NZ vs England - round 2

[Banquo]

as an aside, Boks v Ireland is an epic. More blood than Kill Bill 1 and 2, McCarthy amazing.

[Banquo]

epic win for Ireland....though Ryan nearly blew it.

[Scrumhead]

Up until the last two games, Earl has shown up very well at 8 and CCS and Underhill compliment each other quite well IMO. While I accept that the NZ back row outplayed ours at the breakdown, I don’t see a good reason to throw the baby out with the bath water.

I’d need some convincing on Earl as a 7. IMO, Underhill has done a lot to cement his place and nothing to warrant being dropped. Earl’s strength is his carrying. I’m less convinced by him in the main aspects I want to see in a 7. His tackling and breakdown work in particular would be a huge step down from Underhill’s.

Leave him at 8 or put him in the 20 shirt. If he does play 7, I don’t think CCS is the right 6 to pair him with. Then you’d probably need a fit Tom Curry at 6.

Interesting- why do you think Earl plus CCS wont work on the flanks?
Earl has been an odd mix of high workrate and daft errors of judgement.

I guess to put it simply, I just don’t think there is enough of an appetite for the dirty work. Neither is much of a breakdown operator and if either one of them has to take on a different role focused on clearing rucks and slowing opposition ball, it would take away their main strengths.

Earl is a very good player, but isn’t a particularly good 7. Playing at 8 has allowed him to focus on his strengths and hasn’t really needed him to do a great deal of the nuts and bolts graft.

CCS is a good carrier, a destructive tackler and is becoming a decent lineout forward. He stands out ATM because his role allows him to make big carries or big hits.

You need a dogged, hard-nosed back row somewhere in the mix (the role Underhill does) and with that flank pairing, I don’t know who would really work? Willis is probably closest.

Ultimately, being beaten at the breakdown by NZ doesn’t mean the current trio is not the right one. Particularly when a good deal of the decisions in NZ’s favour were somewhat generous.

I’d rather take the learnings and build rather than make a change which arguably creates more problems than it solves.

[Spiffy]

epic win for Ireland....though Ryan nearly blew it.

Great win despite a creaking set piece and a bit of a one-eyed ref.
So much for the Boks new all singing/dancing/running attack - zero tries.

[R3dders]

Never be afraid to draft over someone, as the Americans would say.

I don't know what that means.

Until we have 30 world class players spread evenly across the squad then I’ll take a ‘find’ in any position, even if we need it in more positions than others.

I'm not saying I wouldn't take a "find", but that we don't NEED them in most positions.
It surely goes without saying that anyone who looks to be better than any incumbent should at the very least get a shot in a training camp.

Don’t be afraid to draft someone from college who plays in the same position of a good player you already have if you think they can be better.

We have just spent nearly five years watching dross and seem to be happy losing a two test series, albeit closely, to a team that haven’t played in months and months under a brand new head coach whose had his hands on them for two (I think) weeks I think we need reinforcements in all positions.
That said, I think we’re agreeing. We def need some finds in weak positions but if we find the next Dan Carter to replace the Smiths (I look forward to the posts working in their lyrics) and Ford then I’d be just as happy, if not more so, than if we found a good test IC. I’m desperately hoping Will Joseph is the next ‘find’.

Yes, like Sleightholme over either of our wingers.

He's not. Much more chance of Marchant coming back before Joseph is test level, if he ever is.

[Mellsblue]

I don't know what that means.


I'm not saying I wouldn't take a "find", but that we don't NEED them in most positions.
It surely goes without saying that anyone who looks to be better than any incumbent should at the very least get a shot in a training camp.

Don’t be afraid to draft someone from college who plays in the same position of a good player you already have if you think they can be better.

We have just spent nearly five years watching dross and seem to be happy losing a two test series, albeit closely, to a team that haven’t played in months and months under a brand new head coach whose had his hands on them for two (I think) weeks I think we need reinforcements in all positions.
That said, I think we’re agreeing. We def need some finds in weak positions but if we find the next Dan Carter to replace the Smiths (I look forward to the posts working in their lyrics) and Ford then I’d be just as happy, if not more so, than if we found a good test IC. I’m desperately hoping Will Joseph is the next ‘find’.

