• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Spring Tour: South Africa - England - 1st Test (09/06/2012, 16:00 GMT)

Though I'm certainly no expert on English rugby, I wouldn't be a fan of putting Tuilagi on the wing either. How much experience has he got on the wing? His pace wouldn't be a concern for me, but his 'non-running basics' would be a major concern: Is he familiar with the defensive responsibilities of a wing? Is he strong under the high ball? Does he have a kicking game? South Africa are experts are targeting opposition wingers with their kicking game - any inexperience/weakness in opposition wingers will usually be exploited. Though I can certainly see the attraction of having Tuilagi on the wing, I think a test match versus South Africa is the last place you would want to experiment!

Totally agree with this!

What I can't understand is why all these talks about getting proper wings, when your wings never got the ball??? Yes Tuilagi was one of the reasons they never got the ball as everytime he got it, he tried to run through the entire bok team with very little success. England's problem was distribution, and this was due to the following reasons:

1. Englands scrum was under pressure the whole time
2. When England got the ball from a scrum, the scrumhalf almost everytime, kicked it back to the boks, or Farrel...
3. When passing, it never got further than 13.

England's problem isn't at wing, and you guys should start at the front and work your way back, not the other way around... Your backline won't be able to do anything if your forwards can't give them good front foot ball.
 
So long as the Rob Andrew legacy lives on, it'll always be 10-man boot-it rugby. The wingers are surplus because of that.

He obsession with players like Farrell & Wilkinson will forever be the achilies heel, while there's always a pragmatic prick voicing against any adventure harping on about territory and basics.
 
So long as the Rob Andrew legacy lives on, it'll always be 10-man boot-it rugby. The wingers are surplus because of that.

He obsession with players like Farrell & Wilkinson will forever be the achilies heel, while there's always a pragmatic prick voicing against any adventure harping on about territory and basics.

Yes well, territory means f****-all if your kickers don't kick the ball out, or on the full outside their 22.
 
To be fair it isn't Tuilagi's job to pass the ball. What Lancaster/Catt should be doing is using Tuilagi as a battering ram, which they are and then have Barrit pass the ball because he can't crash the ball up to save his life, plus he's an ex fly half.
 
To be fair it isn't Tuilagi's job to pass the ball. What Lancaster/Catt should be doing is using Tuilagi as a battering ram, which they are and then have Barrit pass the ball because he can't crash the ball up to save his life, plus he's an ex fly half.

LOL!! Yeah, it's not a 13's job to get the ball away to the faster guys outside him... Tell that to some of the best 13's in the world and see what reaction you'll get...

EDIT: Actually, Barrit is an ex-hooker...
 
LOL!! Yeah, it's not a 13's job to get the ball away to the faster guys outside him... Tell that to some of the best 13's in the world and see what reaction you'll get...

EDIT: Actually, Barrit is an ex-hooker...

Well it's all about balance. Jamie Roberts and Jonathan Davies for Wales hardly ever pass the ball but they can both crash it up (unlike Barrit), Mortlock didn't but he had Giteau inside him to do that.

Barrit should be doing more of the passing because he quite frankly he can't crash the ball up at all. They should look to include Flood, Jonathan Joseph or Anthony Allen to rebalance the centres. You can't win a game with your 12 defending the whole game and the 13 crashing it up, they need different roles
 
After watching the game on saturday i couldn't quite understand why a more prepared england team went to play an inexperienced Boks team and just failed to deliver on many levels.

We lacked any penetration.
We lacked vision.
We lacked a game plan.
Some players looked out of place.

Are the england players just not good enough compared to others or is it the gameplan tactics that we try?

I really thought that this was our best chance to steal a win but to be honest we were never going to win playing as we did.

Is it the players or the gameplan because neither worked well.

What we need is:

A lump of a second row who is our enforcer (maybe lawes when he is back? What about lauchberry)
A nine that can actually pass and box kick properly and make a break - Care should start with Dickson on the bench.
A 10 -12 -13 combo that actually works.
I like Farrels ice cold temperament but this farrell. barrett, tuilagi thing is never going to make tries.

