30/michael-cheika-australia-rugby-world-cup-england

I think there is no doubt he has vastly improved the set up since 2011, but he reached his limit about 18 months ago and it is time he should go. There is no doubt we lost against Wales because of him and the coaches; we decided to kick aimlessly in the 2nd half and whether it was the game plan or not, the coaches should have reacted. As Ryan points out Bomber just doesn't seem to have different options and his game plans have cost us matches in the past. I will be behind England 100% on Saturday, but sadly I just cannot see us winning. We have capable players, but they are not used properly and the management of the breakdown is no better example of this. I take no solace that the silver lining to a loss would no doubt be Bomber's departure.

I'm normally quite a reasonable person, but the backs on the bench are quite frankly, absurd. Slow (except Ford) and only cover one position, madness. I will support them every step of the way but it breaks my heart at what might have been.

the best thing about the team getting leaked early is that one can get all of the miserableness out of the way early and just have a dull ache once the official line up is announced.

When England scrape a win courtesy of a last minute Farrell penalty, I am sure we will all change our tune!

HongKongCherry wrote:There's a good article in The Guardian by Dean Ryan which I feel perfectly sums up Bomber http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/sep/30/michael-cheika-australia-rugby-world-cup-england

I think there is no doubt he has vastly improved the set up since 2011, but he reached his limit about 18 months ago and it is time he should go.  There is no doubt we lost against Wales because of him and the coaches; we decided to kick aimlessly in the 2nd half and whether it was the game plan or not, the coaches should have reacted.  As Ryan points out Bomber just doesn't seem to have different options and his game plans have cost us matches in the past.  I will be behind England 100% on Saturday, but sadly I just cannot see us winning. We have capable players, but they are not used properly and the management of the breakdown is no better example of this.  I take no solace that the silver lining to a loss would no doubt be Bomber's departure.

But would it be his departure?

Robshaw will kick to the corner on that one nlp............................

"Second time lucky", he'll think.

Then when the game is over, a growling Farrell will approach him: "The saying is 'Third Time lucky' you idiot! Third time lucky!"

Not big on the Aus team selection. England to win by 10

Its not exactly the quickest Australian back line is it?

GeordieFalcon wrote:
But would it be his departure?

If we are to lose I cannot see how he or his coaches could stay. This was always bound to happen given the RFU handed a contract extension prior to the RWC. Did they not learn from IRFU with O'Sullivan, its the kiss of death!

I just look at the pack and see no explosiveness....just decent honest grafters.

Why is Launchbury not in yet again???

At 6 - Tom Wood or someone powerful and explosive like Ewers?? No question to me. That also helps the No.8 with his carrying duties. Not to mention his offensive defence...knocking people back. And work on the floor. Wood only beats him in the lineout...but even Ewers is an option.

Similarly Robshaw or a genuine 7 like Kvesic, also a great carrier and linkman. And on fire last season. Only 23.

Too many "average" grafter type selections...not enough game changers....

HongKongCherry wrote:There's a good article in The Guardian by Dean Ryan which I feel perfectly sums up Bomber http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/sep/30/michael-cheika-australia-rugby-world-cup-england .

As always, Dean Ryan has some good things to say. However, I'm a bit wary of anyone who says the losses are Lancaster's fault but wins are down to the players. With that kind of analysis, it's impossible for Lancaster to get any credit.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I just look at the pack and see no explosiveness....just decent honest grafters.

Why is Launchbury not in yet again???

At 6 - Tom Wood or someone powerful and explosive like Ewers?? No question to me. That also helps the No.8 with his carrying duties. Not to mention his offensive defence...knocking people back. And work on the floor. Wood only beats him in the lineout...but even Ewers is an option.

Similarly Robshaw or a genuine 7 like Kvesic, also a great carrier and linkman. And on fire last season. Only 23.

Too many "average" grafter type selections...not enough game changers....

He is in. Starts with Parling and Kruis/Easter on the bench.

