Slamming Sam and the Destabalising Effect

by RubyGuby Wed Sep 30, 2015 1:53 pm

This is not a WUM so please lets have some considered responses here as well as the usual dross.

The inclusion of Sam Burgess divided opinion in many pundits minds with perhaps Carling being among the more vociferous (I have always been a fan of Carling by the way and think that he more than any other person pulled England away from a pompous amateur era to that of a winning mentality) - Now there is no doubting this players ability as an individual although he has yet to prove himself in rugby union and a lot is being asked of him. My question I guess is, has his inclusion and undoubted aura destabilised what has been a pretty consistent ship over the past 3 years. Has it upset the dynamics of the team. He is a natural leader but that can create confusion, particularly in a game where he has not earned the right to be a leader. I've always been a fan of Burrell and of course its about combinations and familiarity in the 10, 12 and 13 axis. I'm just thinking that by opting for 1 potentially precious Jewel Lancaster and Co have discarded a number of Diamonds that have previously shone and perhaps could have shone if given the opportunity. It would have also maintained the equilibrium that appears to be lacking at present.

thumbsup

by Scottrf Wed Sep 30, 2015 1:57 pm

Nope.

by No 7&1/2 Wed Sep 30, 2015 1:57 pm

No, but playing a Burgess and Barritt midfield isn't balanced.

by fa0019 Wed Sep 30, 2015 2:35 pm

Maybe Burrell should have toured over someone like Goode? Slade being the utility back which Goode is often highlighted as.

by LordDowlais Wed Sep 30, 2015 2:39 pm

I thought he was England's best player on Saturday.

by RubyGuby Wed Sep 30, 2015 2:44 pm

I'm not doubting that Dowlais or that he had a decent game but does that come at a price to the other 14 and the team. It reminds me of when Iestyn Harris came into the welsh side whilst he was one of the top RL players in the world. It affected everyone else's game and upset the dynamics of the backline. Players started to look to him too much instead of taking on responsibility themselves etc. I think it has really had a significant impact on the team dynamics here

thumbsup

by fa0019 Wed Sep 30, 2015 2:45 pm

Would England have won without him and maybe Burrell and Barritt playing?

Perhaps, as 7.5 says, its more balanced but then again so is Burgess and Slade.

If you're going to use Slade as the main 13 cover he should be used... not have a 12 come in who is unfamiliar with position and lacks OC pace. I'm not a huge huge slade fan in that I don't know much of him but why pick him if you thereafter decide to play someone else in his position over him, one not suited for the position?

by hugehandoff Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:06 pm

Simple answer Ruby is no. Exactly what diamonds are you talking about? Burrell or 36? Laugh

by SecretFly Wed Sep 30, 2015 6:03 pm

He's a darts player in a poker game.
He doesn't know what to do with his hands as the cardsharps plot and plan and gaze in silence, contemplating their next moves.
All he wants is his pint, his medallion and his three darts. Union is too fussy.

by WELL-PAST-IT Wed Sep 30, 2015 7:11 pm

Ruby has been reading Gordon D'Arse's comments, almost a transcript.

Another paid to be controversial column written to provoke controversy.

Coming from a distinctly average Arse who lived in the shadow of probably the best centre in modern rugby, it's rich.

by Happytravelling Wed Sep 30, 2015 10:59 pm

D'Arcy's comments are ridiculous, almost laughable.

by bedfordwelsh Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:13 am

I don't think Warburton de-stabalises our back row at all or is there another slamming Sam out there Wink

by GavinDragon Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:48 am

Happytravelling wrote:D'Arcy's comments are ridiculous, almost laughable.

How so? This is a recently retired professional, who played international rugby in the same position, giving a forensic analysis, minute by minute, of where Burgess made mistakes which lead to Wales' line breaks. Even Darcy says that Burgess will learn and has all the ingredients to make a top int 12

by stevetynant Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:48 am

GavinDragon wrote:
Happytravelling wrote:D'Arcy's comments are ridiculous, almost laughable.

How so? This is a recently retired professional, who played international rugby in the same position, giving a forensic analysis, minute by minute, of where Burgess made mistakes which lead to Wales' line breaks. Even Darcy says that Burgess will learn and has all the ingredients to make a top int 12

Agreed Gavin

I think Darcey's comments are some of the most insightful I've read anywhere.

