[2014 EOYT] England v Australia

[goodNumber10]

McKenzie - 7 wins from 8 games against the NH.
Cheika - 3 losses from 4.

Karma is beautiful.

Three of those wins were against a p*ss poor french side though that were completely at sea, so it's a slightly skewed statistic really. Besides i don't think if EM had stayed in the job these results would have been any different, do you?

 

[thechosenfamily]

A great comment made by my very knowledgeable friend whilst watching the game with him in Dublin

"A pack wins you games, the backs decide by how many."

Great performance by the England 8 albeit against a woeful Australia pack.

A lot of comments regarding the style of England's win but I say this, what is wrong with adapting your game to beat an opponent, winning ugly is still winning.

Lancaster\Rowntree knew the Aussie pack was poor so went at them accordingly.

England should be better and with injured players back, and should be.

Also, and no disrespect to Ben Morgan here, did AAC not get man of the match, he was immense.

 

[profitius]

McKenzie - 7 wins from 8 games against the NH.
Cheika - 3 losses from 4.

Karma is beautiful.

Karma indeed. I don't think Cheika is technically as good as McKenzie or Deans and he'll be found out eventually. The feel good factor in the camp won't last very long if results go against the team.

 

[goodNumber10]

Karma indeed. I don't think Cheika is technically as good as McKenzie or Deans and he'll be found out eventually. The feel good factor in the camp won't last very long if results go against the team.

Not sure what the hatred for Cheika is, but he had one week to select his squad, support staff and prepare for a game against the Barbarians and set off on a month long tour with tired and upset players.

There is little chance of anyone knowing how Cheika will really go as an international coach but his work at provincial level has been nothing short of incredible.

 

[j'nuh]

Not sure what the hatred for Cheika is, but he had one week to select his squad, support staff and prepare for a game against the Barbarians and set off on a month long tour with tired and upset players.

There is little chance of anyone knowing how Cheika will really go as an international coach but his work at provincial level has been nothing short of incredible.

I'm annoyed at Cheika for bringing back Beale so early, or even at all. I understand the temptation, but some things are more important than winning your next game.

But really, it's not Cheika I'm annoyed at, but the manner with which McKenzie left. The ARU managed it terribly and the Aussie media disgusted me in the whole saga. So I'm hoping it all backfires and Australia lose every game they play.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

A great comment made by my very knowledgeable friend whilst watching the game with him in Dublin

A lot of comments regarding the style of England's win but I say this, what is wrong with adapting your game to beat an opponent, winning ugly is still winning.

Nothing wrong with it at all.
If there's a problem it's that the victory tells us that in key ares - backs, attacking phase play etc - we have not moved on over the past few years to a remotely comparable degree as we have in other areas - set-piece, Mauling game, general forwards.

in these autumn internationals, just as 3 years ago, we were only able to defeat teams who had vulnerable tight 5's. Nothing. New. Whatsoever.
We can bluster about our injuries which, whilst significant, were predominantly to our pack of forwards who performed highly regardless.

 

[j'nuh]

I think it may just be a systematic failing of the NH as much as anything else. We do have some class backs available in the NH, but they are class in the context of what the NH tries to achieve with its backs. I still don't think I'd be able to assemble a backline from the Six Nations teams, that would be able to keep the ball alive as well as New Zealand and Australian backs do. I don't think our backs are coached to be that way, or that the NH conditions favour the teaching of that kind of play.

 

[goodNumber10]

I'm annoyed at Cheika for bringing back Beale so early, or even at all. I understand the temptation, but some things are more important than winning your next game.

I agree about Beale, but Cheika seems to have a strong relationship with him, at the Tahs he kept him straight and he performed for him, EM seemed to send him loco.

But really, it's not Cheika I'm annoyed at, but the manner with which McKenzie left. The ARU managed it terribly and the Aussie media disgusted me in the whole saga. So I'm hoping it all backfires and Australia lose every game they play.

I agree with that, felt very very sorry for EM who i didn't think was doing a bad job on the playing front, and had nipped some silly behavior in the bud.

I think it may just be a systematic failing of the NH as much as anything else. We do have some class backs available in the NH, but they are class in the context of what the NH tries to achieve with its backs. I still don't think I'd be able to assemble a backline from the Six Nations teams, that would be able to keep the ball alive as well as New Zealand and Australian backs do. I don't think our backs are coached to be that way, or that the NH conditions favour the teaching of that kind of play.

It's certainly a coahcing issue, Henry was the one saying that he couldn't' believe how poorly skilled the Wales guys were when they came into camp, things the NZ players were coached at Provincial/club level he was having to coach at Elite level.

 

[Mikel92]

Not sure what the hatred for Cheika is, but he had one week to select his squad, support staff and prepare for a game against the Barbarians and set off on a month long tour with tired and upset players.

There is little chance of anyone knowing how Cheika will really go as an international coach but his work at provincial level has been nothing short of incredible.

I agree with j'nuh about being kind of annoyed with him over the Beale thing. Beale is lucky to be allowed to play again, because it wasn't that long he was responsible for a staff member quitting for his lewd actions. He's just an immature punk and it's not the first time. I'm all for second chances, but he's had a few now. And for Cheika to come out and make light of it "I'm not his social worker" indicates to me he doesn't care about what kind of player culture is going on within that side.

Success at Super level is almost irrelevant these days. Deans was brilliant with the Crusaders, and McKenzie brought the Reds right up compared to the joke they were under Phil Mooney. Even with NSW McKenzie was solid and took them to a final. There's also just certain decisions that...to me don't make a whole lot of sense. He wants all the Super Rugby coaches in Aus to be involved in the National set up, he wants to keep coaching the 'Tahs next year (although maybe that's for contractual obligations). Just not sure how smart those things are. It's also pretty well documented that the guy has anger problems. Makes me question how he'll react to further challenges.

