[2014 EOYT] England v Australia

[Amiga500]

I think this result and the Welsh result further shows that Ireland are not out on a pedestal when it comes to the NH sides - indeed - if we were in Twickenham this year, I'd tip England to win it. But its Lansdowne road...

 

[goodNumber10]

I think the difference is that were seeing genuine progression and solid cohesion with Ireland.

The wins for Ireland in hindsight are expected, the wins for England & Wales were not and were just on the day wins. Ireland were asked and confident in what they set or to do each have England and Wales did not seem to be.

Ireland & Scotland really showed some direction this AI, France were France, England & Wales left a lot on the pitch.

 

[TommiG88]

I think the difference is that were seeing genuine progression and solid cohesion with Ireland.

The wins for Ireland in hindsight are expected, the wins for England & Wales were not and were just on the day wins. Ireland were asked and confident in what they set or to do each have England and Wales did not seem to be.

Ireland & Scotland really showed some direction this AI, France were France, England & Wales left a lot on the pitch.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

So sir Ian mcgeehan believes in the telegraph that the 13 shirt is barritts to loose and when tuilagi comes back he will play 12?

That's not what I expected to read on a Sunday morning after the 4 matches we have had.

 

[TommiG88]

So sir Ian mcgeehan believes in the telegraph that the 13 shirt is barritts to loose and when tuilagi comes back he will play 12?

That's not what I expected to read on a Sunday morning after the 4 matches we have had.

Let's pick forwards to play as wingers then. Pointless having anyone skilful/quick out in those positions.

 

[Chikwa]

This England side is not as good as the 2003 side.Only because they are playing at home they are amongst the favourites to win the Webb Ellis Cup. England ,Ireland South Africa and the All Blacks are my top 4.Wales and Australia are capable of causing upsets. The French are not a factor because of their coaches. They should get a foreign coach and give him enough time to build a team.

 

[Wendigo7]

another classic example of how a Rugby match is won up front. Australia showed resilience, flexibility, adaptivity and intelligence, fantastic ball movement and attacking flair, but England's pack was too dominant. The mauls, the scrum, total domination, and just the eight up front's play around the park generally. This gives Angland guarantees moving forward, but nothing new really. They can dominate up front, and have found good halfback play again with Ben Youngs and George Ford, who are pretty attractive young men. Any time they tried attacking, something went almost immediately wrong, so nothing new...good guarantees and lots of confidence restored.

For Australia, that's 3 defeats despite being good tbf, 3 defeats from 4...still not a disaster, it's an away tour, and they were never blown off the park and played 3 highly competitive tests til the very end of the match. But let's not forget this exact fixture will occur again in a year in the pool stages of a certain RWC, so again, the thought of the day: England's confidence restored. Well done.

Hahahahaha.

I'm not sure how that improves the ability of the side but you go for it you big ewis.

 

[Big Ewis]

Hahahahaha.

I'm not sure how that improves the ability of the side but you go for it you big ewis.

laugh all you want and mock me so, but you can never count out the intangibles on a team and that's something that I now understand after weeks and weeks of maturing, months even, it's not all stats and measurable figures and what the majority has deemed "sensible". If you can't see how that helps, then there's well, there's most probably nothing wrong with you but BUT STILL intangibles and not all measurable calcules defect mathem realitics.
The intangibles.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Finally got round to watching some highlights, and here are the few things I thought and noticed:

1) We didn't appear to have played catastrophically bad from the extended highlights I Saw; albeit we played in a very pragmatic fashion which won't work against many top teams.

2) Lawes, Morgan and Robshaw looked demoniacally good - or at least demoniacally effective! I don't think you can ask any more of a player than that they play the role you give them to play, and that's what happened yesterday - Morgan made yards, spinning out of countless tackles, Robshaw tackled and jackled, Lawes scythed defenders who initially appeared to have some space...

3) Our attacking play still looks as though its coached by a 12 year old. The contrast with Australia is utterly, utterly ridiculous. For this reason alone I struggle to describe us as a better side than Oz, despite our good recent record against them.

4) If anybody ever identifies a player more pathetically bad at the breakdown than Dylan Hartley, please tell me as I'd be fascinated to see what such a player would look like. Hartley seems to immediately do the splits / faceplant into the ground when attempting to compete, and while it was pretty harmless this time round it can often be construed by the referee as going off your feet and a penalty offence.

5) Not just trying to be difficult but Farrell seriously needs to improve his pass - towards the end of the game following a scrum, with Brown waiting on the touchline, he gave a really poor pass to May who otherwise could have run onto it and probably skinned his man in the same way he skinned Conrad Smith 3 weeks ago. Simple, important things.

6) Youngs' pass is also truly terrible. He makes up for it a tiny wee bit by being quite good at scrambling in tight spots - because of as someone pointed out his heightened physicality compared to Care.

7) My kingdom for an inside centre! Twelvetrees who I do believe is at heart is a very good player, plays like a reindeer on roller-skates. I don't think he's in the same league as Eastmond right now.

