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).

May should have had the awareness and decision making ability to move his nose out of the way of whatever broke it

Just another example of how he lacks in those areas

beshocked wrote:Early injury meant England were forced into a reshuffle which meant a full back was on the wing.

An injury can contribute to a loss. Billy and B.Young's injuries were likely crucial in losing to Wales in the RWC.

The player themselves aren't to blame for the injury but it would be wrong to say they aren't important.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSHhHYmhD1I

This is another 9 having fun with May....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYEfy1BQ8cs

Last try, May overpowered in a 1 v 1 by an Italian.

Have you ever been sectioned ?

beshocked wrote:Early injury meant England were forced into a reshuffle which meant a full back was on the wing.

An injury can contribute to a loss. Billy and B.Young's injuries were likely crucial in losing to Wales in the RWC.

The player themselves aren't to blame for the injury but it would be wrong to say they aren't important.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSHhHYmhD1I

This is another 9 having fun with May....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYEfy1BQ8cs

Last try, May overpowered in a 1 v 1 by an Italian.

I fear I may as well find a brick wall .. but here goes

The Rhys Webb try .. isn't that a case of Haskell failing to do his job as a flanker and stopping Faletau off the back of the scrum?

This meant Ford had to rush up to try and make a tackle, and given its Toby Faletau against a (at the time very green) small George Ford did May really cause the try by trying to stop Faletau?

Isn't it a case of a mistake by Haskell missing the tackle, and an excellent offload from Faletau taking full advantage?

munkian wrote:

beshocked wrote:Early injury meant England were forced into a reshuffle which meant a full back was on the wing.

An injury can contribute to a loss. Billy and B.Young's injuries were likely crucial in losing to Wales in the RWC.

The player themselves aren't to blame for the injury but it would be wrong to say they aren't important.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSHhHYmhD1I

This is another 9 having fun with May....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYEfy1BQ8cs

Last try, May overpowered in a 1 v 1 by an Italian.

Have you ever been sectioned ?

Says the person who thinks a 24 point margin of victory is scraping a win....


Bambam not my fault guv..... that's what it is down to no? May could have stopped a try but did not. Sure you could argue that it wasn't only May's responsibility. Someone should have prevented a try. Webb slipped through.


Ford has worked on his tackling, he's an improved player now. It's up to May to show he's improved too.

You're a colossal moron.

This comes down to your favourite boy Ashton not getting in the side, what would he have done? Yanked Webb's hair from behind after he'd already scored?

Tickled Faletau's tummy as an attempt at a tackle?

Let's not call people morons please guys

BamBam wrote:You're a colossal moron.

Says the person who thinks that a player is not at least partially responsible for a try being conceded when he missed a tackle.

When I show video evidence of poor defence, you just downplay it/ ignore it.

I honestly don't care about Ashton any more. Ashton is a fool, he deserved his two bans for biting and making contact with the eyes. His international career is deservedly over.

I said he was a fool when he got those bans.

I haven't mentioned Ashton on this because he's no longer relevant to England rugby.

No 7 & 1/2 wanted to know why I thought May was a poor defender. I thought evidence would be helpful.

Is that your definition of a missed tackle? Doesn't anticipate Haskell missing his tackle, so doesn't get off his wing quickly enough to wrap up Faletau.

He barely lays a hand on Faletau before the ball is already gone out to Webb, and he has a walk in from 4 yards

I just think the fault for that try lies completely with Haskell, no international blindside should be getting palmed off so easily, and from that point on with that distance to the tryline we were buggered

I can't believe you're all still arguing about this stuff.

BS is never going to change his mind, just give it up

Need something to keep the thread going until the teams are announced, then we can move on to hearing about which Saracens player has been grossly insulted and unfairly treated by a superior player being picked in his place

beshocked wrote:Genge gave Leicester some impetus and forward momentum that Kitchener did not. You are right he did not keep the ball all the time but he asked more questions than Kitchener did. You are not going to beat Saracens by being passive.


Have to trust Jones' judgement in some areas yes.

Beaten by more than one 9 defensively.