Yes, like Sleightholme over either of our wingers.

He's not. Much more chance of Marchant coming back before Joseph is test level, if he ever is.

I admire your surety. Backing oneself is very important.

[Banquo]

I don't know what that means.


I'm not saying I wouldn't take a "find", but that we don't NEED them in most positions.
It surely goes without saying that anyone who looks to be better than any incumbent should at the very least get a shot in a training camp.

Don’t be afraid to draft someone from college who plays in the same position of a good player you already have if you think they can be better.

We have just spent nearly five years watching dross and seem to be happy losing a two test series, albeit closely, to a team that haven’t played in months and months under a brand new head coach whose had his hands on them for two (I think) weeks I think we need reinforcements in all positions.
That said, I think we’re agreeing. We def need some finds in weak positions but if we find the next Dan Carter to replace the Smiths (I look forward to the posts working in their lyrics) and Ford then I’d be just as happy, if not more so, than if we found a good test IC. I’m desperately hoping Will Joseph is the next ‘find’.

Yes, like Sleightholme over either of our wingers.

He's not. Much more chance of Marchant coming back before Joseph is test level, if he ever is.

IFW and Freeman are excellent internationals already, Ollie Sleightholme showed how good he can be, but imo needs more of a body of all round play before saying he is better at this level...but its gret he has stayed fit enough this season to lay down a credible challenge. Good options.

[Banquo]

epic win for Ireland....though Ryan nearly blew it.

Great win despite a creaking set piece and a bit of a one-eyed ref.
So much for the Boks new all singing/dancing/running attack - zero tries.

that guy who came on for le roux was a helluva runner, but the irish defence was brilliant.

[p/d]

12. Seb Atkinson

Ireland, magnificent.

Test rugby remains an absolute joy.

Liam Williams can be such a twat

These are facts!

[Mikey Brown]

I thought Underhill has been very good at the breakdown, and agree with others that Earl’s strengths are in having freedom to get involved in attack as much as possible. His role at Saracens as a 7 is a bit misleading. I don’t see how he can take Underhill’s place.

Jack Willis yeah yeah he’s not available so who cares.

Tom Willis I am a huge fan of but hadn’t fully displaced Billy and doesn’t seem to have impressed in whatever manor Borthwick wanted since leaving him out of the World Cup squad. Hill I guess falls in the same category. Does he get through more breakdown work than CCS?

Dombrandt as a reserve in case of injury feels like a waste, whether he’s fully in or out.

Is Roots really going to provide impact from the bench? I like it in theory, certainly more than whatever nonsense we’ve been doing with the backrow in the closing stages so far.

Curry needs to earn his spot with performances just like everybody else.

I don’t get why you are all saying 19 must cover 6. We need the best lock available to step in for Itoje/Martin if required. I think they’re a fantastic combo but doesn’t mean they need to do 80 every time.

We need a fucking 12. Jesus Christ. How are we still saying it? Lawrence doesn’t get enough chance to do his miracle runs through the 13 channel to negate his generally inconsistent skills and decision making.

Yes please to JVP/Quirke finding some form and Marcus Smith just chilling the fuck out a bit when we’ve got ball in hand.

[Banquo]

Up until the last two games, Earl has shown up very well at 8 and CCS and Underhill compliment each other quite well IMO. While I accept that the NZ back row outplayed ours at the breakdown, I don’t see a good reason to throw the baby out with the bath water.

I’d need some convincing on Earl as a 7. IMO, Underhill has done a lot to cement his place and nothing to warrant being dropped. Earl’s strength is his carrying. I’m less convinced by him in the main aspects I want to see in a 7. His tackling and breakdown work in particular would be a huge step down from Underhill’s.

Leave him at 8 or put him in the 20 shirt. If he does play 7, I don’t think CCS is the right 6 to pair him with. Then you’d probably need a fit Tom Curry at 6.

Interesting- why do you think Earl plus CCS wont work on the flanks?
Earl has been an odd mix of high workrate and daft errors of judgement.

I guess to put it simply, I just don’t think there is enough of an appetite for the dirty work. Neither is much of a breakdown operator and if either one of them has to take on a different role focused on clearing rucks and slowing opposition ball, it would take away their main strengths.