The Bench is a tough place to influence a game from. Team mates rarely pass to you when you're there.

SecretFly wrote:The Bench is a tough place to influence a game from.  Team mates rarely pass to you when you're there.

not in england, your chances of receiving a pass on the pitch or on the bench are roughly equal

lostinwales wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:I just look at the pack and see no explosiveness....just decent honest grafters.

Why is Launchbury not in yet again???

At 6 - Tom Wood or someone powerful and explosive like Ewers?? No question to me. That also helps the No.8 with his carrying duties. Not to mention his offensive defence...knocking people back. And work on the floor. Wood only beats him in the lineout...but even Ewers is an option.

Similarly Robshaw or a genuine 7 like Kvesic, also a great carrier and linkman. And on fire last season. Only 23.

Too many "average" grafter type selections...not enough game changers....

He is in. Starts with Parling and Kruis/Easter on the bench.

Aw which team was I looking at then?

Well theres a positive...yet still would appear only enforced by injury to Lawes. At least he'll be a far better match at the breakdown than Lawes / Parling are.

Is there any actual reason for Care not even making the bench...again! He was England's first-choice 9 not too long ago, now he doesn't even merit inclusion over the painfully slow Wigglesworth.

lostinwales wrote:Its not exactly the quickest Australian back line is it?

Not at all but there isn't much pace in oz rugby at the moment to choose.  Generally our teams are quite slow.  JOC or Speight in form would have been handy but neither have shown any all year.

I'm finding this week painful. It's a bit funny that in a game between England and us neither set of fans feel particularly bullish.

Duty281 wrote:Is there any actual reason for Care not even making the bench...again! He was England's first-choice 9 not too long ago, now he doesn't even merit inclusion over the painfully slow Wigglesworth.

Keeps leaving his homework at home. Wigglesworth on the other hand is first in class in the mornings and always leaves an apple for SL.

Duty281 wrote:Is there any actual reason for Care not even making the bench...again! He was England's first-choice 9 not too long ago, now he doesn't even merit inclusion over the painfully slow Wigglesworth.

Lancaster in a nutshell.....

boomeranga wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Its not exactly the quickest Australian back line is it?

Not at all but there isn't much pace in oz rugby at the moment to choose.  Generally our teams are quite slow.  JOC or Speight in form would have been handy but neither have shown any all year.

I'm finding this week painful. It's a bit funny that in a game between England and us neither set of fans feel particularly bullish.

Thanks for that. I just looked at the list and thought, well, Folau we all know is very dangerous, but Horne seems to be a bit of a nothing kind of player, and AAC has been brilliant on his day but I tend to think of him as a center. Then you have two 10's in the middle and one big lump at outside center. It's like a back line we'd choose in England....

England will be really up for this, but you just don't know where their heads will be (or the heads of their coaches) and if they'll keep up the pace or fall away.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Is there any actual reason for Care not even making the bench...again! He was England's first-choice 9 not too long ago, now he doesn't even merit inclusion over the painfully slow Wigglesworth.

Lancaster in a nutshell.....

Its a strange decision not having Care on the bench. Care offers v good impact and offers a real injection of energy from the bench. Wigglesworth does the basics well but that's it, he doesn't have much of a spark about him.
If I was an opposition player I'd certainly be more worried about seeing Care being on the bench and coming on with 20 mins to go then having Wigglesworth there.

Maj,

You could say that about a number of selection in the squad / bench.

very true, there has been a lot of strange picks from Lancaster. Even though i'm not an England fan it can be frustrating to see opposition teams picks players and line ups that aren't the best that could be picked. You want to play against the best and see the best play.

I think its just a little frustrating...

We look at other teams wishing we had a "real 7" or a "bruising 6" or a tearaway 9 etc etc...and in actual fact we do have those players...they just don't quite fit into the plan that Lancaster has.

Of course we can be biased for players we want playing

I'm surprised the ozzies left out Drew Mitchell. Kane Douglas getting the nod too.

