2nd RWC 2023 semi-final England v South Africa

First topic message reminder :

Having just watched that awesome match with France and seeing the SA players, with family, parade around the ground I can't help feeling that our main hope of not being thrashed lies in their complacency. They will go in as massive favourites and rightly so. England will be fighting for their very lives to avoid humiliation and this often brings out the best in teams. I don't think it will be enough, but it might help keep the score to below 45.

Realistically do we have a prayer?

Argentina also played a huge helping hand in nullifying their own attack to be fair. There are some good things that Borthwicks introduced and one of those is the drop goals. We're going to need those at the weekend as not sure we're realistically scoring many tries or getting pens from the scrum.

I'm interested by what he does with full back. As expected Smith wasn't really challenged with high balls, thinking back everything he got he had a lot of time with and I can't imagine that will be the same vs SA. Does Steward come straight back in?

Some of the pundits seem to think Young's will be back at 9 for this game

carpet baboon wrote:Some of the pundits seem to think Young's will be back at 9 for this game

Probably noting that Borthwick did similar in the prem final with Wigglesworth. Don't think it overly matters tbh.

Young's at 9 to box England to glory.

You read it here first.

SA against France, they didn't seem to kick to the fullback very often, more lifting the ball across to the far wing and relatively short so they could swarm the contested area and exploit anything loose. Not arguing that Steward shouldn't be at full back, but wondering if their may be a thought of playing him on one wing and May (who is still very good under the high ball) on the other. I'd worry about the lack of pace against the Bok wingers with that pairing - may be a reason for playing Arundell at 15 to give pace to cover.

There are several reasons to play Arundell but unfortunately none seem to occur to coaches.

mountain man wrote:There are several reasons to play Arundell but unfortunately none seem to occur to coaches.

He must have really pi$$ed somebody off - does he raid the good biscuits first or never makes his roomie a cuppa?

Seriously, this England team is crying out for a bit of pace, and he's the obvious player in the squad who can provide it. Normally a fullback, so good under the high ball (even if not Steward good) and has the eye for a gap. Rally don't see why he hasn't had more of a chance than the one game in a rout.

dummy_half wrote:

mountain man wrote:There are several reasons to play Arundell but unfortunately none seem to occur to coaches.

He must have really pi$$ed somebody off - does he raid the good biscuits first or never makes his roomie a cuppa?

Seriously, this England team is crying out for a bit of pace, and he's the obvious player in the squad who can provide it. Normally a fullback, so good under the high ball (even if not Steward good) and has the eye for a gap. Rally don't see why he hasn't had more of a chance than the one game in a rout.

Maybe there was some truth in the rumour that he had a bust up with Farrell....

Why would a fight even register in picking a team? It happens loads. He just doesn't suit the game plan. I'd be less surprised should Malins pop up this week.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Why would a fight even register in picking a team? It happens loads. He just doesn't suit the game plan. I'd be less surprised should Malins pop up this week.

But which of out back 3 players do? To be fair, the number of times they are getting the ball in hand with a little space has been so rare that it's not the biggest election dilemma - as long as they catch the high balls that come their way and don't get skinned on the outside, any one of about half a dozen could stand out there getting cold.

I just think Malins is a negative selection - does nothing terribly well from the wing, and I'm not sure that any perceived playmaking abilities can be exploited from there, while his defence is not particularly good. Similar issues with Daly - can play a role there but doesn't worry the opposition. At least May has had a career of running all over the place and causing defences problems, even if his top end speed seems to have dropped in the last couple of years. Steward obviously is solid under the high ball, and offers a physical option in attack, but there are still some defensive issues to work on given his size and relative lack of acceleration and agility.

Look at the top teams, and they have seriously threatening strike runners out wide - I have the feeling htat even if we had a Kolbe (or a Jason Robinson), Jones and now Borthwick would find reasons not to play them.

It's Ben O'Keeffe for this. Ben O'Keeffe, Andrew Brace, Paul Williams, with Brendon Pickerill as TMO.

dummy_half wrote:

mountain man wrote:There are several reasons to play Arundell but unfortunately none seem to occur to coaches.

He must have really pi$$ed somebody off - does he raid the good biscuits first or never makes his roomie a cuppa?

Seriously, this England team is crying out for a bit of pace, and he's the obvious player in the squad who can provide it. Normally a fullback, so good under the high ball (even if not Steward good) and has the eye for a gap. Rally don't see why he hasn't had more of a chance than the one game in a rout.

Arundell hasn't had much game time in this RWC. Given that I wonder if it makes sense to put a relative neophyte out there against the Boks. I know options are limited....

