[2018 November Tests] England vs New Zealand 10/11/18

[Pom in Exile]

1. Moon
2. Hartley
3. Williams
4. Itoje
5. Kruis
6. Underhill
7. Curry
8. Billy
9. Youngs
10. Farrell
11. May
12. Tuilagi
13. Joseph
14. Watson
15. Daly
16. George
17. Mako
18. Sinckler
19. Lawes
20. Wilson
21. Care
22. Ford
23. Nowell

Perfectly Good 23 alternatives:
Prop: Genge, Hepburn
2nd: Ewels
Back Row: Shields, Robshaw
Backs: teo, Slade, ashton

We're winning the World Cup

Launchbury?

 

[BPM]

Yeah, his basics are usually pretty good. But he doesn't seem to bring the degree of impact he once did (maybe because Hartley's upped his game a bit) and he failed to nail down the starter shirt when given the chance. Should definitely have a look at LCD or Taylor to keep George on his toes if nothing else.

I tend to agree here.

I think we should be developing Singleton as our third choice hooker. He is improving all the time and has a good combination of a solid set-piece game with good ability in the loose. He's not a heavy carrier, but as a former centre, his footwork and passing are very good for a hooker.

I've also got a lot of time for Tom Dunn. He's less of an impact player but is excellent defensively and is a fairly good heavy carrier.

 

[Nudger]

The only real negative from that game for the English players is the they're English.

Your getting funnier

 

[All Black]

What really lost us the game was the decision to not take the points and keep going to the corner...

How about how England came back into a position to have that option of whether to go for the three or a try. We scored a penalty goal and then we kicked off and England just stormed their way down. Where was that strong running before? Its no wonder Farrell went for the try.

Anyway, how many times have you seen a team kick the three points only for the opposition to come straight back and kick a three of their own and your back to square one. Thats a similar scenario to what I've described in my paragraph above where we scored and then England came back.

I would say - had you guys gone for the three, we would've been under immense pressure where its so easy to quit. However, I have seen us come back from the death on a regular its ridiculous.

 

[NDC89]

How about how England came back into a position to have that option of whether to go for the three or a try. We scored a penalty goal and then we kicked off and England just stormed their way down. Where was that strong running before? Its no wonder Farrell went for the try.

Anyway, how many times have you seen a team kick the three points only for the opposition to come straight back and kick a three of their own and your back to square one. Thats a similar scenario to what I've described in my paragraph above where we scored and then England came back.

I would say - had you guys gone for the three, we would've been under immense pressure where its so easy to quit. However, I have seen us come back from the death on a regular its ridiculous.

I'm not saying that we would have won the game if we had taken the points, the ABs could easily have come back and taken another penalty or scored. There was a lot of time left. But at the time when we decided to go for the corner, we hadn't scored any points for 40 minutes. It would have out us in the lead. Puts pressure on NZ. Farrell's decision made no sense.

 

[Nudger]

My 2 bits on what transpired.

When I saw the conditions I thought, well, that should help England, as the game will necessarily have to be a lot tighter, more tactical, and less expansive.

England had a blinder start, and dominated tactics in the opening 35 minutes. NZ did what they always find a way to do, right before the half ended. Score a try. Poor Farrell kick off gave them another opportunity to go in at the half, closer than England's domination rather warranted.

England's timing at line out went to the dogs with the hooker change. No other way of looking at it. I like George, but Hartley was error free at line out time. If I was calling the line outs, I'd have steered clear of Retallick as my best option. Retallick is a beast. Wherever he was, don't throw there. Simple. Nothing special.

England's try was harshly called back, but it was certainly offside. The manner in which they contrived to blow the drop kick chance was comical.

In the end, a moral victory for England, who I thought might get smashed. Probably deserved to win, and even in defeat, feel they were robbed.

Not many get to say that after 80 minutes versus the world champs. England came out of that looking as though things are looking up. ABs not so much. Starting to look like a few veterans in their 15? A question, not a comment. Need to be careful what I say there.....

