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

[Taylorman]

Ireland were eviserated last week, the culmination of a year of slow but almost inevitable decline.
Australia went toe to toe with England until Beale decide to shoot Australia in both kneecaps with some headless chicken rugby. His team mates then decided to join him in pressing self destruct.Will England be blown away in the same manner? Unlikely. Will the blackness be able to exploit Daly's defensive weaknesses, a lack of defensive power at 12 and a lack of lineout options in the back row? Highly likely .

If there are weaknesses, most likely. Theyll know more about Daly's game than he does himself.

[Cyril]

Without getting all ‘miaow’ about this, you really do pick and choose what constitutes doing the ‘right thing’ in rugby, Taylor. In any given circumstance what NZ do is exactly right and others wrong. Even in just a few posts it seems to change.

[stub]

They were rampant against Ireland last week Taylor, but it doesn’t necessarily follow it will be the same on Saturday...

You are a proud fan who supports a fine team but I do see Cyril’s point.

[lostinwales]

So
What if the kamikaze kids beat Savea and Read to the breakdown
What if May runs through the NZ backline like they aren't there, again
What if the rush defense and kicking game keep NZ going back or running back
What if Billy decides to keep hold of the ball and not let anyone else get a look in
What if Daly spends his time either kicking penalties from 50m or joining the line to make that overlap
What if Manu has one of those days.

Its not going to be easy, but England can play with real pace too.

[lostinwales]

Without getting all ‘miaow’ about this, you really do pick and choose what constitutes doing the ‘right thing’ in rugby, Taylor. In any given circumstance what NZ do is exactly right and others wrong. Even in just a few posts it seems to change.

I do get the feeling that if Hansen ran over a puppy that our good friend here would consider it a legitimate sacrifice to bring good luck to the team.

[Taylorman]

No, Cyril got the point completely wrong. Its not about being a proud fan, its about understanding what points are being made.

I said as an AB fan an early try can be a good thing, because to have all 15 ABs standing behind the goal line early wakes them up, and as a fan you know they are now hurting. If something on the prep was wrong, if motivation was low...whatever. You know they know theyre in a test as early as the first minute.

Those...can be 'good tries scored against'. More often, the opposition dont follow it up, it becomes a one off, often a fortuitous try, an intercept or where they caught them napping. It happens a lot.

NZ scored early through applying pressure, they then scored again, then again, all as part of the game plan to run up a high score early. Thats not a wake up call, thats a game plan in action.

To then suggest that the two are the same thing is ridiculous.

Im not saying the ABs WILL do it again, Im saying they will definitely aim to do it again.

[lostinwales]

48 posts today so far- do you actually sleep T-man?

[stub]

I suggested that you are a proud fan Tman. Just mention for the sake of accuracy.

[stub]

Love what LIW says by the way. Wouldn’t that be amazing?

[SecretFly]

Without getting all ‘miaow’ about this, you really do pick and choose what constitutes doing the ‘right thing’ in rugby, Taylor. In any given circumstance what NZ do is exactly right and others wrong. Even in just a few posts it seems to change.

I do get the feeling that if Hansen ran over a puppy that our good friend here would consider it a legitimate sacrifice to bring good luck to the team.

It would be. Road kill is the best Karma out there. The Gods love it.

[Taylorman]

48 posts today so far- do you actually sleep T-man?

Geez, someone who actually counts posts. I'm guessing youre asleep now after that.
I'm understanding now why the AB's get on top of the NH sides so easily when it matters now.

Generally they have no idea whats coming at them.

I said, amongst other things, prior to the Irish match Hansen was 'sending out kids' to run all over Ireland.

They wouldnt want to go to full time because they dont have the experience to go to a decider in the last few minutes. That was the risk. That we drop the experienced heads when we need it most.

What happened. All over rover before half time.
The signs were there, yet no one saw them.
If it happens tomorrow, we'll get a whole lot of...oh England didnt play to their potential blah blah.

