England v South Africa, 12 November

First topic message reminder :

       
ENGLAND v SOUTH AFRICA
12 November 2016
14:30 GMT (UTC+0)
Twickenham Stadium, London

Live on Sky Sports 1

Referee: Jérôme Garcès (France)
Touch judges: [tbc]
Television match official: [tbc]

A. Head to Head

37 Played 37
12 Won 23
2 Drawn 2
23 Lost 12
592 Points 780

B. Recent Form

15 November 2014
Twickenham, London
28 – 31 to South Africa

24 November 2012
Twickenham, London
15 – 16 to South Africa

23 June 2012
Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium, Port Elizabeth
14 – 14 Draw

16 June 2012
Coca-Cola Park, Johannesburg
36 – 27 to South Africa

9 June 2012
Mr Price Kings Park, Durban
22 – 17 to South Africa

27 November 2010
Twickenham, London
11 – 21 to South Africa

C. Teams

ENGLAND 

Mike Brown (Harlequins); Marland Yarde (Harlequins), Elliot Daly (Wasps), Owen Farrell (Saracens), Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby); George Ford (Bath Rugby), Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers); Mako Vunipola (Saracens), Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints), Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers); Joe Launchbury (Wasps), Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints); Chris Robshaw (Harlequins), Tom Wood (Northampton Saints), Billy Vunipola (Saracens).

Replacements: Jamie George (Saracens), Joe Marler (Harlequins), Kyle Sinckler (Harlequins), Dave Attwood (Bath Rugby), Nathan Hughes (Wasps), Danny Care (Harlequins), Ben Te'o (Worcester Warriors), Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby).

SOUTH AFRICA

Willie le Roux (Canon Eagles), Ruan Combrinck (Xerox Golden Lions), Francois Venter (Toyota Free State Cheetahs), Damian de Allende (DHL Western Province), JP Pietersen (Leicester Tigers), Patrick Lambie (Cell C Sharks), Rudy Paige (Vodacom Blue Bulls); Tendai Mtawarira (Cell C Sharks), Adriaan Strauss (Vodacom Blue Bulls), Vincent Koch (Saracens), Eben Etzebeth (DHL Western Province), Lood de Jager (Vodacom Blue Bulls), Willem Alberts (Stade Francais), Pieter-Steph du Toit (DHL Western Province), Warren Whiteley (Docomo Red Hurricanes).

Replacements: Bongi Mbonambi (DHL Western Province), Steven Kitshoff (Bordeaux), Lourens Adriaanse (Cell C Sharks), Franco Mostert (Ricoh Black Rams), Nizaam Carr (DHL Western Province), Faf de Klerk (Xerox Golden Lions), Johan Goosen (Racing 92), Lionel Mapoe (Kubota Spears).

Yeah it's just silly to suggest it'll be scored only in 3s especially again from someone who doesn't watch the games.

For the record I have watched all the 6Ns and June internationals and will
certainly watch ALL the AI`s.
I don`t have BT 2 so won`t be watching that game sadly,Irelands best
chance to break there duck v NZ hopefully there will be highlights on
other channels.

So why on earth say that England score in 3s, why the snide remarks on scrums etc.Comes across at best as someone who doesn't get rugby.

I am being objective take off the blinkers and try it,you can take it I
get Rugby big time.The comment about taking it in 3`s was in answer
to an post here.
I think the Boks would have parity against most sides in Scrum/Lineout
that includes England,Aus,NZ,Wales,Argentina,Ireland,France,Scotland etc.
Of course that does`nt mean there won`t be tries but I think from what
I`ve seen of both sides this year.
Will come from set plays off a set piece,intercepts,crosskicks,rolling mauls,
charge downs.As opposed to the more flowing style of NZ,Australia,France
in there hey day.
IF SA have the mindset they have players in there back line to run as
have England.But frankly there is too much importance on winning for any chances
being taken.

Running isn't about not taking chances though, nor is it a less safe way to win. It's sometimes, dependent on conditions and opponents, the right way to play. Against Fiji/Aus, running is more risky because it breaks open play and leaves you vulnerable. Against SA not running is risky because as you accurately point out, they tend to be good at an arm wrestle and it's best not to play people at their own game if you have the option. So I think you'll see Jones run the ball more than you expect and try to move SA about as well. That doesn't mean ignoring the scrum or lineout or pack, but does mean that, and he'll know this as an ex-SA coach, that's not how uou beat the Boks. It's not worked the last 10 times either

It's the normal little dig for you emack. Read back through some of your old posts and you'll see there's rarely one with a pop at England, a reference to an 'uncompleted' scrum, scoring in 3s. We get you prefer to watch NZ on the other side of the world because they're good.

