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

[exeter]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jun/08/stuart-lancaster-manu-tuilagi-england-wing

I hope it's mind games. England need Tuilagi on the ball as much as possible and they need somebody guaranteed to put him into space - Twelvetrees of Eastmond, for me. We could experiment with Burrell/Tuilagi in the third test if it's a dead rubber, or in the autumn.

 

[nzlizard]

I'm putting my money on SBW

Same, the guy is to good to leave out, what he did for the Chiefs those couple of seasons was mint and he was fantastic for the AB's, I have no doubt he has the ability to get back there. Fekitoa is awesome but SBW has the edge on him.

this makes me think Tuilagi will play wing:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/27763157

Too much detail and too much discussion to think it wont happen.

Interesting article, I think you have to play him somewhere, how well does he play wing? I have no idea, but with his size and speed he will be a handful for any defense and if he takes 2 men each time the gaps will open, it is just a matter of capitalizing on them.

 

[barkinghooker]

I'm not keen on the idea of him playing wing defensively.. he's played 11 for the Tigers and apparently he's one of the fastest in the England squad. With a poor kick chase I think Manu would do serious damage at full speed. Can and will Manu kick though? We should use Morgan as a wide runner as I don't see him do much at the ruck. He could play the Read role.


Having said that, he did hit 23 rucks on Saturday!

 

[barkinghooker]

He sort of does in defense but he's rarely out wide in attack for England.

 

[goodNumber10]

look at this photo, 3 all blacks and he's still going, incredible:

 

[Maverick1987]

Zinzan Brooke just said it going to be 10-15 points . That's really nice of him but I don't think England will win by that much

 

[barkinghooker]

That would certainly open up space in the middle if he played 11. Great picture.

 

[goodNumber10]

Sir Ian on England (interesting bit of Analysis):

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...ancaster-a-sturdy-platform-to-build-from.html

Zinzan Brooke just said it going to be 10-15 points . That's really nice of him but I don't think England will win by that much

I speak with a bit of experience when i say that Zinzan Brooke is a very unpleasant man.

 

[barkinghooker]

Ha. 10-15? I'd like that.

 

[Patchey]

the issue with Tuilagi on the wing is that he's out of the game... as jnuh pointed out in the other thread England don't use their wings in the hunter style, they use them as literally wing men to stretch the defence... that's not really where you want tuilagi. He has to to play 13 or ..........



12

I'm really struggling not to rise to the bait here...

Having watched back 1st test highlights and had a read around I'd like to see the following:

1. Joe Marler, 2. Rob Webber, 3. Dave Wilson, 4. Joe Launchbury, 5.Courtney Lawes, 6. James Haskell, 7. Chris Robshaw, 8. Ben Morgan, 9. Danny Care, 10. Owen Farrell, 11. Jonny May, 12. Kyle Eastmond, 13. Manu Tuilagi, 14. Marland Yarde, 15. Mike Brown. 16. Matt Mullan/Alex Waller, 17. Kyle Sinckler, 18. Dylan Hartley, 19. Dave Attwood, 20. Tom Wood / Binny, 21. Lee Dickson, 22. Freddie Burns, 23. Ben Foden / Luther Burrell.

Webber and the guys who started in the back row should be rewarded for how central they were to our performance. I do not like the idea of Tuilagi on the wing, especially when it looks like he and Eastmond are building a good partnership in midfield. Equally, what did either winger do that was so bad we should drop them in favour for a centre who really hasn't played enough on the wing.

If Burrell were to bench May could provide cover for fullback so I wouldn't be too surprised to see us without a specialist fifteen on the bench. Lancaster doesn't seem too keen on Foden. Michael Lawes in for Parling and Ben Youngs kept as far away from a shirt as possible.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Lancaster is a man of loyalty and he will bring back the likes of Hartley, Lawes, Wood, Binny, Care, Farrell, 36 for the 2nd test. As well as Webber, Parling, Haskell, Morgan and Eastmond played in the 1st test, they will be subs at best, unless the first choice are injured.

I can't see him dropping Tuilagi, it's whether he tries to shoehorn both Burrell and Tuilagi in the same side at 13 and wing. I don't think he'll pair the two at centre, as Lancaster and Catt like a playmaker at 12, which neither Burrell or Tuilagi are.

Teams look like they will be announced on Wednesday night our time; Thursday morning NZ time.

 

[Big Ewis]

Nah, Burgess plays for our cross-town rivals South Sydney.

But yes, I think started to develop something of a man crush on SBW ever since last year when he signed with us... I noticed it creeping up on me one day when my girlfriend was commenting on how powerful Israel Folau looks, and found myself saying "he's solid, but his shoulders and arms ain't got nothing on SBW". By the time he burst throw Manly's defence in the GF to set-up what was effectively the match turning try, I think it had evolved into a category 4 case of man-love.

...

What were we talking about?

Oh yeah, Nonu sucks right now .

meheheh...I like how you make mention of having a girlfriend in there, so it's not too weird.
Anyways, yes I do think Nonu kinda sucks right now. He's not battering like before, never was a great passer or great with his kicks...he's good on defense but that ain't enough. He's been a bit mediocre for a while now if I'm not mistaken, and he certainly added very little to the AB last Saturday.