Aussie Rugby has more problems than just who the coach is. But, I'm not totally sold on the guy personally. I reckon Ewen could have made Australia more competitive in the England and French games.

 

[goodNumber10]

I agree with j'nuh about being kind of annoyed with him over the Beale thing. Beale is lucky to be allowed to play again, because it wasn't that long he was responsible for a staff member quitting for his lewd actions. He's just an immature punk and it's not the first time. I'm all for second chances, but he's had a few now. And for Cheika to come out and make light of it "I'm not his social worker" indicates to me he doesn't care about what kind of player culture is going on within that side.

Success at Super level is almost irrelevant these days. Deans was brilliant with the Crusaders, and McKenzie brought the Reds right up compared to the joke they were under Phil Mooney. Even with NSW McKenzie was solid and took them to a final. There's also just certain decisions that...to me don't make a whole lot of sense. He wants all the Super Rugby coaches in Aus to be involved in the National set up, he wants to keep coaching the 'Tahs next year (although maybe that's for contractual obligations). Just not sure how smart those things are. It's also pretty well documented that the guy has anger problems. Makes me question how he'll react to further challenges.

Aussie Rugby has more problems than just who the coach is. But, I'm not totally sold on the guy personally. I reckon Ewen could have made Australia more competitive in the England and French games.

My friend played under Cheika at Stade and he was very unpleasant, but he's got a proven track record at Leinster and NSW - that doesn't mean it will translate to the international stage but i don't think judging him on the poisned chalice that was Australias EOYT is a great judge

 

[thechosenfamily]

Nothing wrong with it at all.
If there's a problem it's that the victory tells us that in key ares - backs, attacking phase play etc - we have not moved on over the past few years to a remotely comparable degree as we have in other areas - set-piece, Mauling game, general forwards.

in these autumn internationals, just as 3 years ago, we were only able to defeat teams who had vulnerable tight 5's. Nothing. New. Whatsoever.
We can bluster about our injuries which, whilst significant, were predominantly to our pack of forwards who performed highly regardless.

Difficult to argue your points there.

 

[tonydav58]

what a stupid comment...

 

[Big Ewis]

as usual the entire world-wide community for a sport blames the coach based solely on results, as if there weren't 80min before the final score was settled. Results are important and for sure 3 out of 4 sounds pretty bad, but again it's an away tour and defenses have tightened up tremendously over the past two RWC cycles. The one team that was supposed to trip up again was France but they woke up temporarily for just that test in Paris against the Wallabies, the Irish are peaking like never before and still those two confrontations ended in the narrowest 3-point defeat. Then England in desperate need of a result before tackling the next 6N and hosting of the RWC were starving and played with incredible workrate, activity and commitment. They didn't leak too much, and power up front simply has no substitute or repellant in Rugby Union.

Now back to Cheika and this Wallabies tour of Europe, it wasn't bad in content. Their last tour in 2013 was nothing short of excellent, so surely in comparison this tour paleos, no cheerios (it's my new expression). But the Wallabies played their regular intelligent, adaptive, quick Rugby with variety and excellent skill.

Rod Kafer needs to first of all swallow that fried chicken when he speaks, it's downright indecent although I understand it's a good tactic to keep food available in case of an imminent stomach growl - but second of all yeah playing "Super Rugby at Test level" does work. They beat Wales with it (and Wales got 7 whole points from scrum dominance) and almost got France and Ireland in their own backyard too.
The Wallabies aren't now going to go through a fkng existential crisis and rethink their entire culture of Rugby Union and running schemes and tactics lore because they lost a pretty tight affair in Twickenham to some starving Englishmen.

 

[goodNumber10]

Anyone see the incident with Hooper and Robshaw after Morgans second try?

He properly goes for Robshaw effing and blinding at him, the ref has to restrain him and he's visibly upset as he's talking to the ref saying "you saw it, you saw it!"

there seems to be no good angle of what happens but I think Kruis gives him a dig in the head, or slaps him or something, and he mistake Kruis for Robshaw as Robshaw is essentially on top of him.

 

[Maverick1987]

Anyone see the incident with Hooper and Robshaw after Morgans second try?

He properly goes for Robshaw effing and blinding at him, the ref has to restrain him and he's visibly upset as he's talking to the ref saying "you saw it, you saw it!"

there seems to be no good angle of what happens but I think Kruis gives him a dig in the head, or slaps him or something, and he mistake Kruis for Robshaw as Robshaw is essentially on top of him.

I did see something . Thought maybe there was a bit of holding or something like that . Maybe Hooper was getting frustrated , his dad is from Kent so he could have been thinking about which scrum he'd rather be playing flanker for that day

 

[goodNumber10]

Robshaw to his credit just kind of looks disinterested at him and walks off.

 

[Maverick1987]

Robshaw to his credit just kind of looks disinterested at him and walks off.

Haha that's the best way to be ! What do you think Hooper would have looked like the next day if he'd have done that to Hartley ? England would have almost certainly played the rest of the game with 14 men .....

 

[goodNumber10]

yeah, was just such a surprise to see it as i was watching back this evening... don't really see hooper as that but he was really upset.

 

[Maverick1987]

Was it from a scrum ?

 

[j'nuh]

Robshaw's one of those players you see pull others away from a fight/confrontation time after time, that I can't see him getting involved in anything like this. Would be very surprised if he did something wrong.