Relevant for any England captain worried about jibes from SH armchair pundits regarding 3 pointers:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/12067633/Chris-Robshaw-It-took-me-months-to-get-over-my-World-Cup-decision-not-to-kick-late-penalty-against-Wales.html

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Funny thing about Saints defeat by Castres; Hartley must have played crap as Saints pack was overwhelmed, Harrison can't have been much cop either by the same reasoning.

What was EJ's description of Harrison's performance, something like, "that was the best performance by and England 7 I have seen this season, especially as he was on a losing side". Well if Harrison could put in the performance of the season for a 7, Hartley could have done well as well, even on a losing side.

Just because a side is beaten, thrashed even does not mean some players are not performing well; unless they are competing with a Sarries player that is, then it's a given they are playing rubbish

Have you not noticed that Jones has back tracked since now he needs players? That’s certainly the case with Wood who not long ago he said was putting in average performances. Wood has not magically improved but Jones is saying Wood has improved to keep up morale of the player.

Jones is hardly going to say – “That’s the worst display from a 7 I’ve ever seen or “he was average but I picked him because I had no choice”. Jones has to justify his selections to the media.

Sorry which Saracens player is Harrison competing with?

In the circumstances Jones hasn't really got much of a choice.

You surely can't believe everything that Jones says.

I could just as easily say that why hasn't Jones talked up Hartley's performances? If Jones does pick Hartley it won't be because of his form, it will be because he's the captain and is the most experienced hooker.


Oh and another thing if England do want to be more enterprising in attack then George is clearly more likely to create something than Hartley from hooker.

He's a back tracker full stop hence the comments on his 2 6.5s etc. Again you haven't watched the players, so you really can't comment on form.

Difficult to watch a player when he's been rarely on the pitch this season.... Can't string together a run of games.

Jones has to back track due to the ever changing circumstances. He has to talk up Wood and Harrison because he likely has to rely on them. Two players who I am sure he wouldn't have in the squad if others were fully fit.

Similarly with Robshaw, Robshaw is a player I think Jones originally wanted to get rid of but now he's vital.


I still think looking to win the game vs Wales by kicking for the corner was the right decision. It was just poor execution after that which let England down.

Oh and by the way starting in 3 consecutive games is not the same as not even managing 40 in your last game......

Again, absolutely fine for you to say that. You don't know how well he's played though.

And yes he's back tracked and seemingly says things in the press he doesn't really think as well.

Last bit about Farrell and Hartley? Fair enough again mention time on the pitch (obviously taking into account their position) and base an argument on that.

Sometimes you have to backtrack because you realise you are wrong. Jones may have done this

Wise words CJ, sometimes I think one of our board members should take heed of that advice

no 7 & 1/2 I can come to my own conclusion that it cannot be that stellar if Castres are outmuscling Saints in the pack despite not riding high in the Top 14 and not being full of international quality.

I am not sure how taking account their position has anything to do with it. Hartley is one of Saints best players so should be starting. Haywood isn't even on the England radar and rightfully so. Hartley should walk back into the Saints side, not be stuck on the bench.

If Eddie Jones doesn't truly believe what he says then you cannot claim that what Jones says is true.


Bambam I do backtrack occasionally, sadly other posters do not admit when they are clearly wrong. This is because they do not realise they are clearly wrong.

Amazing reversal of fortunes in these 2 sides since they last met.

I can see the boks losing heavily here against a side that couldn't buy a win against them for nigh on a decade.

Beshocked, whatever made you think I meant you?!

You can come to your own conclusion on individual performances based only on a score in a game? You're a better man than I Gunga Din.

Position is important when thinking of including people back into the team and the minutes on the pitch of course. A front rower is going to be getting less game time than a back based on the stress on the body.

And you're quite right and could say Jones' comments on Harrison aren't true but you can't say he hasn't played well without seeing him yourself.

rodders England have a mental block when it comes to beating SA.

If England had a full strength side then 10+ win wouldn't surprise me but with our current options it's going to be very tough indeed. Could go either way.

The injuries to England have obviously evened the playing field.

no 7 & 1/2 even if I hadn't watched Saracens vs Leicester - I would have still come to the conclusion that T.Youngs struggled at set piece time, obviously he did.

