SF1 - Match Thread - ENGLAND v NEW ZEALAND - 26/10/19 - K/O 09:00 BST

[Guest]

First topic message reminder :

Again, making these early for the sake of ease and consistency.

ENGLAND

Team:Daly; Watson, Tuilagi, Farrell (capt), May; Ford, Youngs; M Vunipola, George, Sinckler, Itoje, Lawes, Curry, Underhill, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Marler, Cole, Kruis, Wilson, Heinz, Slade, Joseph.

NEW ZEALAND

Team: Beauden Barrett; Sevu Reece, Jack Goodhue, Anton Lienert-Brown, George Bridge; Richie Mo'unga, Aaron Smith; Joe Moody, Codie Taylor, Nepo Laulala, Brodie Retallick, Sam Whitelock, Scott Barrett, Ardie Savea, Kieran Read (capt).

Replacements: Dane Coles, Ofa Tuungafasi, Angus Ta'avao, Patrick Tuipulotu, Sam Cane, TJ Perenara, Sonny Bill Williams, Jordie Barrett.



Venue: Yokohama
Referee: Nigel Owens
AR1: Romain Poite
AR2: Pascal Gauzere
TMO: Marius Joncker

[LondonTiger]

Genuinely didn't recall so many lineout errors in that game last year, but that's a good breakdown by Kay. Reflects badly on the referee if they've missed all of those, but I can't remember there being that much discussion about them, so maybe they were marginal

The discussion was mainly - oh look George lost us the game. Which was unfair - but hookers always carry the can.

[Guest]

Interesting stat, make of it what you will!

Ford 14 tackles 0 missed - Farrell 31 tackles, 11 missed.

Video analysis of all tackles would be interesting. Ford's clearly doing to job asked of him well - not slipping off tackles - but how much good work is being done by centres, flankers etc. protecting him?

[Heaf]

Genuinely didn't recall so many lineout errors in that game last year, but that's a good breakdown by Kay. Reflects badly on the referee if they've missed all of those, but I can't remember there being that much discussion about them, so maybe they were marginal

The discussion was mainly - oh look George lost us the game. Which was unfair - but hookers always carry the can.

Or the disallowed try from a 'clear and obvious' offside which took the TMO about 5 minutes and 20 replays to conclude ...

[Guest]

As zi said earlier

Very progressive of you goose. Good to see...

[Guest]

On lineouts as well - how much does the fact crooked throws aren't being picked up change things?

[Pie]

New Zealanders are the most arrogant supporters in the world

Did you see the Air NZ ad for the Irish!

So arrogant. Not rugby at all.

Just funny, makes sense you wouldn't get it

[Pie]

Can't wait to see Air NZ ad about England

[majesticimperialman]

NZ are and have been the best team for ???how many years?

England ( now) have one of the strongest team's they have had for a long time.

England put 40 points on Australia, who was a very strong attacking team, and let Australia score 1 try.

NZ put 46 points on Ireland who for most of the game seem to be going back wards. and Ireland scored 2 try's against them.

It will be hard to call,can England calm NZ's attacking game like they did against Australia?

[majesticimperialman]

Just been reading that England will have all 31 players fit and in contention for this game.

What about NZ do they have any injury's going into this game?

[robbo277]

The 8 unused players last weekend were Genge, Singleton, Launchbury, Wilson, Francis, Cokanasiga, McConnochie and Nowell. Nowell may get onto the bench for Joseph, but you'd say the other 7 will probably miss out again.

The other big decisions are Lawes or Kruis and Ford or Slade. Everything else will probably remain as is.

[Mr Bounce]

I wish it wasn't so robbo. I am a big fan of Elliot Daly, but he's been poor this world cup. His tackling is not up to much and as is almost expected now, his full back defensive positioning when under pressure is also a bit rubbish. I'd go for a back three of 11 May, 14 Nowell and 15 Watson but Eddie does love his favourite utility back with the big boot.

I doubt there;ll be much change to the starting XV - as stated above Kruis is likely to come in for Lawes, who'll be kept on the bench to inflict maximum carnage later on I expect, whether we're chasing the game or ahead of NZ. I reckon Nowell will come in for Joseph on the bench, otherwise, it's as it was on Saturday.