Hansen pulled thier 6 off and put barrett on to have 3 line out specialists that changed the game

 

[Pom in Exile]

[

Venerable? We may have watched a different game. NZ had that one easy. EZ-PZ England
You're quite a tedious bell end aren't you?

 

[All Black]

I'm not saying that we would have won the game if we had taken the points, the ABs could easily have come back and taken another penalty or scored. There was a lot of time left. But at the time when we decided to go for the corner, we hadn't scored any points for 40 minutes. It would have out us in the lead. Puts pressure on NZ. Farrell's decision made no sense.

I think Farrell refused to swallow his pride and wanted to make the old statement of 'whatever you can do, we can do', he wanted to get back at us for when we turned down the three and scored a try. Whilst it's good to be confident and he had his reasons (Ashtons try made it look easy to find holes) he needed to have some respect for our defence at that stage of the game.

We were guilty of a similar thing that Farrell was going through this year when we played the Boks in Wellington. We couldve gone for a drop goal to win it as Barrett was right in front of the posts and he was like less than 20 metres out but we wanted to go for the try and we ended up losing lol.

I guess its a poor decision on Farrells part. His leadership would've helped because he wasn't exactly hitting it up and inspiring his team pass the advantage line but he trusted his team to do it and so it's sometimes good to test the waters yourself before you make a call. Farrell is not a captain yet IMO but hes an improved player from last time we played.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

I'm not saying that we would have won the game if we had taken the points, the ABs could easily have come back and taken another penalty or scored. There was a lot of time left. But at the time when we decided to go for the corner, we hadn't scored any points for 40 minutes. It would have out us in the lead. Puts pressure on NZ. Farrell's decision made no sense.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. 2nd decision to go for the lineout was clearly wrong looking back and should have taken a pot at goal. But that's an experience thing and Farrell like Kolisi last week are relatively young/inexperienced as captains. Jones is right that players have to feel it in the game, and watching from the comfort of pubs/sofas it is easy to criticise Farrell not taking the 3 at that point. But As long as he learns from it and doesn't repeat it the next time at such a crucial juncture of a test match.

 

[NDC89]

I think Farrell refused to swallow his pride and wanted to make the old statement of 'whatever you can do, we can do', he wanted to get back at us for when we turned down the three and scored a try. Whilst it's good to be confident and he had his reasons (Ashtons try made it look easy to find holes) he needed to have some respect for our defence at that stage of the game.

We were guilty of a similar thing that Farrell was going through this year when we played the Boks in Wellington. We couldve gone for a drop goal to win it as Barrett was right in front of the posts and he was like less than 20 metres out but we wanted to go for the try and we ended up losing lol.

I guess its a poor decision on Farrells part. His leadership would've helped because he wasn't exactly hitting it up and inspiring his team pass the advantage line but he trusted his team to do it and so it's sometimes good to test the waters yourself before you make a call. Farrell is not a captain yet IMO but hes an improved player from last time we played.

I just hope we learn from this, the way that the ABs seem to have learnt from Wellington this year. And by we, I mean Farrell. As I said, I think we would have found a way to eek this one out with Hartley on, but we will never know.

 

[ncurd]

Reading through yesterday's comments and wanted ask on a scale of 10 how peeved are you

Oh I'm pretty annoyed Farrell cost us the game by kicking to the corner twice. Yet some are treating him like a genius.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Glad to see D-Mac getting an opportunity to shine in a "big game" in terrible conditions (which don't suit the smaller, lighter player).

I know rain is a great leveller, but I'd be mildly concerned if I was an AB fan. They haven't been at the same level this year in my opinion. They areng firing on all cylinders and seem to have selection issues at centre. I do wonder if the poorer form of their RC rivals in the past three years is beginning to have a negative impact on them. The top 4 European sides arguably have more disciplined defences than are found in the RC and the ABs aren't getting much exposure to them.

