Eng v NZ, Sat 14 June, 0835

Swiwi.

I'll start the ball rolling by naming my England side for Saturday, and we'll see how it pans out.

1. Marler
2. Webber => Hartley
3. Wilson
4. Launchbury
5. Parling => Lawes
6. Haskell => Wood
7. Robshaw
8. Morgan
9. Youngs => Care
10. Burns => Farrell
11. May
12. Eastmond => Tualagi
13. Tualagi => Burrell
14. Yarde => Ashton
15. Brown

It's no-brainer for me to bring Hartley back in. If you leave your feelings about him aside, he's a world class hooker: scrums well, throws well, good at ruck-time. Nothing better to get up Kiwi noses than one of our own playing for the Poms. Has to make sure he doesn't get carded though, could be costly.

Lawes/Launchbury was the best locking partnership in the 6N, would reunite them for sure. Lawes also used to be a card-magnet, but if he uses his aggression properly, he is some player.

Haskell was actually quite good in the weekend, and a bit of the Super XV came out with the flick through the legs, but I'd bring back Wood and move Haskell to the bench. On the other hand, I'd keep Morgan in the starting XV, and have Billy on the bench.

Care for Youngs. Not difficult. Care is up there with Murray as the best SH for the NH sides.

Farrell is England's main man at FH, and I imagine he'll get the nod again. I don't watch the Aviva, but apparently Burns surprised all and sundry with his display in the weekend, so that is handy for England to have depth.

I think any idea of moving Tualagi to wing is foolhardy, so I'd keep him in the midfield, but probably move him to 12 to accommodate Burrell.

Ashton for Yarde. Once again, feelings aside, Ashton has been in good form, and he runs good support lines for mine. Wing was a weakness for England in the 6N, there is room for improvement. Is Foden in the picture these days, or completely out of favour? Can he play wing?

Tox56

Didn't think Id be playing the NZ side of this... If Read and Savea come back they'll obviously go straight in, but I reckon B Smith could go to 15 with Dagg dropping out and presumably Kaino moves to 6 if Read does recover from that head knock. Also you'd think the looseheads would swap after England's scrum dominance last week. Dont think Barrett will come in but I wouldn't rule it out

CatFromHue

That's potentially a much stronger England team.

student15

I think NZ will win this one regardless of how strong an England side is put out, purely on the fact that NZ have a unique ability to lick their wounds and adapt very quickly. Especially in these test series.

Klunk_NZ

I think NZ will win on the basis that the backline cannot be so uncohesive 2 weeks in a row. I don't think England would be able to chase the game effectively if the AB's start well.

Swiwi.

Dunedin Stadium will help as the conditions will be perfect. Personally I'm picking England to go very close if Hansen goes with the same pack again. In saying that, England are not the greatest at converting their chances as we saw in the 6N (France, Scotland).

thomond2006

Remember what happened the week after Ireland ran NZ close in NZ

Klunk_NZ

I was at that game live, 60-0 will likely not happen to a top side for a long time. It was special.

skippymac6

Swiwi. wrote: »

I'll start the ball rolling by naming my England side for Saturday, and we'll see how it pans out.

1. Marler
2. Webber => Hartley
3. Wilson
4. Launchbury
5. Parling => Lawes
6. Haskell => Wood
7. Robshaw
8. Morgan
9. Youngs => Care
10. Burns => Farrell
11. May
12. Eastmond => Tualagi
13. Tualagi => Burrell
14. Yarde => Ashton
15. Brown

It's no-brainer for me to bring Hartley back in. If you leave your feelings about him aside, he's a world class hooker: scrums well, throws well, good at ruck-time. Nothing better to get up Kiwi noses than one of our own playing for the Poms. Has to make sure he doesn't get carded though, could be costly.

Lawes/Launchbury was the best locking partnership in the 6N, would reunite them for sure. Lawes also used to be a card-magnet, but if he uses his aggression properly, he is some player.