[lostinwales]

Looking at the players we are leaving out you have to say we have come a long way

[quinsforever]

going to be a great game.

i also dont love daly at FB. he seems to be out of position too often defensively, without offering a devastating attacking option himself. and when was the last time he landed a 55m kick?

bookies odds of 60:40 look about right. but we have a great chance to win this. if curry and underhill have great games, i think we win. turnovers are going to be key as both teams are going to kick A LOT. not like the Aus game.

i'm looking forwards to it.

anyone else going to be at the game?

[Taylorman]

Can't wait to see Air NZ ad about England

Should be better that than the Farrell doing Sumarai Sam one surely.

Gees, Tom Cruise as a Sumarai warrier was bad enough...

[Mr Bounce]

anyone else going to be at the game?

My best friend is over in Japan and has managed to blag himself tickets for both Semis. Lucky so and so. I think he'll have a whale of a time. Perhaps I should deliberately keep texting him so he looks at his phone instead of the game. I am SO jealous!!

[Guest]

Can't wait to see Air NZ ad about England

Should be better that than the Farrell doing Sumarai Sam one surely.

Gees, Tom Cruise as a Sumarai warrier was bad enough...

You know Sumos and Samurais are different, yeah?

[Guest]

anyone else going to be at the game?

My best friend is over in Japan and has managed to blag himself tickets for both Semis. Lucky so and so. I think he'll have a whale of a time. Perhaps I should deliberately keep texting him so he looks at his phone instead of the game. I am SO jealous!!

hope not

[Pie]

anyone else going to be at the game?

My best friend is over in Japan and has managed to blag himself tickets for both Semis. Lucky so and so. I think he'll have a whale of a time. Perhaps I should deliberately keep texting him so he looks at his phone instead of the game. I am SO jealous!!

 


hope not

Hope h sourced them correctly or I guarantee he'll be eating sushi in a dive bar at kick off

[Taylorman]

All Blacks v England – Referee: Nigel Owens. Assist: Roman Poite & Pascal Gauzere. TMO: Marius Jonker

Hope they can all understand eachother...

[Rugby Fan]

It's been lashing with rain for 12 hours straight so far, and not expected to stop for a few more. Very wet underfoot. It'll be dry tomorrow but then we'll probably see showers every day through Sunday. You can see from the link, typhoon 21 is veering east, and missing the mainland. Still, the associated front is the one which will bing the rain.

England haven't so far played in lower temperatures during the tournament. It's closer to what players would experience back home, so you can't really call it a disadvantage.

Arguably, though, New Zealand have a small advantage because they played Australia in this stadium on the same weekend of the year in 2018. While the team has changed since then, most of these players have already experienced Yokohama in similar conditions.

https://www.jma.go.jp/en/typh/

[kingelderfield]

Btb, England have lost to NZ at all WC matches;
91, 95 & 99.
Doesn't mean a lot now, other than we're not normally competitive(91?) and only one of those games, 95, really compares as was a semi after we'd scrapped past Ozy.
That was Jonah's tournament......

[Rugby Fan]

...Doesn't mean a lot now, other than we're not normally competitive(91?)...

We were competitive in 1991. On the day, New Zealand were the better team but it took a lovely moment by Michael Jones to separate the sides. Players afterwards said they over-psyched themselves, as it had been nearly six and half years since the two sides had faced each other. Simon Halliday said they spent an inordinate amount of time wondering what to do during the haka. The loss meant the team decided to play more pragmatically, as we were very helter-skelter at times. As it turned out, New Zealand were past their best at the 1991 tournament, so a less nervous England team might have done them.

Mind you, a victory would have put England on course for a semi-final against Australia, and the likelihood of a re-match against New Zealand in the final. We probably got the better route, and an easier final but still couldn't get over the line.

[Taylorman]

England have lost he last 6 but only last years is a anything of a guide, and they should have won that.
They've always been competitive matches and this will be no different.
NZ will need every bit the start it got vs Ireland.
Interested to see what Hansen has for the loosie and Farrell threat. Shutting his time down as they squeezed Sexton out of the games a start.
Gotta go back and watch that match.
Close Farrell outs gotta be near the top of the list. Do that and you can split the forwards from the backs in a useful way.
A toughy...

[Rugby Fan]

Matt Todd will miss the semi-final, so someone else is due to be named to the NZ 23. Kieran Read has a tight calf, and didn't appear outside for training. Hansen says he did bike work inside, to avoid the rain, and is not a doubt for Saturday.