A frontrower might generally only play 60 minutes but they still need gametime. They need to be able to last 80 if needed.

We clearly have different viewpoints - you think Kitchener played well when I didn't,I expect I wouldn't have thought Harrison played well. Sure I do not know for sure but again it can come down to opinion.

If we look purely at performance Kitchener did alright but in the context of the match I was disappointed. He was not facing top class 2nd row options. He was outplayed. On that basis I do not think he's good enough for England.

Similarly Castres do not have a star studded pack.

When you are playing weaker opposition/worse players it is expected that you should perform better. Inevitably beating a good side is better than beating a bad side. You can of course shine in a losing team.


Back on topic - South Africa should exploit the English weaknesses that have appeared thanks to the injuries. If SA do not exploit these weaknesses, it will be a criticism that can be used against them.

Wings, 2nd row and backrow - all areas that can potentially be attacked. If a non fully fit Hartley starts then hooker too.

Youngs struggled at the lineout? Didn't really think so.

And I'm accepting the fact you can't explain why you feel Kitchener played poorly or evenly average. What did Hamilton do which was superior for instance? I'm interested to know, plenty of peopel disagree with performance but most can point to something other than his team lost.

Did you actually watch the game? From your comments it really doesn't seem like you did.

Keep on defending the indefensible.

I have explained why I felt Kitchener was disappointing but you have ignored/dismissed my explanation.

Both Hamilton and Rhodes outplayed Kitchener.

Hamilton was influential in a successful Saracens set piece and pack but if that's not enough for you just look at the stats.

2nd most amount of tackles - 22, 11 lineouts won.

http://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/brad-barritt-mike-haley-billy-vunipola-and-james-horwill-top-the-opta-ratings/

Yeah watched the game beshocked, wouldn't be commenting on players performances otherwise. You haven't really mentioned much about Kitcherners performance at all hence why I asked. Thanks for that stats, again now you start to mention stuff like that I can start to undertsand where you're coming from. Hamilton outplayed him as he completed more tackles and Saracens had a better scrum (and lineout?). Honestly don't think Leicester were under much pressure at lineout time but fair enough. So how would you try to improve Kitchener, you've sat him down and say...make more tackles?

Good to see May beating so many defenders isn't it? I assume you rated his performance?

Jonny May seems to be getting tipped more and more to start.

It's interesting seeing a fair few articles stating that he's the only left wing in the squad with Roko and Yarde considered right wingers. The distinction between the two is something I actually like, many wingers are more effective on one side due to having a dominant step of a particular foot or which foot they kick off.

It's interesting hearing Yarde spoken of as a right wing though. Until Visser has been at Quins hasn't he usually been a left winger? Most of his England caps have certainly come on the left (including both caps under Jones). I'm pretty certain he was predominantly a left wing with London Irish as well.

no 7 & 1/2 I just feel like you are contradicting me on purpose.

Saracens put the squeeze on Leicester at the set piece. It was sufficient enough to keep Leicester on the backfoot. I've seen worse lineout displays but it was not a completely fully functioning Leicester lineout. I am not even sure how straight some of them were either.

It's not about completing tackles, it's about being involved. It's about getting stuck in. Hamilton was less visible than Rhodes but his work was just as important.

If I sat Kitchener down I would say - don't let your opposite numbers get the upper hand. Do the basics well, get involved. Up the workrate. Inspire your team.

Good for May, now he needs to perform for England.

If Road Runner plays well for England I'll give him credit. Needs to happen first though.

Contradicting yes but I don't agree with something or someone just because it's been said. So you believe Kitchener didn't do the basics and wasn't working as hard as he could. Fair enough.

May has played well for England, particularly that first set of AIs. I know you didn't watch them but we must have won at least a couple so that means individually he was great!

You should agree with something when it's very obvious.

Maybe it was the best Kitchener could do but if that's the best it's not good enough. Need to improve, if he wants to play for England. No I don't think Kitchener did the basics well enough.

Same with May - doing a handful of good things in 19 tests is not good enough. You can be in a winning team and be mediocre/poor. May has shown that many times for England.

I hope May if he starts plays well vs SA, a good performance is long overdue. Injuries have given him this opportunity.

