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]

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.

Sorry but some utter .... in there. Hansen has been building his team for a while, with some enforced changes along the way. the team that played Ireland was what most people would have expected. Sure the Wings had just a handful of caps, but they had been selected before the WC.

Both Hansen and Jones have made major changes to their team in the last 12 months, this is about springing a surprise in the most important game of the last 4 years. With Hansen being such a meticulous planner usually, that is surely a surprise.

[LondonTiger]

Anyway it is now midnight in Wellington, and you were up at 4:30am - perhaps take a rest then come back refreshed to continue telling us why we are wrong?

[George Carlin]

NZ Herald are clear that one of the reasons the Blackness beat England last time was because they targeted their line out.

Choosing Barrett at 6 is clearly an attempt to do the same again because if it's one area where England don't reign supreme its at the back of the line out where their jumpers are shorter than other sides.

Might work. Let's see.

[Taylorman]

LT, again you miss they key reason for the selection.

He’s a better ball carrier than cane, and that lends to an open, and as you say, faster game. He’s been backing up centres to score tries. He’s a very...very good ball carrier.

We still have a Read and Savea to effect the breakdowns so don’t lose too much there. He is also a lineout option but no it’s not about strengthening the set piece, that is a bonus.

It is still about running England off their feet. Without a doubt.

And we’re harping on? Well if people would get the selection then we wouldn’t have to. I’d be more concerned about having only two lineout options, no matter how many springs they have in their boots.

[Soul Requiem]

It's all about the set piece Taylor and you know that all too well.

[Taylorman]

It will become partly that now England have picked a short back five. But I’ll maintain that Barretts selection will be evidenced by his ball carrying more than his lineout work.

Even after seeing the Ireland match you really don’t get that England will be asked to run and cover so much that they risk being wiped off the field if they don’t keep up. How do you think Ireland lst so badly?

Through poor set piece?

[Soul Requiem]

Ireland lost badly because they're not very good at the moment and have a lack of pace throughout the team.

[Taylorman]

Anyway it is now midnight in Wellington, and you were up at 4:30am - perhaps take a rest then come back refreshed to continue telling us why we are wrong?

How about you go get a rugby for dummies and read up. Moderator or not, you don’t need to be so patronising. And Im not the one questioning the current world champion coaches selections. You are.

[Taylorman]

Ireland lost badly because they're not very good at the moment and have a lack of pace throughout the team.

So did Oz. They were hopeless. Right through the comp.

[Gooseberry]

Anyway it is now midnight in Wellington, and you were up at 4:30am - perhaps take a rest then come back refreshed to continue telling us why we are wrong?

How about you go get a rugby for dummies and read up. Moderator or not, you don’t need to be so patronising. And Im not the one questioning the current world champion coaches selections. You are.

I think youre getting over tired Taylorman.

[Soul Requiem]

Ireland lost badly because they're not very good at the moment and have a lack of pace throughout the team.

So did Oz. They were hopeless. Right through the comp.

Your point being what?

I'm not clinging to the Australia game expecting Saturday to go the same way, you seem under the impression that England are going to miraculously start performing like Ireland.

[Guest]

The ABs will run England ragged like they did Ireland. Barrett is part of that plan as Tman says. He carries it up, he’s pretty fast for a big boy, he’s got good handling like his brothers. I like the selection.

[LondonTiger]

LT, again you miss they key reason for the selection.

He’s a better ball carrier than cane, and that lends to an open, and as you say, faster game. He’s been backing up centres to score tries. He’s a very...very good ball carrier.

Sorry but having a better ball carrier means bugger all to whether the game is quick and open. To be quick and open you need quick ball above anything else.

[Taylorman]

Anyway it is now midnight in Wellington, and you were up at 4:30am - perhaps take a rest then come back refreshed to continue telling us why we are wrong?

How about you go get a rugby for dummies and read up. Moderator or not, you don’t need to be so patronising. And Im not the one questioning the current world champion coaches selections. You are.

I think youre getting over tired Taylorman.

Yes you probably do. Think, that is. Sore?

[LondonTiger]

Anyway it is now midnight in Wellington, and you were up at 4:30am - perhaps take a rest then come back refreshed to continue telling us why we are wrong?

How about you go get a rugby for dummies and read up. Moderator or not, you don’t need to be so patronising. And Im not the one questioning the current world champion coaches selections. You are.