[No 7&1/2]

Todd for new is no great loss. Read obviously a bigger blow. Really want to see our 2 first choice back rows go up against each other.cor the first time in a good while we have a top quality back row and I want to see them prove it. Said it before but the main point of difference in the pack is rettalick. How itoje goes will have a big deciding factor in this game.

[maestegmafia]

In the paper this morning, is Eddie on the wind up? Paranoid? Or just starting to sound more like A delusional Donald Trump twitter rant?

Eddie Jones claimed that his team's security staff spotted someone filming his coaching session on a long lens camera from a nearby building.

"There was definitely someone in the apartment block filming. It might have been a Japanese fan," he said.

"You just don't need to do it anymore. You can watch everyone's training on Youtube. There's absolutely no value in that anymore."

Asked whether this would derail England’s Semi Final hopes against the ABs, Jones said: "Don't care, mate. Don't care. We knew from the start that they were filming and it doesn't change anything we do. We used to do it. I haven't done it since 2001. There's no need.”
“We have two security guards - Prince Harry's… and the ex-Prime Minister's. Only those two. Lovely blokes.“

[George Carlin]

Tough task for England. Head to heads over the past decade are not pretty:

29 November 2008
Twickenham, London
6 – 32 to New Zealand

21 November 2009
Twickenham, London
6 – 19 to New Zealand

6 November 2010
Twickenham, London
16 – 26 to New Zealand

1 December 2012
Twickenham, London
38 – 21 to England

16 November 2013
Twickenham, London
22 – 30 to New Zealand

7 June 2014
Eden Park, Auckland
20 – 15 to New Zealand

14 June 2014
Forsyth Barr Stadium, Dunedin
28 – 27 to New Zealand

21 June 2014
Waikato Stadium, Hamilton
36 – 13 to  New Zealand

8 November 2014
Twickenham, London
21 – 24 to New Zealand

10 November 2018
Twickenham, London
15 – 16 to New Zealand

Very seldom has it been a one-sided blow out through. This one will also be close.

[Poorfour]

You know Sumos and Samurais are different, yeah?

Technically, I think sumo wrestlers are the last remaining class of samurai. Certainly, it developed from bouts between samurai and a lot of its rituals are derived from samurai culture (as well as shinto) - Sumo history

[No 7&1/2]

Ha. Jones seems to be trying to get people talking about anything other than england. May be a bit worried that pressure could start to build.

[SecretFly]

Spying Tonight!

Eddie does love a good show.

Meanwhile, in other news, Australia are looking for the money back that they paid him to spy on England....

[Big]

Todd for new is no great loss.  Read obviously a bigger blow. Really want to see our 2 first choice back rows go up against each other.cor the first time in a good while we have a top quality back row and I want to see them prove it. Said it before but the main point of difference in the pack is rettalick.  How itoje goes will have a big deciding factor in this game.

I remember in 2008 a young back row containing Tom Rees, James Haskell and (off the bench in the second test) Tom Croft. Haskell is a character and has played his part over the years for England, but it's a real shame that repeated injuries and eventual early retirement stopped both Toms from really being able to develop and contribute the way I hoped back then.

Of course in 2008 it didn't seem that long ago that we'd had the likes of Hill, Back, Dallaglio and Moody all available.

[No 7&1/2]

Injuries play such a big role in careers and how we view players.

[LondonTiger]

Tough task for England. Head to heads over the past decade are not pretty:


Very seldom has it been a one-sided blow out through. This one will also be close.

If I remove the first one you put down, being that it was 11 years ago, the only one sided game was the 3rd test in 2014 - after NZ had won the first two by an aggregate margin of just 6 points. However except for the 2012 game where we built up a lead then NZ pulled it back before the Manuisation of the game, NZ have kept finding a way to win.

We have to prevent NZ getting a quick start, so having some possession in the first 10 minutes would be good (unlike the 1/4 final) and ideally we need a fast start to put NZ under pressure. Not sure we have the mental strength to hold them off though should it be tight or they come back at us.

[robbo277]

Tough task for England. Head to heads over the past decade are not pretty:


Very seldom has it been a one-sided blow out through. This one will also be close.

