England vs New Zealand - 19/11/22

[Geordie]

i think Hill is very good in the more open wider channels definitely ...not sure on the heavy duty stuff...and the grunt in the tight..

 

[BrokenWing]

I noticed he's lost his mullet. Is this to maintain the overall mullet cap in the squad as I've noticed a couple of the others looks slightly more mullety.

 

[Which Tyler]

I noticed he's lost his mullet. Is this to maintain the overall mullet cap in the squad as I've noticed a couple of the others looks slightly more mullety.

He left Exeter

 

[TRF_Olyy]

i think Hill is very good in the more open wider channels definitely ...not sure on the heavy duty stuff...and the grunt in the tight..

He's a very good scrummager and mauler - even when he was more lightweight frontrowers he played with said he was a great tighthead lock

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Great game, good to see England fight back like they did, although has a 25-25 draw done more harm than good. Papering over the cracks? It seems they have a good team, but poor tactics/coaching is perhaps letting them down, as well as some odd selections.

you could honestly be talking about either team there

 

[duncanb]

I think those are old stats for Hill, he looks to have bulked up significantly over the summer/this season

Ruck last year had him listed at 133 kg.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

Robertson encourages you to be yourself and be brave on the field. In a team coached by Robertson, I don't think Marcus Smith would have kicked out the ball for the draw. It seemed to sum up England's mindset.

I need to disclaim this. Had hoped to get a reaction before the big reveal, but with no reaction I still can't sit with it. It was mike brown who said it, not me. He said it after experiencing robertson playing under him for the barbarians. And it was a ridiculous thing to say. It is the barbarians game plan, not Robertson's, which encourages you to be yourself and be brave on the field.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Ruck last year had him listed at 133 kg.

That would make him a full stone heavier than Paul Willemse. He's definitely never been that kind of weight.

 

[Zed]

Not always the ABs played with a big 12 and a playmaker at 13 in SBW or Nonu.
The key to those 2 was the handling and offloading skills.
Now they are putting Barrett at 12 who also has the handling skills bit also the kicking skills.

Yeah forgot about SBW, he played the same position as Burgess in league too - lock.

 

[Duck a l'Orange]

That would make him a full stone heavier than Paul Willemse. He's definitely never been that kind of weight.

Yep, or a full 7kg heavier than the England website (which lists Hill at 112kg) currently lists Mako Vunipola.

 

[Zed]

England seem to be copping a bit of stick for kicking the ball out at fulltime, personally I think it was the right move. They came close to getting a hiding, came back to draw level, if they'd gone for the win and got penalised, losing the game they would have been gutted. And perhaps they would have been dealt a bit of a psychological blow. Perhaps if they'd been in the ABs half, go for for it, but not in their half, in kickable range.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

England seem to be copping a bit of stick for kicking the ball out at fulltime, personally I think it was the right move. They came close to getting a hiding, came back to draw level, if they'd gone for the win and got penalised, losing the game they would have been gutted. And perhaps they would have been dealt a bit of a psychological blow. Perhaps if they'd been in the ABs half, go for for it, but not in their half, in kickable range.

i think its simply a case of, yes, 20 minutes before they were heading to a loss...but at that moment they have had 15 minutes of dominance and had proven they could get at least into penalty range with ease (if not over the line), i think the AB's were spent and down a man

 

[duncanb]

That would make him a full stone heavier than Paul Willemse. He's definitely never been that kind of weight.

All sites I think are probably not correct ,it was pre Calcutta match 2021.
Who knows for sure looking at body shape and height I would guess 125 ish, which could be ribbans weight again depending on which site you look at.

 

[Crash Hamster]

This is actually something which rugby does really badly.

It wouldn't be difficult to:
list each player's height and weight
list international squads by position
explain positions to the more casual fan (googling a player will reveal that they're a prop, but not LH or TH without careful examination)

Rugby's a complex game, but if it doesn't explain parts of itself to spectators, how can it attract a wider audience?

