[Closed] 2015-16 rugby, world cup year

Kryton57 - Member
Lol!

England's defence will stop that AB March up the field much harder and quicker than Argentina did. If McCaw is neutralised by the ref we stand a much better chance. Sonny Bill looked impressive though - ultra world class.

Will they really?

They're not in England's pool .
They're not in England's side of the knockout draw.
There's a lot of rugby to be played,
or do England just have a basket full of chickens and no eggs?

At this stage, it might be more relevant for the enthusiastic England fan to be talking about how they'll cope with Wales, OZ , or just about anyone else, tbh.

What was Ali Williams saying about arrogance?

your analysis is that of a parody rugby fan again.

No it isn't, its fact - see dantsw13 post under mine I'm not the only one that thinks so. As I said, IMO the best way for England to play is to their strengths, up through the forwards, threatening with the backs on the return phases, and the rush defence.

Forget the fancy pants tactics we employed against Fiji, the team didn't adapt / isn't practised enough to make it work, and better teams will rip them a new one.

I agree with mrhoppy, you shouldn't look too deeply at that game. A second string Wales side who looked pretty disinterested vs a team who could conceivably be considered the worst in the tournament. Saturday will be a seriously tough game.

On another note, I'm not normally one to express pleasure at an injury but huget is a total **** of the highest order and whilst he's a fantastic player, I'm not upset that his RWC is over. If ever there was evidence of the existence of karma - this is it.

England's defence will stop that AB March up the field much harder and quicker than Argentina did. If McCaw is neutralised by the ref we stand a much better chance. Sonny Bill looked impressive though - ultra world class.

Walls should b worried - if Englamd don't put them to the sword it's a massive fail on our part, we should, edge them all over the park, and a little intensity into the mix should see the, crumble, as long as we hold onto the ball and take it up,the middle.

This would work for the historic England teams but the one weakness of the current squad is.... the pack! The forwards will need to have a hugley different game compared to the one against Fiji to do well in the tournament.

It should be seen as a failure if England don't beat a depleted Welsh side at home. The casual fan probably didn't even recognize half the Welsh team yesterday it was that much of an improvised, C or D team so you can't read anything in to that... but it will be the backs not the forwards who'll clinch it for England

No it isn't, its fact - see dantsw13 post under mine I'm not the only one that thinks so.

I read that as "we are traditionally strong in the forwards, have the players... but need sort ourselves out for it to actually happen like that"

but it will be the backs not the forwards who'll clinch it for England

Sure, they'll score. I just think England play better and look more powerful when the forwards are carry it up, rather than their absence based strategic against Fiji where we looked frail.

The forwards will need to have a hugley different game compared to the one against Fiji to do well in the tournament.

...is my point, back to what they know, and do week in week out. The fact we don't have a genuine seven means they need to stay on their feet longer and are threatened there by Wales and Aus, but thats what we have, so we have to live with it.

I don't think England's pack is a weakness, they just haven't played well for a few games. On paper, they are still a very strong pack.

Kryton57 - Member

As I said, IMO the best way for England to play is to their strengths, up through the forwards, threatening with the backs on the return phases, and the rush defence.

None of those are strengths in the current England team.You will beat what's left of Wales,I have little doubt of that,but trying to make out that England has the attributes you mention above is evidence of a Meth habit. You do also realise that those "fancy tactics" are the result of the entire training camp,and thats how you are going to play,don't you? Lancaster has schooled the plan B out of that side.

None of those are strengths in the current England team.

One of us is watching with some kinted of tinted glasses. I never said they were the best at it though, thats just how they play traditional vis a vis natural strengths.

You do also realise that those "fancy tactics" are the result of the entire training camp,and thats how you are going to play,don't you? Lancaster has schooled the plan B out of that side.

IMO if we play like that for the rest of the tournament we are screwed.

wrecker - Member
...
On that, why isn't Cave in the ireland squad for the game? He looked excellent last I saw of him.

Going back a bit, but I'm really happy Joe gave Fitz a run out of position at 12.
IMO, it wasn't about fielding the best no 12 for the job against Canada but a little bit more experimentation on what players can cover as bench options.
No doubt that if it's a critical match and Henshaw's out then Cave is next best starter centre. But neither are really "big game" first choice, and now Joe can have a bit of confidence that if he put's Fitz on the bench he can cover 11-15 if needed.
It's been an ongoing experiment for the last two years with nearly every game including at least one player slightly out of position testing what they can offer as cover in case of injury. Mostly players who might be considered as 16-23 for the "big" games. Joe's a "bench for cover first and foremost" rather than "bench for impact" selector.

