• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2014 Mid-Year Tests] New Zealand vs England (1st Test)

Why Burns would be picked to start is beyond me but then for all we know he's been lighting things up in training.

I made this point in the other thread when Burns came up... out of that Gloucester environment playing behind a fast and dynamic pack he could very well be a completely different player. He and Cipriani haven't played for four weeks so league form is irrelevant other than for getting them ont eh tour.
 
I just haven't seen anything to convince me Catt is an internetional prop tbh. I could be doing his a disservice but I think Mullan is a more sensible choice.
Ah yeah, I completely forgot he was there :lol:
He'd be my choice too.


I made this point in the other thread when Burns came up... out of that Gloucester environment playing behind a fast and dynamic pack he could very well be a completely different player.
Yeah, he was outstanding for England Saxo....oh.
 
Yeah, he was outstanding for England Saxo....oh.

What's your point?

I know you're a Danny Fan, i was when eh played for WASPS as well.... but the season ended 4 weeks ago, form can turn around in one game. Cipriani is on the tour and rightly so, but the environment brings different things out of different players.

Nonu for New ZEaland is a prime example of not being a form player who makes the step up in camp.
 
You said that out of the Gloucester environment Burns could shine, but he was terrible when with England Saxons - that was my point.
 
Burns is a talented player - and I'm sure he'll turn his form around at some point.

But he is a massive gamble - if he plays as badly as he has done this season we are going to be humiliated.
 
that was four months ago in the saxons environment with John Callard who you're all b*tching about as a coach in a different thread, and frankly that whole Saxons team was a shambles.

Different environment, and with more time - my point stands.
 
Burns is a talented player - and I'm sure he'll turn his form around at some point.

But he is a massive gamble - if he plays as badly as he has done this season we are going to be humiliated.

I don't disagree, but I trust Lancaster, Farrell and Catt to make the right call - IIH there hasn't been much i've disagreed with over their tenure.
 
that was four months ago in the saxons environment with John Callard who you're all b*tching about as a coach in a different thread, and frankly that whole Saxons team was a shambles.

Different environment, and with more time - my point stands.

Well yes, John Callard is a massive waste of space as a coach but Henry Slade still managed to look good at the weekend despite being in coached by him. The poor standard of coaching and game plan will effect how the team as a whole performs but I think it still allowes for individuals to play well. Burns has clearly had a massive drop in confidence and his form has fallen off a cliff. He ended the season play out of position with his 19 year old brother having taken his place! A player just doesn't bounce back from that kind of loss of form in four weeks.

I have no doubt that we'll see him at his best again, but its going to take a lot of hours on the training ground and plenty of game time to produce that. I don't think him starting against NZ at Eden Park is going to help that process or increase our chance of winning.
 
those aren't bad XV's for England, especially given that it's test 1. Won't be enough though. I think they'll give NZ some difficulty, but the latter will start running in a few scores in the last 15min. to inflate that win.
 
that was four months ago in the saxons environment with John Callard who you're all b*tching about as a coach in a different thread, and frankly that whole Saxons team was a shambles.

Different environment, and with more time - my point stands.

How does it still stand? He has played badly/sub-par in whatever jersey he has pulled over his head. And it's not just the set-ups he has been involved with, you can see in him a player bereft of belief in himself.
Frankly I think that there's not much to trust in because I don't personally believe the coaches are going all out to win this game - I think they know Burns is part of our future plans and they're using the cover of a much publicised depleted squad as an opportunity to try and force Burns into some form. Whatever the score-line, the press will just talk about how England were playing their reserves anyway, so it does give them an opportunity to do what they want.
Whatever hat you put on, the choice of Burns over Cipriani is not a defensible one based on form, and by all accounts Cipriani has impressed in training. There is no reason why Burns should be ahead of Cips except perhaps with the long-term view as outlined above.

As for Jon Callard, I've been saying for a while now that there's something not right there. I don't have much concrete evidence for him being a poor coach but certainly given the resources - the fact that England's second string should really be world top 2 considering our player base - he has performed poorly.
 
Well yes, John Callard is a massive waste of space as a coach but Henry Slade still managed to look good at the weekend despite being in coached by him. The poor standard of coaching and game plan will effect how the team as a whole performs but I think it still allowes for individuals to play well. Burns has clearly had a massive drop in confidence and his form has fallen off a cliff. He ended the season play out of position with his 19 year old brother having taken his place! A player just doesn't bounce back from that kind of loss of form in four weeks.

I have no doubt that we'll see him at his best again, but its going to take a lot of hours on the training ground and plenty of game time to produce that. I don't think him starting against NZ at Eden Park is going to help that process or increase our chance of winning.

again i don't disagree with any of that. All i'm saying si we have no clue what's gone on in camp, so if Burns gets a start it will not be out of lipservice with Lancaster and his crew.