Recently retired International playing at the elite end of sport for a decade plus - why would anyone dismiss his comments

by englandglory4ever Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:15 am

Guby has let the media hype around Sam get the better of him. The media have built him up and would love him to fall. It would sell plenty to people like Darcy, carling and guby.

by No 7&1/2 Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:28 am

The media didn't really build him up either.

by doctor_grey Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:47 am

Originally I was not a fan of seeing Burgess in the RWC squad. Even more so since he has split his time in Rugby between the flank and centre. I have to admit to being surprised he has played fairly well. Great? No. But decent, certainly. And not remotely the reason the team is not playing well. He does have a really strong future in our sport. I would still prefer Burrell in the squad now simply because I believe he would be a better option today.

That said, Burgess is not at all the reason the entire squad has played mediocre Rugby in the RWC warm-ups and in the first two RWC matches. I think this is the real point, the entire squad has not played well. The quality of play in the 6 Nations whilst not fantastic, was at a good level. That England team team would easily defeat the England squad as they are playing today. A full squad of players who have usually delivered previously and not getting it done now.

by TightHEAD Thu Oct 01, 2015 10:02 am

Burrell is underrated for what he brings to the party, as is Hartley.

by offload Thu Oct 01, 2015 10:07 am

I have a season ticket at Bath and have heard many fans comment that Burgess plays centre to a fraction of the standard he plays backrow - and pretty much everyone says he has taken time to adapt and is not there yet.

I'm amazed he made the England squad, although he has played OK. Is OK good enough? Maybe. I doubt he has destabalised anything - that charge should only be levelled at Lancaster.

by RubyGuby Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:10 am

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Ruby has been reading Gordon D'Arse's comments, almost a transcript.

Another paid to be controversial column written to provoke controversy.

Coming from a distinctly average Arse who lived in the shadow of probably the best centre in modern rugby, it's rich.

I haven't read Darcy's comments and perhaps it is the timing of this post and the fact that I am welsh that is resulting in the responses. I have a professional interest in social and psychological dynamics in sport and this was a genuine post that has perhaps come at the wrong time and from the wrong person. I'm also surprised at the vitriol levelled at Will Carling who just calls it as he sees it. Maybe opinions that arouse negative emotions in people are not wanted at this juncture, however I can assure you that it is those very opinions that people need to consider rather than swat away as if they have no merit whatsoever. I just wonder if Sam had still been on if Robshaw might have turned to him and said, "what do you think we should do Sam" instead of asking the most junior member in Ford. Social dynamics and decision making are fascinating areas to discuss and crucial to most team sports.

thumbsup

by doctor_grey Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:51 am

RubyGuby wrote:
WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Ruby has been reading Gordon D'Arse's comments, almost a transcript.

Another paid to be controversial column written to provoke controversy.

Coming from a distinctly average Arse who lived in the shadow of probably the best centre in modern rugby, it's rich.

I haven't read Darcy's comments and perhaps it is the timing of this post and the fact that I am welsh that is resulting in the responses. I have a professional interest in social and psychological dynamics in sport and this was a genuine post that has perhaps come at the wrong time and from the wrong person. I'm also surprised at the vitriol levelled at Will Carling who just calls it as he sees it. Maybe opinions that arouse negative emotions in people are not wanted at this juncture, however I can assure you that it is those very opinions that people need to consider rather than swat away as if they have no merit whatsoever. I just wonder if Sam had still been on if Robshaw might have turned to him and said, "what do you think we should do Sam" instead of asking the most junior member in Ford. Social dynamics and decision making are fascinating areas to discuss and crucial to most team sports.

I handn't heard of Darcy's coments either, so your post was interesting. It is weird that I had heard rumblings such as yours about Burgess' presence. But only rumblings which could be normal given his short tenure in Rugby. Most comments about Burgess seem to be positive, but that is for public consumption and has no net value. I think if the team was doing better there might be no rumblings at all, but who knows. And I agree with Tighthead, the overall poor play is down to Lancaster as oppsoed to any individual palyer.

Carling? Well he is a well known self-promoter (and I am chosing the absolute kindest possible language here). He doesn't have much credibility and most people woudl prefer he keeps out of the limelight he craves. Very hard to take him seriously.