I'm hoping with barrett out lancaster will see this as a chance to try something that will make our axis work properly.

Our and a decent 8 who is match fit for an international.
 
After watching the game on saturday i couldn't quite understand why a more prepared england team went to play an inexperienced Boks team and just failed to deliver on many levels.

We lacked any penetration.
We lacked vision.
We lacked a game plan.
Some players looked out of place.

Are the england players just not good enough compared to others or is it the gameplan tactics that we try?

I really thought that this was our best chance to steal a win but to be honest we were never going to win playing as we did.

Is it the players or the gameplan because neither worked well.

What we need is:

A lump of a second row who is our enforcer (maybe lawes when he is back? What about lauchberry)
A nine that can actually pass and box kick properly and make a break - Care should start with Dickson on the bench.
A 10 -12 -13 combo that actually works.
I like Farrels ice cold temperament but this farrell. barrett, tuilagi thing is never going to make tries.

I'm hoping with barrett out lancaster will see this as a chance to try something that will make our axis work properly.

Our and a decent 8 who is match fit for an international.

It wasn't inexperienced, they had far, far more caps than us and loads of big game experience.

Its not that the players are worse than others - its that the 3 years of development that should have happened under Martin Johnson didn't happen. And the coaching staff need to select better but its a learning process.
 
After watching the game on saturday i couldn't quite understand why a more prepared england team went to play an inexperienced Boks team and just failed to deliver on many levels.

We lacked any penetration.
We lacked vision.
We lacked a game plan.
Some players looked out of place.

Are the england players just not good enough compared to others or is it the gameplan tactics that we try?

I really thought that this was our best chance to steal a win but to be honest we were never going to win playing as we did.

Is it the players or the gameplan because neither worked well.

What we need is:

A lump of a second row who is our enforcer (maybe lawes when he is back? What about lauchberry)
A nine that can actually pass and box kick properly and make a break - Care should start with Dickson on the bench.
A 10 -12 -13 combo that actually works.
I like Farrels ice cold temperament but this farrell. barrett, tuilagi thing is never going to make tries.

I'm hoping with barrett out lancaster will see this as a chance to try something that will make our axis work properly.

Our and a decent 8 who is match fit for an international.

That's v. negative. For me it was a good performance with more accuracy needed. To lose by 5 away to the boks is no embarassement, they would expect to always win at home, reagrdless who they are playing. That home advantage probably reflected itself in the scoreline.

We were going backwards in the second half and from there we lacked the game plan to dig ourslves us. Even then, both tries scored against us could have been prevented.

Try 1, 47 minutes: Hartley comes up out of the line and throws himself at Janie Du Plessis' feet. He didn't so much misss the tackle as he just missed Du Plessis altogether. Mouritz Botha then faces the wrong way for the pick and go, making his presence completely pointless. Then Johnson moves towards Steyn rather than shifting accross to cover the whole gap and prepare himself for a tackle. He comes up slightly but realises he's misjudged it and moves accross but its too late.

Second Try, 59(ish) minutes: Brown decides not to tackle but instead jabs out his hand, resulting in a broken hand and a try to South Africa. I just feel Foden would have made a hit on De Villiers, and from there, who knows.

I'm not saying that we should have won just that there are certainly things to get sorted before we start saying 'maybe we're just not good enough'.

According to ESPNscrum we missed 19 tackles, grouped as follows: (I'm only talking about the starting 15 for brevity)

3 Tackles missed: Hartley, Cole, Johnson
2 Tackles Missed: Marler
1 tackle missed: Brown, Ashton, Tuilagi, Barritt, Youngs, Botha, Parling,
0 Tackles Missed:Foden, Farrell, Robshaw, Morgan

Sometimes you have to take these with a pinch of salt, especially relatin to the front row, because when mis-matches happen you would never expect a Cole to stop a Habana... but, 19 is lots of tackles.
 
