[2014 EOYT] England vs New Zealand

[Ragey Erasmus]

nah, no stereotype, stop it with that. You'll have to accept someone may have an opinion that England aren't exciting AND actually knows his facts, has seen the games...Mike Brown I've never criticized, although yes his form in NZ was very mediocre and he couldn't confirm the elite player status we thought he would.

France you know the situation. We've been by far the most sterile attack in potential/results ratio. Just terrible, terrible.
Wales: they had issues scoring against Italy, France were *miserable* and they only got a lucky North try and another one. They were aaaawful offensively in Twickers and got smashed in Ireland (not a single try in either). They were terrible again in Test 1 but good in Test 2 in SA...

Well it is a stereotype... Just what is your criteria for "exciting"? That move we almost finished against Wales (stopped by Halfpenny) certainly seemed as good as any you will see in the world with only the finishing to fault. I have no problem with you having a different opinion, what I'm wondering is how you justify it. I didn't question your knowledge of the game either, excitement doesn't require knowledge. In our last game against Aus we did some running from our own 22. Infact you should remember that we socred a try on the end of that that people got wound up by because Mike Brown caught the ball to prevent it going out but had his toes in touch. Doing what Brown got away with, running the ball all the way up the pitch and scoring a try against Australia should count as exciting.

In our first game vs NZ we would almost certainly have got a try had Nonu not illegally pulled Haskell back to prevent him getting to an offload. On the whole England have done a fair amount of exciting rugby and I just feel you are catering to the old view of England being like a tractor or something; slow, boring, uninspiring but efficient and can just keep chugging on. Also I fail to see how England are less exciting due to their opposition having poor attack...?

Nobody is claiming we will be playing at the same pace as the ABs or Aus but there is plenty of space to still be exciting without being the most exciting.

 

[Jbobo]

Well it is a stereotype... Just what is your criteria for "exciting"? That move we almost finished against Wales (stopped by Halfpenny) certainly seemed as good as any you will see in the world with only the finishing to fault. I have no problem with you having a different opinion, what I'm wondering is how you justify it. I didn't question your knowledge of the game either, excitement doesn't require knowledge. In our last game against Aus we did some running from our own 22. Infact you should remember that we socred a try on the end of that that people got wound up by because Mike Brown caught the ball to prevent it going out but had his toes in touch. Doing what Brown got away with, running the ball all the way up the pitch and scoring a try against Australia should count as exciting.

In our first game vs NZ we would almost certainly have got a try had Nonu not illegally pulled Haskell back to prevent him getting to an offload. On the whole England have done a fair amount of exciting rugby and I just feel you are catering to the old view of England being like a tractor or something; slow, boring, uninspiring but efficient and can just keep chugging on. Also I fail to see how England are less exciting due to their opposition having poor attack...?

Nobody is claiming we will be playing at the same pace as the ABs or Aus but there is plenty of space to still be exciting without being the most exciting.

I agree. Over the past couple of years England seem to have changed their philosophy so as to use their forwards as a catalyst to attack using their backs, rather than to rely on the forwards momentum. I think their 'excitability' has increased as a result.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Well it is a stereotype... Just what is your criteria for "exciting"? That move we almost finished against Wales (stopped by Halfpenny) certainly seemed as good as any you will see in the world with only the finishing to fault. I have no problem with you having a different opinion, what I'm wondering is how you justify it. I didn't question your knowledge of the game either, excitement doesn't require knowledge. In our last game against Aus we did some running from our own 22. Infact you should remember that we socred a try on the end of that that people got wound up by because Mike Brown caught the ball to prevent it going out but had his toes in touch. Doing what Brown got away with, running the ball all the way up the pitch and scoring a try against Australia should count as exciting.

In our first game vs NZ we would almost certainly have got a try had Nonu not illegally pulled Haskell back to prevent him getting to an offload. On the whole England have done a fair amount of exciting rugby and I just feel you are catering to the old view of England being like a tractor or something; slow, boring, uninspiring but efficient and can just keep chugging on. Also I fail to see how England are less exciting due to their opposition having poor attack...?

Nobody is claiming we will be playing at the same pace as the ABs or Aus but there is plenty of space to still be exciting without being the most exciting.

I would if I were you...

 

[goodNumber10]

England were fine in New Zealand in Test 2 for instance, but at the 6N they scored just 1 try over Ireland at home and 2 in France, the two major games for their tournament. Scoring all those tries in Italy, seeing how the latter spiraled into complete darkness gradually all year long after a good match in Cardiff to hit it off and three losses against Tier 2 nations in the summer...that game really didn't mean much.
And anyways, I'm not talking about that; England's efficiency scoring tries; I'm talking about this present group's excitement. Not ecstatic over seeing what they can do.

