England vs Australia - 01/11/25

[Ddanno]

That was a disappointing match regardless of the result. The pack was fine but no-one seemed to know what the **** was going on in the backs.

The ABs will munch us

 

[Becca]

That was a disappointing match regardless of the result. The pack was fine but no-one seemed to know what the **** was going on in the backs.

The ABs will munch us

I just watched NZ/Ireland and I can honestly say neither side looked very impressive

 

[NickBD]

I mean I wouldn't call that disappointing. I also wound't call the pack just fine it was very impressive.

Based those 2 games Im not sure I'd be saying the ABs will munch us. I fancy that England pack with that bench against what I just saw against Ireland.

 

[Zed]

Only watched the extended highlights. Looked like England were returning to more of a kicking game? It's effective, but limiting. It will win them a lot of games, but they'll come unstuck when they face the top sides in the world. Kicking should complement their overall strategy, not be the primary strategy. You don't play open rugby just to please the fans, you play open rugby because it should result in tries. Nothing wrong with playing 10 man rugby from time to time or parts of the game, relying on it though will send this England team backwards. Have a game plan, but still play naturally, with what is in front of you. e.g if England have an opportunity in their 22 would they run it or are they so pre-programmed by SB that they dutifully kick the ball into touch?

 

[Ddanno]

I mean I wouldn't call that disappointing. I also wound't call the pack just fine it was very impressive.

Based those 2 games Im not sure I'd be saying the ABs will munch us. I fancy that England pack with that bench against what I just saw against Ireland.

Incohesive then. Hopefully more time in camp will get things clicking.

I wouldn't pick Steward or shove Freeman at 13 again.

 

[BPM]

Steward seems to be getting a huge amount of criticism. Was he really that bad?

Yes, we didn’t look totally sharp but off the back of minimal training, that’s understandable/to be expected.

At times when we did have momentum, I thought we looked pretty good. The moves that led to Earl being held up and Potter’s intercept were both very good an on other days would have resulted in two tries.

Fiji will give us a very different challenge but overall, I expect us to be much slicker come the NZ game,

 

[TommiG88]

Steward had a nervous first half, but was one of our better players in the 2nd.

A couple of tweaks and there’s a good team in there. With an actual 13 (nothing against Freeman as I feel he’s class) I think we would have looked a lot more cohesive.

 

[Jimbo]

Steward seems to be getting a huge amount of criticism. Was he really that bad?

Yes, we didn't look totally sharp but off the back of minimal training, that's understandable/to be expected.

At times when we did have momentum, I thought we looked pretty good. The moves that led to Earl being held up and Potter's intercept were both very good an on other days would have resulted in two tries.

Fiji will give us a very different challenge but overall, I expect us to be much slicker come the NZ game,

I’m no fan of his and fairly harsh at times, he had a very poor first half an not a bad second, we know his lack of pace and defensive vulnerabilities, if he’s being picked for aerial excellence he was poor there in the first half, someone unfamiliar with the game or his reputation wouldn’t have come to the conclusion that he excelled there and others (Roebuck) certainly didn’t struggle there in the slightest so you can really put it down to conditions, personally I’d start Freemo or Roebuck at 15 next week.

 

[TommiG88]

I'm no fan of his and fairly harsh at times, he had a very poor first half an not a bad second, we know his lack of pace and defensive vulnerabilities, if he's being picked for aerial excellence he was poor there in the first half, someone unfamiliar with the game or his reputation wouldn't have come to the conclusion that he excelled there and others (Roebuck) certainly didn't struggle there in the slightest so you can really put it down to conditions, personally I'd start Freemo or Roebuck at 15 next week.

You’re being a touch harsh in my opinion.

You’re right that Roebuck excelled there, but he was excelling in attacking the high ball, and not defending it. With the change of the rules giving attacking players a free run up to the contest, this put the defender at a bit of a disadvantage as they’re generally standing under it.

 

[dirty harry]

You're being a touch harsh in my opinion.

You're right that Roebuck excelled there, but he was excelling in attacking the high ball, and not defending it. With the change of the rules giving attacking players a free run up to the contest, this put the defender at a bit of a disadvantage as they're generally standing under it.

Exactly, Suaali was the perfect example, leaping 3m high in attacking a high ball, useless under it.

Steward dropped a few, some were not his fault, but i thought he stood the test pretty decently, and had some great counters and defuses in the 2nd half

 

[LIONSxv]

Steward was poor first half better in the second. I'm not sure he is quite good enough at FB against the very best teams

If SB wants Roebuck and Tommy Freeman in his XV why not play TF at FB. It's a position he knows well. Then play Lawrence at 13. It's a win win

 

[Jimbo]

Steward was poor first half better in the second. I'm not sure he is quite good enough at FB against the very best teams

If SB wants Roebuck and Tommy Freeman in his XV why not play TF at FB. It's a position he knows well. Then play Lawrence at 13. It's a win win

This is where I am with it, I just don’t think he quite had it at international level, if as others have pointed out defending the high ball is no longer a given for the best 15 specialists it negates his original USP regardless of how it’s come about, teams will be aware of his other limitations and expose it, it’s unfortunate but I don’t think he’s quite there.

 

[Which Tyler]

Steward was poor first half better in the second. I'm not sure he is quite good enough at FB against the very best teams

If SB wants Roebuck and Tommy Freeman in his XV why not play TF at FB. It's a position he knows well. Then play Lawrence at 13. It's a win win

This.
I'd rather he'd played more at FB before giving him tests there, but he's more accustomed to FB than OC, played it more recently (before yesterday), and it's an easier switch from his actual position.