So at least we get a bit more info here into what you were looking for; not basics which Genge lacked on the day, not head to head as the scrum still creaked but strong carrying (though as said he lost yhe ball 2 to 3 times).

lostinwales wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:When Genge came on he certainly carried well initially but lost the ball in contact at least twice possibly 3 times from memory? I agree he has the makings of a strong scrummager, reminds me very much when Cole came in and put pressure on to start. Having been critical of Kitcheners basics and having the upper hand on his opposite number I simly can't see why you feel Genge was better.

I assume with the Ewels Beaumont next in line comment it's from Jones' picking them not what you would consider yourself?

What does May have to improve on in defence? This stems from him being beaten by a 9 for pace doesn't it?

I'd disagree that he was beaten for pace given that he did run down Matawalu short of the England line (when the Fijian effectively had a head start). He was beaten initially but then that is a particular strength of Matawalu and May is one of many that he's made look stupid on occasion. Just look at the Scottish threads from when he played up North.

Sorry quoted beshocked's previous thoughts, personally I think May is only behing Nowell and Rokoduguni in (partially at least)established England wings. The Fiji moment was when the criticism of May as a defender started and focused on getting beaten for pace.

Yappysnap you say that... and yet I've changed my mind on Nowell, he's turned into a decent player.

Ford has improved his defence and Ford in general has done well for England.

Players can improve. I hope May is one of them.

Bambam when you mean superior of course you mean picking players not in form/unfit.

The only Saracens player who can aggrieved that he might not start vs SA will be Jamie George and there are of course reasons Hartley will start. Resting a captain would be bold.

More likely he means higher quality.

Didn't realise not in form/unfit players would be of higher quality.....

Yes clearly a player carrying an injury can be higher quality than 1 at 100%, look at McCaws career where he was almost constantly carrying 1. No response on Genge and the basics or your mirroring ofLancasters perceived miwtakes? I'll let you mull it over.

bicker

verb (used without object)
1. to engage in petulant or peevish argument

On rare occasions yes, when you have someone like Mccaw who will go down as one of the best rugby players of all time. England do not have Mccaw. Unless you now think Hartley is on Mccaw's level?

What do you want me to say about Genge? Genge was an injury replacement, had to face a first choice Saracens frontrow. He's a young man, he had a tougher job. Also none of the rival frontrow won man of the match. Wasn't the fairest frontrow battle. I thought in the circumstances Genge did well. He didn't have a spotless match but he had hunger and a will to win. I thought he also tried to galvanise the rest of the team.

It's not mirroring Lancaster's mistakes, Lancaster threw players into the deep end when he did not need to. It's a different situation. He lost games with his stupidity.

In contrast it seems like Jones' hands are tied. It's not his fault if he has to play a 7th choice flanker or 5th choice lock.

Thanks very much LT!

McCaw proves your initial thought wrong and proves the wider point. So Kitcherner didn't do the basics even though he actually did while Genge who (while he should turn into a very fine player) was actually lacking in the basics in this match. It always comes down to lack of consistency in your arguments.

You criticised Lancaster for debuts against sides such as France or better and having Goode on the bench. You have 3 potential debutants vs SA in the team you want to see. Consistency lacking.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Thanks very much LT!

I live to serve.  

Lancaster lost games with his "safety first" bench strategy (e.g. Wigglesworth vs Care) and making some poor choices when injuries hit his preferred selections (e.g. Dowson and Wood at 8) or he was trying to squeeze particular talents into a team (e.g. Burgess).

In contrast, one of the more impressive things he did was back new players - usually with no option, because he had a raft of injuries and few more senior players to fall back on. If he was occasionally slower to introduce a new player (e.g. Joseph) than some of us might have liked, to my mind it's excusable because of the need to build up squad experience from a desperately low base.

For all that his reign ended in a very poor RWC, I don't think anybody seriously believes Lancaster wasn't a good selector. There were some that didn't work out (Clark, Dowson) but it's pretty telling how many of Lancaster's selections are still in Eddie's squad.

As for the Paris game, I think we need to distinguish between capability and circumstance. I was at the game, and therefore sober (on vende seulement la biere sans alcool dans le Stade de France). The first try was a result of a mix-up, and Nowell deserves a little of the blame but his was one of only several mistakes. I thought he played well thereafter.

