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).

Looking forward to seeing The Sink get his first cap. He'll probably nab a try on debut and knock himself out after.

Brown seems to have been changed by his marriage. I even saw him pass to guarantee a try rather than take on a 90% chance himself the oother week

Goode, Roko, Harrison, Genge, Morgan, Haley, Ewels and Lozowski released

That gives us:

Brown
Yarde :/
Joseph
Farrell (k)
May
Ford
Youngs
Vunipola
________
Robshaw
Lawes
Launchbury
Cole
Hartley
Vunipola

Marler, George, Sinckler, Attwood, _____, Care, Te'o, Daly

Unsure who of Wood or Hughes to start now
Beaumont cover for Lawes I'd guess




Part of me was hoping we might get Yarde back...

Back 3 cover is a weakness

Daly covering full back?

I have been criticising Mallinder all season for not playing Harrison, but EJ feels the same way so perhaps I was being harsh.

A bit surprised as Harrison on the bench gives cover for all back row positions as Wood covers 6 very well.

BBC has Wood starting at seven. Probably makes sense given the options plus gives another line out option.

Yarde... I remain to be convinced by him. Really surprised Roko was released.

Harrison and Roko released goes against what I was expecting. Also goes against most the papers predictions, which are usually pretty accurate once camps start and they see who is running where in training.

25 retained so 2 will miss out on the match day squad. Te'o and Beaumont would be my guess with the below 23.

1.M Vunipola 2.Hartley 3.Cole 4.Launchbury 5.Lawes 6.Robshaw 7.Wood 8.B Vunipola
9.Youngs 10.Ford 11.May 12.Farrell 13.Joseph 14.Yarde 15.Brown

16.George 17.Marler 18.Sinckler 19.Attwood 20.Hughes 21.Care 22.Slade 23.Daly

With what is remaining I don't mind the look of it. That starting XV is remarkably similar to what Bomber was moving towards though!

Interesting about Roko. Worth remembering that Yarde was very good in the first test against Australia in the summer (even if he was dumped for Nowell thereafter). What was impressive was seeing him look for work so much.

Genuinely shocked that Roko is not in!! Not sure what the coaches can't see.

And wood? Well he must have shown he has the intensity and tackling ability required for that 7 role. I remain sceptical but hope he can do it!

Ps Whilst the Line-up may be very similar to Lancasters I suspect the individual instructions will be very different.

Interesting he's gone with Yard over Roko, Marland is a hard worker and pretty powerful but does make a few mistakes each game. I wonder what the problem was with Roko?

Nick Mullins on twitter reported Roko was originally dropped after his 1st Cap as he was too over awed by the occasion...

Perhaps some players were world class in training....

Agree Geordiefalcon with that squad selection you would think Lancaster was still in charge.

Still... if Jones,Gustard and Borthwick can get the best from the players.....

Let's just hope Brown isn't crocked.

Blooming eck we're over 12 months on now and you still don't get the argument. You're going for a record!

As Itoje and Kruis are out doesn't that restrict how England would normally play under EJ? In that case it might be Wood at 6, Robshaw at 7 - both interchangeable despite their number I guess. A genuine fetcher 7 on the bench perhaps.

no 7 & 1/2 Performing on a training ground is not the same as in a real match.

Player X might hit his jumpers 100/100 compared to player Y hitting his jumpers 90/100 but it's not the same thing as an actual real match.

Player M might be the fastest man in training, might have the best fitness stats but it doesn't mean that in a match situation he'll play well.

Proving you really don't get what the discussion was about.

Please do try and educate me then.

Taking us back 12 months; discussion of how George could force his way into the match day squad given there were no further matches for him to perform in. A few of us said he would first have to perform and impress in training. Ever since you have insinuated that training is more important than matches. That's the summary anyway you could go back and see the thread for more detail.

Jamie George's competition was Webber who couldn't even get past Batty at Bath.

George had performed a lot better than Webber. So yes I think Webber must have been world class in training. Shame Webber didn't do that in the RWC or indeed in this year's 6 nations/ tour of australia....

Lancaster has praised May's ability in training and he flattered to deceive in the rugby world cup. I wouldn't say May was rubbish, just a disappointing 5/10.

Nowell had performed a lot better than May throughout the year but was overlooked - the reasoning - May must have been brilliant in training.

Billy was the in form no 8 and had an excellent 6 nations but was 2nd choice no 8 behind Morgan. I can only speculate this was again because Morgan was excellent in training.

Burgess picked, probably because he was brilliant in training.


These are the occasions that make me think that performing in training was crucial for Lancaster.

Tom Youngs probably was deadly accurate with his throwing and was a world class scrummager in training.

Are you still not getting it? can't decide if you're not or just being difficult?

I am saying that in Lancaster's mind, training must have been the most important aspect because it certainly wasn't form or ability.

When you have two players of similar form and ability then superior training to differentiate from the two makes sense but if one player has been playing a lot better and is simply a better player - superior training does not override this IMO.

Again, not sure if you were getting what the previous discussion was or you're just trying to insult; I assume the 2nd.