The dynamics are fascinating. Very much a social experiment in each case. Worth a separate thread of its own. I woud be happy to contribute.

by englandglory4ever Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:07 pm

No 7&1/2 wrote:The media didn't really build him up either.

You obviously don't see much of it. Almost every single article about England carries at least one picture of Sam Burgess. They are setting him up I just hope he continues to do well. I couldn't name anyone who has played less at centre and done so well against world class opposition. No one. The bloke is a legend in the making I hope.

by RubyGuby Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:12 pm

Land of Hope and Glory then

thumbsup

by **seanmichaels** Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:18 pm

How many clean breaks were there on Saturday? I know there were a few but the only one highlighted is Williams's when Burgess was slightly out of position. Sometimes credit could be given to the attacking team....

by RubyGuby Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:28 pm

seanmichaels wrote:How many clean breaks were there on Saturday? I know there were a few but the only one highlighted is Williams's when Burgess was slightly out of position. Sometimes credit could be given to the attacking team....

I think that's a bit unfair - Faletau and North made a great break down the touchline with about 10 mins' left 60-70 yards

thumbsup

by No 7&1/2 Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:54 pm

englandglory4ever wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:The media didn't really build him up either.

You obviously don't see much of it. Almost every single article about England carries at least one picture of Sam Burgess. They are setting him up I just hope he continues to do well. I couldn't name anyone who has played less at centre and done so well against world class opposition. No one. The bloke is a legend in the making I hope.

There' s been some focus on him certainly but I haven't seen much building up of him, mostly criticism really. Hopefully if we see him again this WC he can cut out the positional mistakes and stop the easy breaks before moving onto 6 as previously discussed.

by WELL-PAST-IT Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:03 pm

Ruby,

If you hadn't read D'Arse's column, I would be worried as you seem to have a mind link with him.

"I'm just thinking that by opting for 1 potentially precious Jewel Lancaster and Co have discarded a number of Diamonds that have previously shone and perhaps could have shone if given the opportunity"

You both talk about precious jewels and diamonds, not a common turn of phrase?

by RubyGuby Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:13 pm

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Ruby,

If you hadn't read D'Arse's column, I would be worried as you seem to have a mind link with him.

"I'm just thinking that by opting for 1 potentially precious Jewel Lancaster and Co have discarded a number of Diamonds that have previously shone and perhaps could have shone if given the opportunity"

You both talk about precious jewels and diamonds, not a common turn of phrase?

Are you serious about this 'cos I haven't got a clue about Darcy's article and can assure you have never seen it. For a month I've talked about my dismay at seeing people like Burrell, Cipriani and even Eastmond discarded for a relatively untried player at this level. They were the diamonds for me.

by marty2086 Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:26 pm

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Ruby has been reading Gordon D'Arse's comments, almost a transcript.

Another paid to be controversial column written to provoke controversy.

Coming from a distinctly average Arse who lived in the shadow of probably the best centre in modern rugby, it's rich.

You do realise that D'Arcy was called up to the Ireland squad at 17 and was capped before BOD?

He has admitted his own issues playing centre after moving from wing and full back and the problems he had readjusting to the different styles of Contepomi and ROG when going between Leinster and Ireland.

Its hardly controversial to say that its about the sum of all parts and that union and the position of centre take a lot of understanding and adjusting

by lostinwales Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:27 pm

Cipriani didn't get in because they went with 2 arguably better fly halfs, not because he wasn't good enough. Burrell was carp in the 6N. Eastmond does some things brilliantly and others not so well. There are times when I would have quite happily settled for twelvetrees' mixture of the brilliant and the mundane but that wasn't to be either.

Given that it seems like the home pressure has got to England a bit, having someone like Burgess around does make more sense as he doesn't seem to feel any of it. In hindsight they could have done with getting Easter in there from the start for precisely the same reasons, regardless of how much pitch time he gets.