Ewis, mate. You're wrong here sorry.

England were excellent in test 1 not test 2 in the summer, whilst France got pumped and everyone else had performances that fluctuated wildly.

In the 6 nations they scored 13 tries to Irelands 15 and Wales 11, more importantly though 9 of those tries were scored by the fullback and outside centre and all of them in under 5 phases - so not big boring truck it up rugby at all. Additionally the scrum half scored 2 and back row got 2 all came from line breaks, that is not the hall marks of a boring team, as you are alluding to.

In the top 12 try scorers france and scotland are the only teams to not have more than one, and England and Ireland both have 3.

Ireland 15 tries
England 13 tries
Wales 11 Tries
France 8 tries
Italy 6 Tries
Scotland 3 tries

You want to talk about this current group, combined both fly halves made more line breaks than the entire french team. Englands scrum half as many as.

You do roll this anti-england claptrap out everytime the tests come around though, so bravo for getting a bite

 

[iINDOMINUSxx]

Ewis, mate. You're wrong here sorry.

England were excellent in test 1 not test 2 in the summer, whilst France got pumped and everyone else had performances that fluctuated wildly.

In the 6 nations they scored 13 tries to Irelands 15 and Wales 11, more importantly though 9 of those tries were scored by the fullback and outside centre and all of them in under 5 phases - so not big boring truck it up rugby at all. Additionally the scrum half scored 2 and back row got 2 all came from line breaks, that is not the hall marks of a boring team, as you are alluding to.

In the top 12 try scorers france and scotland are the only teams to not have more than one, and England and Ireland both have 3.

Ireland 15 tries
England 13 tries
Wales 11 Tries
France 8 tries
Italy 6 Tries
Scotland 3 tries

You want to talk about this current group, combined both fly halves made more line breaks than the entire french team. Englands scrum half as many as.

You do roll this anti-england claptrap out everytime the tests come around though, so bravo for getting a bite

what stats are those ? scotland scored 4 tries in the six nations and 5 on the mid year tests ?

 

[goodNumber10]

@ImScotty

you're right, i miscounted,

it was actually:
Ireland 16
England 14
Wales 11
France 9 (LOL!)
Italy 7
Scotland 4

 

[Big Ewis]

nah man. England butchered a ton of tries throughout the 6N. I don't give a crap about numbers, I remember what I saw. They showed MUCH better attacking form than previously, as they were absolutely laughable previously (remember their 2013 6N form ??) and a true England caricature back then. With the changes like Tuilagi out and Burrell in, Brown's revelation, and just overall it seems more attention to the game out wide and playing individual matchups I'm guessing from Lancaster, England were pretty cool to watch at times this year.
In NZ, overall England were pretty good on attack, yeh. No issues there. Even in Test 1, that's true, they were a real threat.

And your repeated mentioning of France is just cheap as hell GN10. Where do I mention France are a good attacking team ???? In the last...2 YEARS on this forum ?! Even making mention of France's offensive numbers here is dubious.


"You do roll this anti-england claptrap out everytime the tests come around though, so bravo for getting a bite "
It's disappointing you'd see it this way. You do realize this all started when I just looked at the England roster and expressed my sentiment they didn't look exciting, with the exception of a Brown or Eastmond. There's a couple more guys, but that's just not an exciting roster for me, from what I've seen from those guys. And there's no doubt on my mind France individually have much more excitement, but play like absolute dogshiit as a unit.

You English posters on here will have to admit sooner or later that you're amongst the most sensitive as a group and will always overreact to stuff that's said about your team. I remember a NIGHTMARE some months ago in the Italy England 6N thread when it wasn't called for, and here again, I get insulted by some and get major attitude from others. Plus mixed notions. I don't give a shiit how many tries Scotland or England scored in the last 6N :lol: I'm just saying I don't think that list is exciting from England, leave me alone ffs...

 

[iINDOMINUSxx]

with the way france are playing how did they get 9 tries in the six nations @goodNumber10

 

[Big Ewis]

with the way france are playing how did they get 9 tries in the six nations @goodNumber10

individuals shining. We have Huget, we have Dulin, Fofana...

 

[TRF_Olyy]

"You can keep your facts and stats, I have blind ignorance and that's enough for me."