Or worse, ABs have gone to another level...again. The number of times fans misread the analysis is astounding.

No, it will be because England couldnt slow the ABs momentum down.
If they do, good on them, but they wouldnt have got their ideas from here thats for sure.

[Scottrf]

It was impressive. But 57-15>46-14. You're not the only ones that can run Ireland ragged. Just with only 7 tries, not 8.

[Taylorman]

So
What if the kamikaze kids beat Savea and Read to the breakdown
What if May runs through the NZ backline like they aren't there, again
What if the rush defense and kicking game keep NZ going back or running back
What if Billy decides to keep hold of the ball and not let anyone else get a look in
What if Daly spends his time either kicking penalties from 50m or joining the line to make that overlap
What if Manu has one of those days.

Its not going to be easy, but England can play with real pace too.

That's great, and if all that happens, England will thrash NZ. See...its simple.
Personally I thought Oz did England no favours at all. It left them with no real test in this comp to date. Missed France in the pool, and were way to good for a one dimensional crazily coached oz.
I think theyre undercooked with no one testing them, and the pace will catch them by surprise, despite knowing whats coming. Even from and AB point of view, last weekend was as fast, and skilfull as Ive ever seen them play.

[SecretFly]

It was impressive. But 57-15>46-14. You're not the only ones that can run Ireland ragged. Just with only 7 tries, not 8.

Ireland... a Kiwi coach and an English coach...... hmmmmmmmmmmm

[Guest]

Hansen is saying, as he said to Ireland..'we are going to run you ragged so you will not be able to play your normal game'.

That's hardly much of a prediction though. When have NZ ever stuffed it up the jumper v England...

Make England play at a tempo and ball in play time, and they are significantly weakened; fail to do so, for whatever reason, and their stop:start, control:manic style of rugby will give just about any team a torrid time, including NZ.

Personally, I don't think Barrett's selection suggests 'we're going to run you ragged' at all.

I think it shows that England went 15-0 (??) up v NZ in Twickenham last autumn, once from a pre-planned phaseplay, and the other from a driving maul from the tail which rumbled over from about 15m out.

Barrett is there to stop one of England's key weapons if/when they can't get going in the loose - the driving maul. Not the lineout per se - although no doubt Tuilagi will be absolutely relishing clean ball from first phase - not even to prevent England kicking well. It's to stop the maul, because if England maul, it means NZ can't get the ball, and it means England possibly score tries despite losing every other 'area' of the field.

Simple stuff really. Barrett's there to help nullify the maul, among other things.

[Guest]

Exactly what NZ want to avoid happening again. My mistake, it was from the front, not the tail: https://youtu.be/RZHc256tf2w?t=70

[Cyril]

You’ve got to love the way that the Aussies ‘did no favours to England’ playing the way they did but Ireland, looking pretty poor by all accounts, gave NZ the perfect lead up into the semis.

Taylor, please. This is getting a tad silly.

[Taylorman]

You’ve got to love the way that the Aussies ‘did no favours to England’ playing the way they did but Ireland, looking pretty poor by all accounts, gave NZ the perfect lead up into the semis.

Taylor, please. This is getting a tad silly.

Who said Ireland gave NZ the prefect run in...you did Cyril. We had the Boks in section play. Oz had no one to test them.

Silly? stop making things up then.

[Taylorman]

Interesting on the Reason take:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/rugby-world-cup/rwc-2019-japan/116907130/mark-reason-gloating-english-need-a-good-beating-from-the-all-blacks

Not normally a NZ fan but there you go...

[Duty281]

48 posts today so far- do you actually sleep T-man?

Up to 53 now, but Miaow edging him out with 60.

[Scottrf]

Interesting on the Reason take:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/rugby-world-cup/rwc-2019-japan/116907130/mark-reason-gloating-english-need-a-good-beating-from-the-all-blacks

Not normally a NZ fan but there you go...