The second try - like May's broken nose - was just a freak event. Brown got a foot to the grubber, which ninety nine times out of 100 would have put England on the front foot, but it bounced nicely for the French.

It's easy to forget that England were ahead with 4 minutes to go, and that France scored a superb try to win the game - but were helped by a use of the bench that left most of the backline out of position.

Some really good posts, and then there is the same old argument about that French game which goes back to May being responsible for breaking his nose and therefore contributing to us losing it.

no 7 & 1/2 Mccaw is one player and we currently have no 7 of his caliber.


ultimately it depends what you want from your players. Do you want someone who is trying to win like Genge or someone like Kitchener whose just plodding along not really making an impact?

I was more impressed by Genge personally.  

you are not understanding my points. That's your problem not mine.

You do not seem to understand that I would ideally not want to start 3 debutants but in the circumstances as there are very few options. I am being consistent. I am not someone who jumps at joy at throwing a debutant into the deep end.

lostinwales May is not responsible for breaking his nose but his injury did contribute to the loss. I find it baffling that you don't think an injury can be very important.

Poorfour

His selections weren't overall as bad as perhaps I make out but he got it wrong on enough occasions for it to contribute to the loss of his job.

Well as you know I thought Lancaster's RWC selection wasn't good enough. He trusted in some players he shouldn't have, did not give opportunities to some he should have and in the case of Burgess, it was one of the worst handlings of a player I've seen.

Lancaster perhaps wasn't the luckiest coach in the world but his England team became the nearly men of world rugby, almost making the quarter finals of the RWC, almost winning a GS.

With the resources available to Lancaster, it was a disappointing return. His win % was not bad but it's not enough.

Oh right so you are blaming bad luck for England's loss.

England were indeed leading with 4 minutes to go but were forced to overturn a significant deficit which in the end they paid the price for.

England should have beaten France in that game but didn't and it's something I will always use as a reason to criticise Lancaster.


Lancaster was on the wrong end of too many key matches.

In contrast to Lancaster even though Gatland has a worse win % than Lancaster because he's won some silverware and knocked England out of a RWC, his job has been secure.

I've been saying for some time the Welsh should get rid of Gatland but the Welsh fans were still too pleased with the victory over England to realise that he's holding them back.



If Jones can beat SA then he will tick another box that Lancaster was incapable of doing.

beshocked wrote: ...

lostinwales May is not responsible for breaking his nose but his injury did contribute to the loss. I find it baffling that you don't think an injury can be very important.
;;;;

Injuries can be highly significant of course. The question seems to be who, if anyone, should be held responsible for the injury.

May got hurt and it affected the team and quite possibly the result. It's just that it is not, (or highly unlikely to be) you know, actually May's fault that his nose got broke. It isn't his fault we lost that match. His actual contribution either way was minimal, as he wasn't on the pitch for very long.

lostinwales yes you are right. It is not May's fault his nose got broken but the injury contributed to the loss as it forced a hasty reshuffle and led to a mess in the back three which was brutally exploited.

I do not think it's wrong to suggest that the injury was important. England did not handle the situation well.

Yes, beshocked, luck is sometimes a factor in games. I've seen games won because of a stroke of luck and lost because of them. You can't legislate for the bounce of the oval ball, and in a close game it can be decisive.

But there's no point arguing with someone who can read minds. Otherwise how could you be so sure that Genge was trying harder to win the game than Kitchener?

Funny, cuz I regularly hear a losing coach say the oppo 'wanted it more'. Maybe it only works collectively.

As for the infamous nose incident - it's tough on the poor old schnozzle to blame it entirely. But I reckon that it played its part in the loss. Perhaps next time May will keep his nose out of it.

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Funny, cuz I regularly hear a losing coach say the oppo 'wanted it more'. Maybe it only works collectively.

As for the infamous nose incident - it's tough on the poor old schnozzle to blame it entirely. But I reckon that it played its part in the loss. Perhaps next time May will keep his nose out of it.