Mr Fitzwilliam Darcy wrote:"I have faults enough, but they are not, I hope, of understanding. My temper I dare not vouch for. It is, I believe, too little yielding—certainly too little for the convenience of the world. I cannot forget the follies and vices of other so soon as I ought, nor their offenses against myself. My feelings are not puffed about with every attempt to move them. My temper would perhaps be called resentful. My good opinion once lost is lost forever."

I sometimes feel this could equally be applied to some 606 posters.

I guess then to me it wasn't obvious that Kitcheners basics were skew wiff as I watched it and thought he was the guy with his hand up in the Leicester pack. Certainly wasn't sat watching thinking he's not taking his lineout, not making carries, not making his tackles, not reacting quickly enough when balls are bouncing off posts!

Like I said May has played well but not brilliantly. Interestingly your view on May is somthing some point at Goode, and I myself have said the same thing of Ashton when he went through a longer poor period with England.

Kitchener was certainly one of Leicester's better players. He took all his own lineout, stole one of Saracens, made hard yards and made all his tackles. Sure he made less tackles than Hamilton (J) but as Sarries had to make more than 3x the tackles Leicester did is that a surprise?

His time for England has gone however and I cannot see EJ looking at him - as such his performance at the weekend is largely irrelevant. He had a chance, first when he got injured and was replaced by Kruis in the EPS and then when Kruis got a minimal ban for a tip tackle meaning he did not miss the subsequent 6Ns. Kitch will be one of those nearly men.

Ford
Farrell
JJ
Roko
Yarde
Brown

That's a pretty good back line to be able to play against SA, I'm not worried about our backs particularly (apart from Goode on the bench)

If we go with the 6-2 split (assuming enough forwards to have 6!) then surely Daly is the bench back

Hopefully Haley overtakes Goode sharpish

I don't think we will go 6-2 simply because of full back cover without the option to shift Watson across, Joseph to the wing and Daly at 13. One area England will need to top South Africa is tactical kicking given their inexperienced half backs.

Youngs, Ford, May/Yarde, Farrell, Joseph, Roko, Brown

Reps: Care, Daly, Goode

Even with those 3 subs we are short of 12 cover. Take away Goode and we are short of 12 and 15 cover, both key positions which Jones will be relying on given his starters.

I'm not a fan of Goode for England but with Watson and Nowell injured I can live with it. He's also in good form for Sarries, as is usually the case. Haley staying in the squads shows the coaches rate him and he'll probably replace Goode and possibly Brown in due course.

I will be disappointed if Youngs starts. His club performances haven't been great - but I guess there is EJ credits in the bank.
EJ does seem to prefer starting Ben and then finish with Danny.

I suspect you are right with your selections Carlos. Only problem is the lack of wing cover, but I guess that could be Daly coming on - and we know that Brown can cover there well.

Everyone thinks that it will be May or Yarde - despite recent good form, Roko is the least experienced of wings! Is there a chance that he will miss out and EJ decides to start with May and Yarde?

david - Joseph would move to wing as cover with Daly at 13 I'd guess.

Youngs isn't in his best form but far from his worst either. DC hasn't really hit his best either. It's the usual case that unless Care is blowing Youngs out the water with their club form he will struggle to get a start due to his kicking game.

Both tend to perform more consistently for country than club over the last year anyway so it isn't a position I'm concerned about. Although it is one where England should have a clear advantage up against 2 SA rookies. I am a big Faf De Klerk fan from his play with the Lions though.

Daly can cover wing can't he? I'd imagine as well as Joseph can, he's played a lot more back 3

king carlos I feel like England sometimes need to a bit more optimistic instead of just sticking with what we've got.

Robson is in good form so I would have at least had him in the squad. I think most agree he should be there.

Care and Youngs are alright but when there's the opportunity for someone to pressure them I think it would be worth doing. They've become undroppable and that's dangerous.

England still need to consider who will be the back up no 8 to Billy. If it's Hughes then he needs to be given an opportunity.

I hope Billy is not forced to play every AI game if he stays fit.

Quite right Beshocked I think its importnat that whilsta latrge number of players are innured and we are having to try out 3rd 4th choices and sticking platers across the team that we drop all the experienced peopleto make sure that we know for sure that the 3rd choice people in their positions arent good enough to be first choice.

I would say that we stand a good chance of learning a lot about the team and players as we go through this series.

How well the established guys will stand up with increased pressure? Will Cole, Hartley, Vunipolas, Robshaw, Youngs, Farrell, Brown and Joseph carry the team forward on their own if they need to?