Forgetting where we are or where we should be England is a talented team, very physical and hard to break down. It's also the youngest team at the RWC and unfortunately last Saturday it showed. We'll find out if we have much of a future in this competition on Saturday. If we don't make it there is still a big future ahead of this team and its a shame that we will have to wait 4 years for another chance on the biggest stage.

by stevetynant Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:47 pm

Darcy's comments in case anyone's interested

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/international/gordon-d-arcy-burgess-is-blunder-that-could-bury-england-1.2371821

pretty interesting stuff I thought

by RubyGuby Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:57 pm

I just read the article, it seems insightful with the fella at least giving good reason for his views. When I read O'Gara's book last year he would talk about the fact that it took seasoned internationals at least 4 weeks to learn new moves and to begin to develop the muscle memory involved in these moves. There's no doubting Burgess as a supreme athlete of world class proportions its just that all these subtleties and soft skills take a long time to develop.

thumbsup

by quinsforever Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:23 pm

Darcy is talking biased rubbish. A few observations.

- he is terrified at the ease which which Burgess is having an impact. He was player of the match for England for me in his first 60 and should never have been taken off

- yes Williams made 1 line break. But how many did Roberts make while burgess was on. Zero. And how many yards of carry did Roberts make while burgess was on?

- if he's going to criticise burgess for one line break against Scott Williams, how about some credit for cometely neutralising welsh go forward ball via their usual tank Roberts?

by quinsforever Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:25 pm

And once English 11, 14 and 15 learn to chase the burgess created gaps for offloads, like NZ and AUS do do well, well then I'll be very excited about our possibilities. Being able to attack through the middle or out wide is very very hard to defend against.

by GunsGerms Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:45 pm

marty2086 wrote:
WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Ruby has been reading Gordon D'Arse's comments, almost a transcript.

Another paid to be controversial column written to provoke controversy.

Coming from a distinctly average Arse who lived in the shadow of probably the best centre in modern rugby, it's rich.

You do realise that D'Arcy was called up to the Ireland squad at 17 and was capped before BOD?

He has admitted his own issues playing centre after moving from wing and full back and the problems he had readjusting to the different styles of Contepomi and ROG when going between Leinster and Ireland.

Its hardly controversial to say that its about the sum of all parts and that union and the position of centre take a lot of understanding and adjusting

He was 18 at the time and still in school studying for his leaving cert. I know because I was in school with him. Gatland asked him to tour in SA in 1998 but he turned him down as he wanted to finish school. As a school boy he was incredible. Our school defeated BODs school in the senior cup. BOD played OH. Darcy was simply unstoppable as a schoolboy and the last Irishman to get a call up while still in school.

He was capped in the 1999 RWC.

by **seanmichaels** Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:50 pm

I think a lot of the lesser home nations like Ireland and Wales are jumping on the bandwagon. Realistically they know they'll never win a World Cup due to their ineffectiveness against southern Hemisphere sides on a consistent basis. Kicking England / Burgess after a pool game loss isobviously some comfort.

by marty2086 Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:00 pm

GunsGerms wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Ruby has been reading Gordon D'Arse's comments, almost a transcript.

Another paid to be controversial column written to provoke controversy.

Coming from a distinctly average Arse who lived in the shadow of probably the best centre in modern rugby, it's rich.

You do realise that D'Arcy was called up to the Ireland squad at 17 and was capped before BOD?

He has admitted his own issues playing centre after moving from wing and full back and the problems he had readjusting to the different styles of Contepomi and ROG when going between Leinster and Ireland.

Its hardly controversial to say that its about the sum of all parts and that union and the position of centre take a lot of understanding and adjusting

He was 18 at the time and still in school studying for his leaving cert. I know because I was in school with him. Gatland asked him to tour in SA in 1998 but he turned him down as he wanted to finish school. As a school boy he was incredible. Our school defeated BODs school in the senior cup. BOD played OH. Darcy was simply unstoppable as a schoolboy and the last Irishman to get a call up while still in school.

He was capped in the 1999 RWC.

I thought he hadn't yet turned 18 when he was called up but I stand corrected

by marty2086 Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:05 pm

seanmichaels wrote:I think a lot of the lesser home nations like Ireland and Wales are jumping on the bandwagon. Realistically they know they'll never win a World Cup due to their ineffectiveness against southern Hemisphere sides on a consistent basis. Kicking England / Burgess after a pool game loss isobviously some comfort.

