QF1 - Match Thread - England v Australia - 19/10/19 - K/O 08:15 BST

[Guest]

First topic message reminder :

Thought I'd get these made nice and early for a few reasons - but one being that we're already now looking ahead to the QFs with several teams having finished their group stage, so it's all heating up for the proper knockout stuff...barring any more disruption.

England



Team: Daly; Watson, Slade, Tuilagi, May; Farrell (capt), Youngs; M Vunipola, George, Sinckler; Itoje, Lawes; Curry, Underhill, B Vunipola.

Replacements: Cowan-Dickie, Marler, Cole, Kruis, Ludlam, Heinz, Ford, Joseph.


Australia



Team: Beale; Hodge, Petaia, Kerevi, Koroibete; Lealiifano, Genia; Alaalatoa, Latu, Sio; Arnold, Rodda; Naisarani, Hooper (c), Pocock.

Replacements: Uelese, Slipper, Tupou, Coleman, Salakaia-Loto, White, To'omua, O'Connor.



Venue: Oita
Referee: Jerome Garces
AR1: Romain Poite
AR2: Mathieu Raynal
TMO: Ben Skeen

[BamBam]

Guess that could be a view, but I think I'd rather have my flanker giving away a penalty trying to affect a turnover in the opposing 22 than giving away an easy shot at goal in our 22!

Time on the clock is obviously important too, but just goes back to my original point that stats lack context

Cannot remember the game, but it was last season. We have opposition pinned in their right corner after a perfectly weighted box kick and the great chase by May. 

Farrell concedes a dumb penalty, so instead of a rushed clearance they ease their way to half way. Itoje is then pinged for playing the jumper in the air and opponents kick and get a 5m lineout. 

An in at the side in the maul sees a kick at goal and 3 points. The last man is slated for conceding a penalty and 3 points, but the other two are far worse as they were unforced penalties.

Can't disagree with your final point, but they are compounding errors. In isolation, the Farrell penalty you mention has less of an impact than whoever went in at the side

5m out is also very different to a penalty 22m out

[Big]

As a Tigers fan I was much happier to keep Ford than I would have been had we lost Ford and kept Toomua. Anything can happen on the day come the QF, but from watching them over a couple of seasons on a regular basis - Toomua can be good, but Ford is a great player and a clear step above.

I've heard a few commentators asking... 'how will Ford perform under pressure', well, they obviously weren't watching Tigers last year. He's had lots of practice playing in a generally poor Tigers team last year, and repeatedly played well despite being under pressure when those around him were falling apart. Same goes for May.

[Gooseberry]

Going back to LTs comment "good" is a very loose word. I wouldnt have Aus on my top 5 of teams at the world cup, and they arent good by Australian world cup team standards.
But they are good compared to scotland.
I would say England are a good side and are favourites with almost everyone to win the game.
They couldve had easier opponents, France or Japan for sure, but it's better than facing New Zealand SA Wales Ireland or errr England.
Aus pushed Wales closer than I'd expected, and Japan beating Ireland show that a bit of flair and attitude can catch better teams napping ( even Scotland managed to win a couple of games) . But England are very settled, as injury free as a squad ever going to be, full of confidence and showing a lot of discipline both in tackling and in sticking to a structured ame plan that's working for them. Aus conversely seem to be playing selection roulette and relying much more on individuals having big performances and producing moments of magic.
Theres always a chance, but Aus arent that good a side.

[lostinwales]

Re: the Australian selection roulette. I have read that Leifano is the favoured FH, but that because of his recovery from leukemia they are reluctant to play him in successive matches.

[Rugby Fan]

...I've said it before when English fans were going on about how they'd rather play Australia than Wales. For me, Australia are still a very, very good team.

Have you found many England fans who have said Australia are not a good team? It's not a question of thinking Wales are a threat but Australia are a gimmee.

Me. I think Australia are a team that is not very good, but is capable of some good play. A good team does not lose as many matches by two clear scores as Australia have in the last few years.

I think England's recent victories against Australia have involved a lot of good calls for us. You could even go back to the 2013 non-obstruction call against Hartley, and say that most of England's wins against the Wallabies since then have seen significant calls in our favour.

That doesn't make Australia a better team. They saw the benefit of the rub of the green in their phenomenal winning streak over Wales, and never felt lucky, so there's no reason why England should either.