Haskell was actually quite good in the weekend, and a bit of the Super XV came out with the flick through the legs, but I'd bring back Wood and move Haskell to the bench. On the other hand, I'd keep Morgan in the starting XV, and have Billy on the bench.

Care for Youngs. Not difficult. Care is up there with Murray as the best SH for the NH sides.

Farrell is England's main man at FH, and I imagine he'll get the nod again. I don't watch the Aviva, but apparently Burns surprised all and sundry with his display in the weekend, so that is handy for England to have depth.

I think any idea of moving Tualagi to wing is foolhardy, so I'd keep him in the midfield, but probably move him to 12 to accommodate Burrell.

Ashton for Yarde. Once again, feelings aside, Ashton has been in good form, and he runs good support lines for mine. Wing was a weakness for England in the 6N, there is room for improvement. Is Foden in the picture these days, or completely out of favour? Can he play wing?

I thought Parling was excellent last week and even though Launchberry is a very good up and coming player, I think Parling keeps his place. He is their lineout general and also a Lions test starter. Harsh on Joe maybe but I think he keeps his place, be interesting to see how it goes...

Swiwi.

skippymac6 wrote: »

I thought Parling was excellent last week and even though Launchberry is a very good up and coming player, I think Parling keeps his place. He is their lineout general and also a Lions test starter. Harsh on Joe maybe but I think he keeps his place, be interesting to see how it goes...

Ah yeah Parling is basically 100% guaranteed lineout ball, but I reckon Launchbury will keep his spot. The English lads will debate about Parling vs the other guy on the bench, I don't know enough to comment.

thomond2006

thomond2006 wrote: »

Remember what happened the week after Ireland ran NZ close in NZ

this is feeding my betting tips this weekend...

skippymac6

Deleted User wrote: »

this is feeding my betting tips this weekend...

The line is at -13 at the minute. Do you think they will be able to beat England by more than that?

I know the Irish game is mentioned but also remember the matches last year against the French when teh Lions series was on, they were poor enough throughout that three game set.

Swiwi.

skippymac6 wrote: »

The line is at -13 at the minute. Do you think they will be able to beat England by more than that?

I know the Irish game is mentioned but also remember the matches last year against the French when teh Lions series was on, they were poor enough throughout that three game set.

NZ have been mediocre since Ellis Park. Lassitude seems the right word. I'm kind of hoping we lose (sacrilege I know) and force a hard look for the decider. Stephen Jones could whip out his favourite "powder-puff" front row, and I'd find myself nodding in agreement.

We have to find a way to beat teams that play methodical forward based rugby, not lolly scramble displays like what Aussie will throw up, and which plays into our hands.

In saying that, the mental fatigue for NZ players must be hard, constantly expected to win, and win well.

GiftofGab

Deleted User wrote: »

this is feeding my betting tips this weekend...

That's what I was thinking.....NZ -13 looks a very good bet..... have a feeling that NZ are going to tear them a new a$$hole. The same thing happened last year. France came close to beating them in the 1st test, then NZ came back in the 2nd test and smashed them 30-0.

England are a well drilled side but if NZ get on top early it will be downhill from there.

sydthebeat

skippymac6 wrote: »

The line is at -13 at the minute. Do you think they will be able to beat England by more than that?

I know the Irish game is mentioned but also remember the matches last year against the French when teh Lions series was on, they were poor enough throughout that three game set.

stung enough last weekend not to make this mistake again.
i wont be betting on this game.

matthew8

Swiwi. wrote: »

NZ have been mediocre since Ellis Park. Lassitude seems the right word. I'm kind of hoping we lose (sacrilege I know) and force a hard look for the decider. Stephen Jones could whip out his favourite "powder-puff" front row, and I'd find myself nodding in agreement.

We have to find a way to beat teams that play methodical forward based rugby, not lolly scramble displays like what Aussie will throw up, and which plays into our hands.

In saying that, the mental fatigue for NZ players must be hard, constantly expected to win, and win well.

