New Zealand v England 3rd test & the 2nd test review

First topic message reminder :

1000 posts and the 2nd test thread is blocked time to move onto the 3rd test in Hamilton.

What are England's chances of securing a win?
Could NZ win convincingly?
Will it be close again?
Who will play?
How much will the referee affect the game?

Let the banter begin..................

Oh, and feel free to discuss test's 1 and 2.

Taylorman wrote:ok...I couldnt remember if he started... I'd never heard of him before this tour. Did he play the 6N?

No he didnt. He got some games against Argentina last summer, including scoring a truly spectacular try, which, while it was very 'league' in style, involved wrong footing half the Argentinian team (or something like that...)

He has long been on the international radar but has seemed to have ongoing issues (and the usual injuries) with with his club side Bath which has seen him get limited game time.

From reading here and on the usual news sources it is hard to get a good feel about what is happening with him at Bath - there is certainly no apparent drive to leave- but there do seem to be problems even if its just down to him throwing the toys out when he isnt picked.

Can be dangerous hoping for a repeat vs the ABs thats all. They learn very quick. And Burns for one really stands out as a target this time. At his home ground watch out for Cruden charging him down too. He's done it to many and scored from them often- Carter and Steyn included.

Burns and Eastmond will be fine as long as the pack holds up. Care and Farrel's dodgy kicking was also a reason for the added pressure last week, let's hope Youngs and Burns are better at it this week.

LIW ive just posted the very same concerns on the other thread about his club situation?

NZ as usual favourites imo. A lot of shattered Englishmen out there. We'll do well to stay within a score and 18 or more wouldn't surprise me, but I'm still hoping we'll manage a win.

Do I think it will affect our belief that we can beat the All Blacks? No. We know that the ABs at full throttle WILL score. That's never been in doubt. But we had our chances in this series and may do again tomorrow and we all know it. We also know this has been a mess of a tour and we will get better. A lot of good has come out of this tour in terms of the B and C and even D side players putting their hands up and the experience alone has been valuable for many of these young players.

It may seem odd to NZers, used to a steady diet of victory, that we can be so positive about a (likely) 3-0 defeat, but we're used to our team playing dreadfully and then getting to a WC Final. We've been amazingly erratic over the last decade, so anything that looks like steady progress is wildly exciting. We also have a sort of idea of what it takes to beat ABs in NZ - the 2002 side laid down a benchmark - and this side isn't there yet. But I do think it has the talent to get there and nowadays, a good structure to support the talent.

Taylorman wrote:I picked NZ by 18.

Right, as your the font of all knowledge i'm piling on the draw with England at +18 @ 28/1.

If your wrong i'll want my stake back   

B91212 wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:He's the typical player that Canty specialise in now: solid but lacking anything that stands up and makes you take note like Fekitoa. Still he scored the try against Ireland and went round 5cm more to make the kick easier on the second attempt so he's another Canty legend in my book.

Thanks  . Is he a center/wing/back 3 or just general utility?

He can cover both centre positions. Not quick enough for a winger. Think of him as a much diluted version of Manu, but without the possibility of placing him on the wing.   

GeordieFalcon wrote:LIW ive just posted the very same concerns on the other thread about his club situation?

I never know if I should say great minds think alike or fools seldom differ   

It is a strange situation.

Cowshot wrote:NZ as usual favourites imo. A lot of shattered Englishmen out there. We'll do well to stay within a score and 18 or more wouldn't surprise me, but I'm still hoping we'll manage a win.

Do I think it will affect our belief that we can beat the All Blacks? No. We know that the ABs at full throttle WILL score. That's never been in doubt. But we had our chances in this series and may do again tomorrow and we all know it. We also know this has been a mess of a tour and we will get better. A lot of good has come out of this tour in terms of the B and C and even D side players putting their hands up and the experience alone has been valuable for many of these young players.

It may seem odd to NZers, used to a steady diet of victory, that we can be so positive about a (likely) 3-0 defeat, but we're used to our team playing dreadfully and then getting to a WC Final. We've been amazingly erratic over the last decade, so anything that looks like steady progress is wildly exciting. We also have a sort of idea of what it takes to beat ABs in NZ - the 2002 side laid down a benchmark - and this side isn't there yet. But I do think it has the talent to get there and nowadays, a good structure to support the talent.