Like that refereeing choice. All set for Barnes to take the final, unless England score a massive upset.

Aotearoa Pod reckons Genge, Earl, Itoje, Lawes were the only four carriers in the pack, with George, Curry, Chessum and Cole registering no carrys between them. The New Zealanders think this must have been a clear tactic but a similar demarcation in the semi-final will make it dangerously easy for the Springboks to line up carrying threats.

The pod team tips South Africa, and sees England only having a chance if they take more risks in attack.

Oakdene wrote:

dummy_half wrote:

mountain man wrote:There are several reasons to play Arundell but unfortunately none seem to occur to coaches.

He must have really pi$$ed somebody off - does he raid the good biscuits first or never makes his roomie a cuppa?

Seriously, this England team is crying out for a bit of pace, and he's the obvious player in the squad who can provide it. Normally a fullback, so good under the high ball (even if not Steward good) and has the eye for a gap. Rally don't see why he hasn't had more of a chance than the one game in a rout.

Maybe there was some truth in the rumour that he had a bust up with Farrell....

Or maybe that hes not quite up to speed with his defence yet?

Geordie wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

dummy_half wrote:

mountain man wrote:There are several reasons to play Arundell but unfortunately none seem to occur to coaches.

He must have really pi$$ed somebody off - does he raid the good biscuits first or never makes his roomie a cuppa?

Seriously, this England team is crying out for a bit of pace, and he's the obvious player in the squad who can provide it. Normally a fullback, so good under the high ball (even if not Steward good) and has the eye for a gap. Rally don't see why he hasn't had more of a chance than the one game in a rout.

Maybe there was some truth in the rumour that he had a bust up with Farrell....

Or maybe that hes not quite up to speed with his defence yet?

i'd take the positive in Arundell's attacking ability ahead of any perceived negatives in his defence. We need a player with a bit of X-factor to cause the opposition problems rather than just picking players to negate the opposition's tactics.

Looking through the punditry, there's a lot of focus on what front row should start, to show the best possible first picture to the referee. Some want Marler & Cole together in the starting XV. That's not something Borthwick has been inclined to do so far.

The other main talking point is about inserting Steward back in the starting XV in place of either Smith or May.

dummy_half wrote:

Geordie wrote:

Oakdene wrote:

dummy_half wrote:

mountain man wrote:There are several reasons to play Arundell but unfortunately none seem to occur to coaches.

He must have really pi$$ed somebody off - does he raid the good biscuits first or never makes his roomie a cuppa?

Seriously, this England team is crying out for a bit of pace, and he's the obvious player in the squad who can provide it. Normally a fullback, so good under the high ball (even if not Steward good) and has the eye for a gap. Rally don't see why he hasn't had more of a chance than the one game in a rout.

Maybe there was some truth in the rumour that he had a bust up with Farrell....

Or maybe that hes not quite up to speed with his defence yet?

i'd take the positive in Arundell's attacking ability ahead of any perceived negatives in his defence. We need a player with a bit of X-factor to cause the opposition problems rather than just picking players to negate the opposition's tactics.

i would do the same with Radwan....but in international rugby you need a rock solid defence on the wing. Malins has been found out...Daly is iffy but they want that playmaker there...

Maybe they know Arundle is the future but he just needs to work on that aspect. May is not the force he was offensively but his defence is very strong, and dont forget it took him time to build that up at this level.

Rugby Fan wrote:Looking through the punditry, there's a lot of focus on what front row should start, to show the best possible first picture to the referee. Some want Marler & Cole together in the starting XV. That's not something Borthwick has been inclined to do so far.

The other main talking point is about inserting Steward back in the starting XV in place of either Smith or May.

I don't see Steward for May as a positive move. Could understand him coming in for Smith, especially as Marcus took quite a pummeling from the Fijians, or on the opposite wing ahead of whichever of Malins or Daly Borthwick otherwise has in mind.

Front row is a problem simply in that we don't have enough quality in the squad to match up to the SAs first choice, whether we go for the most set-piece orientated option (Marler-George-Cole) or the best rugby playing option (Genge-George-Sinkler). Also, we don't have the power from the second row that the Boks have - Chessum's big enough, but I do wonder if some of the scrum issues we've had in the last couple of years have been from Itoje starting as quite a small 2nd row and then being at less than optimum fitness?

A low error count is the only way to stop the Boks scrum, rather than the scrum itself. Fewer handling errors especially mean fewer scrum feeds for them.