Earl is a very good player, but isn’t a particularly good 7. Playing at 8 has allowed him to focus on his strengths and hasn’t really needed him to do a great deal of the nuts and bolts graft.

CCS is a good carrier, a destructive tackler and is becoming a decent lineout forward. He stands out ATM because his role allows him to make big carries or big hits.

You need a dogged, hard-nosed back row somewhere in the mix (the role Underhill does) and with that flank pairing, I don’t know who would really work? Willis is probably closest.

Ultimately, being beaten at the breakdown by NZ doesn’t mean the current trio is not the right one. Particularly when a good deal of the decisions in NZ’s favour were somewhat generous.

I’d rather take the learnings and build rather than make a change which arguably creates more problems than it solves.

fair enough, but not convinced that trio is the answer...Earl not being smart was an issue for the second game in a row which i guess didnt help....plus breakdown issues arent only down to the backrow.
Annoying Jack Willis aint available.

[Banquo]

I thought Underhill has been very good at the breakdown, and agree with others that his strengths are in having freedom to get involved in attack as much as possible. His role at Saracens as a 7 is a bit misleading. I don’t see how he can take Underhill’s place.



I don’t get why you are all saying 19 must cover 6. We need the best lock available to step in for Itoje/Martin if required. I think they’re a fantastic combo but doesn’t mean they need to do 80 every time.

presume Earls name should be in there somewhere?

And I am exactly saying that Coles should cover lock only, and if you want to cover lock and 6 in one person the player needs to be very good at both. Yes, I know I`m repeating myself....and frankly Itoje looked shot with 10 to go..

[Mikey Brown]

I thought Underhill has been very good at the breakdown, and agree with others that his strengths are in having freedom to get involved in attack as much as possible. His role at Saracens as a 7 is a bit misleading. I don’t see how he can take Underhill’s place.



I don’t get why you are all saying 19 must cover 6. We need the best lock available to step in for Itoje/Martin if required. I think they’re a fantastic combo but doesn’t mean they need to do 80 every time.

presume Earls name should be in there somewhere?

And I am exactly saying that Coles should cover lock only, and if you want to cover lock and 6 in one person the player needs to be very good at both. Yes, I know I`m repeating myself....and frankly Itoje looked shot with 10 to go..

Ah. Yes. ‘Underhill good, Earl’s strengths not similar to what our openside is currently doing’ is what I meant to write.

What’s the deal with Itoje? He misses club pre-season or warm-up games or something?

He generally seems to take very good care of himself but running him in to the ground so early in a World Cup cycle would be a shame. Fantastic performances on the whole though. Martin really compliments him. Can’t wait to have Chessum’s dynamism available again from the bench.

[Banquo]

I thought Underhill has been very good at the breakdown, and agree with others that his strengths are in having freedom to get involved in attack as much as possible. His role at Saracens as a 7 is a bit misleading. I don’t see how he can take Underhill’s place.



I don’t get why you are all saying 19 must cover 6. We need the best lock available to step in for Itoje/Martin if required. I think they’re a fantastic combo but doesn’t mean they need to do 80 every time.

presume Earls name should be in there somewhere?

And I am exactly saying that Coles should cover lock only, and if you want to cover lock and 6 in one person the player needs to be very good at both. Yes, I know I`m repeating myself....and frankly Itoje looked shot with 10 to go..

Ah. Yes. ‘Underhill good, Earl’s strengths not similar to what our openside is currently doing’ is what I meant to write.

What’s the deal with Itoje? He misses club pre-season or warm-up games or something?

He generally seems to take very good care of himself but running him in to the ground so early in a World Cup cycle would be a shame. Fantastic performances on the whole though. Martin really compliments him. Can’t wait to have Chessum’s dynamism available again from the bench.

Yep to all that. I like Coles as a lock but definitely behind those three.

[Oakboy]

Looking at average ages leads me to think we are in an excellent place going forward. Replacing Cole, Marler, George, Ford, Slade etc. puts us well ahead of SA and Ireland, for example. There are more grounds for optimism than for decades.