I still don't understand your point. You seemed to be justifying training as the main reasoning for not picking a player. I was suggesting that it's irrelevant who was better in training. George was clearly the superior hooker compared to Webber. Nothing has changed. Webber is still nowhere to be seen because he's not been good enough.


Jones has picked his team, hopefully they deliver.

So you really don't get it; fair enough. One more try. Quite the contrary to suggesting the main reason in not picking a player being training, there was me and some others saying that after a decision on a player is made and there are no further games for that player to influence the coach, the only thing he has left is to impress in training to show the coach he was wrong. I really can't make it any more simple than that. I truely believe you're ain't an idiot.

If the coach ignores the games played then yes the only thing a player can do to influence a coach is training.

That's not the fault of the player though. It's the coach for making training the most important decision for picking a player.

Training should not be the most important thing. You are saying it isn't but it clearly was for Lancaster in some circumstances.

Jones clearly sees his training as a way to select May and Yarde over Rokodiguini, he might well prove to be right in his decision we'll see.

Lancaster got it wrong too many times though - not picking on form and instead relying on training as a key factor in picking a player. It backfired particularly in the RWC.

You're nearly there beshocked. You're now playing to the assumption that a coach uses training as the primary or only factor in deciding his team; I would suggest that's not the case and the issue you have is that a coach has a different opinion to you.

We have seen recently you are unable to separate player performance or attributes from his teams results so very possible.

No 7&1/2 and Beshocked, do you two call each other in the middle of the night when you're drunk?

I'm sure he dreams of me.

Sorry to disappoint but no and no.

I don't mind a coach having a different opinion to me if there seems to be some logic to it.

E.g. picking Hartley instead of George, Hartley is the captain after all. He is more experienced. I wouldn't do it but I can see Jones' POV.

Hartley must be fully fit or it would be illogical.

Goode not in the squad, he's not pacy, he's been a poor sub on the bench in the past. Perhaps Daly has been good in training.

May and Yarde must have been picked ahead of Roko for some reason and perhaps training is the reason.


Unfortunately I did not understand the logic of a few Lancaster selections, yes you've tried to explain it to me but they are poor justifications, not good enough.


I feel like I have been vindicated by questioning some of his more bizarre decisions.

There's always a reason, you just don't agree and then refuse to acknowledge. I doubt everyone agrees with Jones now either. Seems a bigger risk to me having Daly covering full back than Brown covering wing for instance. But like I said you can't cover every position with a speacialist.

Yes there can be a reason but they are generally illogical. The thing is even you can occasionally see my point of view. I thought that for example there was little to no justication for starting Morgan ahead of Billy in the RWC or Lancaster ignoring George. Or May ahead of Nowell (though at least in his case it was supposedly down to being world class in training).

The problem is that if you had Goode on the bench then Joseph would be forced to the wing, you could argue that's preferable but there's not really an ideal situation.

The decision in this situation is not obvious whereas with Lancaster there were obvious decisions he did not make.

Morgan was Lancaster's preferred pick and has generally performed very well for England, so not illogical. Webber was his 3rd choice pick and you yourself very vocally said that it was this experience which was important (until it doesn'tt suit your argument). May was the pick of the wingers in the warm up games, which for George and Itoje should have been used to prove themselves.

Yes there is no way to cover every area from the bench with a specialist. For the France game for instance who was the obvious guy for the bench?

I don't mind any of your arguments but you never carry them through and thus are never consistent.

From the Telegraph


Elliot Daly will be handed his first start for England against South Africa, replacing Jonathan Joseph in a new-look midfield alongside Owen Farrell, Telegraph Sport understands.

The Wasps centre has made five appearances from the bench since England head coach Eddie Jones gave him his debut in the Six Nations victory over Ireland in February, but his outstanding form for his club this season has now been rewarded.

Joseph had started every game under Jones and has been a central figure in England’s Six Nations Grand Slam and Test series victory over Australia. The Bath star has scored nine tries in 19 caps but has been struggling recently with a groin injury.

If Joseph is considered fit enough to be involved on Saturday - he was retained in the 25-man squad announced on Tuesday night - it is likely he will be named on the bench, along with Danny Care, with Jones understood to be considering selected six forwards, including Josh Beaumont, Dave Attwood and Nathan Hughes, to give him extra ballast in the second half against the Springboks.

Daly offers a similar attacking threat as Joseph but is also blessed with a huge kicking game, which could see him attempt long-range penalty attempts from inside the South African half. Daly previously ranked a 59-metre penalty kick for Wasps against Bayonne as his longest strike.

Jones had originally suggested Daly was not ready for Test match rugby when he named his first squad in January but brought the Wasps player in for the first time after Ollie Devoto was ruled out of the third round of the Championship with concussion, and he made his debut off the bench in a 21-10 victory at Twickenham. Daly has remained part of the squad ever since.

Daly’s elevation will represent a sixth change to the England side that defeated Australia in the third Test in Sydney in June. Other injury-enforced changes will see Jonny May and Marland Yarde start on the wings in place of Anthony Watson (jaw) and Jack Nowell (quad).

