[2015 RWC] Warm Up Match: France vs England (22/08/2015)

[ZeroTwo]

I disagree. Most SH teams have shown you can produce something, if not a victory, behind a pack on the back foot. Theyve all done it either in the tri nations, rugby championship or on tours against NH.

Unfair to completely write them off but to say they were helpless little petals who couldn't do a thing is wrong.

 

[ShonH]

Wow... Firstly 11 tries in 4 games is closer to 3 than 2. Secondly we were the highest scoring team by a long way, Wales are the only team to have more tries than us in total if you remove the French game, that is INCLUDING the Italy game the Welsh had. So basically England scored more tries in the first 4 games than anyone else did in 5 except Wales thanks to their Italy game.

As for can't compete with the Southern Hemisphere, last year we got the closest to beating New Zealand of any side in the world and had the closest overall score difference (yes better than SA and Aus). The last 2 years we have beaten Australia, 2 years ago we beat NZ... You're talking crap.

Well done, I failed to realize that you have blasted away on NZ by going 1-15 in the last 16. I also did not realize how close you are to SA by going 0-11-1 in the last 12. You have managed to put up a fight by splitting the last 10 against the weaker of the three at 5-5 vs Australia. Against the lot you are 6-31-1. I take back everything I said. England is right there with the Southern Hemisphere. You are right and I am wrong. I sometimes find myself looking at the wins and losses which distorts my judgement. Will not happen again.

 

[TobesHodges]

I disagree. Most SH teams have shown you can produce something, if not a victory, behind a pack on the back foot. Theyve all done it either in the tri nations, rugby championship or on tours against NH.

Unfair to completely write them off but to say they were helpless little petals who couldn't do a thing is wrong.

I completely agree, what have the Aussies done for the last 8 odd years, Ireland haven't had the greatest packs, but there backs always did the job, you can't just dissolve the responsibility of the backline for lose of this game.
A backline still has a job to do on the pitch generating go forward rugby, whether it be kicking or running..

 

[chippieolamus]

Well done, I failed to realize that you have blasted away on NZ by going 1-15 in the last 16. I also did not realize how close you are to SA by going 0-11-1 in the last 12. You have managed to put up a fight by splitting the last 10 against the weaker of the three at 5-5 vs Australia. Against the lot you are 6-31-1. I take back everything I said. England is right there with the Southern Hemisphere. You are right and I am wrong. I sometimes find myself looking at the wins and losses which distorts my judgement. Will not happen again.

What's the point in looking at matches before this world cup cycle - the matches before 2011 are irrelevant as the England team was very different. Since then, we have these records:

Australia: 2 wins, 1 loss, total points diff of +10
NZ: 1 win, 6 losses, total points diff of -23 (distorted by NZ's 36 – 13 win last year, if you exclude that the points diff is 0)
SA: 0 wins, 4 losses, 1 draw , total pd of -18

So, clearly we do compete, and aren't as far off as you seem to think, with mostly close losses and a few wins.

 

[goodNumber10]

Well done, I failed to realize that you have blasted away on NZ by going 1-15 in the last 16. I also did not realize how close you are to SA by going 0-11-1 in the last 12. You have managed to put up a fight by splitting the last 10 against the weaker of the three at 5-5 vs Australia. Against the lot you are 6-31-1. I take back everything I said. England is right there with the Southern Hemisphere. You are right and I am wrong. I sometimes find myself looking at the wins and losses which distorts my judgement. Will not happen again.

Regardless of the win loss ratio, the fact is trying to copy the SH style of play is a fools errand.

England, France and Wales best results have been when they play to their own strengths.

I'm not really sure why people don't understand that, NZ have been playing their type of Rugby since mini's, it's natural and not our style of play.

 

[smartcooky]

Regardless of the win loss ratio, the fact is trying to copy the SH style of play is a fools errand.

England, France and Wales best results have been when they play to their own strengths.

I'm not really sure why people don't understand that, NZ have been playing their type of Rugby since mini's, it's natural and not our style of play.

It hasn't always been that way though, and admittedly you will have to go a long way back to find when things were the other way around; NH teams used to play a more open style.