 

[higgik]

Im not sure size is the "be all" at 12. Power and strength helps yes..but its about having an all round game...and the ability to be an extra flanker.
Its why ive always said if only Sam Simmonds had focused on 12. Imagine him with his power and speed, but with developed Hands and kicking ability.

Brad Barritt was a massively effective 12 for Saracens..not a monster.

Its all about how you want your backline set up. Where you want your creative pivots and where you want your power options...and of course whats available.

Totally agree that power is the thing, but often that goes with size.
Think EJ want the forwards to be doing this work and allowing us to have backs still in place. Very RL style. The issue then becomes at set pieces when you still need a power option to give the forwards a target to clear. Going sideways to a ruck means wasted time.
Finding the balance is his goal, but so far unsuccessful.

Maybe having steward as an option at set piece would help the overall balance

 

[Which Tyler]

Some views on the draw.
Ont he one hand, here's Nadja


And on the other, whilst he's not everyone's cup of tea, but here's Squidge's take.


Or there's Charlie Morgan's prose+gif breakdown

12ft

 

[miccloarch]

I need to disclaim this. Had hoped to get a reaction before the big reveal, but with no reaction I still can't sit with it. It was mike brown who said it, not me. He said it after experiencing robertson playing under him for the barbarians. And it was a ridiculous thing to say. It is the barbarians game plan, not Robertson's, which encourages you to be yourself and be brave on the field.

He also said/wrote: "What really struck me is how good he is with people. I've played for plenty of coaches over the years but I've not come across any who bring people together like Scott did this week. He's not the typical mould of English rugby. He would come in and be a bit of a positive disruptor."

In any case, Robertson's reputation doesn't rest on Mike Brown's eloquence or lack thereof. Plenty of coaches have a reputation as good motivators but it's well established that Razor actually is one. The evidence is easy to find, something I've said before and which I'll repeat until he proves otherwise: dude's a serial winner.

 

[miccloarch]

Some views on the draw.
Ont he one hand, here's Nadja


And on the other, whilst he's not everyone's cup of tea, but here's Squidge's take.


Or there's Charlie Morgan's prose+gif breakdown

12ft

I think Squidge is spot on. Jones is keeping much of his World Cup game plan in the locker at the expense of regular test matches and the 6N. This is probably one reason why a lot of people hate the whole "World Cup Cycle" thing but to me it's incredibly intriguing. Do you gamble on your squad's ability to execute when it matters under pressure without much in-game practice? Or do you make them a well-oiled machine at the risk of exposing everything and being predictable?

The All Blacks usually choose the latter which sometimes leads to catastrophe as they struggle to respond when things don't go to plan. Jones has presumably taken the former option. My money's on France to win the WC but England are definitely the darkhorse.

 

[Reiser99]

I think Squidge is spot on. Jones is keeping much of his World Cup game plan in the locker at the expense of regular test matches and the 6N. This is probably one reason why a lot of people hate the whole "World Cup Cycle" thing but to me it's incredibly intriguing. Do you gamble on your squad's ability to execute when it matters under pressure without much in-game practice? Or do you make them a well-oiled machine at the risk of exposing everything and being predictable?

The All Blacks usually choose the latter which sometimes leads to catastrophe as they struggle to respond when things don't go to plan. Jones has presumably taken the former option. My money's on France to win the WC but England are definitely the darkhorse.

My view is that when England can't even do the basics well how the hell do you expect them perform some complex world cup winning plan without practice? If England were playing boring but error free rugby then maybe, but they are error strewn instead.

 

[miccloarch]

My view is that when England can't even do the basics well how the hell do you expect them perform some complex world cup winning plan without practice? If England were playing boring but error free rugby then maybe, but they are error strewn instead.

Fair point, and if I were an England fan I'd probably be as frustrated with them as I am with the All Blacks and be similarly unconvinced. With neutral eyes however, this was an epic comeback against an improved AB team. So this game was evidently a trial run as to how they might iron in the master plan through the decoy. It seemed to work.

Inconsistent teams have won World Cups. We don't need to mention how pathetic SA were before Rassie but even with him their end of year tour before the 2019 WC was less than convincing.