[Mikey Brown]

Looking at average ages leads me to think we are in an excellent place going forward. Replacing Cole, Marler, George, Ford, Slade etc. puts us well ahead of SA and Ireland, for example. There are more grounds for optimism than for decades.

Nice to hear some positivity from you!

[Banquo]

Looking at average ages leads me to think we are in an excellent place going forward. Replacing Cole, Marler, George, Ford, Slade etc. puts us well ahead of SA and Ireland, for example. There are more grounds for optimism than for decades.

dunno, I was pretty optimistic after the 2019 RWC on the back of a decent turnaround by Jones from 2015; had a good core of players, esp up front and some contenders coming through. There are probably more good lads coming through now though, fingers crossed we get the pathway and development right for them.

[Scrumhead]

To be fair, I think Eddie was the biggest part of that particular problem. There are several players that should already have more experience and others lost to us through his mismanagement- Marchant being the obvious one.

Also to @Oakboy’s point, it’s also worth considering the bigger picture across the other tier 1 sides. In the past few years Ireland’s peak has coincided with our slump. It may be that goes the other way in this cycle. It does feel as though we should have a good crop reaching their peak in 2027 but development in sport rarely works as simply as that.

[Oakboy]

To be fair, I think Eddie was the biggest part of that particular problem. There are several players that should already have more experience and others lost to us through his mismanagement- Marchant being the obvious one.

Also to @Oakboy’s point, it’s also worth considering the bigger picture across the other tier 1 sides. In the past few years Ireland’s peak has coincided with our slump. It may be that goes the other way in this cycle. It does feel as though we should have a good crop reaching their peak in 2027 but development in sport rarely works as simply as that.

I think your last sentence sums it up well. Top management could get us there IF things go well. That leaves the question about whether Soapy Balls is the man. I think he might be but he may need to dump Wigglesworth for somebody better. Having said that, I don't want a return to the incompetence of the previous era's turnover. A quaIity improvement or two in the back-up staff and my qualified optimism could develop into convinced excitement.

[Banquo]

To be fair, I think Eddie was the biggest part of that particular problem. There are several players that should already have more experience and others lost to us through his mismanagement- Marchant being the obvious one.

Also to @Oakboy’s point, it’s also worth considering the bigger picture across the other tier 1 sides. In the past few years Ireland’s peak has coincided with our slump. It may be that goes the other way in this cycle. It does feel as though we should have a good crop reaching their peak in 2027 but development in sport rarely works as simply as that.

Oh yes, Jones fckd up after RWC 19, and overall development would have been hindered by covid in fairness. Not sure how many players were actually’missed’ tho.
I’m optimistic because the RFU, whatever faults that are still there- the fckrs have cut direct funding for the champ again- they recognise that our best young players need proper development plans and game time in order that the head coach has a pipeline coming through, and have tried to enshrine through the PGP.

[R3dders]

Don’t be afraid to draft someone from college who plays in the same position of a good player you already have if you think they can be better.

We have just spent nearly five years watching dross and seem to be happy losing a two test series, albeit closely, to a team that haven’t played in months and months under a brand new head coach whose had his hands on them for two (I think) weeks I think we need reinforcements in all positions.
That said, I think we’re agreeing. We def need some finds in weak positions but if we find the next Dan Carter to replace the Smiths (I look forward to the posts working in their lyrics) and Ford then I’d be just as happy, if not more so, than if we found a good test IC. I’m desperately hoping Will Joseph is the next ‘find’.

Yes, like Sleightholme over either of our wingers.

He's not. Much more chance of Marchant coming back before Joseph is test level, if he ever is.

IFW and Freeman are excellent internationals already, Ollie Sleightholme showed how good he can be, but imo needs more of a body of all round play before saying he is better at this level...but its gret he has stayed fit enough this season to lay down a credible challenge. Good options.

Tricky to prove oneself at international level without playing in tests. The conversation is about not being afraid to replace players with better ones.

Freeman is OK, excellent is one hell of a stretch for a guy who isn't that quick and has 2 tries in 12 tests (1 in 11 before yesterday). He managed 14 metres yesterday vs sleightholme's 60, and didn't beat a defender.

As for a body of all round play, sleightholme had played 3 times the games IFW had when he got picked, and pretty similar amounts on the wing to Freeman, so a bit of an odd one too.