Could tell from the title that they would reference the British Empire...pathetic.

[stub]

Cyril, you are probably wasting your breath. Taylor has decided and 90% of the time he is proved right. He probably will be right again but that is by no means certain. Really looking forward to Saturday.

[Taylorman]

Hansen is saying, as he said to Ireland..'we are going to run you ragged so you will not be able to play your normal game'.

That's hardly much of a prediction though. When have NZ ever stuffed it up the jumper v England...

Make England play at a tempo and ball in play time, and they are significantly weakened; fail to do so, for whatever reason, and their stop:start, control:manic style of rugby will give just about any team a torrid time, including NZ.

Personally, I don't think Barrett's selection suggests 'we're going to run you ragged' at all.

I think it shows that England went 15-0 (??) up v NZ in Twickenham last autumn, once from a pre-planned phaseplay, and the other from a driving maul from the tail which rumbled over from about 15m out.

Barrett is there to stop one of England's key weapons if/when they can't get going in the loose - the driving maul. Not the lineout per se - although no doubt Tuilagi will be absolutely relishing clean ball from first phase - not even to prevent England kicking well. It's to stop the maul, because if England maul, it means NZ can't get the ball, and it means England possibly score tries despite losing every other 'area' of the field.

Simple stuff really. Barrett's there to help nullify the maul, among other things.

Yeah all thats possible, likely in some areas. Thats what tomorrows about. I see Barretts got everyone talking. No one seems to agree on exactly why hes there at all. I say its for his open play support and carry, lineouts a bonus, which just happens to be exactly where he has excelled at recently to get there, but hey, what do I know, so we'll see.

[stub]

British Empire references? Probably time to move on for that “journalist.”

[Guest]

Oz kept England at bay for the first twenty minutes. NZ slaughtered Ireland in the first twenty.

Theres your comparison right there oif you want one.

Completely different styles, completely different opponents.

England were 14-3 up after 20 minutes after relatively little effort - wouldn't call that Australia keeping them at bay. England defended and kept Australia out, let them blow themselves out for a while with only 3 points to show, and, as that began to take its toll, pounced on the turnover ball - exactly the same as NZ did v SA a few weeks ago. England were content to keep their shape, let Australia overplay with the ball, and punish them when the inevitable mistakes came - they'd seen that they would produce them in every group game they'd played, and it proved true.

NZ knew that to give Ireland the ball would be a nightmare as they're good at holding on to it, battering away, grinding the game down, and winning penalties - or at least, were, up until 6 months ago. Still not bad though, and had Ireland had early possession, the game might have gone differently. NZ knew an early start would kill the Irish resolve, which it did, and that they were unlikely to go up several levels and run the ball, which they didn't/couldn't. England knew to keep it tight v Australia, use their extra bulk, and the Australian resolve would slip away as England's score built - as there has been a consistent pattern to this over the last 4 years with the second half results being rougly 24-6 each time to England.

Pointless comparison, really. The tactics would have been literally opposite - NZ, it was essential to keep ball, take the Irish set defence out of the game, and take the scoreboard early; England, it was less essential to give Australia the ball, but the knowledge was there that they would profit from turnovers, and to not give them territory but rather force them to attack from deep and possibly overplay and make mistakes, as they did.

Why not mention the SA v NZ game in the pools?

3-0 to SA after 20 minutes.

2 sucker punch tries from SA'n mistakes on 24 and 27 minutes after NZ scored their first points on the 23rd minute via a penalty to level the scores.

SA possession: 53%
SA territory: 59% (61% first half)

So NZ started very slowly and backed their defence against SA. Considering England are closer to SA in style/pack size but with a more potent and much more varied attacking game from 1 to 15, why are you using a clearly over the hill Ireland as the example?

I'd be comparng the England game to the SA game, and wondering if England cut out the mistakes to avoid turnover tries, and profit from their stat % dminance they may or may not achieve, whether NZ can stay in touch and/or adapt to win the game coming from behind?

