[2014 EOYT] England vs South Africa

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Opps sorry wait maverick you picked the right answer. Injuries no excuse though

 

[TRF_Olyy]

England should just clear out the backroom staff. Bring in the Mallinder/Diamond #NorthernGrit dream team, King for attack and Forshaw for defence.
Done.

 

[Maverick1987]

It was a 50/50 and you picked the wrong answer! The stubborness of our coaches is arguably a bigger problem then the players we have available, though..

I'm not overlooking the stubbornness of the coach at all . Just think labelling is worse than wales and Ireland off the back of a couple of losses with a lot of injuries is premature . I might be wrong but let's leave that for the six nations page ?

Opps sorry wait maverick you picked the right answer. Injuries no excuse though

Haha no probs mate. I didn't really know what you meant by wrong answer anyway

Edit : sorry about the double post can an admin merge it please ..,

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

They didn't even do that though. Three charge-downs (I think) and two spoons at goal isn't exactly a master class.

Solid doesn't really equal a master class... Farrell and Care cost England at least 10 points whereas Reinach scored a try in a rather inexperienced display. Throw Pollard in there today and the margin of victory would have been bigger in my opinion, although I probably overrate Pollard.

 

[j'nuh]

England should just clear out the backroom staff. Bring in the Mallinder/Diamond #NorthernGrit dream team, King for attack and Forshaw for defence.
Done.

tbh, I still think there's a place for Rowntree. For me, selection has been the only obvious problem in the forwards. Our set piece looks very good and we have developed bags of depth 1-5. Give Rowntree a fetcher to work with, and pick the right players, and I'm happy to see Rowntree for a while yet.

Also implying the coaching team isn't already full of Northerners.

 

[Big Ewis]

well this game is over and doesn't mean as much as some are making it to, but the real question is this:
Saffers, are you very superstitious as a people typically ? because if so, the Boks might not dare win 13 in a row against the English...( ) oh wait what's that, spell it out ? ok, that's thirteen (13). Yes...what ?? haha no, not thirtYY, thirteennnn, with an 'n' ! Yes yes..haha, no no 30 would be just ridiculous...

Ok ok I'm done

 

[Maverick1987]

well this game is over and doesn't mean as much as some are making it to, but the real question is this:
Saffers, are you very superstitious as a people typically ? because if so, the Boks might not dare win 13 in a row against the English...( ) oh wait what's that, spell it out ? ok, that's thirteen (13). Yes...what ?? haha no, not thirtYY, thirteennnn, with an 'n' ! Yes yes..haha, no no 30 would be just ridiculous...

Ok ok I'm done

You have lost to Italy before ..... You can say nothing !! Haha

 

[TommiG88]

Lancaster is under pressure. He will swap it around for next week, we will smash Samoa and then he will revert to his favourites for the aus game.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

tbh, I still think there's a place for Rowntree. For me, selection has been the only obvious problem in the forwards. Our set piece looks very good and we have developed bags of depth 1-5. Give Rowntree a fetcher to work with, and pick the right players, and I'm happy to see Rowntree for a while yet.

Also implying the coaching team isn't already full of Northerners.

I did actually mean to include Cauliflowers as scrum coach

 

[Big Ewis]

You have lost to Italy before ..... You can say nothing !! Haha

bllehhh, you almost lost to them two years ago...AT HOME !!!

 

[Crapspray]

Solid doesn't really equal a master class...

I was being ironic; that many errors I wouldn't count as solid. Not abysmal, but I think they wobbled. The missed kicks would have made the scoreline a better representation too.

England were just too crap to take advantage.

---

EDIT: What I'm getting at is that the Saffas were, I think, pretty crap today by their usual standards. Certainly no where near when they beat NZ. Yet England, with home advantage, conspired to throw the game away. Even more annoying when Ireland took them to pieces a week earlier.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

I'm sorry to go back to this but today has demonstrated clear as day that we are right to be highly concerned about the coaches preference for Farrell. Reasoning as follows: vunipola and Farrell were both terrible, with Farrell probably worse. Yet vunipola gets substituted very close to half time (good call) yet Farrell stays on, despite the fact that he could hardly be playing any worse, until he picks up a knock around the hour mark. This was an ideal time to change things earlier because ford had the potential to get us back in the game, Farrell had hit rock bottom, there's nothing to lose. Ford looked great going forward but had no time.

