England V Australia Saturday 9th November

First topic message reminder :

After the disappointment of the NZ defeat what team should we play against the Wallabies? A defeat in this match would be an undoubted disaster and of course the boys need some confidence before taking on the mighty SA so a decent performance and a victory are the must have requirements.

We cannot afford another scrummaging disaster so surely Marler has to return at the expense of Baxter? He needs a hit out to get ready for the bomb squad. I would also love to replace Dombrandt with Willis. Anything else?

England team to face Australia: G Furbank; I Feyi-Waboso, O Lawrence, H Slade, T Freeman; M Smith, B Spencer; E Genge, J George, W Stuart, M Itoje, G Martin, C Cunningham-South, T Curry, B Earl.

Replacements: L Cowan-Dickie, F Baxter, D Cole, N Isiekwe, A Dombrandt, H Randall, G Ford, O Sleightholme.

Australia: Wright; Kellaway, Suaalii, Ikitau, Pietsch; Lolesio, Gordon; Bell, Faessler, Tupou, Frost, Williams, Valetini, McReight, Wilson (capt).

Replacements: Paenga-Amosa, Slipper, Alaalatoa, Salakaia-Loto, Gleeson, McDermott, Donaldson, Jorgensen.

Which all actually raises the point I was making in the second part. Why bother swapping their shirts now? Unless it's so the fans have something to talk about

Re Steward at 12. I'm a Tigers fan that wants to see it. I think his most valuable skill is his ability to get over the gain line. It's not his best skill. That's obviously the high ball work, where he's as good as anyone in the world. It's also relatively easy to diffuse someone being great in the air. You just don't kick to compete as much. Or kick to compete elsewhere. Whereas someone getting over the gain line can be of use every time you're in possession. He might be the best player in a game at taking a high ball by a distance, yet only the 2nd or 3rd best back across both sides at getting over the gain line. I still think that is more valuable skill given the frequency with which it can be used though. Whilst his high ball work can still be used as a chaser. I've said it a few times, but Steward and Freeman as centres, chasing bombs up centre field is something I'd tactically love to see. No sign of Steward being shifted yet though.

Re changing the shirt numbers. The hilarious reason would be a typo. The tactical reason I can see is that the England blitz has shifted subtly at eye level but significantly in terms of the 13s role.

In the Six Nations they had insane line speed matching the Boks model they copied, out 'only' to the 13 channel. The wingers weren't quite as aggressive. Mostly, they hung back slightly to make covering the ground outside Slade easier. More akin to the blitz under Gustard. Over the summer, the wingers came higher, tighter and started leading the line speed. It's higher risk, it makes wing arguably the toughest defensive job in the side, it also adds potency. By and large, it's shown huge promise. I hope they stick with it. It means that the wingers have to cover about half the pitch, often with 3 man overlaps. IFW and Freeman are doing that though. Whilst the locks, back rows and Slade are doing an outstanding job on flooding round to cover the outside - in turn an impressive Kolisi, PSdt and Kriel/Am impression.

That change raises the interesting question of whether you want your defensive leader at 12 or 13? When 13 was leading the line speed, Slade was the obvious man as he's so good defensively and Chiefs use him in that role. If the wingers are leading the line and setting the width, is there an argument to have your best defensive communicator tighter in? Try to have Slade one place nearer the ruck, basically next to the stack of forwards in the fringe defence. Is that are valuable place to communicate from? Outside their own 22, England's 10s are being used more frequently in a Faf de Klerk or Tomos Williams style 'SH sniper' role where they fly up to be disruptive. Near the line, they're generally wider out. Either way, they aren't key defensive leaders in this system. Slade at 13 means that the winger leading your line speed and the guy most key to keeping alignment are next to each other. I think they potentially want to have a bit more separation there, put their defensive leader in the best place to communicate to the inside defence as well as the outside. Whilst also seeing what Lawrence's acceleration can offer as the penultimate defender flying up to keep pace with that openside winger who's leading the rush.

A more simplistic look would be suggesting it just puts Slade opposite Kerevi. They didn't do that either in shirt numbers or positioning for Jordie in the last three ABs games. Nor for Aki in the Six Nations. Lawrence is becoming a decent defender in that 12 channel too. He's making good decisions, solid hits and is a jackal threat that slows down ball. I don't really see why they'd make the shift for one Oz player. I think it's more likely a view to evolving the system under Joe El Abd.

What do you think of Borthwick announcing the team on Tuesdays instead of the usual Thursdays (requirement is normally 2 days prior to a match?)? Is he just copying Rassie for the sake of it? Is it meant to exude confidence in the team and the selections? In reality does it not just allow your opposition to factor in some specific training and preparation to combat your chosen lineup? If you announce the team on a Thursday the opposition have no time to run through any specific training scenarios to combat your team. They have the captain's run on Fridays and then the match.

Why do you think he is doing this and is there any benefit? There has not been in terms of results.