Lesser? Ireland and Wales have won 7 of the last 11 6Ns to Englands 1, Ireland have become more consistent against the SH sides and are fairly even against the Wallabies and Boks in recent times and run the ABs close quite a few times in recent encounters but just need that first win

This England team have a record against SH sides comparable to Irelands though historically Englands is far better, don't think the ghosts of RWCs past will take England further tough

by **seanmichaels** Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:23 pm

marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:I think a lot of the lesser home nations like Ireland and Wales are jumping on the bandwagon. Realistically they know they'll never win a World Cup due to their ineffectiveness against southern Hemisphere sides on a consistent basis. Kicking England / Burgess after a pool game loss isobviously some comfort.

Lesser? Ireland and Wales have won 7 of the last 11 6Ns to Englands 1, Ireland have become more consistent against the SH sides and are fairly even against the Wallabies and Boks in recent times and run the ABs close quite a few times in recent encounters but just need that first win

This England team have a record against SH sides comparable to Irelands though historically Englands is far better, don't think the ghosts of RWCs past will take England further tough

World cups. England 3 finals. Consistent against southern hemishphere sides. The lesser home nations haven't acheived on the big stage, albeit Wales winning the bronze medal in the amateur era. It is like when Blackburn won the premier league, you just knew they would do nothing in europe.

by marty2086 Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:27 pm

seanmichaels wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:I think a lot of the lesser home nations like Ireland and Wales are jumping on the bandwagon. Realistically they know they'll never win a World Cup due to their ineffectiveness against southern Hemisphere sides on a consistent basis. Kicking England / Burgess after a pool game loss isobviously some comfort.

Lesser? Ireland and Wales have won 7 of the last 11 6Ns to Englands 1, Ireland have become more consistent against the SH sides and are fairly even against the Wallabies and Boks in recent times and run the ABs close quite a few times in recent encounters but just need that first win

This England team have a record against SH sides comparable to Irelands though historically Englands is far better, don't think the ghosts of RWCs past will take England further tough

World cups. England 3 finals. Consistent against southern hemishphere sides. The lesser home nations haven't acheived on the big stage, albeit Wales winning the bronze medal in the amateur era. It is like when Blackburn won the premier league, you just knew they would do nothing in europe.

So does that mean England are a lesser team than France?

by screamingaddabs Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:28 pm

marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:I think a lot of the lesser home nations like Ireland and Wales are jumping on the bandwagon. Realistically they know they'll never win a World Cup due to their ineffectiveness against southern Hemisphere sides on a consistent basis. Kicking England / Burgess after a pool game loss isobviously some comfort.

Lesser? Ireland and Wales have won 7 of the last 11 6Ns to Englands 1, Ireland have become more consistent against the SH sides and are fairly even against the Wallabies and Boks in recent times and run the ABs close quite a few times in recent encounters but just need that first win

This England team have a record against SH sides comparable to Irelands though historically Englands is far better, don't think the ghosts of RWCs past will take England further tough

World cups. England 3 finals. Consistent against southern hemishphere sides. The lesser home nations haven't acheived on the big stage, albeit Wales winning the bronze medal in the amateur era. It is like when Blackburn won the premier league, you just knew they would do nothing in europe.

So does that mean England are a lesser team than France?

Don't feed the trolls...

by **seanmichaels** Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:29 pm

marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:I think a lot of the lesser home nations like Ireland and Wales are jumping on the bandwagon. Realistically they know they'll never win a World Cup due to their ineffectiveness against southern Hemisphere sides on a consistent basis. Kicking England / Burgess after a pool game loss isobviously some comfort.

Lesser? Ireland and Wales have won 7 of the last 11 6Ns to Englands 1, Ireland have become more consistent against the SH sides and are fairly even against the Wallabies and Boks in recent times and run the ABs close quite a few times in recent encounters but just need that first win

This England team have a record against SH sides comparable to Irelands though historically Englands is far better, don't think the ghosts of RWCs past will take England further tough

World cups. England 3 finals. Consistent against southern hemishphere sides. The lesser home nations haven't acheived on the big stage, albeit Wales winning the bronze medal in the amateur era. It is like when Blackburn won the premier league, you just knew they would do nothing in europe.

So does that mean England are a lesser team than France?