I've posted it a lot of times but it's really rare to get penalties against the head now. Refs seem far more inclined to reset or just tell them SH to "use it" if the side with the feed are under pressure. You have to be getting to Mike Ross and Tom Court at TH against Corbs in 2012 levels of dominance to get much against the head these days. In the 2019 final England had 3 put ins, won all 3 and won a penalty. The Boks had 11 put ins, won all 11 and 4 penalties. So 100% retention and a basically a penalty every 3 put ins for sides. The difference being the 11 scrum feeds for the Boks due to England's error count.

I could potentially see Steward on the wing if they still want that second playmaker at 15. The Boks cross field kicks that led to two tries were impossible to miss against France. For the de Allende try they had about a 20m gap between Libbok and all the other players outside him who were on the far touchline waiting to chase. Having players like PSdT and Etzebeth chasing a bomb to compete in the air is a potent weapon. It's very Rassie and Nienaber.

The Boks defence is incredible. Both in the physicality and line speed of the blitz and the safeguards they've steadily built in either side to allow them to blitz that hard without getting outflanked. England don't have an attack to beat that defence over many phases. They will need to hope for a huge individual error (think de Allende's misread that put Marchant through in 2021 or Sheehan and JvdF's f*ck up with Mo'unga going through in the QFs) when attacking off early phase play. If they haven't made some miraculous headway after a phase of two then boot to ball and try to apply pressure further down the field. I expect them to take the view that they are less likely to give the Boks scrum feeds or turnover penalties if they don't have the ball.

king_carlos wrote:A low error count is the only way to stop the Boks scrum, rather than the scrum itself. Fewer handling errors especially mean fewer scrum feeds for them.

They could also call a scrum from taking a mark!

I appreciate they have a very good scrum and it was a bit of extra theatre as it's so rare (I remember a couple of other charge downs but never a scrum from a mark) but that piece of play was bonkers. Literally all you need is an unlucky slip, a dodgy bind etc and you've left yourself in a stupid position.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I appreciate they have a very good scrum and it was a bit of extra theatre as it's so rare (I remember a couple of other charge downs but never a scrum from a mark) but that piece of play was bonkers. Literally all you need is an unlucky slip, a dodgy bind etc and you've left yourself in a stupid position.

Erasmus explained the decision

A low error count is the only way to stop the Boks scrum, rather than the scrum itself. Fewer handling errors especially mean fewer scrum feeds for them.

This is true but they are so good in scrum on opposition ball so even if it's a SA knock with England feed, SA will be going after Eng scrum big time. And likely successful.


I hate to say it but likely only hope of Eng success is kicking for position and compete. England won't penetrate SA defence by carrying, not a hope.

SA had a grueling match against France so fatigue may play a part but then again they change out half a pack after 50 mins, likes of George, Itoje, Earl played 80 mins albeit in a less physically demanding game.

Dunno, as it is I just can't see how England win. Doesn't mean they can't or won't but I'm struggling to make a case for it.

It's nice to think we have any other plan than to kick anyway! We'll try to get in range of drop goals. That'll be the plan.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's nice to think we have any other plan than to kick anyway! We'll try to get in range of drop goals. That'll be the plan.

Drop goals won't be enough as SA almost certainly will score tries, can't see England scoring enough points just through kicks.

Nor can I. It'll really take SA going into their shells I think to give us a chance. If they start Libbock I think we're toast.

And if we go out in the Semis to this SA team...then thats fine...we have achieved what we should have.

We can re-assess the squad, probably change quite a few, have the new attack coach come in, and then look forward to the 6n....

Yup par achieved. Then we see if Borthwick is dramatically altering his approach. I've still not seen any confirmation of what Jones will be doing with England, has something been released?

Geordie wrote:And if we go out in the Semis to this SA team...then thats fine...we have achieved what we should have.

We can re-assess the squad, probably change quite a few, have the new attack coach come in, and then look forward to the 6n....

I do wonder though how many will be changed seeing as Borthwick seems ultra conservative in team selection. Retirement might force a few but if he's not picking Arundell now will he in future? We might still get May and Daly on wings in 6N etc. And even Farrell at 12.

So whilst I'm hoping for quite a few changes, I'm not overly confident we'll see it.

mountain man wrote:

Geordie wrote:And if we go out in the Semis to this SA team...then thats fine...we have achieved what we should have.

We can re-assess the squad, probably change quite a few, have the new attack coach come in, and then look forward to the 6n....

I do wonder though how many will be changed seeing as Borthwick seems ultra conservative in team selection. Retirement might force a few but if he's not picking Arundell now will he in future? We might still get May and Daly on wings in 6N etc. And even Farrell at 12.

So whilst I'm hoping for quite a few changes, I'm not overly confident we'll see it.