Sometimes form just demands to be picked, and this is one of those times, as was made abundantly obvious by his performance yesterday. The other two haven't down anything wrong, the obvious solution is to move Freeman to 13.

[FKAS]

Yes, like Sleightholme over either of our wingers.

He's not. Much more chance of Marchant coming back before Joseph is test level, if he ever is.

IFW and Freeman are excellent internationals already, Ollie Sleightholme showed how good he can be, but imo needs more of a body of all round play before saying he is better at this level...but its gret he has stayed fit enough this season to lay down a credible challenge. Good options.

Tricky to prove oneself at international level without playing in tests. The conversation is about not being afraid to replace players with better ones.

Freeman is OK, excellent is one hell of a stretch for a guy who isn't that quick and has 2 tries in 12 tests (1 in 11 before yesterday). He managed 14 metres yesterday vs sleightholme's 60, and didn't beat a defender.

As for a body of all round play, sleightholme had played 3 times the games IFW had when he got picked, and pretty similar amounts on the wing to Freeman, so a bit of an odd one too.

Sometimes form just demands to be picked, and this is one of those times, as was made abundantly obvious by his performance yesterday. The other two haven't down anything wrong, the obvious solution is to move Freeman to 13.

I think it's probably IFW or Sleightholme. We use Freeman as the kick chase option when we want to contest as it's not a strength of the other wingers or Furbank. Removing Freeman leaves us short on that tactical option as it's not a Sleightholme strength. Moving Freeman to 13 would require him to play a lot more rugby there for Saints, he could still be used as the main kick chase option but the difficulty in leading the blitz defence would be a big ask.

If Freeman could master the defensive alignment it would offer us some real impact in the backline.

[Banquo]

Yes, like Sleightholme over either of our wingers.

He's not. Much more chance of Marchant coming back before Joseph is test level, if he ever is.

IFW and Freeman are excellent internationals already, Ollie Sleightholme showed how good he can be, but imo needs more of a body of all round play before saying he is better at this level...but its gret he has stayed fit enough this season to lay down a credible challenge. Good options.

Tricky to prove oneself at international level without playing in tests. The conversation is about not being afraid to replace players with better ones.

Freeman is OK, excellent is one hell of a stretch for a guy who isn't that quick and has 2 tries in 12 tests (1 in 11 before yesterday). He managed 14 metres yesterday vs sleightholme's 60, and didn't beat a defender.

As for a body of all round play, sleightholme had played 3 times the games IFW had when he got picked, and pretty similar amounts on the wing to Freeman, so a bit of an odd one too.

Sometimes form just demands to be picked, and this is one of those times, as was made abundantly obvious by his performance yesterday. The other two haven't down anything wrong, the obvious solution is to move Freeman to 13.

I know what the conversation is about, I just don't agree Sleightholme is 'better' than either Freeman or IFW. Freeman has a better all round skillset than Sleightholme so performs a different role (and he is pretty quick tbh), IFW has just been a brilliant 'find'; it was impressive from Sleightholme I agree. By all round play, I mean he's demonstrated his gas, but equally been exposed defensively for Saints, who I watch a lot of.

We will have to disagree, I guess. As I said, nice problem to have.

[Mikey Brown]

No one is talking about Cadan Murley anymore that’s for sure. Some were disappointed Roebuck didn’t get another look as he had a very promising cameo too. It’s a good thing.

Freeman’s form maybe slightly below IFW at the moment but has longer term credit too. I’d love to see if he can be more of a full time 13 for Saints but seemed like they’d found their balance with him on the wing and Odendaal at centre.

[Puja]

Charlie Morgan picking out this moment in his review of the series:



53m in, England are 17-13 up, and Telea rushes up and blocks Smith's pass - given as a knock-on in the tackle by the ref and not reviewed by the TMO, but looked very, very *marginal* on the one replay that we got. Crying shame the ball didn't get through, cause that looks like a try for IFW every day of the week and 24-13 is a very, very different feeling (or playing against a 14 man NZ if Telea gets called up for the slap down).

That period in the second half where we dominated but only scored 3 points was where the game was lost.

Puja