I borrowed Hansen's copy, given to him by Eddie in 2003. Chapter 1 was how to be patronising

[Guest]

It’s a shame Ireland don’t get to play Australia to see who are the more hopeless. It really would settle the question. I thought Australia were abject and are more hopeless. Trying to run the ball out of their 22 all day and coughing up points, hopeless, made England look ok.

[Taylorman]

LT, again you miss they key reason for the selection.

He’s a better ball carrier than cane, and that lends to an open, and as you say, faster game. He’s been backing up centres to score tries. He’s a very...very good ball carrier.

Sorry but having a better ball carrier means bugger all to whether the game is quick and open. To be quick and open you need quick ball above anything else.

And how does the change suggest they won’t get quick ball. What do you think Read and Savea are there for? Cane is not the only breakdown merchant, in fact Ardie is a better fetcher these days, much stronger over the ball. But Canes carrying is negligible and it’s why Franks was also dropped. Laulala is a far better carrier, and just as good a scrummager. Franks carried zero meters in Perth.

[SecretFly]

I think what so many people either forget or fail to appreciate is that NZ is a electronic network rather than a single entity called Head Coach.  If Hansen is making judgements and shifting players then you can be damn certain he's getting the very best analytics back and streams of advice lines informing his decisions.  I do not buy the idea that it's old big shoulder Gruntmeister Hansen v Eddie Jones.

England always have a pretty clinical bunch behind their main man but ultimately, Hanson's network is designed for supreme calculations based on what the opposition can give and what NZ can do.

Could England still win?  Of course.  But Hansen isn't blinking - he's responding to stimuli presented by his background network.

[Taylorman]

Anyway it is now midnight in Wellington, and you were up at 4:30am - perhaps take a rest then come back refreshed to continue telling us why we are wrong?

How about you go get a rugby for dummies and read up. Moderator or not, you don’t need to be so patronising. And Im not the one questioning the current world champion coaches selections. You are.

I borrowed Hansen's copy, given to him by Eddie in 2003. Chapter 1 was how to be patronising

Sweet, yeah I wrote that, wonder where it went. Leave it at that then. Not long now, a long weekend here so that’s handy for a Sunday night second semi.

Cheers LT

[LondonTiger]

LT, again you miss they key reason for the selection.

He’s a better ball carrier than cane, and that lends to an open, and as you say, faster game. He’s been backing up centres to score tries. He’s a very...very good ball carrier.

Sorry but having a better ball carrier means bugger all to whether the game is quick and open. To be quick and open you need quick ball above anything else.

And how does the change suggest they won’t get quick ball. What do you think Read and Savea are there for? Cane is not the only breakdown merchant, in fact Ardie is a better fetcher these days, much stronger over the ball. But Canes carrying is negligible and it’s why Franks was also dropped. Laulala is a far better carrier, and just as good a scrummager. Franks carried zero meters in Perth.

Because for me, remove one breakdown specialist makes quicker ball less likely.

As I keep saying it is a decision that improves one area, decreases another. Something you have been unwilling to acknowledge seeing only benefits with zero negatives. Any decision like this has an upside and a downside. Why I deem it a risk is that it is unkown which will be bigger as NZ have never started Barrett there. Time will tell - but I suspect this will not be a decision that has a major factor on the game. NZ are the better team, and will probably win regardless but not because of this.

[LondonTiger]

[Taylorman]

Ireland lost badly because they're not very good at the moment and have a lack of pace throughout the team.

So did Oz. They were hopeless. Right through the comp.

Your point being what?

I'm not clinging to the Australia game expecting Saturday to go the same way, you seem under the impression that England are going to miraculously start performing like Ireland.

No I don’t know how England will perform, but I do know something, no side has got near the quality, speed, skill levels of the AB performance last week. We get Ireland were hopeless. Sides always are after we play them it seems. Personally I think they looked to be better but were just completely overwhelmed.

But England will be called on to chase a variety of attacks, they’ll be asked to defend like they’ve never defended before, and they’ll be put under so much pressure they will need to find ways of creating scoreboard pressure themselves, before it’s too late.

What they ask of NZ I don’t know. Something similar probably.

[No 7&1/2]

Should be fun. Hope youngs hits the height as he did last time lining up against a lock in the back row!

[Rugby Fan]

Taylorman, when Cane comes on, do you think Barrett comes off, or will there be circumstances where someone else makes way?

[Guest]

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....

Good point.

NZ unleashed a performance and a technical game they hadn't shown before to beat Ireland. You'd expect a continuation but also an adaptation of that. This is surely a team selection to reflect that.