 

[Nubiwan]

George has one bad day at the office and he's not up to it mentally? Mmmh.

You're only as good as your last game, I used to be told quite a bit.

George was a standout in the Lions tour, so you know he has the game in him.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Hansen pulled thier 6 off and put barrett on to have 3 line out specialists that changed the game

And England had Itoje, Ewels and Lawes on at the time and George still kept trying to throw to Maro, which became easily read by Brodie.

 

[NDC89]

I know rain is a great leveller, but I'd be mildly concerned if I was an AB fan. They haven't been at the same level this year in my opinion. They areng firing on all cylinders and seem to have selection issues at centre. I do wonder if the poorer form of their RC rivals in the past three years is beginning to have a negative impact on them. The top 4 European sides arguably have more disciplined defences than are found in the RC and the ABs aren't getting much exposure to them.

Really good point. Ireland, England and Wales all have defences that can suffocate attacks. Scotland are a top 4 European side as well, but I think they buck the trend of NH defences. They're just so dangerous in attack but not the best defensive side, imo.

It's not something that seems to be pevelent in SH rugby, Super Rugby or RC. SA look to be doing it a little, but Oz amd Argentina certainly don't look to win via defence.

And England had Itoje, Ewels and Lawes on at the time and George still kept trying to throw to Maro, which became easily read by Brodie.

Don't think George calls the lineouts. I;d put the blame on whoever does that, Itoje I think in this situation.

 

[Nubiwan]

Oh I'm pretty annoyed Farrell cost us the game by kicking to the corner twice. Yet some are treating him like a genius.

England drove the ABs across the line with a 42 man rolling maul. Farrell's decision was perhaps impeded by this fact, which is fair enough. ABs did not even contest the throw on those occasions. Their goal was to stop England's line out drive. Fair play to Farrell. Too many other reasons for their defeat, outside a choice not to kick 3 points. In the end, england walk away feeling robbed after a pretty decent effort. No shame in any of it.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Read going for the scrum when 15 points down and getting 7 points 3 minutes before half time instead of the 3. Read is smart/experienced and his gamble pays off; Farrell goes for 2 line outs instead of taking the 3 and England come away with nothing from that passage of play. These are the small differences which decide these big games.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Really good point. Ireland, England and Wales all have defences that can suffocate attacks. Scotland are a top 4 European side as well, but I think they buck the trend of NH defences. They're just so dangerous in attack but not the best defensive side, imo.

It's not something that seems to be pevelent in SH rugby, Super Rugby or RC. SA look to be doing it a little, but Oz amd Argentina certainly don't look to win via defence.



Don't think George calls the lineouts. I;d put the blame on whoever does that, Itoje I think in this situation.

Ok good point. Still if Maro does call it then why keep calling it to himself even after Brodie's stolen 1 from him?

 

[Nubiwan]

Glad to see D-Mac getting an opportunity to shine in a "big game" in terrible conditions (which don't suit the smaller, lighter player).

I know rain is a great leveller, but I'd be mildly concerned if I was an AB fan. They haven't been at the same level this year in my opinion. They areng firing on all cylinders and seem to have selection issues at centre. I do wonder if the poorer form of their RC rivals in the past three years is beginning to have a negative impact on them. The top 4 European sides arguably have more disciplined defences than are found in the RC and the ABs aren't getting much exposure to them.

Ball in hand, even in the wet, there was enough on display from the ABs yesterday for me to grow concerned about England's ability to keep the score close. They are simply better recycling and exposing space. Left at least 2 tries begging. Credit to England's defence, but the ABs still looked strong when they felt the need. They have more gears, when needed. That's how it feels.

 

[NDC89]

Ok good point. Still if Maro does call it then why keep calling it to himself even after Brodie's stolen 1 from him?

Believes his own hype? Who knows. Possibly felt that, as the front jumper, he was the safe option despite having the world's best second row marking him.