Is he? Dont forget SB has proven he isnt afraid to bring the kids through...he did so at the Tigers.

So is it that others / kids just arent good enough?

Lets be brutally honest here.

Tight head - Who has challegned Dan Cole for his place...other than Sinckler and Stuart, and IMO Stuart should be nowhere near this squad. Is Hayes saying...pick me? Maybe Schonert has a shout...but who else?
12 - WHO has challegned from the prem....

Similar in many other positions...

We know:
Ribbans, Jack Willis and Marchant are definately gone.

Others i suspect:
Billy V
Youngs will probably retire
Care will probably retire
Johnny May is 33, so his time is probably up
Malins - has totally failed to nail the spot and i think his position will be up also. Daly will remain as the "playmaking" outside back

Then the who knows...
Manu - Has played better this few weeks than he has in years (and stayed fit) but might decide the time is right
Marler - the perpetual retire, unretiree...
Courtney Lawes, still one of our best and a warrior but at 34 hes body will be battered...so i wonder where is he mentally after this WC.

All just my humble opinion of course.

mountain man wrote:

Geordie wrote:And if we go out in the Semis to this SA team...then thats fine...we have achieved what we should have.

We can re-assess the squad, probably change quite a few, have the new attack coach come in, and then look forward to the 6n....

I do wonder though how many will be changed seeing as Borthwick seems ultra conservative in team selection.

If we lose to South Africa, there's still a third place play-off match. Sometimes that's an occasion for unused squad players to play a part.

What are the odds on the England 23 turning up with notes from their Mums saying they can't do PE today because of the bigger boys?

mountain man wrote:

Geordie wrote:And if we go out in the Semis to this SA team...then thats fine...we have achieved what we should have.

We can re-assess the squad, probably change quite a few, have the new attack coach come in, and then look forward to the 6n....

I do wonder though how many will be changed seeing as Borthwick seems ultra conservative in team selection. Retirement might force a few but if he's not picking Arundell now will he in future? We might still get May and Daly on wings in 6N etc. And even Farrell at 12.

So whilst I'm hoping for quite a few changes, I'm not overly confident we'll see it.

He's made changes to the side repeatedly tweaking the tactics over the course of his tenure to try and better the opposition. Hasn't tended to work how he wanted but we are the only undefeated team left in the world cup.

Come the 6N we might see more change. He's backed Dan, Chessum, Martin, Earl, Lawrence, Marchant and Mitchell to all come through and become regulars on the 23. Where they were all in and out or on the fringes under Eddie. He does like some experience in a side, we saw that at Tigers and again at the world cup but I'd be surprised if he kept as much as he had done. Remember May wouldn't be here at all if Ant Watson was fit and he's not yet 30 so could come back in.

Arundell looked great Vs Chile but a liability Vs Wales in the warm ups. Be interesting to see how he goes on France post world cup. He's got a bright future so he'll be back again.

I'm expecting a tweaked 23 for the SA game and for the third place play off and then a few notable changes for the 6N.

Hasn't he simply put all his hooker eggs in 2 baskets of George and LCD? Dan didn't get on again vs Fiji. Given the nature of SA and the use of their bench we're going in a bit cold there.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hasn't he simply put all his hooker eggs in 2 baskets of George and LCD? Dan didn't get on again vs Fiji. Given the nature of SA and the use of their bench we're going in a bit cold there.

The same could be argued of SA with Marx and Mbonambi to be fair. Their third choice is a flanker who used to play hooker covering in emergency. A bit like if Barbeary were in the England squad and used to cover LCD. It arguably cost SA vs Ireland. Mbonambi then played until PSdT returned from his HIA against France.

Jones put the vast majority of hooker minutes into Hartley and George, then George and LCD. I can also understand that though. Similar to SA with Marx and Mbonambi. They were just so much better than the competing options.

When injuries struck we saw Jones try to develop Blamire but he subsequently couldn't nail the starting shirt at Falcons. I'm a Blamire fan, rate him as a better prospect than Walker, but that is unavoidably an issue.

They clearly rate Dan otherwise he wouldn't have been fast tracked. They also just clearly rate George as significantly better than the next best option. Which I again think is very fair. It's like the discussion around England's squad players who haven't had much game time with someone last week suggesting there was no point them being in the squad. It is possible for coaches to simultaneously rate someone as the next best option, but also significantly worse than the incumbent.

Dan hasn't had enough time on pitch, George played entire 80 against Fiji which was not needed. Martin isn't anything more than average at best. Mitchell comes and goes in performance. Lawrence seems at present to be bench option until Manu retires/injured.

Only ones who have had consistent minutes and performed are Earl and Chessum. Marchant unfortunately for England is going.