Before the 1990s, New Zealand were known for their strong, uncompromising forward play. They pretty much monstered opposing packs (with the exception of South Africa who they always struggled against) while playing what was known as "10 man rugby". The 1971 British Lions won a series against New Zealand using minimal forward play (just enough to hold their own) and scintillating play in the backs which the All Blacks simply could not cope with. France and Wales were also known for their running game, especially the French who were so unpredictable, they sometimes didn't know what they were doing themselves!

The tide began to turn after the 1987 Rugby world cup and there is no reason why it cannot do so again if they want to. As you rightly point out, NZ kids play that way from the get-go... there's a clue how it might be done up north.

 

[Peat]

What's the point in looking at matches before this world cup cycle - the matches before 2011 are irrelevant as the England team was very different. Since then, we have these records:

Australia: 2 wins, 1 loss, total points diff of +10
NZ: 1 win, 6 losses, total points diff of -23 (distorted by NZ's 36 – 13 win last year, if you exclude that the points diff is 0)
SA: 0 wins, 4 losses, 1 draw , total pd of -18

So, clearly we do compete, and aren't as far off as you seem to think, with mostly close losses and a few wins.

I don't think excluding NZ's biggest win as a distortion but including our big win against a disease hit side is a right thing to do.

I also don't think a history of close losses is competing. Competing is when you can win a match. The record shows that against South Africa and New Zealand, we can't bar a freak result. What we're doing is doing a credible show in making up the numbers.

I cannot agree with the idea that the way to close the gap with the SH is to ape the way they play - but to say there isn't a gap is not true.

 

[chippieolamus]

I don't think excluding NZ's biggest win as a distortion but including our big win against a disease hit side is a right thing to do.

I also don't think a history of close losses is competing. Competing is when you can win a match. The record shows that against South Africa and New Zealand, we can't bar a freak result. What we're doing is doing a credible show in making up the numbers.

I cannot agree with the idea that the way to close the gap with the SH is to ape the way they play - but to say there isn't a gap is not true.

How else am I going to show England in a good light? Help me out here

I think we compete, we just lack the edge to stay with NZ/SA in the last 20. I can't remember quite a few of these matches, but I distinctly remember almost winning with a depleted XV in the 1st test in NZ in June 2014, so its not as if we haven't really been close. A couple of times we've only needed a little more and we could've won.

 

[smartcooky]

I don't think excluding NZ's biggest win as a distortion but including our big win against a disease hit side is a right thing to do.

I also don't think a history of close losses is competing. Competing is when you can win a match. The record shows that against South Africa and New Zealand, we can't bar a freak result. What we're doing is doing a credible show in making up the numbers.

I cannot agree with the idea that the way to close the gap with the SH is to ape the way they play - but to say there isn't a gap is not true.

How else am I going to show England in a good light? Help me out here

I think we compete, we just lack the edge to stay with NZ/SA in the last 20. I can't remember quite a few of these matches, but I distinctly remember almost winning with a depleted XV in the 1st test in NZ in June 2014, so its not as if we haven't really been close. A couple of times we've only needed a little more and we could've
won.

You also have to be careful just relying on the points in a scoreline to decide what "close" means. To show you what I mean, I will use England's tour in 2014.

As you did, lets dismiss the third test 36-13 because it wasn't close

The other two results were

1st test 20-15
2nd test 28-27

On the face of it, anyone looking at those scores would say the the second test was the closest, but in reality the first test was. It was 15-15 before a single player (Cruden) executed a completely unexpected and freakish play that eventually resulted in the winning try (and only try of the match) in the last moments of the game.

However, the second test was gone for all money, and the score flattered England. Even though they score first and were up at half time with honours about even, they were totally outplayed in the second half. It only looked close because of two late tries; the first of which was incorrectly given by the TMO.

 

[Duck a l'Orange]

Sometimes it's hard, to be an Englishman,
Giving all your support, to one **** team,
Sometimes it's harddd, to be an English man,
Giving all your support, to just one teammm,

Stand by your teammm, and show the worlddd you love them,
Keep giving all the love you've got, to just one teammm...

It's true that even when the scores have been close, England have never seemed like they're going to win in recent games. There is a gap, but how close we are to closing it I have no idea.

