• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2014 Mid-Year Tests] England

New Zealand moved the dates of the tour forward. Not the RFU.

Actually England moved the date of the Aviva back a week this year. Last year it finished on the 25th of May, this year it finishes on the 31st. The Mid year tests have started on the same weekend since 2012 (7/8/9 June).

So you can lay the blame squarely on them for a) missing the opportunity to test a great Barbarians side and b) not being able to field a full strength team in the first of the three tests against the All Blacks.
 
Actually England moved the date of the Aviva back a week this year. Last year it finished on the 25th of May, this year it finishes on the 31st. The Mid year tests have started on the same weekend since 2012 (7/8/9 June).

So you can lay the blame squarely on them for a) missing the opportunity to test a great Barbarians side and b) not being able to field a full strength team in the first of the three tests against the All Blacks.

They haven't moved anything, the final is always the last weekend in May has been since its inception, last year that was the 25th, this year the 31st, in 2012 it was 26th May, and in 2011 it was the 28th â€" like I said always the last weekend, and England have always played the Barbarians the same weekend with a second string unit.

This tour has been scheduled since 2010, 1st test was originally scheduled for the second weekend in June because of this scheduling clash and travel times New Zealand agreed to this and then brought it forward under the new IRB window set in 2012, Ian Robertson mentioned this on BBC 5 live last week when discussing the tour.
 
Dan Cole is not going - Lancaster has pretty much confirmed he is taking the rest of the season off.

We can take that as given.
 
sorry to hear about Dan Cole not going at all. I think David Wilson will be plenty enough for the NZ scrum.
 
Dan Cole is not going - Lancaster has pretty much confirmed he is taking the rest of the season off.

We can take that as given.
Ah, that's a shame - though it'll give Cole to time off that he needs.

Wilson's going to end up with more minutes this season than the rest of his international career combined!
 
Our squad for the BaaBaa's game will be crap but i'm happy that youngsters are getting experience in the England shirt so Cowan-Dickie,Sinkler, Cooper-wooley, Stooke, Matthews, Garvey, Rokoduguni, Devoto, Robson, Spencer, Benjamin so we could put out a better team than what I said in the Barbarians thread
1. Catt
2. Cowan-Dickie
3. Sinkler
4. Stooke
5. Garvey
6. Haskell
7. Seymour
8. Ewers
9. Robson
10. Burns
11. Benjamin
12. Devoto
13. Tait
14. Rokoduguni
15. Pennell

16. Haywood
17.
18. Cooper-Wooley
19. Matthews
20. Wallace
21. Spencer
22. Slade
23. Sharples
 
I go for

1. Catt
2. Ward
3. Snickler
4. Stooke
5. Garvey
6. Fearns
7. Seymour
8. Haskell
9. Robson
10. Slade
11. Benjamin
12. Allen
13. Joesph
14. Sharples
15. Tait

16. Cowan-Dickie
17. (?) Harrison
18. Cooper-Wooley
19. Robson
20. Wallace
21. Simpson
22. Burns
23. Miller/Pennell

that is assuming players like Eastmond, Rokoduguni, cips, Ewers, Daly, Kitchener are off to New Zealand.
 
Hey I've read up on this thread but I may have missed it: is Billy V expected to play on this tour ? I sure hope he is. We all want to see as full strength sides on both ends as we can...
Can someone give me an expected England 23 at the point of, say, test 2 ?
 