Given NZ have won their last 15 or so games, with many against physical teams like France, England, and SA, I think it's fair to say NZ know how to beat teams playing like that.

Swiwi.

matthew8 wrote: »

Given NZ have won their last 15 or so games, with many against physical teams like France, England, and SA, I think it's fair to say NZ know how to beat teams playing like that.

Yeah I thought that as I typed. But I'd say it was more a case of the other teams not taking the gifted chance. Sexton missing an easy kick at goal etc.

skippymac6

GiftofGab wrote: »

That's what I was thinking.....NZ -13 looks a very good bet..... have a feeling that NZ are going to tear them a new a$$hole. The same thing happened last year. France came close to beating them in the 1st test, then NZ came back in the 2nd test and smashed them 30-0.

England are a well drilled side but if NZ get on top early it will be downhill from there.

Yeah but wasn't that the "freak" game when they defended their line like crazy and got two length of the field tries as a result of turnovers on those goal line stands? I think the 30-0 didnt reflect it and in the following test the won by two tries or something?

I think they are well capable of putting it up to England but the English lads won't fear them and have some decent players to come in. I think NZ will win but I won't be backing that hcap line!

Yeah_Right

Swiwi. wrote: »

Yeah I thought that as I typed. But I'd say it was more a case of the other teams not taking the gifted chance. Sexton missing an easy kick at goal etc.

Careful Swiwi. You don't want to get banned for mentioning the game that did not happen.

Swiwi.

Well the readers of the telegraph are in agreement with the OP, except they want Burrell at 12 and Tualagi at 13

Telegraph-readers-England-XV-to-play-second-Test

Where is EL...?

Telegraph doesn't even know what their players look like...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/picturegalleries/10888805/Telegraph-readers-England-XV-to-play-second-Test.html?frame=2904609

CatFromHue

I wouldn't be a fan of putting Tuilagi on the wing he could be exposed for pace. He is a centre and a good one too so I'd leave him there.

Journeyman_1

skippymac6 wrote: »

Yeah but wasn't that the "freak" game when they defended their line like crazy and got two length of the field tries as a result of turnovers on those goal line stands? I think the 30-0 didnt reflect it and in the following test the won by two tries or something?

I think they are well capable of putting it up to England but the English lads won't fear them and have some decent players to come in. I think NZ will win but I won't be backing that hcap line!

I feel like I remember the 2nd test being the one where NZ dominated france territorially with one of the best kicking performances I had seen in a while. I remember dagg in particular being very good!

.ak

Burrell at 12 and Tuilagi at 13 would be devestating imo. Tuilagi was MoTM last week, I've been impressed by his ability to change his game up, he's not just a big bosh centre.

LostArt

.ak wrote: »

Burrell at 12 and Tuilagi at 13 would be devestating imo. Tuilagi was MoTM last week, I've been impressed by his ability to change his game up, he's not just a big bosh centre.

Burrell and Tuilagi is the best option for England imo, as both are Englands best ball carriers in the backs. The playmaker at 12 lots of pundits seem to want is all well and good but only works when you are on the front foot and retaining the ball, which won't happen to England against top end teams.

Swiwi.

LostArt wrote: »

Burrell and Tuilagi is the best option for England imo, as both are Englands best ball carriers in the backs. The playmaker at 12 lots of pundits seem to want is all well and good but only works when you are on the front foot and retaining the ball, which won't happen to England against top end teams.

Besides which, 36 has not impressed me. England have not had a decent midfield since Greenwood etc, but Burrell & Tualagi has the potential to be the business. I'm not sure which is the better 12 though.

LostArt

If England want to go with a playmaking 12, then it should be Eastmond. I don't think that's a close call tbh

irishbucsfan

England need someone else capable of taking the ball at first reciever. It won't be as important against New Zealand, but against most other opposition they will need it. I suppose beating New Zealand is their immediate priority, which means it's something they'll have to address in the Autumn.