A coach I can accept, because they watch their players day in day out and can see when they are giving 95% rather than 100%. A guy who by his own omission doesn't even watch that many games, not so much. Especially when distinguishing between different players in different roles.

I don't understand your points it's true beshocked purely as you're not consistent. Kitchener and Genge with basics is the perfect point but repeated throughout your posts.

Simple fact is we are where we are - we have 3 fit wingers, May, Rokoduguni and Yarde. All of them have their detractors/strengths/weaknesses. Two of them will get the chance to start and we will see how they fair.

Likewise at 7 - whoever gets the gig will have the chance to take it and make it their own as Haskell has done. You can talk a lot of bull about whether someone did this or that, but if any of these players get picked and have a good game, they will be in the next game and so on.

Two weeks ago we had world class second rows coming out of our ears - today we re struggling to put out a half decent pairing. That is rugby.

Lawes MIGHT still be fit...

At least we've all managed to forget about the problems at 12... and Alex Goode's inevitable return to the 23 jersey.

Also I can not wait to see certain posters reactions when Marler starts ahead of Mako.

Obviously not their strongest team but I watched the SA game today. For a side that's been together non stop since August they looked very disjointed, their defense was poor, most players were standing off and a lot of the front on tackling was weak, often they went high and were brushed off. Their back three especially looked like they had never met and didn't want to get involved.

Their attack was pretty toothless, especially when you think the baabaas had 1 week to prepare defensively.

Their ruck work was poor, they struggled to protect their own ball and didn't turn over much.

SA's only real strengths were the scrum and lineout which both went well but that's to be expected.

Obviously It's a baabaas game so don't take it too seriously, but I'm going to tempt fate and say they're there for the taking.

yappysnap wrote:Obviously not their strongest team but I watched the SA game today. For a side that's been together non stop since August they looked very disjointed, their defense was poor, most players were standing off and a lot of the front on tackling was weak, often they went high and were brushed off. Their back three especially looked like they had never met and didn't want to get involved.

Their attack was pretty toothless, especially when you think the baabaas had 1 week to prepare defensively.

Their ruck work was poor, they struggled to protect their own ball and didn't turn over much.

SA's only real strengths were the scrum and lineout which both went well but that's to be expected.

Obviously It's a baabaas game so don't take it too seriously, but I'm going to tempt fate and say they're there for the taking.

I do hope that you're right yappy but I'm worried I think mainly because I know that England have lacked consistency in the past. I know this is a different team hopefully with a different mindset but the concerns somehow linger..

Boks played a team with a lot of fringe players the set piece and
rolling maul was excellent.They entered the spirit of the game
not playing a defensive kicking game.
When you see those not there Leroux,Pietersen,Habana,Pollard
Alberts,Vermuelen,Louw,etc.
So don`t just write them off and Australia look the form team again.

emack2 wrote:Boks played a team with a lot of fringe players the set piece and
rolling maul was excellent.They entered the spirit of the game
not playing a defensive kicking game.
When you see those not there Leroux,Pietersen,Habana,Pollard
Alberts,Vermuelen,Louw,etc.
So don`t just write them off and Australia look the form team again.

Australia always do some things very well. They are also traditionally a smart bunch too. If you let them play their game they can always do a heap of damage. In the summer England found two ways to win, either beating the crap out of them or actually outscoring them when they were threatening to run riot. Sounds like the Welsh team on Saturday were capable of neither of those options.

Australia blasted the breakdown,  Wales were lethargic and lumbered to it and were subsequently smashed out the way. Likewise they're attacking play (when they actually got the ball)was slow and predictable.

England's breakdown has improved dramatically not least in that they take out players with aggression and smash the rucks.  

Even with key players out the instructions will be the same...aggression and commitment

But can we do that?

How many times did Haskell almost single handed LT smash back an Oz attack?

Yeah I think we can do that. We still have some very good players out there. They'll be given strict instructions for each game.

Maybe slightly different for SA than for Australia.
Have faith

With the current injuries I've got to say it feels good to just hear that nobody else has been crocked in the Portugal camp!

Reports from the papers seem to be that May and Rokoduguni are fairly certain to start on either wing.

Lawes still sounds touch and go though.