It'll be interesting to see in a few years if current/recent U20 dominance transfers to first team prowess... My money's on it having some benefit, but not as much as it would be expected too.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Sometimes it's hard, to be an Englishman.

No it isn't.

 

[kesh]

It hasn't always been that way though, and admittedly you will have to go a long way back to find when things were the other way around; NH teams used to play a more open style.

Before the 1990s, New Zealand were known for their strong, uncompromising forward play. They pretty much monstered opposing packs (with the exception of South Africa who they always struggled against) while playing what was known as "10 man rugby". The 1971 British Lions won a series against New Zealand using minimal forward play (just enough to hold their own) and scintillating play in the backs which the All Blacks simply could not cope with. France and Wales were also known for their running game, especially the French who were so unpredictable, they sometimes didn't know what they were doing themselves!

The tide began to turn after the 1987 Rugby world cup and there is no reason why it cannot do so again if they want to. As you rightly point out, NZ kids play that way from the get-go... there's a clue how it might be done up north.

It helps having the weather for running rugby. Having to play an expansive game in torrential rain mud baths for much of the season means its profitable to play tight and be good at that. The Aussies have always seemed to have that running rugby culture, be that coming from NRL professionalising earlier / Aussie Rules / harder pitches / entertainment influences. A lot of rugby league districts here are shifting from winter leagues to summer leagues now, mainly cause they have to compete with xbox's but i can imagine if something similar in were to happen - not that it will - Union would see a similar change in culture just due to climate alone.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Sometimes it's hard, to be an Englishman,
Giving all your support, to one **** team,
Sometimes it's harddd, to be an English man,
Giving all your support, to just one teammm,

Stand by your teammm, and show the worlddd you love them,
Keep giving all the love you've got, to just one teammm...

Being from Newcastle you have had plenty of practice supporting sh*t teams though.

 

[ratsapprentice]

...And being orange.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Well I'm going to put my neck on the line and say it, 2 things England missed were leaders and thinkers. Ford was left without a 2nd decision maker and distributor. This doesn't excuse his own errors but it put him under more pressure than necessary. The 2nd string team had 2/3 game controllers and it allowed the backs to function behind poor forwards. Answer: Slade at 12. I think our glaring weaknesses elsewhere are far more crippling than him potentially not being so solid in defence.

Leadership, didn't feel Robshaw was offering it. Burgess, although it goes against everything I've believed so far, DID offer some degree of leadership and was a sort of morale booster. He has the right attitude. Have him at 12

Also Cipriani, the 2 times recently he has come on for England, he has produced stuff. I don't see how this can be ignored... The guy works and NEEDS more time to truely show it.

 

[goodNumber10]

It helps having the weather for running rugby. Having to play an expansive game in torrential rain mud baths for much of the season means its profitable to play tight and be good at that. The Aussies have always seemed to have that running rugby culture, be that coming from NRL professionalising earlier / Aussie Rules / harder pitches / entertainment influences. A lot of rugby league districts here are shifting from winter leagues to summer leagues now, mainly cause they have to compete with xbox's but i can imagine if something similar in were to happen - not that it will - Union would see a similar change in culture just due to climate alone.

New Zealand is a pretty miserable place in winter mate, the south island especially, one of the best games I've ever seen is the AB vs Aussies in 1996 (below).

So think it's a bit of a myth they only play fairweather rugby, they just piroritise skills over size - promoted through a weighting system at age grade and just excellent coaches at all levels - you're less likely to see a monster 9 year old skitteling kids the same age as he'll be moved into a group where he can't.

It's a much more inclusive system than ours traditional one, and is one of the reasons why contact has been put back so far in Mini-Rugby in England (think it's now introduced around 10-11 but i may be wrong).



***The game i mentioned, pouring rain and a picth so soft underfeet you can see the players almost tip toeing as they struggle to change direction in any kind of small area:

 

[The Jones Boy]

Well I'm going to put my neck on the line and say it, 2 things England missed were leaders and thinkers. Ford was left without a 2nd decision maker and distributor. This doesn't excuse his own errors but it put him under more pressure than necessary. The 2nd string team had 2/3 game controllers and it allowed the backs to function behind poor forwards. Answer: Slade at 12. I think our glaring weaknesses elsewhere are far more crippling than him potentially not being so solid in defence.