 

[goodNumber10]

Lancaster is a man of loyalty and he will bring back the likes of Hartley, Lawes, Wood, Binny, Care, Farrell, 36 for the 2nd test. As well as Webber, Parling, Haskell, Morgan and Eastmond played in the 1st test, they will be subs at best, unless the first choice are injured.

I can't see him dropping Tuilagi, it's whether he tries to shoehorn both Burrell and Tuilagi in the same side at 13 and wing. I don't think he'll pair the two at centre, as Lancaster and Catt like a playmaker at 12, which neither Burrell or Tuilagi are.

Teams look like they will be announced on Wednesday night our time; Thursday morning NZ time.

agree with all of that.

I really hope he doesn't try to shoehorn them both in the same team, it needs to be one in one out - and they won't drop Tuilagi as he just gets them too much go forward and Burrell just isn't a winger.

 

[Geordie]

I would only make a couple of changes...

Lawes for Parling
Care for Youngs

Cant decide whether i would bring back Wood or leave Haskell at 6.

But that would be the extent of the changes. Give the lads from the first test another go...and just feel Lawes and Care could be the difference to take them across the line first this time.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Call me pessimistic but I do feel we've missed our chance; unless, in the space of a week, we can suddenly become twice as ruthless and clinical on attack than we've ever been before...

 

[Patchey]

Lancaster is a man of loyalty and he will bring back the likes of Hartley, Lawes, Wood, Binny, Care, Farrell, 36 for the 2nd test. As well as Webber, Parling, Haskell, Morgan and Eastmond played in the 1st test, they will be subs at best, unless the first choice are injured.

I can't see him dropping Tuilagi, it's whether he tries to shoehorn both Burrell and Tuilagi in the same side at 13 and wing. I don't think he'll pair the two at centre, as Lancaster and Catt like a playmaker at 12, which neither Burrell or Tuilagi are.

Teams look like they will be announced on Wednesday night our time; Thursday morning NZ time.

I think they like the idea of a playmaker at 12 but, as we have seen in the past, are no adverse to ignoring that if it means playing someone they think deserves a spot or to please Andy Farrells insatiable desire to turn the inside backs into tacklebags. Burrell isn't that bad a playmaker so if they are both in the XV I think we'll see him there and Manu at 13.

I really hope we don't see the stand out performers discarded. That would go against the whole message leading up to the first test.

 

[goodNumber10]

Call me pessimistic but I do feel we've missed our chance; unless, in the space of a week, we can suddenly become twice as ruthless and clinical on attack than we've ever been before...

I do think that it was our best chance, and i think NZ will go 3 -0 but do we need to be twice as ruthless?

We had a completely new midfield yet created three try scoring opportunities - took none. they had their regular midfield and took only one of three. If we'd put one of ours away the game could have been different.

Now of course you can't live on if's and buts but for the most part our defence was up to their attack - both front line and scramble and i didn't see massive amounts that made me think they'd rack up a horror score or even put those chances away. If they'd scored 3-4 trys against us then i'd say yeah - but we don't concede lots of trys, and usually we do score.

 

[Geordie]

I appreciate they will propbably raise their game, but i think we can go up a level if we tweak the team slightly, but i dont want loads of changes.

We in general have a 1st choice team that mostly picks itself and i think thats essential. However i think in the name of competition that a player should be able to feel that he can challenge for the shirt.

For example Eastmond looked very good at 12, and made me think his lack of sheer size might not be a liability at this level after all. I would like to see him at 12 again to see if this was a one off...or if he is the real deal. If however he is simply dropped for a not 100% Twelvetrees then i think that sends out the totally wrong signal.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Usually we score but not relative to the chances we create. Especially against the top sides we are still p*ss poor at exploiting space, utilising overlaps etc, though we looked more promising on saturday. Farrell and Twelvetrees are at fault and on top of that the finishing e.g from May in the six nations wasn't great.

I'd argue that most of our potency comes from individual brilliance or broken play rather than from structured attacking rugby. Putting the ball through all the hands hasn't been our forte.

In certain positions we need an attitude adjustment.
Take a typical scenario when a side breaks the line, oppo try and slow the ball down but if you fling it wide, someones got to score.
New Zealand will, inveitably, be right under the sticks with a 7 pointer. England will end up going back for the 3 points because we were ****.
I mostly blame Ben Youngs. I don't think he has a brain. Simpson against Stade Francais showed how quick ball can be following a break, and showed that accurate passing is almost all you need in that situation.

 

[Patchey]

June is the best chance most teams get to beat the All Black IMO. In the Rugby Championship and AIs they're a set of players and coaches who know each other very well, have worked out exactly how best to play and who are coming off the back of a season of Super Rugby. June is half way through the dommestic season(ish) and often sees new players and combinations being tested.

Conversely, and ignoring this years' cock up, the June tour is when England should be at their peak, having used the 6N to blood new players (or not, in our case) and with everyone firing on all cyclinders. I still hold out hope of a victory over the next two weeks.

I'd argue that most of our potency comes from individual brilliance or broken play rather than from structured attacking rugby. Putting the ball through all the hands hasn't been our forte.

That is putting it mildly. The basic handling skills of some of our players is woeful considering they spend all year playing the game. Theres no considence that the moment we gave Mike Brown, one the best broken field runnings in England, game time at full back we started to look much better in attack while the who 'second playmaker' fullback experiment with Goode was a flop.

I don't know how we sort it out. Poor hands and awareness is usually a more systematic thing that can't just be fixed in an international camp.