[2014 Mid-Year Tests] New Zealand vs England (2nd Test)

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Feel bad for Eastmond, Haskell and May. Shocked to see Rugbys answer to Emile Heskey on the bench at least he isnt starting. Not happy Lawes isnt starting but pleased to see Morgan keep his place.

Don't you diss the Hesk, *****!
I scored some cracking goals with him on Pro Evo 2008.


Domncdazzle - Really, why are you getting so hung up on this? Noone is claiming that the team playing last week was a hopeless bunch of idiots, and indeed many of us are suggesting we'll not do as well this week compared to last week.

Nonetheless, remember our injuries, and also remember that when players play well they are often rewarded for doing so with loyalty in selection:

For example:
1) Freddie Burns is still our 4th choice Fly-half - George Ford is still injured. Burns is being rewarded for a good performance last week with the bench spot.
That doesn't suddenly make him our 2nd best fly-half.
2) Geoff Parling is not better than Courtney Lawes, and he's not really any better a player than Dave Attwood.
That he has been selected is in the interests of continuity and a just reward, and doesn't suddenly make him our preferred lock.
3) Rob Webber has been rewarded with reselection: this does not suddenly make him Lancasters 1st choice, all things being equal.
4)Dan Cole, our number one tighthead is injured. That means capping a new guy who is our 4th or 5th choice
5)Alex Corbisiero, our number one loosehead, is injured. mako Vunipola is injured. Both these guys are lions.
This means our 4th choice loosehead is on the bench.
6) Christian Wade, our best winger, is injured.
Fortunately our depth here is pretty good and in and of itself it's not going to be a tour-decider.
7) Ben Youngs wasn't a preferred option in the six nations. That he has stayed in the squad at all is in the interests of continuity and in giving Dickson a rest.
8) Tom Croft, twice a lion, is not touring.
9) Tom Youngs, lion, is not touring.

On top of this, there's the 10 guys (almost half a squad) who were involved last week but not this week.
...and anyway, surely 6 changes to a starting 15 is a lot? In what world is it not?

Now, can we leave this whole second string business?

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Burrell has a great passing game and is a big lad. He is not there for his mass (otherwise they would use tuilagi) Burrell is there for his running lines, passing game and little kicks. He is well rounded.

It's not about mass......but he does have mass

 

[Mumbles119]

Thanks BigEwis. I will build on optimism and hope.

Felt so deflated after being an Eastmond groupie for so long, see some evidence of how great the combo could be, and it gets taken away again.


In respect to a wider view to these selection choices: is this evidence of Lancaster deliberately using the 3 NZ tests as an experimental experience, in regards to RWC 2015?

First test - uses as an example of how to quickly build a new squad if there is an injury crisis. He may have seen this as a 50/50 nothing to lose test.

Second test - uses as an example of utilising emergency position cover due to a restricted World Cup squad size; I.e. Manu on wing, Burns at fullback, Ashton at 9 (sorry only joking), or any other positional moves that may occur during a match... He may be viewing the experience more important than results, so has written off a win.

Third test - uses as an example of picking form squad players for a last chance all out game, a la quarter/semi/final or (god forbid) pool runner up knockout games. He may be viewing this test as a potential knockout game and hopefully a win - all about relevant experience for next year.

These are just musings - but interested in your views

 

[ratsapprentice]

Burrell has a great passing game and is a big lad. He is not there for his mass (otherwise they would use tuilagi) Burrell is there for his running lines, passing game and little kicks. He is well rounded.

Meh... his passing game is decent - certainly not "great".

Good offloads and a good left pass - slightly unpredictable to the right.
36 and Eastmond are a good way ahead in terms of distributing from first phase/1stRec.

 

[goodNumber10]

Thanks BigEwis. I will build on optimism and hope.

Felt so deflated after being an Eastmond groupie for so long, see some evidence of how great the combo could be, and it gets taken away again.


In respect to a wider view to these selection choices: is this evidence of Lancaster deliberately using the 3 NZ tests as an experimental experience, in regards to RWC 2015?

First test - uses as an example of how to quickly build a new squad if there is an injury crisis. He may have seen this as a 50/50 nothing to lose test.

Second test - uses as an example of utilising emergency position cover due to a restricted World Cup squad size; I.e. Manu on wing, Burns at fullback, Ashton at 9 (sorry only joking), or any other positional moves that may occur during a match... He may be viewing the experience more important than results, so has written off a win.

Third test - uses as an example of picking form squad players for a last chance all out game, a la quarter/semi/final or (god forbid) pool runner up knockout games. He may be viewing this test as a potential knockout game and hopefully a win - all about relevant experience for next year.

These are just musings - but interested in your views

yep, i think there is a fair bit of experimentation going on.

Meh... his passing game is decent - certainly not "great".

Good offloads and a good left pass - slightly unpredictable to the right.
36 and Eastmond are a good way ahead in terms of distributing from first phase/1stRec.

you just described Jeremy Guscott.

 

[jessta]

I wouldn't be surprised seeing some high balls going straight tuilagis way... first test on the wing and hes up against one of the best attacking players in the world under the high ball.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

agreed, i don't think getting the ball is a problem for the AB's - quality of ball was an issue last week, and traditionally NZ don't really care about possesion it's about good possesion and what you do with it - trys in under 5 cycles anyone?

The biggest issue for you is in broken play where your missing Read, it's really changed your attack system and the guys didn't look comfortable last week playing a punch and spread pattern.

That'll be different this week. Will be interesting to see how England approach defending you.

That's the ABs problem: being too dependent on one great player. They have to prove they can win comfortably without him.