 

[chippieolamus]

Finally got round to watching some highlights, and here are the few things I thought and noticed:

1) We didn't appear to have played catastrophically bad from the extended highlights I Saw; albeit we played in a very pragmatic fashion which won't work against many top teams.

2) Lawes, Morgan and Robshaw looked demoniacally good - or at least demoniacally effective! I don't think you can ask any more of a player than that they play the role you give them to play, and that's what happened yesterday - Morgan made yards, spinning out of countless tackles, Robshaw tackled and jackled, Lawes scythed defenders who initially appeared to have some space...

3) Our attacking play still looks as though its coached by a 12 year old. The contrast with Australia is utterly, utterly ridiculous. For this reason alone I struggle to describe us as a better side than Oz, despite our good recent record against them.

4) If anybody ever identifies a player more pathetically bad at the breakdown than Dylan Hartley, please tell me as I'd be fascinated to see what such a player would look like. Hartley seems to immediately do the splits / faceplant into the ground when attempting to compete, and while it was pretty harmless this time round it can often be construed by the referee as going off your feet and a penalty offence.

5) Not just trying to be difficult but Farrell seriously needs to improve his pass - towards the end of the game following a scrum, with Brown waiting on the touchline, he gave a really poor pass to May who otherwise could have run onto it and probably skinned his man in the same way he skinned Conrad Smith 3 weeks ago. Simple, important things.

6) Youngs' pass is also truly terrible. He makes up for it a tiny wee bit by being quite good at scrambling in tight spots - because of as someone pointed out his heightened physicality compared to Care.

7) My kingdom for an inside centre! Twelvetrees who I do believe is at heart is a very good player, plays like a reindeer on roller-skates. I don't think he's in the same league as Eastmond right now.

1) Agreed. That sort of game works against sides who do not have strong packs, but will not work against the likes of SA or NZ who can match (or beat) our pack.
2) Agreed. Morgan has been great this series, and Lawes is just fantastic. Among the top 5 locks in the world if you ask me.
3) Agree partly, but I think if we play Eastmond/Tuilagi that will sort itself out. Teams aren't worried in defence by Barritt, and 12T only comes into his own if he has a powerful runner besides him. Tillage and Eastmond interest defences, thus causing our back 3 to have more space and us to score more tries.
4) Also his discipline is awful (he has a history of getting stupid cards which cost his teams important games). Start Webber.
5) Yep
6) Hoping that Care will get back to form to be honest, if he doesn't I'm seriously worried about 9. Maybe Wiggy deserves a shot?
7) I find 12T frustrating. He can be brilliant, but seems to be so inconsistent. Eastmond should have the 12 shirt from now until the world cup.

On a side note, having just rewatched the highlights, I saw this again. Skip to 2:03 https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152604048929825 How is that a knock on? a) it is clearly ripped out of Watson's hands b) it goes backwards. That is a definite try for 12T. Why couldn't the ref have allowed England to touch the ball down, then used the TMO to go back and check the 'knock on'?

 

[McTallshort]

Let's pick forwards to play as wingers then. Pointless having anyone skilful/quick out in those positions.

Yeah lets not forget he played centre for Scotland and The Lions and has a vast coach portfolio so he may just know what hes talking about. With Manu at 12 you have someone who can hit up the middle hard and direct over the gain line, Barrett at 13 ensures your defense is sound and there is nothing wrong with bringing the back 3 into the mix if you need someone a bit quicker running off 9 or 10. He did say in that article that 36 was not the long term option for England and after yesterday I would agree.

 

[smartcooky]

4) If anybody ever identifies a player more pathetically bad at the breakdown than Dylan Hartley, please tell me as I'd be fascinated to see what such a player would look like. Hartley seems to immediately do the splits / faceplant into the ground when attempting to compete, and while it was pretty harmless this time round it can often be construed by the referee as going off your feet and a penalty offence.

This technique will get him pinged off the park with most SH referees. They tend to be much tougher on players at the breakdown pretending to be on their feet while using their head for support, leaning their knees into a player on the ground for support, or using the "BOD" technique; forearms on the ground while jackling for the ball.
.

 

[TommiG88]

Yeah lets not forget he played centre for Scotland and The Lions and has a vast coach portfolio so he may just know what hes talking about. With Manu at 12 you have someone who can hit up the middle hard and direct over the gain line, Barrett at 13 ensures your defense is sound and there is nothing wrong with bringing the back 3 into the mix if you need someone a bit quicker running off 9 or 10. He did say in that article that 36 was not the long term option for England and after yesterday I would agree.

And when he was last in charge of bath or any club team they failed. If we play that way we would be playing like Wales which is one dimensional. It will win the odd game against the big guns but not consistently.

Barritt at 13 will not bring the backs into the game the way we are playing. Our players are not being coached to come into the line on first or second receivers. It also doesn't help that we are getting little quick ball from the break down.

 

[smartcooky]

Yeah lets not forget he played centre for Scotland and The Lions and has a vast coach portfolio so he may just know what hes talking about. With Manu at 12 you have someone who can hit up the middle hard and direct over the gain line, Barrett at 13 ensures your defense is sound and there is nothing wrong with bringing the back 3 into the mix if you need someone a bit quicker running off 9 or 10. He did say in that article that 36 was not the long term option for England and after yesterday I would agree.