Hey I've read up on this thread but I may have missed it: is Billy V expected to play on this tour ? I sure hope he is. We all want to see as full strength sides on both ends as we can...
Can someone give me an expected England 23 at the point of, say, test 2
Billy Is meant to be back for the HCup Quarter Finals so he will be playing against NZ. Our team will be the same that faced Italy I would presume apart from Yarde instead of May and Corbisiero in for Marler
1. Corbisiero 2.Hartley 3.Wilson 4.Launchbury 5.Lawes 6.Wood 7.Robshaw 8.Vunipola/Morgan 9.Care 10.Farrell 11.Yarde 12.36 13.Burrell 14.Nowell 15.Brown

16.Youngs 17.Marler 18.Thomas 19.Attwood 20.Vunipola/Morgan 21.Dickson 22.Ford 23.Tuilagi/Eastmond
I'm predicting big test from Attwood(in the first test), Farrell and Brown.
 
ah, Corbisiero finally returns...so the other Mako won't even get a chance to "return home" then with Marler in for replacement.

I'm really excited about this matchup. Such different teams, no way of really predicting what's going to happen. England are so different already from the last time they faced the Blacks in November, much less one-dimensional (as hard to contain as that one dimension was).

Hey do we barely ever see a replacement fly-half for England or is it me ?? Now that I think about it, doesn't Farrell play 80 most of the tests ??..

So David Wilson is seen as a stronger more traditional scrummaging tighthead but less work in the loose relatively to Dan Cole, correct ?
And fk, that 8 position hurts so much from England. Vunipola comes out, finally...BAM it's Ben Morgan in. I want to see more from Ben Morgan, he shouldn't be that quick off his feet and fast for a guy his MASS. A special specimen, not just a bulldozer....I like him. Let's poach him.
 
...so the other Mako won't even get a chance to "return home" then with Marler in for replacement.

Probably not. M. Vunipola has always been considered as a better impact player. For me, he's too far behind in the scrum and Marler's been even better around the park since he put on weight.

Hey do we barely ever see a replacement fly-half for England or is it me ?? Now that I think about it, doesn't Farrell play 80 most of the tests ??..

Not when Flood was around. But with Burns in terrible form, and Ford being so green, then he had to really.

So David Wilson is seen as a stronger more traditional scrummaging tighthead but less work in the loose relatively to Dan Cole, correct ?

Breakdown and tackle, yes. Carrying-wise he's a lot better.

A special specimen, not just a bulldozer....I like him. Let's poach him.

Something about a rapacious man-at-arms in the hundred years war..?
 
wow, English folks LOVE their historical references. Even on online Rugby forums !! :p

Anyways I personally don't know many other English FH's atm, but I'm still certain Farrell is above the rest. I don't think England has another as accomplished and complete as Farrell. He's disliked a lot and said mean things about, but I kind of like him despite his school-boy look and sometimes demeanor.
England do well to keep him on for so long, and he's young enough and mature enough it seems to keep up with that pace. Even if England had a better FH situation, I like the idea of keeping a FH in for 80min if he can hold it and he helps on many levels not just one.

As for 'Floody', he's a Toulousain now !

M.Vunipola isn't a fantastic scrummager. He isn't horrible either. But originally being a Pac. Islander, he's got those qualities for a large specimen ball-in-hand and in the open field a guy like Marler won't ever bring. When your LH prop can carry and needs 2-3 guys to take down, you're doing pretty well.
 
Farrell is above the rest. I don't think England has another as accomplished and complete as Farrell. He's disliked a lot and said mean things about, but I kind of like him despite his school-boy look and sometimes demeanor.
I think people thought that he only got a spot in the team because his father is our defence/backs coach, which is ridiculous you don't get selected for your country and the lions because you dad is on the coaching staff. He wasn't always our best attacking fly-half but he was by far the best kicker and defensive fly-half. How many times have you seen teams like Italy lose because they don't kick their points and all their possession amounts to nothing, so we pick a fly half who is normally a 80% kicker and can tackle anyone but it's because his dad is the coach. Obviously other people didn't want him there because they thought there where other players who could take control and add more attacking threat, but no one has had the mental capacity he's got and he's only 22 ! Players like Burns and in the past Cipriani would just capitulate if things start going wrong but they have more flair in attack so people think they should have got picked. Rubbish, when we played Australia and Farrell missed a few easy, for his standards, penalties he didn't go into his shell and he grew into the game scored a try and we won the game, I genuinely don't think Burns would have been able to do that.

