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

[Gooseberry]

The two teams are out

Guess the only real surprise tactical call is picking Scott Barrett at blindside by the Kiwis. I guess Lawes is a counter to that? A 4 a 5.5 two 7.5s and an 8 in the back three vs a 4 and 5 a 5.5 a 678 and the worlds best 8?

My how rugby has changed I still remember a fifteen Stone Tighthead Prop being considered a giant and second rows being six foot two.

Horses for courses when you have such large and talent filled squads at your disposal.

There is very little between these teams, both very different in character but also some similarities in countering each other.

Ford and Farrell vs Mo'unga and Barrett as the dictators of play.

Kiwis go for a fast 12-14 vs England’s fast 13-15.

This is going to be a very interesting match tactically. Two teams trying to advance the games preconceptions and evolve.

Can’t wait...!

Lawes is in as a lock so not a counter to Barrett at all. The media talk had been that they might put Kruis in ahead of Lawes to have two out and out lineout leaders, someone on here made a suggestion of Lawes at 6 to counter Barrett. England have stuck to their guns and are willing to take a risk there, lineouts a huge area for them both on their own throw and disrupting the opposition given how much they kick the ball. 

Nowell is still injured, but Heinz and May passed fit. Slade and JJ get the bench spots, Wilson in for Ludlam.  

This game should be a corker.

[Scottrf]

No one is saying accept second best. No one is saying don't aim to win. No one is saying don't be gutted if you don't

This is talking about pressure. Where is the expectation - surely there is more expectation on NZ to win both this game and the WC, than there is on England?

This is a World Cup semi final, there is pressure on both teams. Yes NZ have more expectation, I just disagree with the sentiment that it's only a failure for one team. They are good, but so are we.

[TightHEAD]

England:
Daly;
Watson,
Tuilagi,
Farrell (capt),
May;
Ford,
Youngs;

M Vunipola,
George,
Sinckler,
Itoje,
Lawes,
Curry,
Underhill,
B Vunipola.

Replacements/Finishers/World Champ Beaters: Cowan-Dickie, Marler, Cole, Kruis, Wilson, Heinz, Slade, Joseph.

[Afro]

If you look back to my first post, I didn't say it wasn't a failure for both. I said there was less pressure on England. (well I actually said no pressure, which I hold my hands up isn't true, but less pressure is.

Which I agree tbh. I'll sit and watch it, and if we lose, its expected. We have got to the semi and lost to the best team in the world. No pressure.

If the All Blacks lose, then it will be a failure for them because of the standards they have set

[LondonTiger]

Why would you select a lock in the back row for mobility?

Because he’s also a back rower, a very quick one. Think he’s been underestimated. He’s been one of the best players at this tournament, certainly one of our best. That’s why Hansen can’t ignore it.

Gotta think outside the box LT. Rugby’s not a square pegs in square holes game anymore.

For kiwis, this is one hell of an exciting selection, especially after getting the thumbs up vs Ireland.

Pieter Steph du Toit was a lock his whole career, until Rassie moved him to back row.

In the early days that did not work out too well for him though. He has learnt how to play back row in a more instinctive way since that day Youngs made him look like a traffic cop waving us through.

Barrett to start his first ever test at back row in a WC semi final, with very limited time there at lower level, is a huge ask. While he may well improve thye set piece, just being quick does not mean the game will be quicker for NZ. What comes as second nature to Savea and Cane will need Barrett to think a bit. He will be hitting rucks earlier than usual, performing a different role and still thinking about that red card.

It may prove to be a masterstroke, and certainly in not a Bergamasco at 9 selection, but it is a gamble. If they wanted to facilitate a quicker game then Barrett should have started in the second row.


England meanwhile have opted for the more dynamic players to start. Kruis is a better lineout tactician, but Lawes and Itoje are extremely athletic and will be looking to put just as much pressure on NZ as England receive.

[TightHEAD]

Can't believe Cole and Marler gave away what England have been doing in training this week.

What a fool!

https://rugbyonslaught.com/england-fans-furious-as-joe-marler-leaks-englands-intricate-training-plan-on-live-video/

[Old Man]

Jones will be hoping to unleash Tuilagi at 100% for this game, does feel like he's been held back a bit during the six nations and the build up particularly playing at 12.

I've seen England lose numerous games during world cups but this is the first time I've been genuinely nervous  before a game, I fully expected us to beat Wales and Australia in 2015 and France in 2011.