[Guest]

Without getting all ‘miaow’ about this, you really do pick and choose what constitutes doing the ‘right thing’ in rugby, Taylor. In any given circumstance what NZ do is exactly right and others wrong. Even in just a few posts it seems to change.

No need for the personal side swipe, but I'll take this as praise...

[Cyril]

Miaow By the way, I completely agree with your point just above. The other bit wasn’t meant as an insult, just a comment on you and Taylor’s interactions.

[maestegmafia]

So miaow?, who do you think will win?

[Cyril]

I want to know who maesteg thinks will win too

[Guest]

48 posts today so far- do you actually sleep T-man?

Up to 53 now, but Miaow edging him out with 60.

20,000 plays 3800.

That said, it's quality, not quantity...right??

So miaow?, who do you think will win?

Good question. NZ look a cut above everyone, including England. I think this WC I've made quite a few 'just wait for it' predictions and they haven't quite materialised - thinking about Scotland v Japan, Ireland v NZ, Australia v England, perhaps, sadly, Wales v SA in the semis. The temptation is there to say ' but England haven't een really had to try yet' - but that doesn't mean they have 2-3 more gears to go up and go toe to toe with NZ and beat them.

NZ will always be favourites because their basic skills, mentality, and rugby environment is unmatched. So I think NZ will win. Think I went with a middling 28-20 win, but honestly, I have no idea; I'd actually expect it to be higher for both sides...or lower, as it turns in to a real washout slugfest...I just don't know.

England have possible issues in the 10-12 channel defensively - don't think Farrell is a good defenive 12 anymore, it's become physical and tough and the Kiwis are stronger than they look some of them. Tuilagi at 13 - I've said my piece on that - and ofc Daly, who we all knew was an issue one on one pre tournament. I'd be less concerned about his aerial game, which isn't great but isn't dreadful, than his backfield defence, which is honestly amateurish. It's a specialist skill and he simply hasn't learnt it in time - think I highlighted 3 tries (Leitch Japan, Gar Wales warm up, maybe Irish on as well) pre tournament and now he's had Koroibete skin him, and I think someone else, no?

In games of fine margins - eventhough none of those issues might get exploited - the fact they are there, we as non-coachng staff know them, mean England will look to mitigate them in some way. Maybe that curtails another area. Who knows. NZ's basic skills suggest they exploit weakness and, in particular, get streaky within games and score 1-2, double-up tries when the opposition is rocked. I still question Farrell as captain and leader, I still question how good England can be when under pressure.

But if England perform, and utilise their horrible, nervy, pressure-inducing, crowd-baiting, long ball kicking game - where you're almost fusing the immediacy and speed of football with the physicality and unpredictability of the bouncing rugby ball - they could absolutely take NZ apart, particularly Barrett at 15 and Reece on the wing. I truly don't think this NZ team is the finished article - I see that Irish performance and I wonder if that was their peak, that was their Everest, that was the game where Read came back to form, where everything worked, where ghosts were exorcised. It's really hard to tell.

I'm not saying a lot now, but basically, I think NZ will win it, and we'll hve a great game either way - it's either tiht and cagey, or an absolute tryfest.

One prediction: between 52 and 62 minutes will decide the game...

What are your thoughts?

[maestegmafia]

I want to know who maesteg thinks will win too

New Zealand as they are the better team. England might do it, but if they do I’ll be surprised.

And yourself Cyril? Who do you honestly think is likely to win this one?

Lay your cards out...!

[SecretFly]

48 posts today so far- do you actually sleep T-man?

Up to 53 now, but Miaow edging him out with 60.

20,000 plays 3800.

That said, it's quality, not quantity...right??

As the ABs always say about their population.

[Cyril]

Just read that stuff.co.nz article. Is it a parody website or taken seriously in NZ?