Timing of announcement pretty irrelevant I think. Gives us more time to moan about who's been picked or who hasn't but for how it affects result zero I think. Opposition know who's in wider squad and they will be able to guess who likely 23 will be. It's not as if Borthwick has suddenly put in 3 or 4 unknown players which would have Aus scrabbling to do research on how to attack or defend. Most of us thought starting XV from NZ match probably start again and he'd have thought same.

I'm not sure Schimdt will have a specific plan for England anyway, he'll stick to what he thinks will work. Unlike facing say SA where teams know the scrum HAS to be 100% and so prepare for that and bomb squad.

hugehandoff wrote:What do you think of Borthwick announcing the team on Tuesdays instead of the usual Thursdays (requirement is normally 2 days prior to a match?)? Is he just copying Rassie for the sake of it? Is it meant to exude confidence in the team and the selections? In reality does it not just allow your opposition to factor in some specific training and preparation to combat your chosen lineup? If you announce the team on a Thursday the opposition have no time to run through any specific training scenarios to combat your team. They have the captain's run on Fridays and then the match.

Why do you think he is doing this and is there any benefit? There has not been in terms of results.  

At various times over the years, the team has been leaked early, creating speculation and pre-match talking points which sometimes became a distraction. Borthwick might have concluded he has more to gain from cutting that out, rather than trying to gain a strategic advantage with a later announcement.

Joseph-Aukuso Suaalii making his debut against England

bsando wrote:Joseph-Aukuso Suaalii making his debut against England

Really looking forward to see how he plays in union. He can be an devastating player with ball in hand.

One area that will be pivotal to him to adapt is tacking. In union, the sort of high shots that get sin bins rarely get anything more than a penalty in league.

bsando wrote:Joseph-Aukuso Suaalii making his debut against England

Can England exploit his inexperience and pull him out of position? He sounds a real talent, but it is asking a huge amount for him to play his game of Union at Twickers.

Duty281 wrote:

bsando wrote:Joseph-Aukuso Suaalii making his debut against England

Really looking forward to see how he plays in union. He can be an devastating player with ball in hand.

One area that will be pivotal to him to adapt is tacking. In union, the sort of high shots that get sin bins rarely get anything more than a penalty in league.

Head shots are de rigeuer in league, think ref warns them if they go too low...

mountain man wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

bsando wrote:Joseph-Aukuso Suaalii making his debut against England

Really looking forward to see how he plays in union. He can be an devastating player with ball in hand.

One area that will be pivotal to him to adapt is tacking. In union, the sort of high shots that get sin bins rarely get anything more than a penalty in league.

Head shots are de rigeuer in league, think ref warns them if they go too low...

Exactly - he'll definitely need to lower his tackle height. He famously got sent off in his State of Origin debut this year and to get sent off in league you basically need to commit attempted murder!

RDW wrote:

Exactly - he'll definitely need to lower his tackle height. He famously got sent off in his State of Origin debut this year and to get sent off in league you basically need to commit attempted murder!

Is Gardner reffing again?

Poorfour wrote:

RDW wrote:

Exactly - he'll definitely need to lower his tackle height. He famously got sent off in his State of Origin debut this year and to get sent off in league you basically need to commit attempted murder!

Is Gardner reffing again?

Isn't he an Aussie? Anyway it is Ben O'Keeffe who is a Kiwi.

Australian rugby YouTuber WildKard is known for some shouty rants. From the 2:16 mark, he expresses some displeasure about the way Rugby Australia is handling league convert Joseph-Aukuso Suaalii, who has been named in the starting team tomorrow There are some f-bombs over the six minutes.

Just occurred to me that Steward to 12 is a lot like the debate from a few years back for bananaman to 12. Banahan did occasionally play in the centres but probably nothing like as much as he should of done

I've only ever seen fans on forums going on about Steward to 12, as far as I know he's never played there. Certainly not for Tigers, correct if wrong.

mountain man wrote:I've only ever seen fans on forums going on about Steward to 12, as far as I know he's never played there. Certainly not for Tigers, correct if wrong.

We know that. But the reason it gets brought up is that a) 12 is a perennial problem for England, b) 12 is a position that Steward has a good physique to play, and playing there would make his major weakness - his lack of agility - less of an issue.

I’d like to see him tried there. There’s a comparison with Matt Banahan, who I never really liked as a winger (again because of his lack of agility) but who played 12 in a Barbarians game and looked good enough that I wish England had persisted with it.

Here's a puzzler for the next minute or so: Sleightholme is on the bench but covers 11/14. When it becomes time for Borthwick to make his 60 minute subs, will Sleights go in for Freeman? Or possibly IFW? Or possibly Slade comes off, Feeeman slides inside, with Sleights on the wing?

Or will Borthwick simply keep him on the bench until the 77 minute mark?????