It is the expectation of something great, tantalisingly close, and yet so far

[Taylorman]

Suggests they aren't as worried about the NZ lineout as the media and pundits, and are more focused on their own game than what the All Blacks will bring

Is that the side? I know Itojes a good jumper but that really looks a light, short, back five.Lawes at 2.01, Itoje at 1.95, the back row 1.88 and under?

ABs are 2.04, 2.02, 1.98 and read at 1.93. All just numbers to me but I’d say England are definitely gonna be targeted lineout time. Maybe Im missing something?

Lawes might be quick around the field but big billy isn’t. Think he’ll struggle to keep up at the pace the ABs want.

Interesting...

[Old Man]

Why would you select a lock in the back row for mobility?

Because he’s also a back rower, a very quick one. Think he’s been underestimated. He’s been one of the best players at this tournament, certainly one of our best. That’s why Hansen can’t ignore it.

Gotta think outside the box LT. Rugby’s not a square pegs in square holes game anymore.

For kiwis, this is one hell of an exciting selection, especially after getting the thumbs up vs Ireland.

Pieter Steph du Toit was a lock his whole career, until Rassie moved him to back row.

In the early days that did not work out too well for him though. He has learnt how to play back row in a more instinctive way since that day Youngs made him look like a traffic cop waving us through.

Took time to understand the intricacies of back row play, and he has turned into a formidable back rower.

[LondonTiger]

Can't believe Cole and Marler gave away what England have been doing in training this week.

What a fool!  

https://rugbyonslaught.com/england-fans-furious-as-joe-marler-leaks-englands-intricate-training-plan-on-live-video/

For those unable to open videos at work:

Cole: How will training look thi sweek?

Marler: It will look like, pass the balls around (fakes passing), um on a Monday, which was yesterday. Today we have had a faster session (pumps arms fast), where we run faster, gone through some play. Some unit work (fakes catching a lineout, entering a scrum). And then, um, what we got tomorrow? We got the physical day (punched palm)

Cole: Biggest day of the week, in terms of training.

MArler: Biggest day, big training day. then we taper off Thursday.May head into Tokyo

Cole: More a recovery day.Mentally switching off:

MArler: Recovery (some strange hand gesture), mentally (seems to be pulling thoughts from his brain)

Cole: Before Big Weekend

Marler: Big weekend.

[Gooseberry]

Can't believe Cole and Marler gave away what England have been doing in training this week.

What a fool!  

https://rugbyonslaught.com/england-fans-furious-as-joe-marler-leaks-englands-intricate-training-plan-on-live-video/

Yeah the guy who filmed it all must be fumin' he wasted his time

[robbo277]

Jones will be hoping to unleash Tuilagi at 100% for this game, does feel like he's been held back a bit during the six nations and the build up particularly playing at 12.

I've seen England lose numerous games during world cups but this is the first time I've been genuinely nervous  before a game, I fully expected us to beat Wales and Australia in 2015 and France in 2011.

Same to an extent. I thought we'd have enough to beat France in 2011 (who'd just lost to Tonga) and qualify from the pool (we only had to win one of the two at home and had good recent records against both). Against Argentina and Australia I had an expectation to win, but I was nervous about losing. It felt we had unfinished business, we hadn't fully atoned for previous failures.

I think now we have had a par tournament. Certainly not one to be ashamed of. But we're so close now and have such a good group of players and coaches. Even though New Zealand are rightfully favourites, it will feel like an opportunity missed if we go out here.

[Taylorman]

Why would you select a lock in the back row for mobility?

Because he’s also a back rower, a very quick one. Think he’s been underestimated. He’s been one of the best players at this tournament, certainly one of our best. That’s why Hansen can’t ignore it.

Gotta think outside the box LT. Rugby’s not a square pegs in square holes game anymore.

For kiwis, this is one hell of an exciting selection, especially after getting the thumbs up vs Ireland.

Pieter Steph du Toit was a lock his whole career, until Rassie moved him to back row.

In the early days that did not work out too well for him though. He has learnt how to play back row in a more instinctive way since that day Youngs made him look like a traffic cop waving us through.

Barrett to start his first ever test at back row in a WC semi final, with very limited time there at lower level, is a huge ask. While he may well improve thye set piece, just being quick does not mean the game will be quicker for NZ. What comes as second nature to Savea and Cane will need Barrett to think a bit. He will be hitting rucks earlier than usual, performing a different role and still thinking about that red card.