Still, it makes me aware of the fact that we never really put Australia away under Jones, and so a few calls in the other direction could pose us some problems.

[LondonTiger]

Lealiifano would be their best choice at 10, with Toomua on the bench. Lealiifano has much better control, Toomua more running flair.

[lostinwales]

You could also say that Australia have not found a way past England since 2015.

[LondonTiger]

6 wins on the bounce with an average winning margin of 15 points is way more than the rub of the green. 

But my opinion of Australia is more than just this run. Generally the have one decent performance in them, surrounded by a lot of dross. Saturday may be their second decent performance of the year, though I hope not. We nay see the kind of performance that led to a defeat to Argentina on the Gold Ciast

[Collapse2005]

Didnt England go into the 2015 RWC on the back of a fairly decent run of wins v Australia? Anyway you would have to expect that England will have to much for Australia in this one.

[Luckless Pedestrian]

Yeah there's a reason England are favourites. I still wonder though whether that lack of a real full-on Test match at the World Cup thus far (through no fault of their own) might cost them.

You can't simulate match practice.

[Gooseberry]

2015 is only relevant in so far as it showed the form book could be upset, but the wales result was arguably more of a shock. England are better organised and more together at this tournament and without the level of pressure they had at home.
Even if we take this Aus side as equal to that one and ignore the past 4 years of other results it's hard to make a case that England arent favourites

If the best reason we can come up with to think otherwise is that they are well rested then honestly England are in a pretty good spot.

[SecretFly]

Two edged sword always.  

Fresh v Battle-Hardened
Energetic v Spent
Take your pick which you want.  A bit of both is the ideal I suppose but when does that kick in?  QF or SF?  It's back to depending on how tough your pool was.

[SecretFly]

2015 is only relevant in so far as it showed the form book could be upset, but the wales result was arguably more of a shock. England are better organised and more together at this tournament and without the level of pressure they had at home.
Even if we take this Aus side as equal to that one and ignore the past 4 years of other results it's hard to make a case that England  arent favourites

If the best reason we can come up with to think otherwise is that they are well rested then honestly England are in a pretty good spot.

England are of course favourites.  Anyone really claiming different?

But then the game happens and despite favouritism, it still has to be played (well...... most of them do ).
Australia of 2015 wasn't all that fancied in the build up to that WC if I remember correctly.  So, it's pretty much a repeat of 2015, with Australia wanting to take a few scalps of sides that don't rate them.  They failed in the exercise against Wales but had a pretty good shot at an impressive (stylewise) comeback.  Now, they'll try it against England.

[Poorfour]

Didnt England go into the 2015 RWC on the back of a fairly decent run of wins v Australia? Anyway you would have to expect that England will have to much for Australia in this one.

They did, but then...
- Lancaster used the training camp to try to reshape the pack from big gnarly lumps into fast, mobile ball players, and didn't have enough time for them to adapt in the setpiece
- Lancaster decided to ditch the halfback pairings that had been working (Youngs / Ford and Care / Farrell) in favour of alienating Ford, bringing in Wigglesworth and playing Sam Burgess for 60 minutes only to take him off to replace him with an unfit Manu Tuilagi
- Lancaster also decided to repeatedly play an unfit Billy and an unfit Ben Morgan and ignore Nick Easter, who while not PC was both fit and in form
- Australia adopted the scrummaging technique of having the whole front row dance sideways to split the loosehead away from the rest of the scrum, and completely fooled (the normally reliable) Roman Poite

Australia deserved their win - albeit if the scrum penalties had been correctly awarded it might have been a bit closer - but it was already apparent by the Wales game that Lancaster had made four or five big gambles, none of which were working.

The contrast this time is that a) England now have two sets of big gnarly lumps who are also mobile, b) Billy, while not at his best, is considerably less crocked than he was 4 years ago, c) Eddie's big gambles appear to be working - Heinz and Ludlam have looked worth their slots, Curry and Underhill have both stayed fit and are delivering on what they promised and no-one appears to have worked out that kicking to Daly can be a route to points.

I worry a lot about the latter, especially given Nowell isn't fit, but 2019 England look like a side that has been managed carefully to build towards something rather than one where the coach has made a string of calculated but ultimately ill-informed bets.

[SecretFly]

Why did Lancaster suddenly begin to doubt all that he had and was good on virtually the Eve of the World Cup?