They could use Brown more for this sort of thing. He is deceptively quick off the mark

 

[InsaneAsylum]

frustrating to watch as a Wallabies fan but we've effectively been found out and it's blindingly obvious why but for some reason it gets swept under the carpet by those who can actually effect change on the team.

England's game plan was simple, use up and unders with one or more chasers, go for the scrum as often as possible and use the rolling maul at the lineout as much as possible. not rocket science but exactly how ireland beat us a week ago.

every wallaby scrum went backwards, sideways, up or down and resulted in a penalty. every maul resulted in a penalty for offiside or pulling the maul down. The Wallabies insisted on playing "running rugby" and england just kept kicking it back to them and trusted their defence which was solid. i think it was rod kafer who said during the game "the wallabies are trying to play super rugby against england but it doesn't work at test level".

the wallabies will continue to be useless until 1 - 8 is sorted out.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

frustrating to watch as a Wallabies fan but we've effectively been found out and it's blindingly obvious why but for some reason it gets swept under the carpet by those who can actually effect change on the team.

England's game plan was simple, use up and unders with one or more chasers, go for the scrum as often as possible and use the rolling maul at the lineout as much as possible. not rocket science but exactly how ireland beat us a week ago.

every wallaby scrum went backwards, sideways, up or down and resulted in a penalty. every maul resulted in a penalty for offiside or pulling the maul down. The Wallabies insisted on playing "running rugby" and england just kept kicking it back to them and trusted their defence which was solid. i think it was rod kafer who said during the game "the wallabies are trying to play super rugby against england but it doesn't work at test level".

the wallabies will continue to be useless until 1 - 8 is sorted out.

If only we could mix the England forwards with the Aussie backs, now that would be a good team.

 

[smartcooky]

frustrating to watch as a Wallabies fan but we've effectively been found out and it's blindingly obvious why but for some reason it gets swept under the carpet by those who can actually effect change on the team.

England's game plan was simple, use up and unders with one or more chasers, go for the scrum as often as possible and use the rolling maul at the lineout as much as possible. not rocket science but exactly how ireland beat us a week ago.

every wallaby scrum went backwards, sideways, up or down and resulted in a penalty. every maul resulted in a penalty for offiside or pulling the maul down. The Wallabies insisted on playing "running rugby" and england just kept kicking it back to them and trusted their defence which was solid. i think it was rod kafer who said during the game "the wallabies are trying to play super rugby against england but it doesn't work at test level".

the wallabies will continue to be useless until 1 - 8 is sorted out.

Shades of RWC2011.

If the ARU spent more of their hard earned cash developing props instead of buying expensive, flashy rugby-league backs like Israel Folau, they would be a lot better off. They have known about their shortcomings in the front row ever since Al Baxter was found out and systematically demolished by England at Twickenham in 2005 when Baxter was yellow-carded for deliberately collapsing the scrum, and again in the 2007 World Cup quarter-final in Marseille when Andrew Sheridan just owned him. The All Blacks showed him up again in 2010 when Robbie Dean used his shepherd's crook to whip him out of the contest before Joubert binned him. So its several years later, going into the 2015 World Cup, and Australian rugby has still not addressed this issue seriously.

It is an often repeated adage that the Game of Rugby Union starts up front. It always has, and likely always will. If the ARU is waiting for World Rugby to change the Laws to make props less important, they are going to be waiting for a very long time.

 

[j'nuh]

McKenzie - 7 wins from 8 games against the NH.
Cheika - 3 losses from 4.

Karma is beautiful.

 

[smartcooky]

McKenzie - 7 wins from 8 games against the NH.
Cheika - 3 losses from 4.

Karma is beautiful.

and before McKenzie, Robbie Deans!

35 matches v NH countries
27 wins
7 losses
1 draw

77% win record

Yes, karma is beautiful.

 

[Jaguares]

If only we could mix the England forwards with the Aussie backs, now that would be a good team.

That's a good idea, Aussies forwards are weak and the English backs are boring.

Shades of RWC2011.

If the ARU spent more of their hard earned cash developing props instead of buying expensive, flashy rugby-league backs like Israel Folau, they would be a lot better off. They have known about their shortcomings in the front row ever since Al Baxter was found out and systematically demolished by England at Twickenham in 2005 when Baxter was yellow-carded for deliberately collapsing the scrum, and again in the 2007 World Cup quarter-final in Marseille when Andrew Sheridan just owned him. The All Blacks showed him up again in 2010 when Robbie Dean used his shepherd's crook to whip him out of the contest before Joubert binned him. So its several years later, going into the 2015 World Cup, and Australian rugby has still not addressed this issue seriously.

It is an often repeated adage that the Game of Rugby Union starts up front. It always has, and likely always will. If the ARU is waiting for World Rugby to change the Laws to make props less important, they are going to be waiting for a very long time.

Or do what they did before, stealing front rows from other countries (Topo Rodriguez, Patricio Noriega)

I think Georgia would be a good place to look, any Georgian prop under 20 would be better than Ben Alexander or Robinson