It may prove to be a masterstroke, and certainly in not a Bergamasco at 9 selection, but it is a gamble. If they wanted to facilitate a quicker game then Barrett should have started in the second row.


England meanwhile have opted for the more dynamic players to start. Kruis is a better lineout tactician, but Lawes and Itoje are extremely athletic and will be looking to put just as much pressure on NZ as England receive.

Canes issues in the past, and why he sat behind a McCaw permanently and more recently has given way to Savea since injury, was that he was limited at 7. No doubting his tackling, courage, but on the ball he’s not as quick, or skilled. When do you ever see Cane rip into a 20-30 meter run...never that Ive seen, yet Savea, Barrett, Read do it often. Cane drops balls often, did vs Ireland.

Saveas replaced him, and Barrett’s a move back to a bigger, more mobile, rangier, lineout option at 6. He’s no a kaino, but he’s certainly quicker, and far better lineout time. It’s quite a meteoric rise, but one he’s proved he can handle so far.

[lostinwales]

Suggests they aren't as worried about the NZ lineout as the media and pundits, and are more focused on their own game than what the All Blacks will bring

Is that the side? I know Itojes a good jumper but that really looks a light, short, back five.Lawes at 2.01, Itoje at 1.95, the back row 1.88 and under?

ABs are 2.04, 2.02, 1.98 and read at 1.93. All just numbers to me but I’d say England are definitely gonna be targeted lineout time. Maybe Im missing something?

Lawes might be quick around the field but big billy isn’t. Think he’ll struggle to keep up at the pace the ABs want.

Interesting...

You ever see the video of Itoje out jumping AWJ when AWJ had lifters and Itoje didn't? It isn't just about height.

[Scottrf]

Interesting video of All Blacks vs Ireland.

https://vimeo.com/368310721

[Luckless Pedestrian]

Mark.

[robbo277]

I like the England selection. Ford playing flat, Tuilagi picking holes with Farrell fading behind to release the back 3. It's an intuitive backline for me. I think last week was a specific selection designed to negate Australia - this is probably our best backline. Plenty of kicking options, intelligent kicking ones though, not just hoofing it down the pitch for the sake of it.

The pack too, we aren't getting too hung up on the set piece. We've beat New Zealand's set piece before and lost by 20 points (if you go back to the dark days). We've got out best "round-the-park" tight 5 and if they can hold together a functional set piece then we'll be in a good place to take the game to New Zealand.

The only strange one is having both Slade and Joseph on the bench. It's quite Australian, in that he's getting his best backs on there and he'll work out what he needs when he needs it. With May's injury you'd think he would potentially want to cover the back 3 with a specialist but in Eddie we trust. I'm old enough to remember when everyone was losing their minds over two tight-heads and two scrum-halves in the 31.

Will all that be enough to beat New Zealand? Probably not. You'd say they're still 60%-70% favourites. But I think this squad gives us the best possible chance.

[Taylorman]

Lost in Wales...I mentioned that. We all know about Itojes prowess, but it is about not being able to be in two places at the same time. you have two versus four specialist jumpers.

That logically gives the ABs automatic lineout ball on their own throw, and a chance to double up on the English jumpers. IMO it does look light lineout time. That’s all I’m saying.

Oz stole a lineout with their taller jumpers where England stole none.

Probably not a biggie, just looks mismatched. We certainly aren’t banking on lineout steal being the secret to our success.

[LondonTiger]

Lets face it Tman, no matter what selection Hansen had made you would have called it a masterstroke and the best available.That is fine, you are allowed to have faith in your side.

Selecting Barrett, a novice, in the back row may bring some positives - but it sure as hell brings some negatives. I hope England are good enough to make the negatives bigger than the positives.

And no matter how many times you say it I will struggle to believe this is a selection about making the game more open when it reduces your ability to win quick ball.

[BamBam]

Taylor has waxed lyrical about Cane many times, now he doesn't make enough 30m breaks to be in the side

[TightHEAD]

What time will Cowan-Dickie come on and score the match winning try off a Lineout driving maul?

[Taylorman]

Interesting video of All Blacks vs Ireland.

https://vimeo.com/368310721

Ha ha, cheeky buggas. Some good stuff in between the humour.