[maestegmafia]

48 posts today so far- do you actually sleep T-man?

Up to 53 now, but Miaow edging him out with 60.

20,000 plays 3800.

That said, it's quality, not quantity...right??

As the ABs always say about their population.

It is a stunning place to live to be fair. Like wales with better temperature and less rain

[maestegmafia]

Just read that stuff.co.nz article. Is it a parody website or taken seriously in NZ?

Who do you think will win???

[Cyril]

Maesteg, I think England will edge this one. I think Eddie has them just right in terms of tactics and a full strength squad.

[Taylorman]

Oz kept England at bay for the first twenty minutes. NZ slaughtered Ireland in the first twenty.

Theres your comparison right there oif you want one.

Completely different styles, completely different opponents.

England were 14-3 up after 20 minutes after relatively little effort - wouldn't call that Australia keeping them at bay. England defended and kept Australia out, let them blow themselves out for a while with only 3 points to show, and, as that began to take its toll, pounced on the turnover ball - exactly the same as NZ did v SA a few weeks ago. England were content to keep their shape, let Australia overplay with the ball, and punish them when the inevitable mistakes came - they'd seen that they would produce them in every group game they'd played, and it proved true.

NZ knew that to give Ireland the ball would be a nightmare as they're good at holding on to it, battering away, grinding the game down, and winning penalties - or at least, were, up until 6 months ago. Still not bad though, and had Ireland had early possession, the game might have gone differently. NZ knew an early start would kill the Irish resolve, which it did, and that they were unlikely to go up several levels and run the ball, which they didn't/couldn't. England knew to keep it tight v Australia, use their extra bulk, and the Australian resolve would slip away as England's score built - as there has been a consistent pattern to this over the last 4 years with the second half results being rougly 24-6 each time to England.

Pointless comparison, really. The tactics would have been literally opposite - NZ, it was essential to keep ball, take the Irish set defence out of the game, and take the scoreboard early; England, it was less essential to give Australia the ball, but the knowledge was there that they would profit from turnovers, and to not give them territory but rather force them to attack from deep and possibly overplay and make mistakes, as they did.

Why not mention the SA v NZ game in the pools?

3-0 to SA after 20 minutes.

2 sucker punch tries from SA'n mistakes on 24 and 27 minutes after NZ scored their first points on the 23rd minute via a penalty to level the scores.

SA possession: 53%
SA territory: 59% (61% first half)

So NZ started very slowly and backed their defence against SA. Considering England are closer to SA in style/pack size but with a more potent and much more varied attacking game from 1 to 15, why are you using a clearly over the hill Ireland as the example?

I'd be comparng the England game to the SA game, and wondering if England cut out the mistakes to avoid turnover tries, and profit from their stat % dminance they may or may not achieve, whether NZ can stay in touch and/or adapt to win the game coming from behind?

Yeah SA were stronger than Ireland, a lot stronger. hence the tighter match. That set our tournament. Id say England are similar and they could win.

All Im saying is in the knockouts, something Hansen knows more about than anyone left, bar probably Jones, is Hansens thrown all his eggs in one basket.

ABs have one way to win. And that will be to put a score big enough on England that they cant recover from.

If they dont, which means England have been able to repel that gameplan, England wins. If its five points either way with ten to go, I dont see NZ winning.

So for me, the key, is to stop the rot that Ireland couldnt. As simple as that. The other possibility is England could roll over NZ. Thats also possible, but I havent delved into that analysis as, understandably, that doesnt interest me. If that happens, it happens.

[maestegmafia]

Maesteg, I think England will edge this one. I think Eddie has them just right in terms of tactics and a full strength squad.

Want to put a score to that claim too..!

I’m currently thinking all blacks by 5-10. I don’t think Eddie has it right, I don’t think the England selection as a team or man for man are the equal of the all blacks, I think there are a few England players who lose their heads when the pressure is on. Farrell, Sinckler and Lawes being prime historic examples

[Taylorman]

Just read that stuff.co.nz article. Is it a parody website or taken seriously in NZ?