I'm switching sides here and fancy England to bounce back and win.

lostinwales wrote:

boomeranga wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Its not exactly the quickest Australian back line is it?

Not at all but there isn't much pace in oz rugby at the moment to choose.  Generally our teams are quite slow.  JOC or Speight in form would have been handy but neither have shown any all year.

I'm finding this week painful. It's a bit funny that in a game between England and us neither set of fans feel particularly bullish.

Thanks for that. I just looked at the list and thought, well, Folau we all know is very dangerous, but Horne seems to be a bit of a nothing kind of player, and AAC has been brilliant on his day but I tend to think of him as a center. Then you have two 10's in the middle and one big lump at outside center. It's like a back line we'd choose in England....

England will be really up for this, but you just don't know where their heads will be (or the heads of their coaches) and if they'll keep up the pace or fall away.

i'm going with up their own a*ses.  Anyone else want to hazard a guess

I think the biggest worry is No 8. The loss of Billy is a big one.

IMO Morgan was so sluggish against Fiji.

Haskell showed himself to be a very poor replacement for Billy.

As for Easter he is 35. We are relying on him, ridiculous.

All England's strength in depth seems to be a bit of a farce at the moment.

Haskell was on for 17 minutes, technically playing out of position at no 8 and as far as I could see did nothing particularly wrong, so I am not sure how he "showed himself to be a very poor replacement for Billy".

And whilst I am being pedantic Easter is 37 not 35.

Post world cup presumably Dave Ewers and Nathan Hughes (once England qualified) will add to the competition for the no 8 spot. Possibly Josh Beaumont, although as a Sale fan I don't see him as anything other than a club player.

Very simple for England. Beat Australia, get the five point win against Uruguay, and they're in the quarters.

Simple!

Yep. And (unfortunately) if we beat Australia then we need Wales to lose (and go out) to top the group.

I still think it would be amusing if we go out in the pool stages.

Duty281 wrote:Very simple for England. Beat Australia, get the five point win against Uruguay, and they're in the quarters.

Simple!

Yes, very simple. Except it's not.

Haskell played well when he came on, certainly more productive than Robshaw.

Hughes would walk into this England side, imagine a backrow of:

6. Itoje
7. Armitage
8. Hughes

I really can't see Ewers making the cut yet. He's a lump but pretty unmobile and seems a bit unfit for the next level. He's still a kid though and another season will do him no harm.

If England can't beat Wales then they probably won't beat Australia, frankly England aren't great under pressure and if you thought the Welsh game was bad, then Australia is all or nothing. I am concerned Wales might go out now, Wales might have blown it against Fiji, but England still have it all to do. Wales chances against Australia depend on the injury to Dan Biggar and the potential hand injury to Alun Wyn Jones. Failing that couldn't Wales and A ustralia play for a draw and knock England out?

If England beat Australia with Australia getting a lbp it goes:

Wales 13
England 10
Australia 10

If England beat Uruguay with tbp then they go up to 15. A draw would be enough for Wales, but not Australia. It would have to be an Australia tbp win with Wales get two losing bonus points. Then everyone would be on 15 and not sure exactly what happens.

Edit: if England lose with lbp then they're on 7 with Australia and Wales both on 13. So England would be out.

If England loose to Australia, they are out.  If they beat Australia and win against Uruguay with a WBP, then probably they would go through.  However looking back at the 6N's from previous years, the title has been lost on points more than once, so there is some history of the prize slipping away.

Love to see England and Wales go through.

If we had a strong creative bench I think we would have won this Saturday, oh well.

"As for Easter he is 35. We are relying on him, ridiculous."

No its not ridiculous. Easter has been the form 8 in the prem and has never let England down. He will be a great player to come off the bench if needed. (As long as he doesn't have to play too many minutes). Not true. Quins play a high speed game and Easter is always an 80 minute man. I have complete faith in him. Don't panic Mr Mainwaring. Wales being battered by Fiji and not getting a bonus point is just about as good as it could get for England. We just have to beat Australia and its in the bag.