It doesn't necessarily have to be at 12, but Brown at 15 isn't that type of player either so it limits their options a little bit.

skippymac6

Journeyman_1 wrote: »

I feel like I remember the 2nd test being the one where NZ dominated france territorially with one of the best kicking performances I had seen in a while. I remember dagg in particular being very good!

Not splitting hairs but I'm nearly certain that was the game in Christchurch were France were camped on the NZ line twice and NZ scored two of the most ridiculous counter attacking tries that you will ever see.

Anyway a moot point really. I see Joe Marler didnt do himself or the team any favours in the press this week. It was probably taken out of context and he probably said something like "They are the best team I've ever faced" before saying that their "aura was exposed" last week but still you can be ceratain that Hansen will be reminding his players this week of what was said.

Volvic12

I really think England should look at playing Farell at 12. His defence is very good and he would be a play making option there. He could continue to kick at goal also. Backline of:
9. Care 10. Burns/Cipriani 11. May 12. Farrell 13. Tuilagi 14. Ashton 15. Brown would be quite good IMO.

Volvic12

Volvic12 wrote: »

I really think England should look at playing Farell at 12. His defence is very good and he would be a play making option there. He could continue to kick at goal also. Backline of:
9. Care 10. Burns/Cipriani 11. May 12. Farrell 13. Tuilagi 14. Ashton 15. Brown would be quite good IMO.

Farrell wouldn't be a bad option at all at 12. Would allow a far wider game to be played by the team.

For some reason I think that Cipriani and Farrell couldn't physically play in the same backline though. It's totally unfounded opinion of course, but I reckon they'd clash.

Swiwi.

All Blacks: Ben Smith, Cory Jane, Conrad Smith, Ma'a Nonu, Julian Savea, Aaron Cruden, Aaron Smith, Jerome Kaino, Richie McCaw (captain), Liam Messam, Sam Whitelock, Brodie Retallick, Owen Franks, Dane Coles, Tony Woodcock. Reserves: Keven Mealamu, Wyatt Crockett, Charlie Faumuina, Patrick Tuipulotu, Victor Vito, TJ Perenara, Beauden Barrett, Malakai Fekitoa.

Steve "Declan Kidney" Hansen has only made injury enforced changes moving Ben Smith into FB to cover Dagg, Jane back to his favoured right wing, and Savea onto left wing. I suppose it's reasonable to give the team a 2nd bite of the cherry, but I'd say the English will be pretty happy to see that front-row unchanged.

hahashake

Still no Read. Pretty excited for Ben at FB, could potentially be the beginning of the end for Dagg. Savea should add another dimension in attack we missed last weekend.

Swiwi.

hahashake wrote: »

Still no Read. Pretty excited for Ben at FB, could potentially be the beginning of the end for Dagg. Savea should add another dimension in attack we missed last weekend.

Rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic if the forwards don't front. But yes, happy to see Smith start in his best position.

English team is supposed to be out soon.

I hope Vito gets more of a run this week, and maybe Barrett actually gets to play at 10...

Grimebox

Mike Brown,
Manu Tuialgi,
Luther Burrell,
Billy Twelvetrees,
Marland Yarde,
Owen Farrell,
Danny Care;

Ben Morgan,
Chris Robshaw,
Tom Wood,
Geoff Parling,
Joe Launchbury,
David Wilson,
Rob Webber,
Joe Marler.

Replacements:
Dylan Hartley,
Matt Mullan,
Kieran Brookes,
Courtney Lawes,
Billy Vunipola,
Ben Youngs,
Freddie Burns,
Chris Ashton.

Tuilagi to the wing

CatFromHue

I'd worry about Tuilagi defensively in the wing. As wingers go he wouldn't be that quick and I don't know when he last played there either.

Much stronger bench from England this week in Hartley, Lawes, Vunipola and Ashton they've players who can make a difference when they come on.

Swiwi.