[Taylorman]

Taylor has waxed lyrical about Cane many times, now he doesn't make enough 30m breaks to be in the side

That was so last year, we don’t wait around that long to find better players.

I think Cane is carrying a niggle myself, but the speed of Barrett’s rise to the main side this year has been swift.

It’s clear Hansen doesn’t even want to bother about knocking the opposition over, they just want to rip in and score tries.

Once again they’re off doing stuff no one else is. It’s a bit scary even for us fans but the upside if we get there is worth it.

[formerly known as Sam]

Lost in Wales...I mentioned that. We all know about Itojes prowess, but it is about not being able to be in two places at the same time. you have two versus four specialist jumpers.

That logically gives the ABs automatic lineout ball on their own throw, and a chance to double up on the English jumpers. IMO it does look light lineout time. That’s all I’m saying.

Oz stole a lineout with their taller jumpers where England stole none.

Probably not a biggie, just looks mismatched. We certainly aren’t banking on lineout steal being the secret to our success.

Different lineout leaders though. Against Australia England brought in Lawes for added physicality, Kruis has been given the nod this time out and he is a far superior set piece player. Possibly why Hanson has added bulk to the scrum and an additional jumper to the lineout. Barrett is also added weight to defend the rolling maul.

It is sacrificing jackling ability and mobility though as Cane Vs Barrett, that's bound to have an effect. Will NZ look to play with territory in the first half and apply pressure before using the bench as impact in the second and look to open the game up once they've applied pressure and in their mind hopefully got England's discipline under scrutiny.

[BamBam]

Lawes is still starting Sam

[king_carlos]

I'm glad that Jones has gone with the Ford-Farrell axis. As I said previously both sides will target the opposition fullback under the highball.

I can see NZ using Smith as their exit strategy in their own half, box kicking to find Daly. Whereas I think England will use Ford-Farrell more for exit strategy and look to find grass but kick longer.

England's line-out may well be challenged in the air by NZ but the upside to that will be that putting a jumper up to contest reduces your effectiveness at defending the maul. With 4 jumpers NZ will be looking to play to their strengths by contesting but England will surely try to use their strength in the maul to tie the NZ forwards in.

If the England line-out does come under pressure there will be a big call for Jones to make. Does he bring Kruis on and push Lawes to blindside or will be double down on the Curry and Underhill pairing by instructing his side to look for touch as little as possible when kicking.

It's going to be a fascinating game to watch.

[robbo277]

I'm glad that Jones has gone with the Ford-Farrell axis. As I said previously both sides will target the opposition fullback under the highball.

I can see NZ using Smith as their exit strategy in their own half, box kicking to find Daly. Whereas I think England will use Ford-Farrell more for exit strategy and look to find grass but kick longer.

England's line-out may well be challenged in the air by NZ but the upside to that will be that putting a jumper up to contest reduces your effectiveness at defending the maul. With 4 jumpers NZ will be looking to play to their strengths by contesting but England will surely try to use their strength in the maul to tie the NZ forwards in.

If the England line-out does come under pressure there will be a big call for Jones to make. Does he bring Kruis on and push Lawes to blindside or will be double down on the Curry and Underhill pairing by instructing his side to look for touch as little as possible when kicking.

It's going to be a fascinating game to watch.

Our kicks to touch won't be an issue because they will be NZ ball. But we may have to sit our wingers deeper to cover their kicks and keep the ball in play more - especially as Daly isn't the sharpest when it comes to positioning. That could create more space in the front line of the defence.

You'd hope we'd be able to secure enough good lineout ball to not get too worked up about how many jumpers NZ have got and just stick to our plans. And worse comes to the worse, we had Tuilagi take a lineout in the Six Nations to good effect, which could be one way to take all 4 out of the equation!

[Afro]

I can see Hansen is playing Barrett over Cane for speed (and a lineout gain), but as an England fan I would much rather have Manu, Billy etc running at Barrett. Cane is a tackling machine.

[Taylorman]

Lets face it Tman, no matter what selection Hansen had made you would have called it a masterstroke and the best available.That is fine, you are allowed to have faith in your side.

Selecting Barrett, a novice, in the back row may bring some positives - but it sure as hell brings some negatives. I hope England are good enough to make the negatives bigger than the positives.

And no matter how many times you say it I will struggle to believe this is a selection about making the game more open when it reduces your ability to win quick ball.