Steward was poor first half and decent 2nd, but he's always going to have a major downside in the back 3 leaving him short of top international quality - if he can go low error-countnthen he can be a decent international, but not top. He's also got the disadvantage that he requires a very different set-up to Furbank, who seems to be first choice (who plays in a way that can be backed up by the likes of Daly, Carpenter and De Glanville), and not really having anyone else who can play the Steward way a backup.

That said, I'd personally still start him, due to injuries to others, but I'd also be very tempted to have Freeman back there, allowing our 3 best (fit) back-3 players to be on the field together

 

[Protalus rampart]

I don’t think Steward ever fully kicked on to what people expected of him 3-4 years ago. He’s still excellent in the air but still has a lot of relative weaknesses compared to the top international 15s. I’d probably have a look at Freeman or Arundell there next week but given the injuries and SB’s cautious approach to everything I think it’s likely he stays.

 

[BPM]

I find the continued accusations of Borthwick being cautious quite bizarre TBH.

Say what you like about yesterday's lineup but it wasn't in any way 'cautious'. In fact, more people said it was risky.

I'm still not totally convinced on Borthwick but to repeatedly say he's 'cautious' just doesn't fit with a lot of the selection calls he makes etc.

It feels to me like perceptions based upon his personality often override the actual facts. Yes, we were cautious with a very limited game plan in the last RWC, but since then he’s definitely been more bullish than conservative.

 

[Scotty]

I find the continued accusations of Borthwick being cautious quite bizarre TBH.

Say what you like about yesterday's lineup but it wasn't in any way 'cautious'. In fact, more people said it was risky.

I'm still not totally convinced on Borthwick but to repeatedly say he's 'cautious' just doesn't fit with a lot of the selection calls he makes etc.

It feels to me like perceptions based upon his personality often override the actual facts. Yes, we were cautious with a very limited game plan in the last RWC, but since then he's definitely been more bullish than conservative.

Borthwick is not cautious i agree, he might want a kicking game but tbh he isnt fitting square pegs in round holes here, Freeman Roebuck and Steward are class in the air so he leans into their strengths.

He has fast mobile back rowers like Earl Pepper and Pollock, and that's how we tried to play yesterday when we kept ball in hand.

He plays to the strengths of the team and adapts them to the opposition.

We need to develop alot as a squad and make sure he isnt too bold in selection. Luckily Freeman is a classy player that can play 13 14 15 without to much issue. But he did play like a winger. May be harsh on Steward who i dont dislike but Freeman has more pace and attacking ability and is very good in the air. Also it's like Borthwick to want to have a player who can c0ver 13 14 15 without issue to let MS focus on 10 primarily. Think is the AIs are the time to experiment as you don't want to do in during the 6N.

I'd actually try Freeman at 15 next week allowing us to have
Mitchell FSmith
Ojomoh/Dingwall Lawrence
IFW Freeman Roebuck

Spencer MSmith

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Not sure how it was risky outside of Freeman and even then he’s a British and Irish lion

Borthwick didn’t even have enough bottle to keep Curry out of the squad to rest and use you know another back.

It’s not like Pollock played in the backs to see if he could cover wing or 13 either so we don’t actually know if that is a option

 

[spartan32]

That was a disappointing match regardless of the result. The pack was fine but no-one seemed to know what the **** was going on in the backs.

The ABs will munch us

This was experimental. I can understand wanting to see what Freeman could do at 13. The answer was clearly that he’s not anywhere near as good as OL or even Slade. With time he may get there but when it comes to NZ we will see a change there no doubt.

IFW looked lethal and if he did have a proper centre inside of him I think we would have seen at least a couple of try’s froM the lad. Roebuck looked strong and I do wonder whether he might be the answer to the fullback problem? Steward was poor in my view but we have other options to solve that issue going forwards.

Given the threat of Pollock and Earls, matched with OL and an alternative FB option, I’d say we’re in pretty good fettle.

 

[spartan32]

Borthwick is not cautious i agree, he might want a kicking game but tbh he isnt fitting square pegs in round holes here, Freeman Roebuck and Steward are class in the air so he leans into their strengths.

He has fast mobile back rowers like Earl Pepper and Pollock, and that's how we tried to play yesterday when we kept ball in hand.

He plays to the strengths of the team and adapts them to the opposition.

We need to develop alot as a squad and make sure he isnt too bold in selection. Luckily Freeman is a classy player that can play 13 14 15 without to much issue. But he did play like a winger. May be harsh on Steward who i dont dislike but Freeman has more pace and attacking ability and is very good in the air. Also it's like Borthwick to want to have a player who can c0ver 13 14 15 without issue to let MS focus on 10 primarily. Think is the AIs are the time to experiment as you don't want to do in during the 6N.

I'd actually try Freeman at 15 next week allowing us to have
Mitchell FSmith
Ojomoh/Dingwall Lawrence
IFW Freeman Roebuck

Spencer MSmith

I like the sound of that lineup for next week. Steward is supposed to have one strength, his ability in the air, and this week he was pretty poor. He offers very little else. I’d be tempted to give either Freeman, or maybe even Roebuck (who I think was pretty excellent yesterday all round), a run at 15 to make space for other talent. Wasn’t that impressed with either centre. Maybe give the bath pair a run out together and see how that goes?

 

[BPM]

Not sure how it was risky outside of Freeman and even then he's a British and Irish lion

Borthwick didn't even have enough bottle to keep Curry out of the squad to rest and use you know another back.

It's not like Pollock played in the backs to see if he could cover wing or 13 either so we don't actually know if that is a option

Well he started with the second choice front row, 5 openside flankers in the 23 (in place of a specialist 6 or 8) and no back three cover on the bench …In other words a number of bold selection calls that at least had he potential to backfire. That could very easily be described as 'risky'.