If I remove the first one you put down, being that it was 11 years ago, the only one sided game was the 3rd test in 2014 - after NZ had won the first two by an aggregate margin of just 6 points. However except for the 2012 game where we built up a lead then NZ pulled it back before the Manuisation of the game, NZ have kept finding a way to win.

We have to prevent NZ getting a quick start, so having some possession in the first 10 minutes would be good (unlike the 1/4 final) and ideally we need a fast start to put NZ under pressure. Not sure we have the mental strength to hold them off though should it be tight or they come back at us.

I'd agree, we are hugely unlikely to be able to keep New Zealand quiet for 80 minutes, so we have to make sure when we are on top we score points. That 2012 game is a good template, as is 2018. We need to build a big lead (15-0 both times), know they'll come back (15-14 and 15-16 respectively), but then try and win that final third of the game. We managed it in 2012 and in 2018 we so nearly did.

Would we be able to come back against the All Blacks to win? Possible, but much harder you'd suspect. In 2014, the first test we matched them blow-for-blow before a late try set them above. The second test we got ahead early but then got blitzed after half-time. We were trailing by 15 points and scored two late tries to bring it close. The third test New Zealand started strongly and we were nowhere near.

The South Africa game also showed a similar pattern. South Africa were on top early on, but couldn't turn it into points. New Zealand had their strong patch against them and it was 17-3. Had South Africa stuck a try or two themselves in that opening period, it would have been game on in the second half. But as it was NZ managed to close it out from that kind of lead, even though South Africa won that second half 10-6.

[Poorfour]

Good analysis robbo. One encouraging thing about Saturday was England's ability to score when in possession. They had 36% possession, so on typical ball-in-play time that's 16 minutes.

They scored 12 times (4 tries, 8 kicks), so on average it took 80 seconds of possession to create a score. I don't expect New Zealand to be quite so generous with their tryline, but it's an encouraging stat in terms of taking your chances when you get them.

Equally impressive were the passages of play where we defended our tryline and forced a turnover. Overall, the game showed a level of patience and maturity that England haven't had much in the past.

England's best recent performances against the All Blacks seem to have come where they've been able to keep it tight in the first half and build a lead. When the ABs need to score points, they play more like mere mortals.

In return, I would expect the All Blacks to try to isolate Daly and attack off transition play. If he's on his own against a kick chase, 1 on 1 or worse, they are very likely to score.

[Old Man]

Not sure you can take conversions as a seperate point scoring opportunity though.

Conversions are automatic.

[LondonTiger]

TBF four of those kicks were conversions, so really 8 distinct scores.

I find this interesting, comparing what Daly brings in atatck to what he takes away in defence:

When England played Argentina in Tokyo three weekends ago, it seemed that we were at Elliot Daly’s coronation. If you had to pinpoint a day when he finally established himself for good as the England full back, that was it. Both traditional and social media rose to his acclaim.

When England played Australia two weeks later, Daly failed to get a hand on Marika Koroibete as the Wallaby wing scored the try that hauled his side to within one point of England, and with wicked speed, a large chorus on social media started singing a different tune.

No England player has been the subject of such mixed opinion. For the first two years of his career — after coming into the side in 2016 and quickly establishing himself on the wing, which helped him to earn three caps there for the British & Irish Lions — Daly could do no wrong. He was so widely acclaimed that many of us argued that he should be rapidly revamped as the England full back. Eventually Eddie Jones agreed and Daly moved to full back on the tour to South Africa last June, but then he started dropping those high balls and we weren’t so sure.

Now, here we are, four days from England’s biggest game in four years, a semi-final against New Zealand, and Jones has to decide whether the experiment has really ever worked. Actually, that makes it sound as though there is any kind of selection debate. I don’t think there is. At this point, there shouldn’t be.

But is he a risk to England? Without doubt. Is there really any chance that the All Blacks have forgotten how he dropped the ball when they played against him in last year’s autumn international?

From the moment Jones decided to invest in Daly, he went all-in. Daly’s first game at No 15 was the first Test in Johannesburg; since then there have been 18 England Tests and Daly has started at full back in 17 of them.

This is a guy so talented that Jones used to joke about him publicly, about how he could probably score a half-century “without blinking”, take a diving catch at first slip, then drive a golf ball 300 yards straight. “He’s one of those kids, isn’t he?” Jones said. “We’ve all been to school with them.”