The squad's due to be trimmed on Tuesday then the squad named on Thursday.

I'd guess that Genge, Tommy Taylor, Lozowski, Te'o and Haley will be realised on Tuesday. Along with them at least 1 and maybe 2 from Ewels, Beaumont, Wood and Hughes will be sent back their clubs. Possibly Yarde as well if May and Roko are nailed on to start.

emack2 wrote:Boks played a team with a lot of fringe players the set piece and
rolling maul was excellent.They entered the spirit of the game
not playing a defensive kicking game.
When you see those not there Leroux,Pietersen,Habana,Pollard
Alberts,Vermuelen,Louw,etc.
So don`t just write them off and Australia look the form team again.

Aus looked fairly good. Wales were utterly without redeeming feature, even Halfpenny's boot was awful. SA looked passable against a scratch team.

I agree we shouldn't take either lightly but I also think you are bigging them up, especially Australia
S performance against basically no opposition

yappysnap wrote:But can we do that?

How many times did Haskell almost single handed LT smash back an Oz attack?

Yes we can

We even saw that approach from Robshaw and Wood for Lancaster until we inexplicably completely changed the approach to it after beating the All Blacks

beshocked wrote:


If Jones can beat SA then he will tick another box that Lancaster was incapable of doing.

Beating South Africa doesn't take much these days.

Coetzee and his assistant coaches have no technical nous.

They can't even get the South African national rugby team to play a basic gameplan, they have no idea how to retain possession, they have no cohesiveness, they play as individuals, only thing Coetzee can come up with is there isn't many talented players in SA, they d0n't have skills and aren't fit.

He is a useless coach.

If England does not beat this team then you probably never will.

Was reading last week that the reason, apart from the knock/slight injury on his debut, Rokoduguni never got that 2nd cap was that he was overawed by the experience of playing for England. Will be interesting to see whether they try to get him involved really early should he start on Saturday.

Bilt - how will this Bok side who played the Barbarians compare to the test side for England?:

Biltong wrote:

beshocked wrote:


If Jones can beat SA then he will tick another box that Lancaster was incapable of doing.

Beating South Africa doesn't take much these days.

Coetzee and his assistant coaches have no technical nous.

They can't even get the South African national rugby team to play a basic gameplan, they have no idea how to retain possession, they have no cohesiveness,  they play as individuals, only thing Coetzee can come up with is there isn't many talented players in SA, they d0n't have skills and aren't fit.

He is a useless coach.

If England does not beat this team then you probably never will.

Some opposition are harder to beat for some teams.

South Africa should be beatable but England have struggled in the last few years, the losing streak has continued whilst every man and their dog have beaten SA.

The pressure is on England.

We saw with Wales v Australia that a losing streak is not good for confidence. Australia played with such confidence vs the Welsh and why not? They've now won 12 in a row.

Belief is important. England should beat SA but we have to be cautious - it's first game up, SA are battle hardened and match fit. They have a superior H2H, England do have injuries to key players.

I love my Rugby but economics preclude me viewing everything.
My income is £300 a week pensions by working 12 and a half hours
a day 6and a half days a week.
Tv package,license fee and Computer internet costs me roughly
£160 pounds a month,live alone ,have no savings,and pay £100
tax a month on my pension.
I am accused by some of having a SH bias which is only true up
to point.
I have no coverage of some NH games tv packages vary in can`t
afford them all.So I go with Sky Sports which covers at least RC,
Super,Mitre10,Curry Cup if I want them.
I wanted to Nz and Maori in USA ,when looked into it would have
cost £37 for one match!!
I no longer buy books on rugby or newspapers/maga zines relying
on online coverage.
I would love to debate abstruse points about certain players performance
in say Saracens versus Sale.BUT I don`t comment on matches I`ve not
seen except repeat match reports.
Wales didn't wake up until half way through the second half then a
simple 5 on 2 at one stage and a certain try missed.I was screaming
at the tv GO WIDE.

England vs SA emack. I am rummaging around for the worlds smallest violin I bought earlier in the season though.

emack - I pay nothing and watch every game I want - certain sites stream them all for free. PM me for details ( the mods don't like it spoken about too much)