Granted France have reached the final 3 times as well, but they have never put it in the back of the net as it were.

by **rodders** Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:30 pm

seanmichaels wrote:
World cups. England 3 finals. Consistent against southern hemishphere sides.

Yea I think if Jonny Wilkinson and Lawerance Dallagio were still in the side you'd have a good point. But you have Chris Robshaw and Owen Farrell ...so you don't.

It's a bit like when Blackburn won the premier league, you see - you sort of guessed it wouldn't happen again Wink

by marty2086 Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:32 pm

screamingaddabs wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:I think a lot of the lesser home nations like Ireland and Wales are jumping on the bandwagon. Realistically they know they'll never win a World Cup due to their ineffectiveness against southern Hemisphere sides on a consistent basis. Kicking England / Burgess after a pool game loss isobviously some comfort.

Lesser? Ireland and Wales have won 7 of the last 11 6Ns to Englands 1, Ireland have become more consistent against the SH sides and are fairly even against the Wallabies and Boks in recent times and run the ABs close quite a few times in recent encounters but just need that first win

This England team have a record against SH sides comparable to Irelands though historically Englands is far better, don't think the ghosts of RWCs past will take England further tough

World cups. England 3 finals. Consistent against southern hemishphere sides. The lesser home nations haven't acheived on the big stage, albeit Wales winning the bronze medal in the amateur era. It is like when Blackburn won the premier league, you just knew they would do nothing in europe.

So does that mean England are a lesser team than France?

Don't feed the trolls...

I know but watching him shift the goalposts to suit his argument is amusing

by **seanmichaels** Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:34 pm

marty2086 wrote:
screamingaddabs wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:I think a lot of the lesser home nations like Ireland and Wales are jumping on the bandwagon. Realistically they know they'll never win a World Cup due to their ineffectiveness against southern Hemisphere sides on a consistent basis. Kicking England / Burgess after a pool game loss isobviously some comfort.

Lesser? Ireland and Wales have won 7 of the last 11 6Ns to Englands 1, Ireland have become more consistent against the SH sides and are fairly even against the Wallabies and Boks in recent times and run the ABs close quite a few times in recent encounters but just need that first win

This England team have a record against SH sides comparable to Irelands though historically Englands is far better, don't think the ghosts of RWCs past will take England further tough

World cups. England 3 finals. Consistent against southern hemishphere sides. The lesser home nations haven't acheived on the big stage, albeit Wales winning the bronze medal in the amateur era. It is like when Blackburn won the premier league, you just knew they would do nothing in europe.

So does that mean England are a lesser team than France?

Don't feed the trolls...

I know but watching him shift the goalposts to suit his argument is amusing

There is no shift in the argument. Even in the recent lean years England have beaten the All Blacks. It is so rare for the smaller nations that when they do they feel they have to write a song about it.

by marty2086 Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:55 pm

Yes there was, it was about beating the SH sides consistently, when it was pointed out that Ireland and Englands record is comparable in recent times it was about WCs, now its about the ABs Rolling Eyes

England have one win in their last 15 meetings hardly a great record

by **rodders** Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:57 pm

marty2086 wrote:
England have one win in their last 15 meetings hardly a great record

It's consistent though.

by marty2086 Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:58 pm

rodders wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
England have one win in their last 15 meetings hardly a great record

It's consistent though.

by **Pal Joey** Thu Oct 01, 2015 5:03 pm

I hope the Wallabies have successfully defrosted their cut sandwiches from home. I'd hate to see a bug wipe out the squad before Sunday.
Hygiene will be as important as timing for this one... not to mention hotel selection. Mark my words.

Otherwise Sam will have his way with the Wallabies for the last 17 minutes.

by **seanmichaels** Thu Oct 01, 2015 5:03 pm

marty2086 wrote:Yes there was, it was about beating the SH sides consistently, when it was pointed out that Ireland and Englands record is comparable in recent times it was about WCs, now its about the ABs

England have one win in their last 15 meetings hardly a great record

Ireland have never beaten New Zealand? Wales did in 1953? England have won 6 times since then. Similar when you look at records against Aus and SA.

Returning to my point though, the comparative records in the world cups show the 1st tier team of Eng NZ SA Fra. The second tier tems of Wales Ireland And Samoa etc.

by Sponsored content