Ultimately, isn't it simply getting rid of Matt Todd for a better bench option as well?

[Guest]

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).

Out running a team at this level doesn't mean playing like Fiji, though (Gregor Townsend: take note). You still need the bulk, the skills, the accuracy, and the ability to play the gameplan that will mean they execute their wider game, which is all about playing at a tempo and manner that does its best to kill all the opposition's defensive plans and work, and have them playing on the backfoot.

Out running teams is as much about the clearout, the ability to make an extra 3-5m in the carry, as it is ball players in every position.

Scott Barrett also isn't a slouch and can move as and when needed.

Think it's clear he's been brought in to shore up the set piece and add size against probably the biggest/strongest team in the world apart from maybe SA, but it doesn't signal a huge departure away from what we saw last week - think England's success hinges on their desire and ability to stop NZ from doing what they do better than Ireland did. And that means, as ever, just fronting up.

[Rugby Fan]

isn't it simply getting rid of Matt Todd for a better bench option as well?

Todd is injured.

[Guest]

Ireland lost badly because they're not very good at the moment and have a lack of pace throughout the team.

So did Oz. They were hopeless. Right through the comp.

Your point being what?

I'm not clinging to the Australia game expecting Saturday to go the same way, you seem under the impression that England are going to miraculously start performing like Ireland.

No I don’t know how England will perform, but I do know something, no side has got near the quality, speed, skill levels of the AB performance last week. We get Ireland were hopeless. Sides always are after we play them it seems.

Or for 6 months before, in this case, as well.

It's clear NZ were on another level. Several levels above Ireland in fact. But I don't think they've performed better than that in the last 4 years. Certainly not on the Lions tour, cannot think of anything that came close in the RC, and nor in an AI or summer tour either.

With that in mind - and the fact they're unlikely to completely match or better that performance v better opposition this week - makes for an interesting match up. NZ's game v England's game. England have yet to have their Ireland performance. Their QF was similar to the AB's game v SA in the pools - they haven't had to get past France and then a knockout, so haven't showed their hand, or had to play in anger. Might be a drawback, might help from the tactics side of things. Who knows.

[Guest]

isn't it simply getting rid of Matt Todd for a better bench option as well?

Todd is injured.

Yes, that was my point, perhaps not clearly worded. They've gone for a better bench option than Todd.

[robbo277]

Thought experiment:

70th minute of a test. Level or one point in it. What is the stronger team?

Marler, Cowan-Dickie, Cole, Itoje, Kruis, Wilson, Curry, Vunipola
Heinz, Farrell, May, Tuilagi, Slade, Joseph, Daly

Tuungafasi, Coles, Ta'avao, Retallick, Tuipulotu, Savea, Cane, Read
Perenara, B Barrett, Bridge, Williams, Lienart-Brown, Reece, J Barrett

I think the AB's finishers probably edge this one. I'm hoping Eddie sticks with his first choicers as long as possible. Maybe make the tight-five subs and then leave the other 4 subs as change-ups if required.

[LondonTiger]

Damn, you edited that before I could respond Robbo. I was going to say that with NZ reduced to 14 men we may edge it.

[Guest]

As much as I like the Ford-Farrell combo, I can't understand why he's starting with it and opting to 'finish' with Farrell at 10. Maybe it'll work, who knows. But it seems to rely on closing the game out, rather than chasing it or going to toe to toe with the ABs.

Could be ugly if they're behind and in need of tries? Picked off on the counter?

[robbo277]

I was trying to work out which centre would come off and ended up removing them both. Most of my proof-reading is done after posting. I should really start using the preview button.

[robbo277]

As much as I like the Ford-Farrell combo, I can't understand why he's starting with it and opting to 'finish' with Farrell at 10. Maybe it'll work, who knows. But it seems to rely on closing the game out, rather than chasing it or going to toe to toe with the ABs.

Could be ugly if they're behind and in need of tries? Picked off on the counter?

I guess that's the point I'm trying to make. Start with Ford/Farrell, finish with Ford/Farrell, win with Ford/Farrell.

[Collapse2005]

Looking forward to this game, hoping and frankly expecting England to give NZ a much better game than my beloved Ireland. May even sneek it.

It would be great if someone like Underhill scored a last minute try by wrong footing then burning Barrett. Haha like that would ever happen.

[No 7&1/2]

Too soon collapse.

[Collapse2005]

Ha whats too soon? I mean it I would like to see an England win.