Cowshot we're used to the confidence of extracting positives from defeat from the Australians! I do understand their point not to mention yours. You've really put pressure on NZ in this series and really we can't thank you enough. That's exactly what we've been getting of late, notably since the Boks came to Eden Park. Since then, we haven't been allowed to dominate large areas of our games and the opposition has really tested us by putting points on us and we've had to work really hard to find moments to do the same. You don't get that soul searching with 18 point wins so I'm secretly hoping it's another tight win for us because these attritional wins are ideal training for the RWC. It must be the Atletico supporter in me: I'm a glutton for suffering and punishment!

andyi wrote:

Taylorman wrote:I picked NZ by 18.

Right, as your the font of all knowledge i'm piling on the draw with England at +18 @ 28/1.

If your wrong i'll want my stake back   

our TAB:

Winning Team & Margin
New Zealand 13 & Over: $1.95
New Zealand 12 & Under: $2.80
England 12 & Under $4.75
England 13 & Over: $16.00

good money for the Eng 12 and under...

LiW wrote:I never know if I should say great minds think alike or fools seldom differ

You could compromise on Birds of a feather...?

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:

Cowshot wrote:NZ as usual favourites imo. A lot of shattered Englishmen out there. We'll do well to stay within a score and 18 or more wouldn't surprise me, but I'm still hoping we'll manage a win.

Do I think it will affect our belief that we can beat the All Blacks? No. We know that the ABs at full throttle WILL score. That's never been in doubt. But we had our chances in this series and may do again tomorrow and we all know it. We also know this has been a mess of a tour and we will get better. A lot of good has come out of this tour in terms of the B and C and even D side players putting their hands up and the experience alone has been valuable for many of these young players.

It may seem odd to NZers, used to a steady diet of victory, that we can be so positive about a (likely) 3-0 defeat, but we're used to our team playing dreadfully and then getting to a WC Final. We've been amazingly erratic over the last decade, so anything that looks like steady progress is wildly exciting. We also have a sort of idea of what it takes to beat ABs in NZ - the 2002 side laid down a benchmark - and this side isn't there yet. But I do think it has the talent to get there and nowadays, a good structure to support the talent.

Cowshot we're used to the confidence of extracting positives from defeat from the Australians! I do understand their point not to mention yours. You've really put pressure on NZ in this series and really we can't thank you enough. That's exactly what we've been getting of late, notably since the Boks came to Eden Park. Since then, we haven't been allowed to dominate large areas of our games and the opposition has really tested us by putting points on us and we've had to work really hard to find moments to do the same. You don't get that soul searching with 18 point wins so I'm secretly hoping it's another tight win for us because these attritional wins are ideal training for the RWC. It must be the Atletico supporter in me: I'm a glutton for suffering and punishment!

Yeah I'm not one for thinking much about matches the year or more before the tournament- for me the biggest concern is that period of 4 weeks in pool play. We play Argentian first, then Africa 1, Georgia, then Tonga, then assuming we somehow get through that, a quarter final.

Over four weeks we expected to 'build' our title defending side on playing those sides. Its not too bad having Arg and Georgia- I thought their pack was excellent last time I saw them- but immediately prior to the assumed biggest title in rugby, we're having to play the lowest ranked sides since...yes the last world cup pool round. I'd rather have England, Oz and the Boks in the same section to be honest.

I think that's harsh on Tonga Tman. They gave us a really good run in the second half and outscored us in 2011 I think. Rest up the A team in the Africa match and then prepare for the onslaught of France or Ireland.

I think one of the reasons why you might dismiss the matches running up to the RWC is that we've tended to dominate those matches. Look at 2007: we turned up to the NH matches with two squads and it didn't make much difference. Then in 07, some frighteningly effective French defence shut us down and what experience did we have upon which to draw? I'll tell you: SFA.

You often talk about the motivating benefits of a loss. When you have consecutive winning streaks, what's the next best thing? Thinking you're not being allowed to play well by the opposition and if you don't do something right during a game, you will end up on the losing side. Frankly, I prefer that mentality as RWC preparation to if we just play our own game, nobody will be able to live with us. Sides have figured out by not letting NZ play their own game, you stand a much better chance of winning. Knowing how to be able to play our type of game for moments when a side is succeeding in playing the game they want to play is invaluable experience.

The probability is that it will be another tight NZ win tomorrow. The possibility remains for a big NZ win or a narrow England win. Or a draw - which could easily have been the result of either of the other two matches.