Grimebox wrote: »

Mike Brown,
Manu Tuialgi,
Luther Burrell,
Billy Twelvetrees,
Marland Yarde,
Owen Farrell,
Danny Care;

Ben Morgan,
Chris Robshaw,
Tom Wood,
Geoff Parling,
Joe Launchbury,
David Wilson,
Rob Webber,
Joe Marler.

Replacements:
Dylan Hartley,
Matt Mullan,
Kieran Brookes,
Courtney Lawes,
Billy Vunipola,
Ben Youngs,
Freddie Burns,
Chris Ashton.

Tuilagi to the wing

Delighted with that. I know England went well last week, but NZ played fairly rubbish, so I'm expecting a step up, and I'm therefore surprised Hartley and Lawes only made the bench. But better still, moving Tualagi to wing and bringing in 36 gives NZ players to target defensively. Much better bench though for England. Where have all the English posters gone...?

Swiwi.

Worth a gander

LostArt

I hope Manu's been practising turning back and running!

Surprised Lawes hasn't gone straight back in tbh, Parling was good but Launchbury/Lawes looks like Englands best partnership in ages

Tuiliagi is not a winger, he's a top rate centre. Better than Burrell and he himself is better than 36.

Strange decision unless he's not quite at full steam and Lancaster wants to look at the partnership in the middle on its own first.

Lancaster is a good rugby brain, he's up to something here I think!

irishbucsfan

Twelvetrees is a good choice for me. But I know some others don't rate him. For me it's an easy choice. The only other way I can see England's attack working in future is if Ford develops.

Tuilagi on the wing is a real question mark for me. England really need to get their wingers sorted.

sydthebeat

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Twelvetrees is a good choice for me. But I know some others don't rate him. For me it's an easy choice. The only other way I can see England's attack working in future is if Ford develops.

Tuilagi on the wing is a real question mark for me. England really need to get their wingers sorted.

is this sam burgess a realistic option, or over hyped wishful thinking?

CIARAN_BOYLE

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Twelvetrees is a good choice for me. But I know some others don't rate him. For me it's an easy choice. The only other way I can see England's attack working in future is if Ford develops.

Tuilagi on the wing is a real question mark for me. England really need to get their wingers sorted.

Twelvetrees is a necessary choice imo. I don't really rate Farrell as a top playmaker. If you watch Saracens you will Goode often acting as a second playmaker from 15 and for England Twelvetrees does it from 12.

.ak

Really think they're missing a trick by not putting Tuilagi and Burrell together. I haven't been sold by Tuilagi in the past, thinking he was a one trick poney, but last week he was quality, in terms of handling, awareness, footwork etc. If he wasn't a big lump I suspect people would be claiming he put in a master class performance last weekend. He played the game like a fleet footed centre but got over the gainline repeatedly because of his size also.

I think he'll be wasted on the wing, won't see nearly as much ball. I think Burrell should've been used as a crash centre for the first 50 and then start getting his hands free to Tuilagi when he wears down the defence.

Reckon the rust has gone from the gears of the all blacks, I think they'll win this comfortably.

irishbucsfan

You can't play Burrell, Tuilagi and Farrell in the same midfield. Either need a 10 who is more consistently available or else someone who can step in.

.ak

I don't see why not. Besides Burrell is used as first receiver a lot. Farrell's distribution is top notch when he wants, he can put Burrell on short ball all day.

English Lurker

Thoughts...

First up, maybe controversially, I look at that NZ pack and I scent blood. I think the England pack can dominate that pack and rob NZ of its supply of quality ball, without which they look a great deal more ordinary. I'm not saying England will definitely do that, or that pack domination alone is enough to win, but I have a growing feeling that the unit is there for the taking.