How Daly compares with New Zealand’s brilliant full back: the statistics show that while both Daly, left, and Beauden Barrett, who has twice been world player of the year, are brilliant going foward, their tackling success rates this year hover only just above 50 per cent

It may be that switching to full back has been the hardest thing he has done. It was in November last year that this became apparent. South Africa started it, raining down bombs on him and relishing his failure to defuse them. New Zealand came the following week; they sent ben Smith head to head with him — yes, Ben Smith, one of the best full backs of his era — and up they went for the high ball. Smith was the outright winner.

I have a line in my notes from the Argentina game 16 days ago. Daly and Emiliano Boffelli, the silky Puma full back went up for a high ball and I noted: “At last! That is the most conclusive 50-50 high ball Daly has ever won.”

Has he now mastered the art? No. As Steve Borthwick has explained, this is “a team skill”. What the England assistant coach meant was that after November, England sharpened up their legal obstruction game. The main reason no team since the All Blacks last year have exposed Daly under the high ball is because of the array of English blockers or “pillars” who stand in front of him and thus slow the kick-chase down.

Does this mean that the All Blacks will not try to expose a weakness they found before? Of course not.

The Koroibete try is another issue. First, though, rewind to the Wales game at Twickenham in August: the 22nd minute, Gareth Davies, the No 9, breaks solo from behind the scrum from 45 metres out, Daly is the last line of defence and shows him the outside. Davies goes out to in and leaves him for dead. It is too easy. Daly barely touches him. Try.

Daly’s task against Koroibete was harder, partly because it was Koroibete — bigger, faster, more powerful, infinitely harder to hold on to — and partly because it was a two-on-one. Daly was the last line of defence and Koroibete had Michael Hooper on his shoulder.

However, again, Daly is turned. Again, he goes neither forward nor back and is caught in a kind of no man’s land. A player such as Matt Burke, the former Wallaby No 15, would have sprinted forward to cut down the danger. The only way that Australia were going to mess up that try was if Daly had at least made him pass or step but Koroibete was forced to do neither; again, Daly barely gets a finger on him.

With cruel timing, the Wallabies had shone a light on Daly’s defensive fallibility. The Kiwis know this. Jones knows it too.

Asked, after the quarter-final, if he had any advice for Daly on these one-to-ones, Jones said: “He’s a good player. He will work that out.” Maybe he will but probably not by Saturday. Like his high-ball defence, England will have to live with Daly’s one-on-one defence too.

They have to because of what Daly now contributes in attack. There are occasional holes in defence and they can be horribly costly. The evidence of how he has changed the England attack is overwhelming.

It is not the way he runs the ball back or his kicking game — which are both strong. It is his skill as England’s third playmaker. It is his fast hands, his link work, the position he takes up between the penultimate passer and the wing.

It was against Ireland in the Six Nations that he really seemed to work out the positioning and timing of his arrival in the attack. That has improved with practice ever since and was at its most effective against Argentina, when he was top-ranked for ball-carries. And the thing about Daly is that they are smart carries because he can do so much.

Before Daly wore the No 15 jersey, England struggled to execute in attack in the opposition 22. Now they almost always look dangerous. Take this away and you denude England’s attack.

There is a perfectly good reason why you cannot just expect Anthony Watson, say, or Jack Nowell, to step into this space and do what Daly does — because they are not born-and-bred outside centres. The irony of Daly’s rise at full back is that he looks his most dynamic and England look their most dangerous when he ghosts up into the position in which he really belongs: outside centre.

England won’t change their No 15. Not now that their attack is looking so smooth. If they are going to beat the All Blacks, they need to score tries; move Daly and they score fewer.

Jones has cut himself a deal. He believes he will gain more in attack than he loses in defence. At this point, it is the right deal.

[Poorfour]

I counted the conversions separately because a) they each take up a separate block of time and b) Mo'unga missed several of his.

But for the sake of argument, if we knock off a minute for each conversion, then England scored 8 times in 12 minutes of possession, which is still a score every 90 seconds.

[robbo277]

Good analysis robbo. One encouraging thing about Saturday was England's ability to score when in possession. They had 36% possession, so on typical ball-in-play time that's 16 minutes.