Yep, it could, it hasn’t yet though has it. In Hansen’s words after selection, it gives us better lineout options and he can carry better. What else can you say? So far, Hansens selections have been airtight.

I think you use the words novice, inexperience, naive poorly, like its only a matter of time before something goes awry.
We’ve brought in several, and every one has performed so far. If Hansen had thought that way, those selections would never have been made.

[bluestonevedder]

What time will Cowan-Dickie come on and score the match winning try off a Lineout driving maul?

He's got a real knack hasn't he? Don't think he can quite believe it either.

[lostinwales]

Well I guess we could have played Wilson at 8, then we would have 3 6's and 2 7's in our back 5. We'd be all at 6's and 7's

[BamBam]

I'm confident we'll win our ball with George throwing to Lawes and Itoje. LCD throwing will make me a little nervous if the ABs have been competing

[Taylorman]

I can see Hansen is playing Barrett over Cane for speed (and a lineout gain), but as an England fan I would much rather have Manu, Billy etc running at Barrett. Cane is a tackling machine.

Oh I think Hansen will have something in store for Manu. His style is very similar to what we get here at Super rugby. Big PI centres that can both crash and show a turn of pace. Plus he blew us open in 2012, They won’t forget that. Be surprised if he’s allowed to do it again.

He’s a damn good center. We’d be mad not to cover him.

Said earlier the Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi option is best case scenario for England and that will concern. Many attacking threats off the boot, carry and pass. Youngs though I think will be the weak link, and hopefully he’s throwing out pressure balls to Ford.

[LondonTiger]

Lets face it Tman, no matter what selection Hansen had made you would have called it a masterstroke and the best available.That is fine, you are allowed to have faith in your side.

Selecting Barrett, a novice, in the back row may bring some positives - but it sure as hell brings some negatives. I hope England are good enough to make the negatives bigger than the positives.

And no matter how many times you say it I will struggle to believe this is a selection about making the game more open when it reduces your ability to win quick ball.

Yep, it could, it hasn’t yet though has it. In Hansen’s words after selection, it gives us better lineout options and he can carry better. What else can you say? So far, Hansens selections have been airtight.

I think you use the words novice, inexperience, naive poorly, like its only a matter of time before something goes awry.
We’ve brought in several, and every one has performed so far. If Hansen had thought that way, those selections would never have been made.

Sorry, but you cannot equate moving an experienced lock to a first start in the back row to picking a tyro winger. Hansen has never made a decision as big as this one. If Hansen really thought Barrett was the future in this position he would have started him there before now. Heck if he had thought he may do it two weeks ago he would have given Barrett a start in the back row against Namibia. That this is out of the blue feels reactionary and designed to do nothing more than strengthen the set piece.

It is not a selection designed to increase the tempo of the game. As Hansen himself suggested this is a selection to counter England at the set piece. Time will tell if it was a masterstroke.

[Taylorman]

I'm glad that Jones has gone with the Ford-Farrell axis. As I said previously both sides will target the opposition fullback under the highball.

I can see NZ using Smith as their exit strategy in their own half, box kicking to find Daly. Whereas I think England will use Ford-Farrell more for exit strategy and look to find grass but kick longer.

England's line-out may well be challenged in the air by NZ but the upside to that will be that putting a jumper up to contest reduces your effectiveness at defending the maul. With 4 jumpers NZ will be looking to play to their strengths by contesting but England will surely try to use their strength in the maul to tie the NZ forwards in.

If the England line-out does come under pressure there will be a big call for Jones to make. Does he bring Kruis on and push Lawes to blindside or will be double down on the Curry and Underhill pairing by instructing his side to look for touch as little as possible when kicking.

It's going to be a fascinating game to watch.

Yes we’ll said, the Curry Underhill pair will be interesting and a real battle of the loosies is a certainty. Massive.

So many facets to this game and how it might play out.

[Soul Requiem]

I'd be very disappointed now if Curry and Underhill didn't get the better of their counterparts, they should if they're the real deal be taking Barrett to the cleaners.

[robbo277]

I can see Hansen is playing Barrett over Cane for speed (and a lineout gain), but as an England fan I would much rather have Manu, Billy etc running at Barrett. Cane is a tackling machine.

Oh I think Hansen will have something in store for Manu. His style is very similar to what we get here at Super rugby. Big PI centres that can both crash and show a turn of pace. Plus he blew us open in 2012, They won’t forget that. Be surprised if he’s allowed to do it again.