Don't think he's ever satisfactorily explained his dramatic loss of belief in the stable machine he had purring up until then.

NO! Do not attempt to explain the endless details here. It's just a rhetorical musing.

[Guest]

No endless details, Fly, but presumably because he's kept coming 2nd and not won anything.

[No 7&1/2]

The Joseph injury forced Lancaster into a solid but uninspiring in attack midfield partnership. Some have pointed to the fact it's when Burgess is removed it went slightly pear shaped for me during the first half while we controlled the game we didn't put enough points on the board. Lancaster lacked depth of options in some areas. To bring it back to the current standing england have more options in depth and tactics.
Oh sorry fly!

[Gooseberry]

The Burgess thing was along running project too. That's what really unsettled the squad. Comments from the England players recently have noted a very different atmosphere focused on team building rather than competition with the squad being trimmed early, none of the divisiveness that Lancasters approach bred.

I do agree and pretty much said that the 2015 team were the higher rated team at the start that cup as this one. The difference is we have had the pool stages and can see england look good and together, australia less so.
Even ignoring form this england squad is better than the 2015 one. With form its notably better.
They should win.

But again backing the dark horse makes you look like a genius when it comes off which is why I always put my money on scotland japan

[robbo277]

Fly - on the two edged sword, I'd worried were potentially underdone this week, but only slightly. If we can play through it and win we'll be in a stronger position for it in the latter rounds. Possibly that perfect blend of rested but sharp.

If we get there, and Ireland win, I would think England would have quite an advantage from the week off going in against a team which has played an extra game and tougher games as well.

If England win and NZ win then unfortunately our perfect prep would be negated by NZ having the same preparation. So we'd have to beat them on "playing merit". Overrated. Bring back the lawyers.

With regards to Lancaster, they believed there was a trend for ball in play time increasing year-on-year and thought the World Cup would continue that trend and take it to the next level. So they got everyone fitter and leaner. And then the RWC had the lowest ball in play time of any series in the last 4 years. A gamble that didn't pay off.

On Burgess-gate and the centres, we took Barritt (who was recovering from injury), Joseph (who was recovering from injury), Burgess (uncapped before the WC warm ups) and Slade (not many more caps than Slammin' Sam).

I maintain we should have played Burgess against Fiji. He was fit, there was hype, there would have been big collisions for the TV highlight reel and most importantly we would find out more about him. We went with Barritt and Joseph.

For Wales, Joseph was injured and Burgess came in, shifting Barritt to 13. Very little creativity, very little penetration and the game reflected that. But we held them out until we brought Ford on for Burgess (although Ford in no way at fault for the try).

For Australia I think we went back to Barritt and Joseph. Joseph wasn't really fit, Slade wasnt given a run and Burgess was discarded. And it was pretty bad all round.

[majesticimperialman]

I am looking forward to this game England v Australia all ways a cracking game.

I do believe that England have won the last 6 game,s  v Australia. 

But fore me that does not count, This is a Quarter Final game. and Australia will not be making it easy for England. And England should not  be taking this game lightly.

If we ( England) try to play fast and lose, we could well play in to Australia's strike runners and could cut us down and make us look foolish.

Will both team have their best players available for this game?

Lets hope the game is full on attack and defence from England, from the off.

[maestegmafia]

Expecting to see a few changes in both teams for this or predictable selections?

Hard to judge with the Aussies who their first choices are and bar the obvious similar for England.

Guess the teams are out Thursday morning?

[Poorfour]

Hard to say who England’s first choices are? Really?

Marler* George Sinckler
Itoje Kruis*
Curry Vunipola Underhill
Youngs Ford
Farrell Tuilagi
May Daly Watson#

Cowan-Dickie Vunipola Cole Lawes Wilson% Heinz ? Joseph

* - you could make a case for Vunipola and Lawes, but this is what I think Eddie will go with
# - would be Nowell if fit.
% - could be Ludlam

If Ford weren’t in such good form, and Slade were fully fit, you might have seen Farrell / Tuilagi / Slade. But 13 of the 15 and 21 of the 23 pick themselves, with the only real point of uncertainty being who wears the 22 shirt.

[maestegmafia]

Hard to say who England’s first choices are? Really?