Easter is 37

Screw it I give up on these bonus points and what have you, I'm not even going to waste the brain cells trying to understand. I'll just look at the table at the end of the pool games...

Shifty I think it works out that if England beat Australia they'll probably qualify on points for/against. If Wales lose to Australia, they probably wont based on points for/against difference.

Scratch that comment. Just read the rules. Head to head.

If England beat Australia, they are through. It is that simple.

England will ascend to 15 points, in such a scenario, and there is no way that Wales and Australia can both better that.

HongKongCherry wrote:There's a good article in The Guardian by Dean Ryan which I feel perfectly sums up Bomber http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/sep/30/michael-cheika-australia-rugby-world-cup-england

I think there is no doubt he has vastly improved the set up since 2011, but he reached his limit about 18 months ago and it is time he should go.  There is no doubt we lost against Wales because of him and the coaches; we decided to kick aimlessly in the 2nd half and whether it was the game plan or not, the coaches should have reacted.  As Ryan points out Bomber just doesn't seem to have different options and his game plans have cost us matches in the past.  I will be behind England 100% on Saturday, but sadly I just cannot see us winning. We have capable players, but they are not used properly and the management of the breakdown is no better example of this.  I take no solace that the silver lining to a loss would no doubt be Bomber's departure.

Actually mate, I am not sure exactly what Lancaster really accomplished.  His condition of employment was to make the team younger and to make them act like choir boys.  Clearly it was impossible to continue with the same team as in 2011 sine they was mostly at the end of their careers.  They few boys who didn't get the choir boy lesson still were generally OK when with England.  There was clearly talent, so I wonder what he really accomplished compared to what others may have done.  Or did he simply follow orders.

Yes, I kow he gets the credit because he did get it done.  But what after that?  I have written before that he made England just good enough to come in second in the 6 Nations every year.  Is this good?  Mediocre?  Or worse?  He is certainly the planner type.  But is he really a change agent?  Does he have that leadership edge?  These are the questions.

If England beat Australia by less than 8 points, both teams not scoring 4 tries. Then aus beat Wales by less than 8 points with both teams scoring 4 or more tries, everyone ties on 15 points and its points difference. Unlikely but not impossible. 

From an England perspective, you'd be pretty confident that beating aus is enough.

What does Uruguay have to do to be in with a shot?

lostinwales wrote:

boomeranga wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Its not exactly the quickest Australian back line is it?

Not at all but there isn't much pace in oz rugby at the moment to choose.  Generally our teams are quite slow.  JOC or Speight in form would have been handy but neither have shown any all year.

I'm finding this week painful. It's a bit funny that in a game between England and us neither set of fans feel particularly bullish.

Thanks for that. I just looked at the list and thought, well, Folau we all know is very dangerous, but Horne seems to be a bit of a nothing kind of player, and AAC has been brilliant on his day but I tend to think of him as a center. Then you have two 10's in the middle and one big lump at outside center. It's like a back line we'd choose in England....

England will be really up for this, but you just don't know where their heads will be (or the heads of their coaches) and if they'll keep up the pace or fall away.

Horne is really a centre as well. He was at 13 for the Tahs until AAC joined, then moved to 12 until Beale returned from Melbourne, and then Cheika converted him to a winger because at Super rugby level he was too go a player within our squad not to be on the field somewhere.

Id say he was the best oz winger in SXV this year but he hasn't yet shown test level form at wing. He is also there to defend for whichever of Foley or Cooper plays at 10 as the Wallabies drop the 10 back in defence.

In terms of speed, a few guys possess reasonable acceleration (IF, KB and Horne) but none possess any top end speed of note. Your back three could cause real problems if they can break the line.

A very tight match. England line out in last minute. Throw to the tail, pass to midfield, tackled recycle.Captain rumbles it up the middle. Flyhalf deep in the pocket, quick pass to FH, drop goal ! England win.

What ? Wake up Greg, , here's your cup of tea. You were having a strange dream.