How does it still stand? He has played badly/sub-par in whatever jersey he has pulled over his head. And it's not just the set-ups he has been involved with, you can see in him a player bereft of belief in himself.
Frankly I think that there's not much to trust in because I don't personally believe the coaches are going all out to win this game - I think they know Burns is part of our future plans and they're using the cover of a much publicised depleted squad as an opportunity to try and force Burns into some form. Whatever the score-line, the press will just talk about how England were playing their reserves anyway, so it does give them an opportunity to do what they want.
Whatever hat you put on, the choice of Burns over Cipriani is not a defensible one based on form, and by all accounts Cipriani has impressed in training. There is no reason why Burns should be ahead of Cips except perhaps with the long-term view as outlined above.

As for Jon Callard, I've been saying for a while now that there's something not right there. I don't have much concrete evidence for him being a poor coach but certainly given the resources - the fact that England's second string should really be world top 2 considering our player base - he has performed poorly.

How does it not stand? I said take him out of his regular environment and you don't' know what will happen - this is a different set up with great coaches who may inspire the boy.

You don't know, and nor do I.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just a suggestion GN10 - use the edit button instead of double posting please.

Use the multi-quote button or copypasta.
 
As for Jon Callard, I've been saying for a while now that there's something not right there. I don't have much concrete evidence for him being a poor coach but certainly given the resources - the fact that England's second string should really be world top 2 considering our player base - he has performed poorly.

Just did a bit of research on the man and according to Wikipedia:

In August 1998 Callard was appointed assistant coach to Andy Robinson at Bath, before being made Head Coach in 2000. In 2002 he became assistant coach to Phil Davies at Leeds Tykes and later that year was also appointed as head coach of the England U21s. He joined the Rugby Football Union's National Academy in summer 2005.
Jon was appointed "Kicking Coach" to the senior England rugby team for the Rugby World Cup 2007.

It isn't exactly a stunning resume. I mean he was a great player but as a coach he's been the assistant in a couple of clubs and progressed to become their Head Coach for a short period before moving on. I don't think he did much at either club and in the England set up he has coached the U21s (where you don't really have to defend) and been a kicking coach prior to taking over the Saxons. By comparison Lancaster had been involved in the youth system at Leeds, then was a promotion winning director of rugby at Leeds before becoming Saxons coach.





I like how we've managed to 'English' this thread while all the Kiwis are asleep.
 
I use my phone to make and receive telephone calls from - so I don't know.

copypasta = copy and paste
 
Just did a bit of research on the man and according to Wikipedia:



It isn't exactly a stunning resume. I mean he was a great player but as a coach he's been the assistant in a couple of clubs and progressed to become their Head Coach for a short period before moving on. I don't think he did much at either club and in the England set up he has coached the U21s (where you don't really have to defend) and been a kicking coach prior to taking over the Saxons. By comparison Lancaster had been involved in the youth system at Leeds, then was a promotion winning director of rugby at Leeds before becoming Saxons coach.





I like how we've managed to 'English' this thread while all the Kiwis are asleep.

I don't think Lancaster's was hugely better tbh - took Leeds down as well. Whatevs about that, Callard appears crap, and if Lancaster thinks Burns is up for it he's the best placed to know, but he'll look like an absolute *** if it backfires.
 
I use my phone to make and receive telephone calls from - so I don't know.

ok, well meanwhile here in the 21st century I post frequently from mine, i don't think you can do multiquotes on the TRF app, and copy pasting requires jumping backwards and forwards between discarded posts to copy paste what you want.. so i'm kinda hamstrung there unless someone can show me how to from within the app.

But point noted.

copypasta = copy and paste

I know.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Lancaster's was hugely better tbh - took Leeds down as well. Whatevs about that, Callard appears crap, and if Lancaster thinks Burns is up for it he's the best placed to know, but he'll look like an absolute *** if it backfires.

I think the they is that acadmey time Lancaster had had, as the Saxons involves a lot of bringing young players up to the next level in preparation for full international duty (or it should be).

I agree that if Burns is selected it'll be on training, which we obviously can't see, which is Lancaster's call. I just find it hard to imagine it working.
 
Interestingly Lancaster on talksport when asked about Cipriani talks about everyone except Burns. He even mentions Ford.

The only concession he makes towards Burns is that he says "we have four fly halves out here".
 
Firstly, I'm loving this website. I grew up around football 'yobs' and it's culture but I've always loved Rugby and been a lonely arm chair fan for years. It can be lonely when you love rugby :p

I'm looking forward to the series. I hope England look for quick ball at the set piece as we look a bit weak up front. I can't help but feel optimistic but the ABs just don't lose at home like that?!! Good news Read is out as he has stormers against us.

Does anyone think Pennell will get some minutes in the first test?

I would like to see Eastmond and Manu in the centre. I think a combo like that would be good if Farrell was playing.Shame that Slade ain't touring. He looked solid. ( not positionally )


Probably a close game but not on the score board.
 
Last edited:
Top