Yet Farrell stays on for too long. Favouritism plain and simple and its pathetic.

 

[Tony Manx]

Good to see arrogant English get put in their place.

By the arrogant SA's before we watch the arrogant French face down the arrogant Aussie......................give over laddie!

 

[Maverick1987]

bllehhh, you almost lost to them two years ago...AT HOME !!!

Almost being the operative word

 

[goodNumber10]

Cant wait to watch this game and talk you all down about Farrell.

 

[Horacito]

I think you english are too hard on Farrel and Lancaster, while in the other side Heyneke Meyer is unable to decide over Lambe and Pollard, and it's been like that for three months, and uses them alternatively and without differentiation of systems, playing styles or players they are surrounded with.

And what will saffers do, after seeing that it only takes bad set pieces to make them into a weak and rather simple team?

 

[Maverick1987]

Cant wait to watch this game and talk you all down about Farrell.

Not even you can find good things this time although you were sort of vindicated about Barritt he played well imo

 

[Maverick1987]

I think you english are too hard on Farrel and Lancaster, while in the other side Heyneke Meyer is unable to decide over Lambe and Pollard, and it's been like that for three months, and uses them alternatively and without differentiation of systems, playing styles or players they are surrounded with.

And what will saffers do, after seeing that it only takes bad set pieces to make them into a weak and rather simple team?

You can have them if you like ? We will pay you ? And even throw andy Farrell in as a sweetener !

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I find it hard to believe that Daddy Farrell isn't heavily influencing Lancaster. Let's see 2 players who were performing badly whose replacements did better: Vunipola and Farrell. Both Sarries, one is the son of Farrell Snr and as we may remember, Farrell was a coach at Sarries. Our defence isn't even that great at the moment, we get caught out by chips over the top far too often and the speed our defence is reset is pretty shocking. Farrell snr is actively damaging England as far as I can see by completely neglecting attacking coaching, doind a mediocre job in defence coaching and I strongly suspect is responsible for influencing the poor selection choices (keeping Ashton so long, constantly playing Vunipola first, keeping Farrell anywhere near the team, all Sarries players). Lancaster MUST get rid of him and bring in proper attack and defence coaches. If he can't do that, he should resign and get someone who is prepared to drop players/staff when they aren't performing.

No more "we can take positives" bull****. The only positives we have are our forwards, who repeatedly produce platforms for attack only to have one of the halves or backs completely **** it up. Once the forwards get the breakdown sorted (with a proper powerhouse/fetcher somewhere int he squad) they will be a pretty good unit. Roundtree seems to have done ok there. Hard to say England aren't playing 10 man rugby any more, we have resorted right back to the crappy style of play we had a few years ago.

 

[Big Ewis]

you English guys see this from an English pov too much. "Farrell is the wrong pick", well he may've been initially 3 years ago, but now he's the guy with all the miles on him, he's the guy who's been through all those good 6N campaigns for England, he's been the dude taking the goal kicks, playing the full 80's, wearing the starting 10 when Eng beat the AB. Lancaster took a bet on him some years ago and he's certainly shown some good performances.

Us ? We've been trying out THIRTEEN different hb pairs. Just under Saint-André in 3 years we've had Plisson, Trinh-Duc, Beauxis, Talès, Lopez, Michalak (if I'm not forgetting someone..). Us fans are desperate for some stability. I understand there's a just point in between both 'extremes', while your situation isn't "extreme" though, actually quite regular.

And about the defeat: yeah it's a loss but England had good things to show. They took advantage the fk out of being up 15 vs 14 men and scored 2 tries with brutal intensity and pace. They looked very sharp and scored with ease on their last try to yet again stick to the score late in a game against top opposition.
Overall the attacking was flat out bad, but there were very high points. Scrum went well, own lineouts...but overall England just aren't on NZ or SA's level, but is that even to be expected ?? NZ, out of the question, but even SA ? Why should England be as good ?? What good reason ? They've shown they can compete and that's the point I think. (yes, obviously England needs to be better at home a year away from the WC, I know..).