There are also three changes to the pack, with Tom Wood making his first start under Jones at openside flanker in place of James Haskell (toe) and Joe Launchbury and Courtney Lawes returning to the second row in place of injured duo George Kruis and Maro Itoje.

Lawes, who has overcome a knee injury to take his place in the starting line-up, is poised to win his 50th cap for England. Jones will name his starting XV and replacements on Thursday.

no 7 & 1/2 I've said this before and I'll say it again.

Morgan has not played well for England since 2014. Billy Vunipola was Lancaster's starting no 8 in the 2015 6 nations. Lancaster has no excuses for dropping the in form Billy for the out of form Morgan.

May was dropped by Lancaster in the 2015 6 nations with Nowell coming in. Nowell should have been trusted by Lancaster. I still find it ridiculous that Lancaster dropped Nowell when he shouldn't and picked him when he probably shouldn't have.

Webber did not deserve to be in the England squad. I don't need to say this any more - it's obvious.

Webber is not as experienced as you seem to think. He's barely started for England.

Can't really call him overrated because the only two people who rate Webber are you and Lancaster.

I am more consistent than you believe.

I agree there was not an obvious player in that French game.

Daly to start over JJ apparently

And I should have read the above first of course, just couldn't quite get past the usual pile of BS

beshocked wrote:no 7 & 1/2 I've said this before and I'll say it again.

Morgan has not played well for England since 2014. Billy Vunipola was Lancaster's starting no 8 in the 2015 6 nations. Lancaster has no excuses for dropping the in form Billy for the out of form Morgan.

May was dropped by Lancaster in the 2015 6 nations with Nowell coming in. Nowell should have been trusted by Lancaster. I still find it ridiculous that Lancaster dropped Nowell when he shouldn't and picked him when he probably shouldn't have.

Webber did not deserve to be in the England squad. I don't need to say this any more - it's obvious.

Webber is not as experienced as you seem to think. He's barely started for England.

Can't really call him overrated because the only two people who rate Webber are you and Lancaster.

I am more consistent than you believe.

I agree there was not an obvious player in that French game.

You don't read or understand posts often also. Just to remind you I wouldn't have selected Webber but your argument (not mine) was that experience is neccessary down to third choice (and beyond?) hence if you were consistent you would have applauded the decision. If you were truthful in your reasons ie you don't rate someone as good enough ad just said it we wouldn't rehash tired arguments.

Daly over Joseph is really interesting; started the season strongly but Joseph has been improving lately. JJ stronger in defence, Daly as fast as anyone huge boot as mentioned above. Shame they're both 13s.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Daly over Joseph is really interesting; started the season strongly but Joseph has been improving lately. JJ stronger in defence, Daly as fast as anyone huge boot as mentioned above. Shame they're both 13s.

I guess Daly must of impressed in training

Siidestepping that I'm quite confident and going for a 10 point win.

There is a lot of pace in the backs. There is a lot to be confident about.

king_carlos wrote:No 7&1/2 and Beshocked, do you two call each other in the middle of the night when you're drunk?

I was beginning to wonder this.

Good quality 3rd choices is ideal but Webber didn't qualify as that! Not good enough and yet he was picked. I wouldn't applaud picking a player not good enough to get past a journeyman at his club. You are claiming Webber was experienced but he barely had any starts. Merely scraps off the bench. England's strength in depth at hooker was poor in the RWC.

Daly is only picked it seems because Joseph is not fully fit. So now we'll have a non fully fit player on the bench?

king_carlos wrote:No 7&1/2 and Beshocked, do you two call each other in the middle of the night when you're drunk?

I think they're actually the same person

beshocked wrote:Good quality 3rd choices is ideal but Webber didn't qualify as that! Not good enough and yet he was picked. I wouldn't applaud picking a player not good enough to get past a journeyman at his club. You are claiming Webber was experienced but he barely had any starts. Merely scraps off the bench. England's strength in depth at hooker was poor in the RWC.

Daly is only picked it seems because Joseph is not fully fit. So now we'll have a non fully fit player on the bench?

At his best he did offer a good option and his skill set could be a good alternative to Hartley and Youngs.

I've always been a fan of Webber so I am biased. However in the NZ tour the summer before the RWC camps, Webber started 2 tests and performed well enough that many wanted him to keep the shirt. His hard tackling and tough defence around the fringes was a welcome addition to what most had felt was a soft area for England. His carrying and handling in attack was also impressive, set-piece solid.

He shouldn't have been in the RWC squad having lost form and fitness in the preceding season but to suggest he was never good enough is unfair. A poor choice of 3rd hooker in the RWC squad is fairly irrelevant compared to Bombers other mistakes at the end of his tenure.

So assuming it's
6 Robshaw
7 Wood
8 Billy

Does Jones tweak the back row instructions? Or does Wood try to play the pressing ruck player and tackler with the likes of Launchbury, Mako (outstanding this season) etc covering Itoje as extra turnover breakdown man...

it is a shame when people attempt to discuss rugby and ruin a good domestic

Ah it's just a lovers tiff.

To be fair the intensity and meaningfulness seems to have shot up since Jones took over. More reality training, means you see how players preform under pressure