England v. Wales today

Jonny Wilkinson is England's best option at No. 10. This much was plain from today's peculiar performance. Only Mike Tindall looked threatening behind the scrum. The Welsh dominated the breakdown where matches today are lost and won. The English back row were anonymous today. Martin Johnson & Co have their work cut out for them. Simpson-Daniel would have scored the try that Banahan butchered. I'm not sure what Johnson has against Sinbad.

I don't understand the English selection at 10 over the last two games. You play a primarily kicking flyhalf with your more creative centre partnership in the first game, and then strand your running flyhalf inside a partnership that essentially offers nothing but route one crash ball.

Bizarre.

Banahan wants stringing up for butchering that chance.

He's only about 12 inches taller and 6 stone heavier than Shane and he still couldn't get over the line even with a straight run in.

doctornickolas wrote:Banahan wants stringing up for butchering that chance.

He's only about 12 inches taller and 6 stone heavier than Shane and he still couldn't get over the line even with a straight run in.

Banahan is seriously the most over-rated rugby player around. He has all the physical attributes he needs, but is missing the top two inches.

Bananahaha and Shania Hape are seriously gash rugby players. Nothing to worry Scotland or Argentina here.

Banahan seems to be the anti-Shane. Huge amounts of power but can't read a game and lacks any distribution or ball playing skills.

Still could a handy player for England though if they use him properly.

At least Wales did England a favour this pre RWC game by not fielding a weak team of old crocks. Both teams know there is a lot of work to do before the first match i.e., Wales; sort out the front row, get R Jones fit for number 8 and find a full back. England: fitness of their forwards (lasting 80 mins), back row was better in the first game, defence looks shakey, get shot of Banahan, a back up for Wilkinson (Hodgson is poor) and Hape and Tindal are no great threat.

glamorganalun wrote:At least Wales did England a favour this pre RWC game by not fielding a weak team of old crocks. Both teams know there is a lot of work to do before the first match i.e., Wales; sort out the front row, get R Jones fit for number 8 and find a full back. England: fitness of their forwards (lasting 80 mins), back row was better in the first game, defence looks shakey, get shot of Banahan, a back up for Wilkinson (Hodgson is poor) and Hape and Tindal are no great threat.

So are you saying that England managed to dominate possession for much of the game only using their tight 5?

I thought the backrow were fine. Where England completely fell down was the way the backs used the possession we had.

DaveM wrote:

glamorganalun wrote:At least Wales did England a favour this pre RWC game by not fielding a weak team of old crocks. Both teams know there is a lot of work to do before the first match i.e., Wales; sort out the front row, get R Jones fit for number 8 and find a full back. England: fitness of their forwards (lasting 80 mins), back row was better in the first game, defence looks shakey, get shot of Banahan, a back up for Wilkinson (Hodgson is poor) and Hape and Tindal are no great threat.

So are you saying that England managed to dominate possession for much of the game only using their tight 5?

I thought the backrow were fine. Where England completely fell down was the way the backs used the possession we had.

tbh mate i thought the england back row were innoticeable compared to the welsh back row- that may be because i am welsh and the fact the welsh back 3 were defending like demons but ...

Dave - the backrow sometimes compete at the breakdown, Englands didnt and that contributed to their down fall along with Wales's rock solid defence