That's v. negative. For me it was a good performance with more accuracy needed. To lose by 5 away to the boks is no embarassement, they would expect to always win at home, reagrdless who they are playing. That home advantage probably reflected itself in the scoreline.

We were going backwards in the second half and from there we lacked the game plan to dig ourslves us. Even then, both tries scored against us could have been prevented.

Try 1, 47 minutes: Hartley comes up out of the line and throws himself at Janie Du Plessis' feet. He didn't so much misss the tackle as he just missed Du Plessis altogether. Mouritz Botha then faces the wrong way for the pick and go, making his presence completely pointless. Then Johnson moves towards Steyn rather than shifting accross to cover the whole gap and prepare himself for a tackle. He comes up slightly but realises he's misjudged it and moves accross but its too late.

Second Try, 59(ish) minutes: Brown decides not to tackle but instead jabs out his hand, resulting in a broken hand and a try to South Africa. I just feel Foden would have made a hit on De Villiers, and from there, who knows.

I'm not saying that we should have won just that there are certainly things to get sorted before we start saying 'maybe we're just not good enough'.

According to ESPNscrum we missed 19 tackles, grouped as follows: (I'm only talking about the starting 15 for brevity)

3 Tackles missed: Hartley, Cole, Johnson
2 Tackles Missed: Marler
1 tackle missed: Brown, Ashton, Tuilagi, Barritt, Youngs, Botha, Parling,
0 Tackles Missed:Foden, Farrell, Robshaw, Morgan

Sometimes you have to take these with a pinch of salt, especially relatin to the front row, because when mis-matches happen you would never expect a Cole to stop a Habana... but, 19 is lots of tackles.


I did sound negative but i guess i really thought we should win this. I understand that there are a few things to work on (as in missed tackles) but i genuinly think if the boks had more time to prepare then we would have been smashed simply becasue of the player quality?
I guess i am sick of this NH vs SH player divide thing and really just wonder (after seing all NH teams being defeated) what makes them so much better than us?
 
I don't think England played too badly actually. You were always going to struggle against a very fired-up Bok team at home and Meyer went with a lot of experienced players and settled combinations along with a gameplan they know how to execute so even if there wasn't a lot of time for SA, there wasn't anything SA (only 3 debutants starting) hasn't been doing for the past 7 years.

As for England's performance, well you excelled in the line-out and breakdowns and the defense was pretty solid apart from a few mismatches that came up around the fringes or when we went for the blindside when props and hooker had to seal holes against our backs. I think the main problem England had was that they were trying to beat us playing a gameplan we are better at; bashing it up midfield and putting the opposition outbacks under pressure just outside their 22 with kicks and aggressive follow-up and defense. England should rather have tried to push the advantages they had which would include a better gelled squad (assuming they'd have been less rusty having had time together in the 6N) and ball retention bringing in dangerous runners like Wade, Ashton and Fodenat 15 to look for mismatches in our defenses.

So I wouldn't say the players are of a lesser standard as a whole but rater that you were implementing the wrong gameplan in bringing in two fullbacks to counter our game and try to beat us at our game rather than concentrate on your own game. Not that Brown wasn't good on the day but I think you should have stuck to what worked for you in the 6N.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if we might see Joseph start on the wing next test? He's played a decent amount there (more than Foden, anyway).

I think we might see:

Youngs, Flood, Joseph, Farrell, Tuilagi, Ashton, Foden
With Goode and Turner-Hall coming on to the bench (no Hodgson as Flood, Farrell and Goode can all cover 10).

Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk 2
 
I don't want to sound big mouthed to all the England fans out here but let's face the facts

What you need and I don't see this as getting sorted in a week:

- cecent front row and semi decent guys to counter the ZA "cattle" bench - for Rowntree's info - it's more Brahman bulls than cattle"
- loose trio that can compete more than slowing the ball down, you need devastating runners, killer tacklers
- coherent midfield that actually plays with a plan, right now they are not complimenting each other
- play the best fullback in his position, wasting him on the wing is senseless but that should be sorted with the injuries

What you are likely to face:

- A front row hungry for more and a bench ready like vultures
- two young locks that completed their first match, Etsebeth will come to his right and that is a a scary prospect
- Loose trio that will be even better, pray that Spies is not replaced
- a half back that is very bright and will learn from his mistakes, and if Pienaar comes on with 30 to go and he replaces the useless JP Pietersen on the wing, prepare for fireworks
- Morne Steyn that will play at altitude and regain his aim, don't err within 60 meters as the other Steyn can kick them
- a midfield with more synergy and penetration
- Lambie at 15, welcome to the X-Factor


This might sound like a bit of trash talk, but think about it for a while, these blokes had very little time together and as admitted by the coach defence was basically done on instinct, wait tlil they have a decent defensive pattern in place. If they are even 20% better than last week, you will be in for a very very tough time up in Johannesburg at altitude

Wishing you good luck, but in my honest and humble noob opinion, you are in for a big hiding



 
I agree with Badgena... Altitude, more time together and that debut jitters now a thing of the past.

This all are reasons for the Boks to fire and be more deadly. That and the Fact that only Kirchner the only casualty of the Durban test all comes down to the boks being very dominant.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9800 using Tapatalk
 
Any chance of Christian Wade getting a game for England this series?
 
Presumably will start both mid-weeks, doubt he'll make the test side though.

Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk 2
 
So mid week team is up, no moyne so maybe he will start on the wing for england???? unless he is injured maybe? This backrow looks prety decent. Glad they see Haskell as a 6 though.
England: 15 Alex Goode (Saracens),
14 David Strettle (Saracens),
13 Anthony Allen (Leicester Tigers),
12 Jordan Turner-Hall (Harlequins),
11 Christian Wade (London Wasps),
10 Charlie Hodgson (Saracens),
9 Danny Care (Harlequins),
1 Matt Mullan (Worcester Warriors),
2 Joe Gray (Harlequins),
3 Paul Doran Jones (Northampton Saints),
4 Graham Kitchener (Leicester Tigers),
5 George Robson (capt, Harlequins),
6 James Haskell (Otago Highlanders),
7 Carl Fearns (Bath Rugby),
8 Thomas Waldrom (Leicester Tigers)

Replacements: 16 Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers), 17 Rupert Harden (Gloucester Rugby), 18 Tom Palmer (Stade Francais), 19 Jamie Gibson (London Irish), 20 Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints), 21 George Lowe (Harlequins), 22 Nick Abendanon (Bath Rugby)
 
Just confirmed on Supersport.co.za

Gio Aplon and Dean Greyling has been called up due to injury concerns over Zane Kirchner and Coenie Oosthuizen

Sent from my BlackBerry 9800 using Tapatalk
 
I doubt Monye would start...I dunno. More like that we'll see Jospeph on the wing.

Great team, in most areas as good as our test 15...
Also a very telling selection in that it suggests:

1) Corbisiero is back on the mend and in the mix to start or bench, with marler retaining a spot in the 22. Paul Doran-Jones' inclusion seems to suggest that.
2) Haskell is seemingly being retried with a view to having him available for the final test, but no sooner.
3) Olyy is almost certainly right about 10-12-13. Allens inclusion here again means he pretty much won't play on saturday. Instead we'll see either Farrel Flood Tuilagi or Flood Farrell Tuilagi(hopefully this one). Unless Lancaster has been patrolling these boards in search for inspiration and has decided to go with the Tuialgi > Wing idea - just for the hell of it! If so, we'd see Jospeph at 13 instead.
4) Foden back to 15
5) All locks the same as before.
6) If Care plays well he could be an outside chance for a bench spot on saturday, with Dickson likely to start.

JJ really seems to be thought of highly by his coaches(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...ica-after-being-left-out-of-midweek-side.html)

My hope though is that we don't mess around with him on the wing on his first start. Seems very likely though
 

Latest posts

Top