Marler* George Sinckler
Itoje Kruis*
Curry Vunipola Underhill
Youngs Ford
Farrell Tuilagi
May Daly Watson#

Cowan-Dickie Vunipola Cole Lawes Wilson% Heinz ? Joseph

* - you could make a case for Vunipola and Lawes, but this is what I think Eddie will go with
# - would be Nowell if fit.
% - could be Ludlam

If Ford weren’t in such good form, and Slade were fully fit, you might have seen Farrell / Tuilagi / Slade. But 13 of the 15 and 21 of the 23 pick themselves, with the only real point of uncertainty being who wears the 22 shirt.

Heinz is your only backup scrum half. Surely that guarantees him the shirt? Are you thinking an extra forward or are you missing a back on the bench?

[Poorfour]

Heinz is guaranteed. The ? is for the 22 shirt. Apologies if I didn’t make that clear, but I did say it in the words.

[maestegmafia]

Rumours down under are suggesting Jordan Petaia to start at 13...!

https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/wallabies/michael-cheika-to-punt-on-jordan-petaia-at-no13-in-australias-biggest-ever-rwc-gamble/news-story/c290f60ff917cab9661c1f3552c9b468

[maestegmafia]

Heinz is guaranteed. The ? is for the 22 shirt. Apologies if I didn’t make that clear, but I did say it in the words.

Slade most likely if fit I guess?

[maestegmafia]

LIKELY WALLABIES TEAM: Kurtley Beale, Reece Hodge, Jordan Petaia, Samu Kerevi, Marika Koroibete, Christian Lealiifano, Will Genia, Isi Naisarani, Michael Hooper (c), David Pocock, Rory Arnold, Izack Rodda, Allan Alaalatoa, Tolu Latu, Scott Sio

Reserves: Jordan Uelese, James Slipper, Taniela Tupou, Adam Coleman, Lukhan Salakaia-Loto, Nic White, Matt To’omua, James O’Connor

[Guest]

Not surprised. JOC hasn't cut it at all. No harm in thrusting the new young bright thing in - play without fear, or that's the idea. Either way, not sure JOC has done enough to justify starting - looks an ideal impact sub tbh if things are going pearshaped. Weird to see Kuridrani effectively axed but think he's been up and down a bit - if they wanted size, him, Koroibete and Kerevi would make an interesting 11-12-13...

Reece Hodge might make a difference. From the boot as well as with the ball. Harsh on Haylett Petty who I think is a tidy player, and would be a better 23 than JOC, myself.

[Taylorman]

Beale starting is wrong, he's far to defensively poor, but Cheika keeps putting him there. he should be off the bench to maximise his x factor and limit his defensive liabilities.I'd have DHP there as well as he's a better all round FB but havent kept up with where he's at.

Cheika is dumb enough to select Foley for this. His go to man since 2015 even though theres not a lot to go to. Just can't see Foley not in the 23 though thats what should happen.

Petaia's the shining light for this side and could be the star Oz has needed for a long time. (Bar Folau of course).

[Taylorman]

England team to face Australia in RWC quarter-final.
15. Elliot Daly
14. Anthony Watson
13. Henry Slade
12. Manu Tuilagi
11. Jonny May
10. Owen Farrell (c)
9. Ben Youngs
8. Billy Vunipola
7. Sam Underhill
6. Tom Curry
5. Courtney Lawes
4. Maro Itoje
3. Kyle Sinckler
2. Jamie George
1. Mako Vunipola

Bench
16. Luke Cowan-Dickie
17. Joe Marler
18. Dan Cole
19. George Kruis
20. Lewis Ludlam
21. Willi Heinz
22. George Ford
23. Jonathan Joseph

Ford to the bench?
Interesting...Very good team though, cant see Oz getting near them...

“George Ford will finish the game for us,” said Jones.

“He’ll have a very significant role, we just feel at the start of the game it’s going to be fairly brutal. Having Owen at 10 will serve the team in the best interests.”

[kingelderfield]

Jamie Joseph on the bench.....The Guardian's Gerald Meagher reports......mind your ankles boys!

[LondonTiger]

Interesting midfield call by Jones. Farrell has looked rusty, Manu out of position and Slade barely played. It feels reactionary 5o me - scared of Kerevi.

Kruis to bench another interesting decision.

Less confident than when I went to bed.

[majesticimperialman]

Very surprised to see Ford on the bench. Would of thought it would be Ford, Farrell, Tuilagi.