M.Vunipola isn't a fantastic scrummager. He isn't horrible either. But originally being a Pac. Islander, he's got those qualities for a large specimen ball-in-hand and in the open field a guy like Marler won't ever bring. When your LH prop can carry and needs 2-3 guys to take down, you're doing pretty well.
I've said it before that your props scrummage and that is their main responsibility, everything else is an added extra. There were calls for Wilson to start ahead of Cole anyway before the injuries to both because Cole is not scrumming as well as he was. Ideally you have a Cian Healy or Mtwarria who are good carriers and can scrum, though Corbisiero is world class anyway.
 
M.Vunipola isn't a fantastic scrummager. He isn't horrible either. But originally being a Pac. Islander, he's got those qualities for a large specimen ball-in-hand and in the open field a guy like Marler won't ever bring. When your LH prop can carry and needs 2-3 guys to take down, you're doing pretty well.

But with Tom Youngs, Dave Attwood, and Ben Morgan on the bench there's plenty of carrying impact. I'd take the strength of the set-piece personally. Horses for courses I suppose. (As in racing tracks, not starter or main. We're not savages.)
 
Saffycen I agree with your comment about props, they're there to scrummage, everything else they do is an added bonus, but in modern times props are solicited for those other purposes too.
And just a quick digression about this: people keep saying the scrum is more used today, I'm really not sure about this as examples show "no scrum, no win" is utterly obsolete of an adage while the scrum also is taken far more seriously these days if you watch some of those older games and how "trivial", almost random the scrums were.
But to link this with what you're saying about the importance of a good penalty boot, France beat England this year because of their edge in the scrum, so that's a classic example in the most recent events. That try at the end wouldn't have mattered if we didn't get those penalties from the scrum, or at least avoided England getting them.

As for Farrell, I allow myself to make comments about him although I don't know the other heirs to the 10 jersey too much because I've seen how complete a FH he is. I just haven't seen anyone else for England - or many other countries in fact - as complete as Owen Farrell.
And although England has changed a lot as of 2014 as they are now a genuine attacking threat, Farrell really fits the English style perfectly:
insures his team's efforts are rewarded by making the 3pointers - kicks for territory well - has a fantastic eye and boot and judges those touches accurately - is rough on defense, even wins TO ball at the breakdown.

Now the criticism that he doesn't look to attack as much as other FH's out there, even in England itself, I agree with. Then there's also the temper issue and the fact that he's not as consistent as we expect the EPS no.10 to be. But he's got my vote, I like him and I think he gets more shhit than he deserves, reading comments all over the web...
 
It's very early days yet, however, Glos' fortunes in the scrum are rapidly turning around. Since Trevor Woodman's appointment a few weeks ago, the two games we have had since then have seen a big shift in Glos' ability in the scrum. Against Exeter, all of the 3-pointers scored by Gloucester came off the back of a winning scrum battle. Apparently a Shedweb forum member has Rupert Harden quoted as saying that Woodman has transformed the confidence of the front 5 in terms of the scrum.

I think the evidence is pointing to that the scrum coaching at Gloucester hasn't been up to scratch under Windo. We did well under Brain, and now we are rapidly improving under Woodman.

So I'm wondering whether Shaun Knight may come back on the England scene sooner or later? We could certainly use another tighthead.
 
On yesterdays evidence I think Ed Slater is going to break into the squad very soon...

As a saints fan I can say that slater did look really good. Just offers a good strong lock who does everything well it seems. Although non idea who he would be ahead? But then I'm sure someone will be injured by New Zealand!
 
Our depth at lock is the best in the world right now. I would have Lauchbury, Lawes, Parling, Attwood and Kitchener all ahead of Slater right now but wouldn't be worried about him starting for England.
 
Yeah... I can't see him getting ahead of the current lot but we have got great depth at lock.
 
Top