It would be nice for England to win and raise the stakes for the first AI, but I don't mind too much if they lose while playing well. To put this tour in perspective, for a team with this little experience [1] to go to New Zealand and perform as well as it has is remarkable.

The squad will come away from the tour knowing that they could have won at least one test, angry that they didn't, and with a clear view of what they need to improve in order to do so. That is extremely valuable in terms of the squad's development and preparation for the RWC.

[1] The only 50 cap player in the England squad for Saturday is Dylan Hartley. The second most experienced player is Chris Ashton (!) with 38 caps.

Taylorman wrote:

andyi wrote:

Taylorman wrote:I picked NZ by 18.

Right, as your the font of all knowledge i'm piling on the draw with England at +18 @ 28/1.

If your wrong i'll want my stake back   

our TAB:

Winning Team & Margin
New Zealand 13 & Over: $1.95
New Zealand 12 & Under: $2.80
England 12 & Under $4.75
England 13 & Over:  $16.00

good money for the Eng 12 and under...

I assume your TAB is the same as our TOTE.

England by 1-12 is 9/2 here so pretty similar.

Ive had my usual small stake on 1-5@7/1 and smaller on 6-10@11/1.
more than covered by the Handicap as usual

And i did a little dibble on the draw at +18, LOL.

andyi wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

andyi wrote:

Taylorman wrote:I picked NZ by 18.

Right, as your the font of all knowledge i'm piling on the draw with England at +18 @ 28/1.

If your wrong i'll want my stake back   

our TAB:

Winning Team & Margin
New Zealand 13 & Over: $1.95
New Zealand 12 & Under: $2.80
England 12 & Under $4.75
England 13 & Over:  $16.00

good money for the Eng 12 and under...

I assume your TAB is the same as our TOTE.

England by 1-12 is 9/2 here so pretty similar.

Ive had my usual small stake on 1-5@7/1 and smaller on 6-10@11/1.
more than covered by the Handicap as usual

And i did a little dibble on the draw at +18, LOL.

I might take that England 12 and under...that way surely I cant lose ...good way to end the tour perhaps...drown the sorrows- all paid for by the English side perhaps?  

Taylorman wrote:yeah malakai and Nonu are more similar so somewhat of a risk but its glass half full stuff and nothing we can do with Conrad out. He'll get some rest while his thumb mends and be just right for the most of the RC.

Looking forward to Malakais big hits, being one of those rare types that specialise in big spot tackles. Worth watching him for that alone.

Perfect scenario to start him now the side has settled into its groove and hes got his run on debut out of the way.

The unstoppable force vs the immovable object that is Manu Tuilagi?

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Taylorman wrote:yeah malakai and Nonu are more similar so somewhat of a risk but its glass half full stuff and nothing we can do with Conrad out. He'll get some rest while his thumb mends and be just right for the most of the RC.

Looking forward to Malakais big hits, being one of those rare types that specialise in big spot tackles. Worth watching him for that alone.

Perfect scenario to start him now the side has settled into its groove and hes got his run on debut out of the way.

The unstoppable force vs the immovable object that is Manu Tuilagi?

yes that clash is worth the ticket alone. He's dumped a few this year, Conrad and Savea included. Theyre similar though Tuilagis bigger, Fekitoas all athlete and agility and his timing is spot on.

Great match up. Watched his press conference. Humble kid probably cacking himself with all the attention. Hope he settles down quickly and has a good game. No doubt Manu will be targeting him to get him off his game and Eastmond will be doing his best to give him that space he provided him in the first test in order to do that. Love these kinds of individual contests within the game.

It is disappointing that Care and Farrell both played in a key match when not fully fit.

Having said that, Richie McCaw turned out with a stress fracture during the World Cup, Richard Hill had one of best games for Saracens playing on one leg, and Kieran Bracken played most of a match against the All Blacks after Jamie Joseph popped his ankle joint out and back in again. Sometimes those calls work.

I suppose the frustration is that, at least in Farrell's case, we had in-form back-up.

Given that the coaching set-up has tended to make substitution calls based on in-game performance metrics, or anticipating fatigue, you'd hope they'd be a bit more generally alert to knowing when it's a game too far for a player.

Another interest for me will be Ashtons performance.

Will he thrive of any potential offloads from Billy and Manu...or from Eastmonds skills.

AND how will he cope against Savea?

Does Ashton need to have a big game on Sat? Or can he get by just doing better then Manu did last week?

For me he needs a big game to show he is capable of bringing his club form to Internationals, otherwise all that work at Sarries is wasted.