I just think that it's a bit disrespectful to start predicting a win by 20 points. It would be a massive surprise in my book if it's anywhere near that margin of victory from either side. I don't think England will give the ABs enough quality possession to get away with that margin of victory. It's the margins which the ABs are better than England i.e. that concentration in those moments, not to get isolated and turned over.

In terms of breakdown, scrum, line out and driving mauls England can match and exceed the All Blacks in these facets of the game. The rush defence was also very effective against them and led them dropping the ball so often. I do expect more grubber kicks in behind by the likes of Cruden and Nonu, to try and get England's defence turning back towards their own try line.

But all this talk from the ABs that they were rusty and did not have enough preparation time was just a smokescreen, because they secretly underestimated how good an England team shorn of 2/3rds of their top players would play on the AB's sacred ground on Auckland, where they have not been beaten in 20 years.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Ultimately I don't think NZ have ever lost a game where they haven't been "rusty". The assumption is that if NZ lose, it's because they were bad not that the other team raised their game and were simply better.

 

[Tony Manx]

Burrell has a great passing game and is a big lad. He is not there for his mass (otherwise they would use tuilagi) Burrell is there for his running lines, passing game and little kicks.

I was so completely wrong last week (I am delighted to say) and will from now on back SL's selections regardless of all comments to the contrary.

Without getting into all this, I would just add that Burrell has played some thumping games in the latter part of the season and, in any case, could very well be second choice eventually to Barritt who has been recognised as, in addition to all the stated qualities of Burrell, as the chief defence organiser when he is on the field........................

 

[Peat]

Have to say, I don't feel quite as optimistic now that I've seen the team sheet. Seems to me there's a lot of gambles there and the backs part of the bench is enough to make you weep.

 

[Big Ewis]

England are obviously experimenting, yes, but they're doing it very carefully. They're not introducing new faces that have nothing to do there a year prior to the World Cup. And Tuilagi on the wing isn't a crazy remapping maneuver, there is some sense and some certainty in trying it out. As I've said it before, I'm sure Lancaster must be absolutely thrilled with the result from Test 1:
England are one of these large Tier 1 nations whose players are often injured because of the expansive and crowded calendars they've got. So it's a reality, more than just probability, that England will definitely be without their first choice picks for a few positions. Seeing how England actually could've very well won that game, while playing the best there is at home (as rusty as they were, true, but nonetheless), he's got answers looking ahead into the RWC.
England's maneuvers have been judicious, and so far their bets have gone their way. Let's see how England do in this second test. I reiterate that I'm sure Tuilagi will do fine on the wing.

 

[barkinghooker]

Manu will be tough to stop out wide. I kinda pictured him playing left wing and busting through on the blind side slowly dragging abs defenders in making space for our centres. Though his 40metre try against france came from the right side.. could see more of that Saturday. (Anyone remember 'can't tackle' Ashton's 'thump/assist' for that score? )

 

[Patchey]

I wrote a long post earlier and then lost it as I tried to post it as my train went through a tunnel...

Basically, some positive selections and good bench strength in the forwards, generally woeful backs on the bench and Manu should NOT be trailed as a winger against an All Black team playing under the roof with the strongest back three I a single nation possesses that I can think of!

 

[Crapspray]

I hope Brown's hamstring is properly fixed; I dread to think what will happen if he goes off injured after ten minutes. It's what did for us against France in the Six Nations.

Apart from that it looks pretty good. Youngs is a bit of a head-scratcher, particularly since Dickson was on the bench last week. Lancaster's been talking about putting Tuilagi on the wing since 2012, and had him training there in the Six Nations, so I think he's confident of what he'll get. Crucially, I think the All Blacks may be caught out by it tactically. They may bomb Manu, but they must have been training for him to be crashing up the middle for the last fortnight. If Tuilagi has been training there since the Six Nations, the shock to England's game will, hopefully, be much less. They also know less about Burrell.

Good to see Brookes get a go too. I know it's down to injury, but the amount of time Thomas has had, and the relatively little improvement he's shown, must mean someone else gets a chance. Marler and Vunipola both improved at a far faster rate and, with Sinckler around as well, better options may be available in 2015. Thomas badly needs to eat some pies--like Marler did this time last year.

 

[Peat]

I have been insistent from the start that Tuilagi could make sense on the wing but I don't think away to the All Blacks is the first time to bring it back.

 

[goodNumber10]

Ultimately I don't think NZ have ever lost a game where they haven't been "rusty". The assumption is that if NZ lose, it's because they were bad not that the other team raised their game and were simply better.

the thing is, England made just as many handling errors as New Zealand (if not more), so it's not as if England we're clinical and spot on - new combinations didn't quite work at times (the eastmond pass to brown for example), so there is plenty of room for england to improve as well.

One thing is for certain New Zealand will be better this time and bitter about the game last week, they'll be hurting after it (and they didn't even lose). Both teams will be coming out the blocks 100mph - the intensity will go up a serious level from last week. I expect to see some squaring up up front early on and a very early try or two from New Zealand with England playing their way back into the game, before NZ eventually pull away - sadly i think it will be a 10 point game in favour of New Zealand, but i hope England put them away.

 

[Gavin]

I find that Manu plays a lot like his brother, and he all know what Alesana did on the wing day in day out. Actually that is a point, did Alesana not play in the centre at some stage of his career?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I find that Manu plays a lot like his brother, and he all know what Alesana did on the wing day in day out. Actually that is a point, did Alesana not play in the centre at some stage of his career?

Been playing there a lot in Japan, apparently.

 

[barkinghooker]

Someone posted a video of Allesana throwing a long lateral pass from the centre to Manu on the wing earlier.

 

[Gavin]

When you have got two distributors in the centre and an out-half who can whip about flat passers I think Manu can shine. Of course the problem arises of where he plays for his club. I hope the move works off, but not too well that England win.