Who do you think will win???

and you maes? Who would you pick to play in the final?

[Taylorman]

Maesteg, I think England will edge this one. I think Eddie has them just right in terms of tactics and a full strength squad.

Want to put a score to that claim too..!

I’m currently thinking all blacks by 5-10. I don’t think Eddie has it right, I don’t think the England selection as a team or man for man are the equal of the all blacks, I think there are a few England players who lose their heads when the pressure is on. Farrell, Sinckler and Lawes being prime historic examples

Im picking Youngs there. If we can ruin his confidence I think we can roll the pressure onto Ford and out further.

[Scottrf]

Maesteg, I think England will edge this one. I think Eddie has them just right in terms of tactics and a full strength squad.

Want to put a score to that claim too..!

I’m currently thinking all blacks by 5-10. I don’t think Eddie has it right, I don’t think the England selection as a team or man for man are the equal of the all blacks, I think there are a few England players who lose their heads when the pressure is on. Farrell, Sinckler and Lawes being prime historic examples

I’ve watched pretty much every professional game of Lawes and don’t remember this. Fill me in?

[maestegmafia]

Just read that stuff.co.nz article. Is it a parody website or taken seriously in NZ?

Who do you think will win???

and you maes? Who would you pick to play in the final?

I think wales will edge the Boks and see the kiwis in the final. I think we are a naturally pessimist nation but we would be disappointed not to win the next game and reach the final having seen what SA can do over the last few years.

On the other side, I’m chuffed that the boys made it to the semi finals unbeaten for the first time in 32 years. A great result for such a tiny country in itself. But, even with our small pool of players, appaling quality school rugby system, four professional teams and six first choice unavailable players, I think we can beat this Bok team and see the kiwis in the final.

[Guest]

Yeah off the mark with Lawes. Prone for a big hit early on but Itoje is the penalty machine. Lawes is class and has become one of the best forwards in the world in the last 3-4 years. Not surprised he's starting.

Just watching this vid earlier for a reference - and yeah, he doesn't stop the try, and is possibly offside - but just those basic contributions that perhaps don't go noticed:

https://youtu.be/RZHc256tf2w?t=105

[maestegmafia]

Maesteg, I think England will edge this one. I think Eddie has them just right in terms of tactics and a full strength squad.

Want to put a score to that claim too..!

I’m currently thinking all blacks by 5-10. I don’t think Eddie has it right, I don’t think the England selection as a team or man for man are the equal of the all blacks, I think there are a few England players who lose their heads when the pressure is on. Farrell, Sinckler and Lawes being prime historic examples

Im picking Youngs there. If we can ruin his confidence I think we can roll the pressure onto Ford and out further.

I’m sure Stevo has watched the tapes but Gareth Davies took England to pieces in the six nations by pressuring Young’s and the flyhalf Farrell. Ford is a much cooler head than Farrell but cutting off their halfback link takes a lot out of the set game plan. Frustration sets in then the game is their for the taking.

But I would imagine the ABs will aim to put 15 points up in the first quarter and let things tick after

[Cyril]

No surprise thee then maes. Re. England players losing their heads, I can’t see it . Lawes hasn’t, not has Farrell and I assume you saw Sinckler laugh off the Aussies’s attempts to rile him last weekend? Culminating in a try by the man himself.

For the record, SA by around 15.

[maestegmafia]

No surprise thee then maes. Re. England players losing their heads, I can’t see it . Lawes hasn’t, not has Farrell and I assume you saw Sinckler laugh off the Aussies’s attempts to rile him last weekend? Culminating in a try by the man himself.

For the record, SA by around 15.

Yawn, boring...! Whatever..!

What do you think the score will be between England and New Zealand

[Taylorman]

Yeah off the mark with Lawes. Prone for a big hit early on but Itoje is the penalty machine. Lawes is class and has become one of the best forwards in the world in the last 3-4 years. Not surprised he's starting.