On a similar note, England's bench seems a little strange on the "cover front" to me.
OFarrell is 10 or 12, SBurgess is 12too.
From a "joe" perspective, that wouldn't happen.
Nowell would cover 11, 13, 14, 15 if OF covered 10,12.
Or if Burgess is going to be there as 12 cover, someone like Slade would be a better compliment as he'd cover 10, 13, 15.
And Watson would have had at least a match as an international 15 by now to give him confidence for covering Brown's next knock

Likewise in the Forwards a bit. Selecting two out-and-out 8s in the 23 would require a bit more evidence that 6 and 7 are covered by someone in the 23.
For me, it's interesting how differnt coaches have different outlooks on making up a matchday 23.

IMO if we play like that for the rest of the tournament we are screwed.

You do realise Eddie Jones was free about the same time as you appointed a [s]moral guardian[/s] coach....(Says the man from the country still paying Scott Johnston)

CaptainFlashheart said » Just spotted the cup and 2003 logo on the England shirt. Tacky

Or indeed the jerseys of all previous winners in the 2007 and 2011 competitions.

Australia

15. Israel Folau
14. Adam Ashley-Cooper
13. Tevita Kuridrani
12. Matt Giteau
11. Rob Horne
10. Bernard Foley
9. Will Genia
1. Scott Sio
2. Stephen Moore
3. Sekope Kepu
4. Kane Douglas
5. Rob Simmons
6. Scott Fardy
7. Michael Hooper
8. David Pocock
Replacements:
16. Tatafu Polota-Nau
17. James Slipper
18. Greg Holmes
19. Will Skelton
20. Dean Mumm
21. Nick Phipps
22. Matt Toomua
23. Kurtley Beale

You do realise Eddie Jones was free about the same time as you appointed a moral guardian coach.

Yes but we don't need reminding of that thanks. 😈

Nick Mallet was also available and he'd convinced Wayne Smith to come aboard as attack coach too - but we don't need reminding of that either.......

...Pats NMBuzz on the back in a sympathetic way...

Seriously though,Mallet and Smith?

Jap commentary on their winning try - only marginally more hysterical than it was in our living room.

Crank up the volume!

Seriously though,Mallet and Smith?

Mallet I could take or leave but if he'd come with Smith I'd have taken him. Smith could probably have taught some of the England backs to play rugby properly.

Things like straightening, drawing a man and giving a pass for example.

you're forgetting that we paid something like £40k in recruitment costs to appoint the person already in charge. With that kind of expenditure, we must have the right man for the job!

I almost hope England get a good kicking in the next 2 games so we don't have to go through another 4 years of Lancaster dross.

As to England's style, well, it'll have to be whatever they've trained for. I simply can't work out how we have managed to convert a pack that looked at least as good as any other, and better than most to something so bloody awful.
A scrum that doesn't work (and why won't Tom Youngs hook?), and no ability to compete for the ball at the breakdown, coupled with relatively slow forwards as well. Makes no sense at all.
Still, however bad they'll give wales a good kicking.

For me, it's interesting how differnt coaches have different outlooks on making up a matchday 23.

Completely agree. When you break down the England bench in particular it is a case of pre-planned 50 minute impact subs vs injury cover. The one positive for England is that these subs seem to be making a difference and not disturbing the team overall as much as they did a short while ago. One could argue that they should be able to have their best players last 80 minutes but on the other hand it works and they don't seem to be picking up injuries.

None of those are strengths in the current England team.You will beat what's left of Wales,I have little doubt of that

Got to agree with Duckman (edit and Tinybits) on this. In the current squad who are the players who'll march up the middle of any team and defend to such a level they could *hypothetically* stop a team like NZ in full flow?

The forwards playing as they did against Fiji wasn't a tactic- if it was it was a stupid one and England were lucky to get away with it!

Genuine questions, who are the enforcers in defense and who are the muscular guaranteed gain line breakers in a tight attack for England taking current individuals' form in to account?

12. Matt Giteau

From an Aus perspective this must make the fans very excited 😀 I do love watching Giteau at 12 so long as it isn't against Wales

I think England will go through,not sure about as winners as your pack is not firing well enough to dominate Aus where they are still perceived as being weak...Aus's backs are terrifying mind you,so any ball they get needs to be crap. However,scraping through and then beating us will be enough to keep Lancaster in a job for another 4 years....

One of us is watching with some [b]kinted of tinted[/b] glasses. I never said they were the best at it though, thats just how they play traditional vis a vis natural strengths.

You're not the first person to fluff that line...

I've just watched a replay of SA v JPN. Wow. I'm not sure it was an appalling SA performance -Japan fully deserved to win, by playing great attacking rugby.