Bit nervous now to be honest.

[Taylorman]

Interesting midfield call by Jones. Farrell has looked rusty, Manu out of position and Slade barely played. It feels reactionary 5o me - scared of Kerevi.

Kruis to bench another interesting decision.

Less confident than when I went to bed.

Yes so far both NZ and England have sprung rather surprising midfields. Thought Crotty or SBW had to be inside centre.

[Guest]

Had a feeling Farrell would be back at 10.

[Guest]

Could be a great final 20-30 minutes if either team is leading and the other team empties their running options from the bench...or even both. Worst outcome for the neutral is it's tight and cagey and we don't see it open up.

[Old Man]

Maybe Eddie wants that physicality in the midfield to soften the Wallaby midfield?

[Guest]

Best rugby they've played is with Slade and Tuilagi in midfield. Slade is a fine, fine player - better than Ford in my opinion, albeit different. If Ford is needed, he can be the man to turn a 5 point lead in to a 12 or 19 point win in the dying minutes. Not a bad call. Hence why I asked about the Toomua comparison yesterday, just think both look better off the bench. Not sure who I'd go for, nice mix of styles.

Anyway, have to assume it's about power for both sides. England cannot afford Ford's defensive concessions against the Wallabies. Easy yards equals quick ball equals go time with ball in hand.

Daly's the only obvious weakness. If Koroibete gets free, as he tends to, if Daly is the man needed to shepherd him or bump him toward a covering/scramble defender, or stop him as the last man, I back Koroibete to score where he might not v other 15s. Have to think that's why Watson's there over anyone else, though he deserves it in his own right.

Really looking forward to it. Big game for Manu Tuilagi.

[No 7&1/2]

Can hardly be surprised with a Jones selection to be fair. The pack looks great. The backs look great. There are no excuses for Saturday.

[LondonTiger]

Had a feeling Farrell would be back at 10.

Before the WC I would agree, and pretty sure he would have played there against France, but it is a massive risk to take on two players with no form and one in a position that slightly emasculates him.

[Poorfour]

No real surprises in the XXIII as a whole, but a few in who starts vs who’s on the bench. That is a bench to close out a game — the scrummaging heavy mob and controlling players.

Jones is clearly expecting a very physical contest in the first 50 but hoping to build a lead so he can tighten the screws. 

Have the Aussies done something similar? I was expecting to see the old guard in the pack on the bench, but several of them are starting.

[kingelderfield]

Lets hope farrell brings his kicking boots for pens and convs and keeps them off the ball when we're attacking or needing to keep possession, which is more often than not, all of the time in the modern game.
Kick ball to Ozy and it'll be see you later Eddie.
Huge risk that Mako and Slade are undercooked and though maybe 'fit', can't be test match ready in their reactions. The 1 percenters are where it will cost especially defensively.
Hoping for the best game of the WC so far.

[LondonTiger]

Best rugby they've played is with Slade and Tuilagi in midfield.



Big game for Manu Tuilagi.

Disagree with first comment 100%. As a pairing they have yet to gel.

Agree with second, but actually much bigger for Farrell. Unlike for Sarries where Barritt acts as his eyes and ears, he will have to run the game, making the right decisions.

[kingelderfield]

Farrell cant run the game. Not part of his skill set.

[LondonTiger]

Farrell cant run the game. Not part of his skill set.

He will have to, but will get no guidance from Manu and Youngs (or Heinz) will be under strict instructions on how to play.


We will see a lot of kicking (yes even more than previously)

[No 7&1/2]

Just so I can get my head around this. What do you mean by run the game in your mind king?

[MightyQuin]

It does feel a bit like a reputation XV but still, some squad. Let’s get behind the lads!

[Armchairexpert]

Lot of interesting choices. Perhaps the most interesting is JJ on the bench. Effectively 2 covering centres and no back 3 cover. Is Eddie still a tad worried about Slade’s form and fitness? Certainly putting a lot of faith in a guy who has hardly played and didn’t look that sharp when he did. Hope it comes off.

[No 7&1/2]

Presumably the back 3 cover would be sladento full back and then daly covering wing.

[Taylorman]

It does feel a bit like a reputation XV but still, some squad. Let’s get behind the lads!

Interesting, cos Hansen has gone in the other direction, trusting raw youth over experience.

[Sponsored content]