[Soul Requiem]

As much as I like the Ford-Farrell combo, I can't understand why he's starting with it and opting to 'finish' with Farrell at 10. Maybe it'll work, who knows. But it seems to rely on closing the game out, rather than chasing it or going to toe to toe with the ABs.

Could be ugly if they're behind and in need of tries? Picked off on the counter?

In that case you keep with Ford at 10 then possibly bring JJ on for Farrell.

[No 7&1/2]

The near miss is too soon. I'll be able to start thinking about that again 8 59am on saturday. Hopefully that was their bit of luck over with.

[LondonTiger]

The near miss is too soon. I'll be able to start thinking about that again 8 59am on saturday. Hopefully that was their bit of luck over with.

You need to let it go 7.5.

Let it go, turn away and slam the door.

[Guest]

Cannot see Farrell being taken off unless it's desperate measures. I don't believe Farrell has ever been withdrawn unless England are losing and being outplayed - might be wrong, but that's my abiding memory, of Farrell jogging off, head down, to the cheers of the opposition as they realise they're going for broke as a last resort and taking off Faz.

Interesting set up though. Slade perhaps makes Farrell less important. Think Joseph's pace means you have to get him on the field if you're in need of a try. Electric in attack.

No clear 13 for England though. I've made clear what I think about Tuilagi's defence in that channel, and wiith Goodhue running at him, I can see a mistimed blitz going wrong for Manu and NZ profiting.

[Scottrf]

No clear 13, except Tuilagi and Joseph.

[Collapse2005]

The near miss is too soon. I'll be able to start thinking about that again 8 59am on saturday. Hopefully that was their bit of luck over with.

I think you should take plenty of confidence from it. A contentious referee decision decided Englands fate in a hard fought game. Chances are England might have won if the Ireland game came first.

[Soul Requiem]

No clear 13, except Tuilagi and Joseph.

And Slade and Daly.

[Rugby Fan]

No clear 13, except Tuilagi and Joseph.

...and Slade. With Daly also capable of playing there.

[LondonTiger]

The near miss is too soon. I'll be able to start thinking about that again 8 59am on saturday. Hopefully that was their bit of luck over with.

I think you should take plenty of confidence from it. A contentious referee decision decided Englands fate in a hard fought game. Chances are England might have won if the Ireland game came first.

That NZ had to face you guys after being roughed up by us must have helped. I was hoping that you may return the favour.

[Poorfour]

Rugby’s one of those unforgiving games where small margins one way or the other decide the score. In most games, there’s a bit of balance: a deficiency for one side in one area is offset by an advantage elsewhere, and it comes down to who plays best to their strengths and minimises the areas where they are behind.

A blowout like the NZ-Ireland game happens more often because one side is marginally ahead across the board, rather than because they’re massively better than the other side in any one area.

It’s pretty clear from the last two times they met that England are currently better than Ireland in most areas. So are the All Blacks. What we don’t know is whether England are better than Ireland in enough areas and by a large enough margin to get parity with the ABs. 

The chances are that New Zealand won’t have it all their own way, but have an edge in enough areas to win. But we don’t know. The player comparisons in the papers have the teams pretty close man for man. And while New Zealand have much more experience of playing as a team, this England side has come together far better and faster than I had hoped they could. 

Plus, there’s the Eddie factor. Hansen is a very fine coach, but he doesn’t have Eddie’s track record of ambushing better teams with tactics that succeed in throwing them off their game. Doesn’t mean he can’t, but he’s never really had to. The choice of Barrett on from the start suggests that he’s trying to mix up the game to frustrate England, which I take as a mark of enormous respect. But Eddie will undoubtedly have some tricks that he’s not yet revealed.

I think the game will be competitive. I think the All Blacks will win, but that there will be a couple of moments where England can seize the initiative. Whether they have what it takes to do that is what we will find out on Saturday.

[LondonTiger]

No clear 13, except Tuilagi and Joseph.

...and Slade. With Daley also capable of playing there.

It is the club position of all four of them.

[Guest]

No clear 13, except Tuilagi and Joseph.

No clear starting 13. You can add Slade and, recently, Daly to that mix as well. Hence no clear 13.

[Scottrf]

No clear 13, except Tuilagi and Joseph.

No clear starting 13. You can add Slade and, recently, Daly to that mix as well. Hence no clear 13.

There's a very clear starting 13. It's on the official England Rugby Twitter.

[Sponsored content]