 

[iINDOMINUSxx]

individuals shining. We have Huget, we have Dulin, Fofana...

actually to be fair France did start off very well in the six nations manage to bounce back against england and played very well against italy but then slacked abit and getting a lucky win against us

 

[Big Ewis]

"You can keep your facts and stats, I have blind ignorance and that's enough for me."

:lol: bwahaha !!! I don't think your team is exciting and it's PANIC MODE !! I'm immediately uncultured, the biggest fool, an idiot, dirty, an evil Frenchman with dubious ideas...you guys are fkng insane !!!! I DON'T REALLY LIKE YOUR FRIGGIN TEAM !! suuuuuue me !! the sensitivity level is off the CHARTS.

actually to be fair France did start off very well in the six nations manage to bounce back against england and played very well against italy but then slacked abit and getting a lucky win against us

wait up wait up Scotty. I'm at war with the English again. (Wait for a historical joke about France losing, just wait, patience is key..).

 

[Jbobo]

Sigh...Big Ewis

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

@Big Ewis Really? You accuse others of being sensitive? Pot, please meet kettle. How about you look at your reactions in the France thread... For the love of God stop always trying to paint yourself as a victim, large chunks of it is caused by you and then you decide to be a complete hypocrite. Also you said of 2013 "a true England caricature back then" so you subscribe to the England boring stereotype. If England are being boring then that is a "true" England. Yes we butchered tries, that makes a team not exciting?

Funny how you say " You'll have to accept someone may have an opinion that England aren't exciting AND actually knows his facts" yet you flat out refuse to accept our opinion, again hypocrisy. Maybe you should accept that we have an opinion that England aren't boring and we know the facts. Can't see that happening though.

You want to not have a discussion about it and meet people who disagree? Don't wade in with stupid comments and then flat out refuse to back them up, assert your own superiority and then cry when you get taken up on it. If you aren't intending to stir up trouble then you simply lack decorum, if you are then you are trolling and that's pretty pathetic. Which is it?

 

[Big Ewis]

dude, go read my posts from Page 5 til now, and read the replies to it. Go do it. WITHOUT your England glasses on, just read the words that I and others have posted. And you think it's a trend I always play victim, I accuse ppl who accuse me of that of making it a trend to always think I'm playing victim !

I don't reject your opinions. If you guys are excited about England, that's fine. And I've admitted England have some good attacking weapons and have put some nice attacking performances as a team...what - the - fucc - more - do - you - want - from - me ??

2013 England was monumentally boring as FKKKK. That's fact, that's not "subscribing to" an ideology or a trend. Soooo fallacious, your thinking....it's preetty dangerous what you're doin there

This is plain just pathetic...c ya.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I have read them, I tend to get to the current post by reading the previous ones... Yes I do think you play the victim a lot. You will say something, someone will disagree, you will throw some accusation at them such as not knowing the game as well as you, being biased, hating you, being sensitive etc, they will respond to your accusation and you will act like you have done absolutely nothing to cause it.

I don't want much from you at all but we disagree, that happens. However every single argument that's put forward you are batting away without reason. More tries? Nah they don't count. More meters run, more offloads, more defenders beaten, tries scored by backs? None of that matters. Playing against an opponent with poor attacks is suddenly a criteria that rubs off on England to make them less interesting by virtue of who they are playing. Not being clinical enough to finish all the chances produced makes a team less exciting too apparently. It's not that you think England are boring that is the issue, it's that you offer no reason why.

Yes 2013 England was crap, the point I actually highlighted was that you said it was a "true caricature" of England, ie that being boring is what England is about and that this is a caricature you think should be used to describe England. If not then why call us boring a true caricature? Would you say NZ going through a period of dull rugby was a true caricature of them? Of course not because you don't have the pre-conceived view that NZ are boring. Now you have as good as admitted that England being boring is a true England and it seems you can't bring yourself to accept an alternative regardless of what happens. You think England are boring? Fine, I personally cannot see what it is based on other than you thinking that is how it should be thus that is how it is.

Again Ewis, the golden rule, treat others as you wish to be treated.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

So, uh, New Zealand aye?

 

[Darwin]

So, uh, New Zealand aye?

Who? I thought this thread was about England's midfield / general creativity.....

I assume the ABs side will be named in a few hours, so us kiwis should have something to talk about then. I for one plan to complain vociferously about the inclusion of Israel Dagg at fullback.....

 

[Maverick1987]

On sky sport news they are saying Julien Savea is danger . I'm sure this comes as a huge surprise to Stuart Lancaster !! Haha

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion. The difference is that Big Ewis feels he is entitled to his own facts.