2014 6 Nations: Italy vs England (Round 5)

[St George]

Am i the only one who wonders why it has to be Tuilagi v Burrell?

Tuilagi & Burrell anyone?

 

[Tony Manx]

Am i the only one who wonders why it has to be Tuilagi v Burrell?

Tuilagi & Burrell anyone?

If we HAVE to have Manu then probably........................

 

[ratsapprentice]

Exactly what these guys ^ have said.

Manu is a very impressive player, but he does have a stifling effect on our attacking shape.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

.....I do not buy into this hype of Manu who is what the great Nonu and Bastreau were before they learnt that there was more to rugby than just trying to run through everything......!

Can I point out that Bastareud definitely Hasn't learnt this yet

 

[goodNumber10]

He barely touched the ball, who is to say what would have happened if he started. Over the past 4 years he has shown what he can bring, and that is something England want.

we must have been watching different games.

 

[Tony Manx]

Can I point out that Bastareud definitely Hasn't learnt this yet

He certainly has shown good use of his hands on many occasions in the Top 14 if not for Les Bleus..................

 

[ratsapprentice]

He certainly has shown good use of his hands on many occasions in the Top 14 if not for Les Bleus..................

That's the point, surely?

 

[Aristodemus]

So Basteraud is the superior player

 

[St George]

That's the point, Shirley?

A-ha....so Tony is an alias....

 

[Draggs]

A-ha....so Tony is an alias....

He is a man with an identity crisis! Is he French or Manx?!?
Come on Tony!

 

[Tony Manx]

A-ha....so Tony is an alias....

.....................found out!

Manx with heavy French tendencies!!!

 

[Draggs]

.....................found out!

Manx with heavy French tendencies!!!

I think they can treat that these days!

 

[Big Ewis]

can't you just admit england were way better than Italy? Do you have to spin it into a massive negative for italy, rather than just admit England dispatched Italy without really playing well?

england were just better on so many levels and if they hadn't been chasing points would have dominated them even more with a lot more structure.

if you want. "England were much much better". But that's just not the point. I see what you're implying, that I'm trying to spoil it for England, but it's just a fact that Italy were God awful well beyond their usual reckless, soft ways. Just watch those other matches.
I said what I meant to say. England can rejoice from putting 50 in an away match. But Italy were awful. More to take from Italy than England, as we already know England are a very solid team atm, but for Italy this is just close to despair.

Try to read my posts in the way that I write them, the intention - as opposed to seeing things in my posts that AREN'T THERE.


EDIT: I'm trying to decline my logic. Look at it this way: as good as England are atm, how many teams could they currently put a 40-50type score on in their own stadium currently in world Rugby ?
Think about that for a moment. Just, objectively think about it.

And now, think of where Italy are at. And understand how wrong I was to think they were an improved side from June/November 2013 (although earlier in the tournament, one would have to agree with that notion).

They're already written off in the 2015 RWC as it stands, barring a miracle.

This is harsh for them, but this summer, while we're in Australia and England in kiwi-land - they'll be playing in Fiji, Samoa and Japan. And here's the bomb dropping: it's only fitting.
Yes they still have some Tier 1 quality in some aspects, but right now, they're just a side that's subjected to the faster pace of actual Tier 1 Rugby.

 

[ratsapprentice]

.....................found out!

Manx with heavy French tendencies!!!

Translation = "I fell off my steed at the TT"

 

[Tony Manx]

Translation = "I fell off my steed at the TT"

Whats this....get me day?

Big Ewis not good enough for you today and you have to start on the three legged guys? Well....surprise surprise with them I can run faster than you guys!!!

 

[Draggs]

We all know about Ewis' identity crisis. He will be a Russian this time next week.

 

[Big Ewis]

We all know about Ewis' identity crisis. He will be a Russian this time next week.

choose....your words carefully. They might be your last as 'TRF-Draggs with 9,011 posts'....

 

[Bada-Bing!]

If England lose the 6N ***le it was not because we did not beat Italy by a differential of more than 49 points, it was firstly those last 5 minutes in Paris (obviously cost us the Grand Slam) then to compound it (lose the ***le) by only putting 20 points on the board v an awful Scotland; which should have been 40, which would not have put so much pressure to score so many points v Italy.

That being said come on France !!! It is out of England's hands now and even if France win, it won't be by 70 points, England win the ***le; if we don't then well done Ireland and a fitting Felina for BOD.

That aside, I think England are building nicely for the bigger picture: the RWC at home. Nice parallels with the 2003 WC winning team in that we could be saving a Grand Slam for the World Cup year; which would hopefully give them the confidence platform to challenge for the ultimate prize, especially with home advantage. This team may also have the edge over 2003 because this England team is full of young players and still more players to come back from injury, which means this team won't have to be dismantled if the dream is fulfilled.

A tough NZ tour to come, followed by a dress rehearsal of 4 games at Twickenham against the big 3 plus Somoa and this England team will be ready for 2015.

 

[Crapspray]

EDIT: I'm trying to decline my logic. Look at it this way: as good as England are atm, how many teams could they currently put a 40-50type score on in their own stadium currently in world Rugby ?
Think about that for a moment. Just, objectively think about it.

Argentina this summer*. Could/should have done it against Scotland (taken chances and playing on a grass rugby pitch might have helped). And most sides beneath Italy. Bear in mind this England side is under-strength, then I'd say they could do it to a fair few.

*Yes, a second-string side. However, England were without thirteen Lions, one banned player, five rested, and three/four injured players. In total, 22-23 first choice players.

EDIT: Four rested players. Barritt was rested, but was called up for the Lions near the end of the tour. So 21-22. I.e. a match day squad.

 

[Big Ewis]

Argentina this summer*. Could/should have done it against Scotland (taken chances and playing on a grass rugby pitch might have helped). of the tour.

oh right, my bad, my bad ! Of course, I forgot Argentina's C team (a nation with a huge depth problem in the first place).
As for Scotland, yes England could've scored more but they didn't for a reason first of all, and second they couldn't have put 50 on them. They couldn't have almost tripled their score at Murrayfield.

Now that's out of the way. With *Italy woeful match* in mind, think about it. How many respectable "tier 1" sides does England put 50 past in their own stadium ? Now think of Italy again.

In Italy's defense, it was a disaster. So they're not that terrible and are not going to be that terrible the whole time. But it's just a monstrous setback for them still, and one can't just use "they were awful today" as some excuse. It's part of their calendar results for 2014, and so is the blowout in Dublin, and my goodness they don't look good going into the next RWC right now.

They looked in sheer progression around that November 2012 til April 2013...even contained the All-Blacks laudably well for a while, were one penalty (they missed) away from tying against Australia, beat France and Ireland at home and finished 4th in the tournament in 2013....the game had replenished too, noticeably. They'd do things we hadn't seen them do ever.

Big, big disappointment today for them on this final weekend of the tournament....