Disaster. I bought some beers for the match, which starts at ten past midnight here. In an evening of indiscipline, I've finished them all already.

On paper England should beat this poor Aussie team without too much trouble - look at the gulf in the rankings and recent results. Its more of a banana skin than anything else.

Poorfour wrote:

mountain man wrote:I've only ever seen fans on forums going on about Steward to 12, as far as I know he's never played there. Certainly not for Tigers, correct if wrong.

We know that. But the reason it gets brought up is that a) 12 is a perennial problem for England, b) 12 is a position that Steward has a good physique to play, and playing there would make his major weakness - his lack of agility - less of an issue.

I’d like to see him tried there. There’s a comparison with Matt Banahan, who I never really liked as a winger (again because of his lack of agility) but who played 12 in a Barbarians game and looked good enough that I wish England had persisted with it.

His form from fullback has been excellent so far this season. The try saving big hit on Joe Hawkins in round 1 set the tone for what has followed. Tigers put out some stats before the Saints game a few weeks back and metres after contact were way up on Furbank who certainly looked second best in that particular game. Competition for the shirt is certainly driving Steward on and with Hewat as attack coach at Tigers it's certainly helping. Furbank might not hold onto the shirt if he doesn't perform.

Very unlikely he'll play 12 for Tigers. Not least because Kelly and Woodward have both started the season well and you'd assume will continue being given game time. Defending at 12 requires agility as there's normally multiple runners coming down that channel.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

mountain man wrote:I've only ever seen fans on forums going on about Steward to 12, as far as I know he's never played there. Certainly not for Tigers, correct if wrong.

We know that. But the reason it gets brought up is that a) 12 is a perennial problem for England, b) 12 is a position that Steward has a good physique to play, and playing there would make his major weakness - his lack of agility - less of an issue.

I’d like to see him tried there. There’s a comparison with Matt Banahan, who I never really liked as a winger (again because of his lack of agility) but who played 12 in a Barbarians game and looked good enough that I wish England had persisted with it.

His form from fullback has been excellent so far this season. The try saving big hit on Joe Hawkins in round 1 set the tone for what has followed. Tigers put out some stats before the Saints game a few weeks back and metres after contact were way up on Furbank who certainly looked second best in that particular game. Competition for the shirt is certainly driving Steward on and with Hewat as attack coach at Tigers it's certainly helping. Furbank might not hold onto the shirt if he doesn't perform.

Very unlikely he'll play 12 for Tigers. Not least because Kelly and Woodward have both started the season well and you'd assume will continue being given game time. Defending at 12 requires agility as there's normally multiple runners coming down that channel.

I agree with everything you have said FKAS. But I would still love him to play 12, just like I always wanted to see Alex Goode move permanently to 10, just think they both have the ability to be outstanding in those other positions,

Got to think that this is somewhat of a must win for England, we can keep putting in decent performances, but the results have got to start turning at some point.

Brilliant try! Loved how they kept it alive.

Sounds like we got away with one there...

Ooo hatrick before 20 mins for CCS?

Crying out loud, it is a bloody try.

Wow, two scores in 12 minutes. Let's not try to defend the lead for the rest of the afternoon, eh, boys...

So when this new law come in?

Ford on now, keep them out. Job done.

Slight concern early doors. Smith is trying to play like Ford but providing enough direction. In the first attack Spencer is looking around for the pass a couple of times. For the first try he's in the backfield having not expected his dab threw to be regathered.

He's much better when he plays at the line and someone else provides the option out the back. Which is proved as he scythes through in the build up to the second try. Furbank needs to take on some of the management role from in behind and support Marcus so he can play right on the gain line.

Kicked the ball away twice there in good positions

That kick was a really poor decision from Smith, can't take this too lightly and treat it like an exhibition match.

So many careless passes and plays by England

Earl to 7 and Dombrandt 8

Geordie wrote:So many careless passes and plays by England

It is just too casual, they are playing like they feel like they just have to turn up and win.

Curry spark out.

Great start though by England.

Cumbrian wrote:

Geordie wrote:So many careless passes and plays by England

It is just too casual, they are playing like they feel like they just have to turn up and win.

Yep they need to concentrate and not be over-confident.

Sad for Curry this, he hasn't had much luck recently. Classy from Valentini.

Good try for the Aussies, hopefully that will wake England up a bit.

Jeez can they guffaw over this kid anymore?

Heart says corner, head says the posts.

Yep - take it back out to 2 scores

It’s bizarre how England still over-celebrate the opposition knocking on.

Second week in a row Furbank steps in for a two man tackle and doesn't stop the ball from being offloaded. As last week it results in a try. He's either got to trust his inside defender or make sure the ball is wrapped up.

Jeez England so loose....

And that's what happens

England far too loose again - any idea what the free-kick was for?

Too many missed tackles by England, needs tightening up. Australia right back into it

That was an easy almost gimmee try England just gave up.

That's just poor communication in and around the ruck.