They scored 12 times (4 tries, 8 kicks), so on average it took 80 seconds of possession to create a score. I don't expect New Zealand to be quite so generous with their tryline, but it's an encouraging stat in terms of taking your chances when you get them.

Equally impressive were the passages of play where we defended our tryline and forced a turnover. Overall, the game showed a level of patience and maturity that England haven't had much in the past.

England's best recent performances against the All Blacks seem to have come where they've been able to keep it tight in the first half and build a lead. When the ABs need to score points, they play more like mere mortals.

In return, I would expect the All Blacks to try to isolate Daly and attack off transition play. If he's on his own against a kick chase, 1 on 1 or worse, they are very likely to score.

Those defensive sets may end up being key. In November, NZ were on top just before and just after half-time. But England kept them down to 1 try. Although they got a couple of penalties and the drop goal to keep the score building, England stopped them from the double strike that they seem to be regularly capable of which absolutely winds teams and is difficult to recover from - see again the South Africa match (24th minute and 27th minute). You could also look at the 36-0 against Australia, an early penalty was the only score for near enough 30 minutes, before they struck with two tries on the 29th minute and the 32nd minute. 17-0 lead and the game effectively over as a contest.

If England can get an early try or two and then ride the wave, stay in the game until the 50th/60th minute when the benches come on then I think the belief will build throughout the team. But we'd need a much better start than the Australia game and then everyone to maintain that level throughout.

[robbo277]

I find this interesting, comparing what Daly brings in atatck to what he takes away in defence:

I'd agree with large portions of that and I think the one-on-one defence is possibly more of a worry these days than the high ball issue. Daly is fine under a high ball that is uncontested and he's just as likely to have to take contested kicks on the wing as he is at full back, so moving him to wing doesn't solve that issue.

But the point of difference is most definitely what Daly brings in attack and our attacking game is much stronger. It was last Six Nations and it has been in the warm-ups and the World Cup as well.

Watson and Nowell aren't the answer for me. If we wanted someone safer, we should have kept Mike Brown in the squad and we'd have that option. As it is, we have to go with what we have been building towards for the last 15 months - Daly at 15 - and back him to do more damage to them then he allows to be done to us.

[Afro]

I counted the conversions separately because a) they each take up a separate block of time and b) Mo'unga missed several of his.

But for the sake of argument, if we knock off a minute for each conversion, then England scored 8 times in 12 minutes of possession, which is still a score every 90 seconds.

Exactly what possession do the possession stats measure. It may sound like a stupid question, but do the minutes between a try and the kick-off afterwards count. I'd be surprised if they did.

Either way, I think the basis of what is said is right. England were ruthless with their possession (how ever many minutes it was). Two intercept tries help that of course as do any penalties that came during Aussie possession

[Old Man]

I counted the conversions separately because a) they each take up a separate block of time and b) Mo'unga missed several of his.

But for the sake of argument, if we knock off a minute for each conversion, then England scored 8 times in 12 minutes of possession, which is still a score every 90 seconds.

Exactly what possession do the possession stats measure. It may sound like a stupid question, but do the minutes between a try and the kick-off afterwards count. I'd be surprised if they did.

Either way, I think the basis of what is said is right. England were ruthless with their possession (how ever many minutes it was). Two intercept tries help that of course as do any penalties that came during Aussie possession

Yes, the clock doesn’t stop when you aim at poles.

[TightHEAD]

A lot of love for Daly on here, I hope you guys are right but he looks seriously out of form to me.

But to be honest I don't understand FB play, during my time we just had to jog back for a scrum when our FB dropped the ball.

[robbo277]

I counted the conversions separately because a) they each take up a separate block of time and b) Mo'unga missed several of his.

But for the sake of argument, if we knock off a minute for each conversion, then England scored 8 times in 12 minutes of possession, which is still a score every 90 seconds.

Exactly what possession do the possession stats measure. It may sound like a stupid question, but do the minutes between a try and the kick-off afterwards count. I'd be surprised if they did.

Either way, I think the basis of what is said is right. England were ruthless with their possession (how ever many minutes it was). Two intercept tries help that of course as do any penalties that came during Aussie possession

I would imagine it would be % of ball in play time? So if the ball goes out at all, line-out, scrum, kick at goal, etc, the ball in play clock is stopped. As above, the ball in play time is often under 40 minutes for a game. So if you have ball in play time of 35 minutes and 50% possession, you would have had the ball for 17 minutes 30 of actual play time, regardless of how long your kicker lined up his kicks at goal, your scrum half stood with the ball waiting to feed a scrum or your hooker stood ball in hand waiting to throw into a line-out.