Leadership, didn't feel Robshaw was offering it. Burgess, although it goes against everything I've believed so far, DID offer some degree of leadership and was a sort of morale booster. He has the right attitude. Have him at 12

Also Cipriani, the 2 times recently he has come on for England, he has produced stuff. I don't see how this can be ignored... The guy works and NEEDS more time to truely show it.

I think you're on the money.
Burgess would slot in wherever they let him and bring energetic defence and leadership.
His brash confidence and talent seems to scare Lancaster.

 

[Peat]

How else am I going to show England in a good light? Help me out here

I think we compete, we just lack the edge to stay with NZ/SA in the last 20. I can't remember quite a few of these matches, but I distinctly remember almost winning with a depleted XV in the 1st test in NZ in June 2014, so its not as if we haven't really been close. A couple of times we've only needed a little more and we could've won.

Sorry dude. I value truth over patriotism

I don't get how we can be said to be competing when we can't stay with them over the full 80. To me those are mutually exclusive things.

I'm not even sure I'd say they've been that close. There's been a lot of games where we've played really well in patches and where the scoreboard's looked close, but most of them they've pulled away when they needed to and there's never been any real doubt about their ability to do so and our inability to reel them back in. In any case, however far away we are from them, it seems we are incapable of bridging that gap at current. And to me, that isn't competing.

Well I'm going to put my neck on the line and say it, 2 things England missed were leaders and thinkers. Ford was left without a 2nd decision maker and distributor. This doesn't excuse his own errors but it put him under more pressure than necessary. The 2nd string team had 2/3 game controllers and it allowed the backs to function behind poor forwards. Answer: Slade at 12. I think our glaring weaknesses elsewhere are far more crippling than him potentially not being so solid in defence.

Leadership, didn't feel Robshaw was offering it. Burgess, although it goes against everything I've believed so far, DID offer some degree of leadership and was a sort of morale booster. He has the right attitude. Have him at 12

Also Cipriani, the 2 times recently he has come on for England, he has produced stuff. I don't see how this can be ignored... The guy works and NEEDS more time to truely show it.

You can't pick both of them at 12!

I definitely agree about you with the playmaker. Yes, Ford did well without one in the spring, but by and large England have played best with two playmakers over the last couple of years and they've definitely done so this summer. Even if we just have one on the bench, we need the option somewhere. Incidentally, everything I've seen and heard says Slade is very solid in defence. For a player his size and shape, he's a savage. I like the prospect of using Cipriani or even Goode as a playmaker at full-back at the end for a little extra burst.

Leadership... I'm not sure I'd say it based on today, but in general, Robshaw needs more help out there. One thing I would point at him though is that he's very much lead by example. I'm increasingly seeing him stationed out wide, like Croft was when some England fans started to hate him. He seems less involved and as a result, I'm not sure he can be as influential a leader.

Truth told, I love Robshaw as a player and leader, but I find myself increasingly dissatisfied with what he means for the team.

 

[Mcfadden]

New Zealand is a pretty miserable place in winter mate, the south island especially, one of the best games I've ever seen is the AB vs Aussies in 1996 (below).

Also depends which part you're talking about. The only place that's miserable in terms of rain is the west coast of the south island, the deep south (Otago, Invercargil, etc) and Wellington can throw a tantrum with it's gales and horizontal rain. Christchurch isn't really rainy (in fact, they suffered a shortage not long ago), it's just bloody cold. Beautiful mind you, but very chilly. There's no such thing as winter north of Auckland. And places like Hawkes Bay and Bay of Plenty can be just as good as what Australia has to offer. So there are plenty of parts that are probably better than England.

Overall I think it's in the genes a bit. Getting started at an early age helps. A lot of physical contact games that involve sprinting and avoid being clobbered are quite popular, a couple have even been banned. The Maori and Polynesian influence also helps in terms of adding another dimension to attacking rugby.

 

[gaston le gaff]

32 pages ago this was all about a game between France v England which seems to have got just slightly derailed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but carry on guys just don't knock any of the very few French guys when they do the same !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!