He’s a damn good center. We’d be mad not to cover him.

Said earlier the Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi option is best case scenario for England and that will concern. Many attacking threats off the boot, carry and pass. Youngs though I think will be the weak link, and hopefully he’s throwing out pressure balls to Ford.

We need Youngs to play well. He makes us tick. Looking back at the game against NZ last Autumn, if you rewatch the Ashton try in the first minute Youngs deliberately picked the ball up, took a couple of steps, fixed the fringe defence and hit a forward coming on at pace. Small yardage gains, quick ball, and then the switch play with everyone flooding open and Youngs going blind to find Ashton.

We'll need similar invention and variety from our 9. At his best I think he's right up there with the best 9s in the world, but doesn't always hit those levels.

[Taylorman]

Lets face it Tman, no matter what selection Hansen had made you would have called it a masterstroke and the best available.That is fine, you are allowed to have faith in your side.

Selecting Barrett, a novice, in the back row may bring some positives - but it sure as hell brings some negatives. I hope England are good enough to make the negatives bigger than the positives.

And no matter how many times you say it I will struggle to believe this is a selection about making the game more open when it reduces your ability to win quick ball.

Yep, it could, it hasn’t yet though has it. In Hansen’s words after selection, it gives us better lineout options and he can carry better. What else can you say? So far, Hansens selections have been airtight.

I think you use the words novice, inexperience, naive poorly, like its only a matter of time before something goes awry.
We’ve brought in several, and every one has performed so far. If Hansen had thought that way, those selections would never have been made.

Sorry, but you cannot equate moving an experienced lock to a first start in the back row to picking a tyro winger. Hansen has never made a decision as big as this one. If Hansen really thought Barrett was the future in this position he would have started him there before now. Heck if he had thought he may do it two weeks ago he would have given Barrett a start in the back row against Namibia. That this is out of the blue feels reactionary and designed to do nothing more than strengthen the set piece.

It is not a selection designed to increase the tempo of the game. As Hansen himself suggested this is a selection to counter England at the set piece. Time will tell if it was a masterstroke.

Huh? Hansen made a similar decision recently when he put two sevens at six and seven. Neither had ever played 6 for years, ever possibly. Is that also not a big decision, in fact, bigger? We went from Kaino, couldn’t find a better similar, to Cane, who has little of the usual AB 6 qualities.

Here he’s going back to a six, standard lineout and big, ball carrying option. How is that bigger than two specialist sevens? We’ve never done that.

You seem to be restricting Barrett to lock when he has played Super rugby at 6 many times, and has subbed at 6 in about ten tests. He’s both a lock and 6. He started more at lock while Retallick was injured.

Hansen’s still working out where he fits, but either way, he’s playing superbly in both roles at this level.

Honestly don’t get your highly risk averse thinking when the guys fronted every single time. Where’s the problem?

Sure there’s risk, I get that. ABs wouldn’t be where they are without it.

[Soul Requiem]

I'd say playing a second row at 6 is far riskier decision than playing a 7 at 6 personally, don't rate Barrett that highly in all honesty.

[Scottrf]

I'd be very disappointed now if Curry and Underhill didn't get the better of their counterparts, they should if they're the real deal be taking Barrett to the cleaners.

Don't agree with this at all. Ardie is phenomenal, so much so that they are willing to ignore that he's a shocking lineout option. He has more caps than our flankers combined. Barrett may have little test experience here but clearly another fantastic and in form player who has played there a fair amount for one of the best club sides in the world (possibly the best) and as a sub for the All Blacks. Curry and Underhill are playing incredibly well but are still pretty green.

[Scottrf]

We need Youngs to play well. He makes us tick. Looking back at the game against NZ last Autumn, if you rewatch the Ashton try in the first minute Youngs deliberately picked the ball up, took a couple of steps, fixed the fringe defence and hit a forward coming on at pace. Small yardage gains, quick ball, and then the switch play with everyone flooding open and Youngs going blind to find Ashton.

We'll need similar invention and variety from our 9. At his best I think he's right up there with the best 9s in the world, but doesn't always hit those levels.

Honestly it must be Eddie's biggest mistake that we are going into a semi final with a 9 who can't pass and a sub with 4 international caps.

