Re: England vs South Africa
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:24 pm
The RFU won’t sack him before the World Cup regardless of results.
Who else is about? Jake White!!!!!
Who else is about? Jake White!!!!!
Sensefivepointer wrote:Can see why Manu on the bench as he hast been involved with England for a number of years. Te'o does have recent experience of playing, so that would have just won out. Manu from bench with 20-25 to go is the right way to bring him back in.
Elsewhere i'm surprised Hepburn starts ahead of Moon. I suspect his carrying work got him the nod.
No lock at 6 is god news. Curry continuing at 7 i like and as a fan of Wilson i'm delighted he's starting. He has played a bit at 8 so he's not completely new to the position. Mercer on the bench seems the right call.
Farrell widely expected to start at 10 so now we have to see how he directs this team.
Pleased that Nowell gets in ahead of Ashton and Daly stays at FB.
In the circumstances not the worst side that could have been selected, but the lack of experience at prop and in the back row is really quite alarming. Sinckler has 1 start at Twickenham, the other props have 2 starts (Williams) between them and none of the back row have played a test in England.
That appears to be Guscott on record as expecting 2 from 4.Which Tyler wrote:Eddie is on record as expecting 2 from 4
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/46059567
They're marginally bigger than Wilson and Shields. According to the stats I can find:Warrior85 wrote:That South African pack is massive! Vermuelen and Whitley in the same back row is huge! The front row is possibly the best in the world at the moment!! I really worry for us at scrum time!
I think England may just get bullied on Saturday!
Yep. Though what he is really saying is 1 from 3. A year out from the WC and playing at home that is a depressing expectationPuja wrote:That appears to be Guscott on record as expecting 2 from 4.Which Tyler wrote:Eddie is on record as expecting 2 from 4
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/46059567
Puja
Can you pm me your dealer.Stom wrote:I would. I actually don't think much of this NZ team. Watching some of the matches, the defense has been atrocious.twitchy wrote:Who would expect that england team to beat SA and NZ? Let alone sack the coach if they don't?
Yeah, but for me that underlined the difference between size and physicality. I believe a fair bit of it is psychological. SA forwards in particular seem to be able to bring a different level of aggression/disregard for their own bodies. Kaino is another example of a guy who is not outstandingly big but is incredibly physical.Beasties wrote:They're marginally bigger than Wilson and Shields. According to the stats I can find:Warrior85 wrote:That South African pack is massive! Vermuelen and Whitley in the same back row is huge! The front row is possibly the best in the world at the moment!! I really worry for us at scrum time!
I think England may just get bullied on Saturday!
Whitely 6'4" 17st 5lbs
Vermeulen 6'4" 18st 6lbs
Shields 6'4" 17st 7lbs
Wilson 6'3" 17st 9lbs
Curry is 6lbs lighter than Kolisi.
Mind, I'll be surprised if Sinckler doesn't struggle at scrumtime.
Edit: Swap Wilson for Billy/Hughes and it's us who have the huge backrow.
I am not one of these people who obsesses over size when selecting a team. I really look forward to seeing Hepburn for example, and I like a mobile 7 like Curry. However... I believe it would be sensible to have Attwood (or Slater) on the bench over Ewels and I would've picked Morgan at 8 for his carrying power. These changes would've been form led primarily but these guys do add the bulk that helps against SA. It'll be irritating if we do get thrown around up front when Eddie can call on these players.Beasties wrote:Indeed, but I was just making the point that our media often like to make out that the oppo are mahoosive and we're tiny when the facts just don't back that up. I totally take your point though. Collins was another who punched way above his weight. Fearns could've been ours but then he turned into a twot.
Lbs sounds like a horribly arcane unit of measurement, is it little bits of steroids?Beasties wrote:They're marginally bigger than Wilson and Shields. According to the stats I can find:Warrior85 wrote:That South African pack is massive! Vermuelen and Whitley in the same back row is huge! The front row is possibly the best in the world at the moment!! I really worry for us at scrum time!
I think England may just get bullied on Saturday!
Whitely 6'4" 17st 5lbs
Vermeulen 6'4" 18st 6lbs
Shields 6'4" 17st 7lbs
Wilson 6'3" 17st 9lbs
Curry is 6lbs lighter than Kolisi.
Mind, I'll be surprised if Sinckler doesn't struggle at scrumtime.
Edit: Swap Wilson for Billy/Hughes and it's us who have the huge backrow.
Ok but you see my point. We want a dominant scrummage primarily and we need the props to do it. There were so many "Mako Vunipola is world class" statements flying around for years during which time he scrummaged like a beanbag. Nothing more depressing than watching England being demolished at scrum time; hence why Marler is a real loss.Digby wrote:Props who carry are not a luxury, still less if you don't have carriers in the backrow
Scrummaging was always his obv weak point but he has improved considerably as he's got older. He's still not formidable but he's good enough now for it to not be a weakness.TheDasher wrote:Ok but you see my point. We want a dominant scrummage primarily and we need the props to do it. There were so many "Mako Vunipola is world class" statements flying around for years during which time he scrummaged like a beanbag. Nothing more depressing than watching England being demolished at scrum time; hence why Marler is a real loss.Digby wrote:Props who carry are not a luxury, still less if you don't have carriers in the backrow
Re Vunipola, I agree, I was making the point that he was lauded as world class when his scrummaging was still shit. It's cerainly far better now.Beasties wrote:Scrummaging was always his obv weak point but he has improved considerably as he's got older. He's still not formidable but he's good enough now for it to not be a weakness.TheDasher wrote:Ok but you see my point. We want a dominant scrummage primarily and we need the props to do it. There were so many "Mako Vunipola is world class" statements flying around for years during which time he scrummaged like a beanbag. Nothing more depressing than watching England being demolished at scrum time; hence why Marler is a real loss.Digby wrote:Props who carry are not a luxury, still less if you don't have carriers in the backrow
I would've started Williams in preference to Sinckler too but I can see why Eddie's wanting his carrying. I'm just not sure it's gonna pan out like that though, I fear that Sinckler's gonna be too knackered to do much in the way of positive carrying.
No. You’ve got it the wrong way around. Kitshoff is the ginger loosehead. He’s actually a strong all rounder, he’s just been stuck behind Beast.Mikey Brown wrote:For what it’s worth isn’t Malherbe generally viewed in a similar way? Has looked great off the bench and in the loose but only recently being trusted to be destructive from a start?
He’s the ginger loosehead right or have I got that the wrong way round?
Kruis is at least supposed to be the best scrummager on the tighthead isn’t he?
I agree. I don’t think it’s been overlooked, but it’s the only part of our pack that has a vague semblance of being ‘first choice’. Definitely in comparison to the front and back rows anyway.Oakboy wrote:Our second row hardly gets a mention. SA's is formidable. Itoje may hold his own but Kruis's ability to match his opponents in every aspect is crucial. I have reservations. In terms of pure in-your-face aggression, I can understand Dasher mentioning Attwood or Slater, even as a bench option.