Wade, Watson and Nowell on the horizon so if he wants to stay in the team I think he'll need to show something.

He needs a MASSIVE game in my opinion.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Wade, Watson and Nowell on the horizon so if he wants to stay in the team I think he'll need to show something.

RWC 2015 as Nowell rounds Dagg in the last minute for the winning score.

The crowd bursts into a spontaneous round of Nowell, Nowell, Nowell, Nowell, Born is the King of Israel...

That would be nice.

He is more a full back though.

Taxi for Portnoy...  

Nowell - unless there is a big run of injuries I suspect he'll be out of the the front line for a few years but may well come in as FB when Brown's international career winds done

Well yes Nowell looks a Fb , but it depends what happens to Anthony Watson...if he remains a winger or moves to FB where his skills look well suited.

Currently I can see both of them in the side in the coming years, although looking at some of the wingers coming through the academy you never know. I always considered Nowell more the full back to Watsons wing but it was the other way around for the u20s wasn't it.

Watson looks to have all the tools for Fb. Hes tall, big, powerful, has pace to counter attack, he's brave and has great skills.

But who knows what will happen.

IF England scrape a win in the final test...with Burns and Eastmond in there...what effect would that have on the selections for next season?

Would Burns then be 1st choice 10? Or would Farrell just walk straight back in.

I was a little bit sorry Lancaster had not given half a thought to having Watson in the squad on Saturday.  He does add a bit.

GeordieFalcon wrote:IF England scrape a win in the final test...with Burns and Eastmond in there...what effect would that have on the selections for next season?

Would Burns then be 1st choice 10? Or would Farrell just walk straight back in.

I think Farrell would be considered number 1 considering what he has achieved and how well he's performed for England. Think a bit depends on how Burns takes to Leicester. Got to remember without Ford's injury he would have probably picked up 20 mins off the bench as well.

I think Farrell would be considered number 1 considering what he has achieved and how well he's performed for England.

Just being argumentative 7.5   what has Farrell achieved?

Agree Burns move to Tigers will be interesting. Im really of the opinion it will make him. They have a very tough aggressive training mentality, and if he can toughen up a little, he could make that 10 spot his own.

But we do have some serious competition now...for that 10 spot.

Oh,what brilliant conundrums. Even versus a year ago the selection headaches are enormous.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

I think Farrell would be considered number 1 considering what he has achieved and how well he's performed for England.

Just being argumentative 7.5   what has Farrell achieved?

Agree Burns move to Tigers will be interesting. Im really of the opinion it will make him. They have a very tough aggressive training mentality, and if he can toughen up a little, he could make that 10 spot his own.

But we do have some serious competition now...for that 10 spot.

Well I'm obviously a big fan of Farrell but he's nailed down that 10 spot from Flood, led us in 2 six nations to 2 2nd place finishes (joint points). Consistent, adding flair to his game. He's 22. That to me is a lot of achievement. I do hope Burns pushes on again, so frustrating watching him last season in comparison to the one previously. If (yes I know if) he, Ford and Cipriani, hell even Slade) can all produce a top quality season I'm sure we'll all be delighted.

I like Farrell, only 22, seems to be improving. Sure he can add to his game, but along with care and lawes and brown he was one of the highlights of the 6 nations. Not sure I'd say he'd achieved much yet, but I believe he has it in him.

That said if burns can turn in another performance, and with cips resurgent and offering a running option from 10, plus ford when back from injury. I think competition is hotting up... Can only be a good thing.

I suppose one thing all our fly-halves (notice not 5/8 - which is a gash made up position) have in common is youth and surely the room to improve. Farrell being number one is sort of worrying because he's just so bloody flakey. One minute he's the dog's lipstick, the next he's a petulant brat. None of the above really stand out as taking the No10 spot by the scruff of the neck, not even Farrell. The trick is to bring on the right pecking order, for example, Burns 'seems' to be second choice - but he isn't that convincing and what about if Cipriani has actually got his ass in gear and has the potential to eclipse them all? we're not going to find out, but maybe that's a good thing. Go with what we know and stick by it right or wrong.

Pick whoever is in the best form
Farrells biggest problem is his temper
He seems to lose it every time he plays for England and is making himself a target for opposing teams and the referee
I'm wondering if his shoulder charge had any bearing on his yellow later in the game

if the ref hadn't forgotten what a maul was farrell wouldnt have gotten a yellow.

farrell rarely seems to actually lose his temper though, he always seems to stay just on the non-card-receiving side of dirty niggle. which is calculated, and naughty, but suggests he is just about in control of his temper.