I'm happy enough that Hartley is only on the bench, only looks World Class when he has a grievance to settle, and Webber did well. Putting on Big Bill for Big Ben makes me happy, I'm happy that Morgan's form has been rewarded and the thought of Vunipola minor shambling into tired defences makes me smile. However, as a big fan of Geography teacher Geoff, I think I'd have rather seen Lawes start as he has been a revelation for us this season. I look at that choice and I suspect Lancaster is definitely looking for a big impact from his subs. I think he might be hoping to have us slow the game down and rely on the set-piece - where Parling is superior - then unleash Lawes once the game breaks up. Which makes sense, but I'd have started with Vunipola and kept Morgan for the looser spaces if that was my plan.

Ok, the backs. Not entirely happy there...

I think Lancaster is very much wedded to a playmaking 12, and I think Burrell is unlikely to play there anytime soon. I feel Eastmond has been hard done by and while I like Twelvetrees as a player, he often looks a touch ordinary at this level. He can execute all the options though so that should keep NZ guessing but he's been out for a little and might be rusty. I think NZ will set out to test his defensive awareness and positioning early.

Btw, since people mentioned it, I personally wouldn't consider Farrell at 10. His running game is barely adequate for a fly-half imo - at 12 he simply would offer too little threat for my liking. England have more natural distributors too. Long term, I wouldn't be surprised to see Ollie Devoto of Bath get the nod at 12.

Moving out... jesus. Passingly, I'd have kept May ahead of Yarde, but I think I'd have kept both! I'm not against the Tuilagi wing experiment. Apparently he's one of the fastest players in the England squad and sticking him on the wing maximises (potentially) his strength (running with the ball) and minimises his weakness (not wanting to give anyone else the ball). As a winger he has a bit of a licence to roam too - if a defence fails to spot him coming inside for a pop off of the shoulder in time, he's breaking the line. There's a bit of logic for thinking it could work.

I don't think away to the All Blacks is the time to test it. His kicking, his taking of the high ball, his positioning, none of these things have been seriously tested since he was 19. There's also the teething issue of getting the ball to him. Lancaster likes his wings to touch the sidelines a lot of the time and this backline isn't the fastest at getting the ball through the hands. It's not difficult to see this going wrong. I think he's mainly there due to fear of Savea bumping wingers.

In general, I'm annoyed that the first test centre partnership was broken up. It made four line-breaks and if England had ever heard of support runners, it would have probably caused even more damage. I don't see Twelvetrees and Burrell doing the same level of damage, I don't see them being as defensively secure. I know they were decent in the Six Nations, that Burrell picks a nice line... but it seems a step back. Neither guy will routinely bust the NZ line with three All Blacks hanging off him, neither has Eastmond's step.

As for the backs bench... jesus. Youngs is a player I am rapidly losing patience with and I lost it with Ashton a long time ago. Ashton has offered nothing but weakness to this England team for a long time. He also offers poor versatility - I think Burns will have to be full-back cover. Youngs is playing the game as smoothly as Stephen Hawking doing the Tango.

In summation... my guess at how the game will go is; An inconclusive and sapping tussle up front, in which both sides spoil supply but cannot get many turnovers or big linebreaks themselves. A less rusty and wiser ABs team will make more of their ball however - I see Ben Smith being a big danger from 15. They'll force more cracks and score a couple of tries. England will probably look a little disjointed in attack and not score too many more than they did last week.

Final note - I would love to see Care with either Burns or Cipriani at some point. The most natural and instinctive half-back pairings England has. I don't see it happening for a while, and the rest of you should be happy about that.

CatFromHue

Tuilagi one of the fastest players in the squad? That doesn't sound right!

He was hauled down relatively easily when he made that intercept against Ireland in the pre RWC11 friendly in the Aviva.

.ak

CatFromHue wrote: »

Tuilagi one of the fastest players in the squad? That doesn't sound right!

He was hauled down relatively easily when he made that intercept against Ireland in the pre RWC11 friendly in the Aviva.

I also remember his pace causing us problem in that game. Wasn't it a last ditch tackle by Murphy to stop him just short?

CatFromHue

Murphy caught up to him around our 22 so he isn't a flyer considering the distance between him and Murphy at the start.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyGTMFT7GaY

.ak

Yeah but Murphy started ahead of him.