[Afro]

I counted the conversions separately because a) they each take up a separate block of time and b) Mo'unga missed several of his.

But for the sake of argument, if we knock off a minute for each conversion, then England scored 8 times in 12 minutes of possession, which is still a score every 90 seconds.

Exactly what possession do the possession stats measure. It may sound like a stupid question, but do the minutes between a try and the kick-off afterwards count. I'd be surprised if they did.

Either way, I think the basis of what is said is right. England were ruthless with their possession (how ever many minutes it was). Two intercept tries help that of course as do any penalties that came during Aussie possession

I would imagine it would be % of ball in play time? So if the ball goes out at all, line-out, scrum, kick at goal, etc, the ball in play clock is stopped. As above, the ball in play time is often under 40 minutes for a game. So if you have ball in play time of 35 minutes and 50% possession, you would have had the ball for 17 minutes 30 of actual play time, regardless of how long your kicker lined up his kicks at goal, your scrum half stood with the ball waiting to feed a scrum or your hooker stood ball in hand waiting to throw into a line-out.

That was my guess for how it worked

[Big]

But to be honest I don't understand FB play, during my time we just had to jog back for a scrum when our FB dropped the ball.

Ah man. I remember the time I (a second row/occasional prop) had to cover FB because we had a shortage of actual backs turn up for the match (the joys of amateur 2nd team rugby). I really didn't have a clue! I basically thought my job was to hang around at the back, avoid doing anything except cover tackles when someone got through and catching kicks. In the case of the later, it would have been better for me to leave it and let a back try and outsprint the chase and clear up than to attempt the catch and knock on...

[LondonTiger]

But to be honest I don't understand FB play, during my time we just had to jog back for a scrum when our FB dropped the ball.

Ah man.  I remember the time I (a second row/occasional prop) had to cover FB because we had a shortage of actual backs turn up for the match (the joys of amateur 2nd team rugby).  I really didn't have a clue!  I basically thought my job was to hang around at the back, avoid doing anything except cover tackles when someone got through and catching kicks.  In the case of the later, it would have been better for me to leave it and let a back try and outsprint the chase and clear up than to attempt the catch and knock on...

I was an openside who moved to hooker after fracturing several vertebrae in my neck due to a high tackle in late teens. Stopped playing senior rugby at 28, but got tempted into playing Vets rugby when I turned 35. Just a few games a year but as the youngest (Hooker was 67, TH prop 68)was put at FB. At that level it was pretty fun - except for the day it snowed and the old buggers kept the ball in a continuous maul just so they could keep warm. I swear there were several hip flasks in the middle of it all.

[robbo277]

But to be honest I don't understand FB play, during my time we just had to jog back for a scrum when our FB dropped the ball.

Ah man.  I remember the time I (a second row/occasional prop) had to cover FB because we had a shortage of actual backs turn up for the match (the joys of amateur 2nd team rugby).  I really didn't have a clue!  I basically thought my job was to hang around at the back, avoid doing anything except cover tackles when someone got through and catching kicks.  In the case of the later, it would have been better for me to leave it and let a back try and outsprint the chase and clear up than to attempt the catch and knock on...

Don't underestimate a return volley a la the John Smith's advert from about 15 years ago. Can't knock on off your foot.

That is if you manage to get to the ball. Every time I've been asked to get involved in the backs my positioning has been miles away. Normally I end up getting bored and just hitting rucks. Evidently it takes a lot of practice to perfect standing around doing nothing.

[Rugby Fan]

...I was an openside who moved to hooker after fracturing several vertebrae in my neck due to a high tackle...

As a hooker who turned into a flanker because my neck wasn't strong enough for the front row as we all got older, that sounds like a strange transition to make.

[LondonTiger]

...I was an openside who moved to hooker after fracturing several vertebrae in my neck due to a high tackle...

As a hooker who turned into a flanker because my neck wasn't strong enough for the front row as we all got older, that sounds like a strange transition to make.

A couple of vertebrae fused making the neck stronger, some damage to the thyroid gland led to me gaining some bulk.

[Sponsored content]