Just watching this vid earlier for a reference - and yeah, he doesn't stop the try, and is possibly offside - but just those basic contributions that perhaps don't go noticed:

https://youtu.be/RZHc256tf2w?t=105

Yeah Lawes is very athletic for his height as well. moves well across the field. Yet to be impressed with Itoje, went well on the Lions tour in parts but we just havent played him enough. One English test in five years?

[Guest]

Maesteg, I think England will edge this one. I think Eddie has them just right in terms of tactics and a full strength squad.

Want to put a score to that claim too..!

I’m currently thinking all blacks by 5-10. I don’t think Eddie has it right, I don’t think the England selection as a team or man for man are the equal of the all blacks, I think there are a few England players who lose their heads when the pressure is on. Farrell, Sinckler and Lawes being prime historic examples

Im picking Youngs there. If we can ruin his confidence I think we can roll the pressure onto Ford and out further.

I’m sure Stevo has watched the tapes but Gareth Davies took England to pieces in the six nations by pressuring Young’s and the flyhalf Farrell. Ford is a much cooler head than Farrell but cutting off their halfback link takes a lot out of the set game plan. Frustration sets in then the game is their for the taking.

But I would imagine the ABs will aim to put 15 points up in the first quarter and let things tick after

I actually think Wales have had more joy out of pressuring Ford than Farrell over the years:

https://youtu.be/EpO7RN5ugbs?t=80

https://youtu.be/L5lLj4PUeDY?t=3739 / https://youtu.be/L5lLj4PUeDY?t=4098 / https://youtu.be/L5lLj4PUeDY?t=4824

https://youtu.be/ltvd-1Tp5DA?t=486 / https://youtu.be/ltvd-1Tp5DA?t=510

And a bonus with Youngs exploited, by Ford at 10: https://youtu.be/ltvd-1Tp5DA?t=5259

Ford can be got at, for sure.

[Cyril]

In reply to maesteg, I posted my prediction several posts above. Please check it out rather than replying ‘yawn’ I said England would edge it. No idea on the scores though.

As a mod you should maybe have more about you than just ‘yawn!’ and ‘whatever!’ to a perfectly reasonable reply.

Ok, let’s do it. England 35 NZ 26

[Taylorman]

Maesteg, I think England will edge this one. I think Eddie has them just right in terms of tactics and a full strength squad.

Want to put a score to that claim too..!

I’m currently thinking all blacks by 5-10. I don’t think Eddie has it right, I don’t think the England selection as a team or man for man are the equal of the all blacks, I think there are a few England players who lose their heads when the pressure is on. Farrell, Sinckler and Lawes being prime historic examples

Im picking Youngs there. If we can ruin his confidence I think we can roll the pressure onto Ford and out further.

I’m sure Stevo has watched the tapes but Gareth Davies took England to pieces in the six nations by pressuring Young’s and the flyhalf Farrell. Ford is a much cooler head than Farrell but cutting off their halfback link takes a lot out of the set game plan. Frustration sets in then the game is their for the taking.

But I would imagine the ABs will aim to put 15 points up in the first quarter and let things tick after

I actually think Wales have had more joy out of pressuring Ford than Farrell over the years:

https://youtu.be/EpO7RN5ugbs?t=80

https://youtu.be/L5lLj4PUeDY?t=3739   /   https://youtu.be/L5lLj4PUeDY?t=4098   /   https://youtu.be/L5lLj4PUeDY?t=4824  

https://youtu.be/ltvd-1Tp5DA?t=486   /   https://youtu.be/ltvd-1Tp5DA?t=510

And a bonus with Youngs exploited, by Ford at 10: https://youtu.be/ltvd-1Tp5DA?t=5259

Ford can be got at, for sure.

Thanks, got it...its in Hansens inbox

[Sponsored content]