[formerly known as Sam]

Lawes is still starting Sam

So he is. That might be an error. I was hoping we'd use Ford and Farrell to control territory and then like on the pressure at the set piece. Hanson is obviously thinking similarly because he's beefed up his set piece in response. Kruis is better in that kind of game plan then Lawes and it limits our potential impact off the bench as well.

[lostinwales]

We have frequently played either Lawes or Itoje at 6. We are not doing this for this game and its also something we have not tried for a long time, nor will we again except in an emergency

The first time we started Lawes at 6 was a disaster. He's a lot better now than he was back then and I am just happy we have him on the field, but he's unlikely to ever start there again.

There is obviously mitigating factors, but it still feels like an unforced adaption. It is not the same as the midfield changes that England made vs Australia as the combo they put out was tried and tested. Could it be that Hansen just blinked?

[Afro]

All in all, I'm feeling more confident having seen both sides.

It's still a big ask, but I'd say where I was 20% confident, I'm now 30%

[Scottrf]

Lawes is still starting Sam

So he is. That might be an error. I was hoping we'd use Ford and Farrell to control territory and then like on the pressure at the set piece. Hanson is obviously thinking similarly because he's beefed up his set piece in response. Kruis is better in that kind of game plan then Lawes and it limits our potential impact off the bench as well.

Have you ever seen Lawes at a lineout? He has arms for days.

Kruis is the more solid option but solid wont beat the All Blacks. Lawes is capable of a bigger performance than Kruis IMO.

[Taylorman]

yeah well, he’s a six as well but that message seems to get lost in translation somewhere.

Hansen likes him so I guess we’ll just have to go with that then huh?

[LondonTiger]

We have frequently played either Lawes or Itoje at 6. We are not doing this for this game and its also something we have not tried for a long time, nor will we again except in an emergency

The first time we started Lawes at 6 was a disaster. He's a lot better now than he was back then and I am just happy we have him on the field, but he's unlikely to ever start there again.

There is obviously mitigating factors, but it still feels like an unforced adaption. It is not the same as the midfield changes that England made vs Australia as the combo they put out was tried and tested. Could it be that Hansen just blinked?

And both have played a lot at 6 for their clubs. I agree it does feel as if Hansen has blinked - making a change to counter what he expects from England rather than concentrating on Kiwi strengths. It feels like the conservative option (hmm slight oxymoron a conservative risk).

[Luckless Pedestrian]

This time last week, Michael Cheika was being criticised for not focusing on / adapting to what England would bring. Now Steve Hansen's being criticised for (allegedly) doing what Cheika was critised for not doing....

[Taylorman]

We have frequently played either Lawes or Itoje at 6. We are not doing this for this game and its also something we have not tried for a long time, nor will we again except in an emergency

The first time we started Lawes at 6 was a disaster. He's a lot better now than he was back then and I am just happy we have him on the field, but he's unlikely to ever start there again.

There is obviously mitigating factors, but it still feels like an unforced adaption. It is not the same as the midfield changes that England made vs Australia as the combo they put out was tried and tested. Could it be that Hansen just blinked?

Well I’m guessing your experience is different from ours then, at least I’d hope so. Hansen has been unbelievably successful with bringing new players through that it’s almost a gimme these days.

His motto has been over the last few years if you’re in the AB camp then you can front test rugby. And so far, he’s been very successful even when we had doubts. These days that’s no longer there when he pulls out these surprise selections. He dropped a wealth of experience at Eden park on the Bled. Decider after a 21 point loss, he did it here against Ireland, and he’s doing it again. And despite complete and utter success in both risk selections, there’s still a lot of doubt for the next one.

I know who Im going with that’s for sure.

[LondonTiger]

This time last week, Michael Cheika was being criticised for not focusing on / adapting to what England would bring. Now Steve Hansen's being criticised for (allegedly) doing what Cheika was critised for not doing....

Not criticising, just saying that Hansen bangs on about playing to their strengths, Tman has been banging on about NZ looking to run England off the park, and then the selection is one that seems to improve the set piece but weaken the breakdown. It may be the right call though, will be hard to tell as NZ should win either way round, but for now it looks like Hansen taking a risk in trying to play safe (another oxymoron).

It feels like Hansen is being reactionary, which is odd when his team are the best. Australia have over the last 7 meetings been significantly inferior to England. Cheika needed to look at changing things but came with the exact same game plan that failed 6 times previously.

[Sponsored content]