How the new incoming cover will cope in full test environments? Is hughes a genuine contender for Billy, Attwood, can he improve of previous performances. Harrison - has he learned what he got wrong in Oz? Can Rokko and Yarde consistently step up?

Inevitably, who will be left standing for the Oz test?
Imagine ending with a back row of T.Wood, T.Harrison and B.Morgan!

Gooseberry I agree. Let's flog all our fit players and make it so we learn nothing from the injury crisis.

Repeatedly pick Billy and Hartley then when they inevitably get injured, struggle to fill the gaps at hooker and no 8 as usual - worked wonders in the RWC....

Have to learn from previous mistakes, not repeat them.

If you put players on undroppable pedestals then it becomes very hard to replace them.

So we come back to enough depth down to 3 positions and how to get people that experience while also developing the 1st team and maintaining the tick in the win column. Easy!

Yes - Simples.
And is it enough of a test of the players to experiment in the Fiji game? Do they need to be tested against tier 1 opposition to really see if they can cope?

Play less games

Propdavid london it's still experience. It's generally better to ease players in than throw them in the deep end.

no 7 & 1/2 if you can't try out players vs a team like Fiji then when is best in your opinion? The more difficult the match the better?

beshocked wrote:Propdavid london it's still experience. It's generally better to ease players in than throw them in the deep end.

no 7 & 1/2 if you can't try out players vs a team like Fiji then when is best in your opinion? The more difficult the match the better?

I wouldn't take Fiji lightly, you scraped past them in the RWC

England were the only side to get a try bonus vs Fiji, would hardly call beating a side by 24 points scraping a victory but if you want to believe so fair enough even if it's not true. Yes, I watched the game, England always kept Fiji at arms length and put on the accelerator with the Vunipola bros coming off the bench.

Fiji put up a sterner fight against both Australia and Wales.

It's not taking Fiji lightly to suggest utilising the squad throughout the AIs. Need to trust players to deliver.

Yeah think that's a bit harsh munkian. It's fair to say they only just scraped the BP (last play of the game) but the result was never in doubt.

I actually agree with beshocked on this one: yes injuries have probably limited the scope for trying out new players, but Fiji would surely be the ideal opportunity to start George for instance, maybe also have a look at Slade/Daly (yes I know Slade has started a couple of games for England, but hardly ones that could be called important).

Well said mad for chelsea I don't think it's risky to try someone like Slade.

To be honest I would have liked to see something like this vs Fiji.

1.Marler
2.George
3.Sinckler
4.Attwood
5.Launchbury
6.Robshaw
7.Harrison
8.Hughes

9.Robson (I know he's not in the squad but I wanted him to start)
10.Ford
11.Roko
12.Slade
13.Joseph
14.Yarde
15.Goode

16.Mako
17.Taylor
18.Cole
19.Ewels
20.Beaumont
21.Care
22.Farrell
23.Daly

beshocked wrote:Propdavid london it's still experience. It's generally better to ease players in than throw them in the deep end.

no 7 & 1/2 if you can't try out players vs a team like Fiji then when is best in your opinion? The more difficult the match the better?

You can try players against any nation, sorry thought we were talking about giving players experience down to third choice not just one appearance dropping them and assuming they're ok for a WC.

Against Fiji I'd probably go (though this depends on how players do vs SA!)

Goode
Roko
Daly
Te'o
May
Ford
Care (Robson if he's allowed to)
Hughes
Harrison
Wood
Lawes
Launchbury
Cole (bring Sinckler on early)
George
Mako (but would be ok with Marler)


Marler, Taylor, Sinckler, Ewels/Beaumont, Morgan, Youngs, Slade, Haley 

On the bench

I agree with Beshocked that especially in the pack, and with some players having recent knocks, it's not wise to run our starters too hard and make Robshaw, Billy, Hartley etc play every match. I also think you need to give Ford a match kicking at Int Level but having Goode/Daly there gives backup if needed and another playmaker in the backline whilst giving Te'o a shot and seeing how the power 12 model works (in hopes of a future fit Manu). Slade should get time off the bench, giving us the Farrell style 12 if needed, and Haley is outright back 3 cover. MB not really a bench player, you start him or you keep him at home.

In general yes you need to blood players but I don't think dropping a player in for a game or 2 here or there is actually going to do that sufficiently to qualify them as part of the team etc.If the experience Easter had coming in as 3rd choice for instance wasn't good enough will games here and there suddenly give that depth?