Watched bits of it back over the weekend too. All SA did was underestimate Japan wildly but once they found themselves in a dogfight, they didn't adapt. And it was to Japan's credit that SA didn't have an answer. It's blown the group wide open now. Not sure how confident the Scots will be for the game at Kingsholm but I wish I had a ticket for it. It'll be a cracking game.

Anyone notice how quickly the ball came out the back of the Japan scrums? 😀 Fair dues, they accepted they were probably going to be pushed back so went for getting it out quickly.

I still fancy us to beat Japan.We aren't the biggest ourselves and have a really good set of backs.We tend to struggle against teams that boss us up front (i.e almost everybody in int rugby) Japan will be sore as even though the Boks were poor,they were still big and hard..and poor. Japan also suddenly find themselves under a whole new type of pressure as well.

I'm not sure it was an appalling SA performance

Japan played out their skins, they had a game plan, and they hammered it out for the full 90 minutes.

*cough* 80 *cough* 😉

Felt like 90. Felt like 190.

A pretty good assessment of the SA game plan there.Hopefully they can be that bad again...

Anyone notice how quickly the ball came out the back of the Japan scrums? Fair dues, they accepted they were probably going to be pushed back so went for getting it out quickly.

This - in spades!

Why is it that all teams seem to now think that they have to win a penalty at each scrum, rather then just re start, tie in the fatties and get the damn ball out. If England is having trouble at scrum time, hook the damn ball (don't try to push over it Tom Youngs) and get it out. Ball back in play, no disadvantage. Simples.

Especially when the penalties are by and large given in turns by the refs.

tinybits - Member

I almost hope England get a good kicking in the next 2 games so we don't have to go through another 4 years of Lancaster dross.

Indeed. Although in the (highly) unlikely event of us winning - all will be forgotten. 😉

Just an observation: The last two RWC finals have been contested by teams that came from the same group. I wonder what the chances are of that happening again?

NZ/Arg - possible
Fra/Ire - possible
Aus/Eng/Wal - possible
SA/Sco/Sam/Jap - unlikely but hey, after Saturday, who knows?

So, after the opening round, who is actually looking good??? Apart from Japan.

Just got round to watching the video of the Japanese commentary. Gotta love moments like that. 😀

As for who's looking good? Too early to tell. Green machine are just building our hopes up before taking to the field with no injuries, Sexton on fire, Healey and O'Brien in the form of their lives and O'Connell at his belligerent best facing an injury ravaged France. And losing.

[img] [/img]

Earls clearly enjoyed the welcome for the team in Burton on Trent, bloody Munster folk, no manners. 😀

Joseph a doubt for Englandshire.

Joseph a doubt for Englandshire.

I saw that along with the BBC website saying:

Coach Stuart Lancaster may opt to move Barritt to 13 and bring in either Burgess or Farrell at inside centre.

Brad Barritt seems impervious to being dropped despite being totally s**t. First, being injured a lot somehow preserved his "certain starter" status and now being completely crap at 12 somehow elevates him to getting moved across to 13.

Can anyone, with a straight face, explain to me why Barritt should have ever played for England in the first place?

PS no uses of the following phrases are allowed: "When we beat the All Blacks", "Defensive Centre" and "he looked good alongside Manu Tuilagi".

Slade would be the best option surely? Wales would cope with Burgess and Barritt so much easier imo.

"he looked good alongside Manu Tuilagi".

So, after the opening round, who is actually looking good???

Can't deny that barritt isn't the most creative player but he's a long way from being shit. Not necessarily my selection (i'd like to see Slade in there), but I'd still pick him every single time ahead of Eastmond.

If Joseph is out, I think we may see the Burgess/Slade partnership rekindled.

he's a long way from being shit.

Against Fiji he was not a long way from being shit. In fact he was sharing the same seat....

barritt isn't the most creative player but he's a long way from being shit.

I fully agree, shit would be offended to be compared to him.

Oh I dunno...really can't wait for this game. 😀

Can anyone, with a straight face, explain to me why Barritt should have ever played for England in the first place?

He's South African and they know how to win stuff? Oh wait 😀

He played under Farrell at Saracens with Jr? case of coaches picking who they know?

He looked good alongside Manu Tuilagi? Oh damn it! 😆

Slade would be the best option surely? Wales would cope with Burgess and Barritt so much easier imo.

The thought of Slade (or even Cipriani!) in the centres is worrying for Wales as they are capable of making and exploiting a gap against Gatlandball pretty well. Burgess is right on for Wales normal pattern of play. Farrell must be England's wort option. If Ford wanted to play some rugby then Farell would end up stopping things dead for England one man along the line instead of at 10 like he has been doing for a while now.