I agree about TH, Stuart not good enough and who else is there. Sinckler not player he was.

As for liabilities in warm ups, that was entire England squad!

I think Lawrence is (finally) coming through very well. Manu isn't the player he was but we have had few if any better centers over the years.

As for Martin I guess the management see something different as they have been picking him ahead of Ribbans every time, and it is not like we have any shortage of locks who can do a shift at 6. Chessum is the real deal and it is clear why he's in, but some players take more time than others, and it is a very hard task telling which ones will make it and which ones won't, especially with a lot of alternatives being talked up.

Marcus Smith might be too banged up to play. While he passed an HIA on the day, there are two more stages to pass to be available for selection. Telegraph already saying Steward will start at fulll back, though uncertain if Smith will be on the bench. Times openly saying Smith has concussion and won't be available.

Rugby Fan wrote:Marcus Smith might be too banged up to play. While he passed an HIA on the day, there are two more stages to pass to be available for selection. Telegraph already saying Steward will start at fulll back.

Looked like he had a bust lip too.

I'd think Steward starting at 15 would be plan anyway, certainly that's what likes of Paul Grayson saying and it makes sense for SA.
If he's fit Smith on bench.

Shots of Smith in training this week so I don't think he's concussed although I had worried about the amount of damage he took to his face.

There's been mixed reports as RF says. Some reporting that Smith was training yesterday but didn't take a full part. Which is common for players who then make the weekend. Others saying he was training but didn't do contact.

I'm expecting Steward to play but wouldn't be surprised if he replaced May on one wing to counter the sort of cross field bombs that created two tries against France. Then Smith at fullback if he's available for the second playmaker.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hasn't he simply put all his hooker eggs in 2 baskets of George and LCD? Dan didn't get on again vs Fiji. Given the nature of SA and the use of their bench we're going in a bit cold there.

I mean those two hookers are both B&I Lions and streets ahead of any other EQ hooker so not a massive surprise. Was a shame that Dan didn't get on Vs Fiji, we are asking a lot from Jamie George.

mountain man wrote:Dan hasn't had enough time on pitch, George played entire 80 against Fiji which was not needed. Martin isn't anything more than average at best. Mitchell comes and goes in performance. Lawrence seems at present to be bench option until Manu retires/injured.

Only ones who have had consistent minutes and performed are Earl and Chessum. Marchant unfortunately for England is going.

I agree about TH, Stuart not good enough and who else is there. Sinckler not player he was.

As for liabilities in warm ups, that was entire England squad!

You wanted promotion of young talent, not all young talent effortlessly steps up to international rugby sometimes you need to bed them in and that takes time.

There's plenty on here who keep demanding England find a big lump of a mobile second row. At 6ft6 and 19 stone Martin, who's played a lot at 6, can certainly offer that. He's a bit raw but at 22 he could quite easily be a mainstay of the side for another decade if he develops to his potential. He's solid and unspectacular so far but the shot on Sapoaga that forced the knock on Vs Samoa put us in a position to see that game out. Hoping for more his big hits this weekend as he developed a reputation for them in the Prem.

Marchant might be going but it works for us for now and he could be back in the Prem in two years. Mitchell is hit and miss but welcome to the England scrum half options. It's that or play the old boys again. JVP will be struggling to make the 6N given his injury.

I think it's harsh to write Martin off already. He hasn't produced yet at this level bar one of his typical brutal hits but he only really switched full time to lock this season and has heen hugely impressive in doing that. Its asking a lot for him to stand out at this level ready....and those pointing at Chessum...well I think he's a bit of a freak to be honest.
Makes you wonder what Chessum Jr will do this season at Prem level...

There's a number of youngsters who might not feature hugely this world Cup who will be gaining unreal experience...Theo Dan is another and hopefully Ollie Lawrence aswell.

Yeah too early to judge Martin though with Ribbans there it seems odd he's not higher up the pecking order.

Can only judge on performances and so far Martin average at best. Ribbans has been better than him. That's it really.
Can Martin improve? Of course as time on his side but so far so meh. I'm not writing him off, just saying what I've seen so far.

Dan should definitely had more time on pitch, one of the warm up games, Japan(?) he didn't get on at all which was very disappointing as it was for Fiji. Lawrence has enough experience and is good enough to be in starting 15.

Anyway, I don't think it matters a lot who is in 15/23 this week. I unfortunately can't see Eng beating SA.

Well teams out at 12 today. My bet is Youngs starts, Cole's on the bench and Smith out of the 23.

Well I said previously, Youngs will box kick to victory. Malins scores winning try.