I agree, Farrells a workie ticket which i like in a player.

I dont dislike Farrell i rate him, im just stuck now between what we need at 10. And im really starting to think we need a genuine playmaking 10 in there over a more physical option.

But then next week ill think Farrell is the best option.

Pah...having all these options is not good!    

Having all these options is however a perfect opportunity for lots of 'I told you so' threads when it goes wrong.

An interesting conundrum for England now to overcome is with all this depth in the team, it will be difficult to forge solid combinations, as the temptation to dabble with partnerships is great, particularly if the team finds itself unable to perform consistently.

To date with England, this hasn't been an issue. Injury has forced the changes from SL more often than not but the time is coming where these players will settle down and start to accumulate caps and inevitably that means certain players start missing out on selection. It's great to have this much depth but it's impossible to accommodate all of them. Eventually you have to narrow that list down and that's when you need to have made the right choices.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:An interesting conundrum for England now to overcome is with all this depth in the team, it will be difficult to forge solid combinations, as the temptation to dabble with partnerships is great, particularly if the team finds itself unable to perform consistently.

To date with England, this hasn't been an issue. Injury has forced the changes from SL more often than not but the time is coming where these players will settle down and start to accumulate caps and inevitably that means certain players start missing out on selection. It's great to have this much depth but it's impossible to accommodate all of them. Eventually you have to narrow that list down and that's when you need to have made the right choices.

I think we have had a long history of all most too much choice but few stand out talents, so guys have been picked up then dropped without much chance to develop and turn into proper internationals. I think now things are different because we have stand out talents and, forced or otherwise, more of them are getting some time on the pitch. But you know for sure that there are going to be some very talented guys that miss out, maybe to less talented guys who just fit into the team or the 'system' better.

quinsforever wrote:if the ref hadn't forgotten what a maul was farrell wouldnt have gotten a yellow.

farrell rarely seems to actually lose his temper though, he always seems to stay just on the non-card-receiving side of dirty niggle. which is calculated, and naughty, but suggests he is just about in control of his temper.

Maybe the ref saw Farrell as a trouble maker and this had a bearing on his interpretation of what was going on

good point kia, its self fulfilling as well in that the more you dabble the more likely you are to get inconsistency, the more tempting it becomes to dabble more.

Lancaster obviously is big on a squad system and style that people can slot into, but ultimately nothing forges understanding better than game time and in many positions its probably more important to pick combinations and stick with them regardless of how unfair it may be to deserving others. Obviously, within reason as you have to be ready to cater for injury and loss of form.

I think of players like Ranger who couldn't get enough game time to lock down a position and then finally when a calling came up, it was too late as he had taken up a contract in France. How many Toby Flood or Steffon Armitages from this current squad will there be?

For sure, these are isolated incidents and on the whole it's very healthy to have a large pool of players you know you can call upon. But you'd be amazed at how many options you might have and then suddenly injuries or bad form strike and you find yourself in the inconceivable situation that you have very limited options in an area you thought you had a seemingly unending source of talent. Just goes to show you can only plan for so much.

I fully agree the situation England now finds itself in is akin to the period leading up to the 2003 triumph. Now, just as then, you need to settle that squad and start building familiarity with the players because that is one the glaring omission I have seen so far on an otherwise exemplary tour.

I think Lancaster has been very good at managing players' expectations - he seems to have a knack for telling them what they need to do to get back in the team, and then sticking with it if they achieve it. Steffon was effectively gone before he arrived, and Flood wasn't prepared to play second fiddle any more (fair enough). Look at how hard Haskell and Cips have worked to get back in the frame. He's created an environment where players want to play.

I think he will in time be able to generate a situation where the Saxons squad has an even mix of developing youngsters and proven internationals who have enough caps that we know that they can do a job but will be waiting on injury or form (or working on a big step in their own game) for their next chance. With the attrition in today's game, they can expect that chance to come.

Lancaster continues to do well with the odd blip - Manu on the wing. Most will feel 3 defeats is a disappointment but not the rout many were expecting (including Taylorman)

But the pressure is steadily building. You have to say that England have to win 2 out of 3 this autumn to suggest that a year out they are where they need to be. In my opinion they can in Twickenham. Then the real pressure begins because they simply have to win next years 6 Nations.