England to whitewash Australia
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="barbarian" data-cid="588754" data-time="1466070623">
<div>
<p>The problem, hurricane, is that IMO if you are beaten in the forwards you will lose the game 80-90% of the time. It's just a basic tenet of rugby, and I don't think there is a way to get around that, even with the slickest backs imaginable.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Thanks barbarian appreciate the answer! </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="588753" data-time="1466070415">
<div>
<p>Well, that is pretty much what we do already - rely on the backs. The depth of our school and club level competitions doesn't really allow for development in the forwards because a few bigger kids in the backline will allow you to dominate.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Thanks NTA - I am very interested in stories about Aussie rugby at the development level. And in the past, and it may have been your answer, enjoyed a post an Australian member made explaining the incredible depth in the number 7 jersey in Aussie rugby vs the number 8 jersey.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>All for now - thanks again for the feedback gents :)</p> -
<p>Hurricane, from my biased vantage point, (as an AB fan), I've always believed the Wallabies to be at their best when they achieve pretty much parity in the tight 5 (Aussies have always had good as any looses I reckon), have a reliable line out and tackle like absolute madmen. The backs have always run onto the ball well and the passing generally always fine - I attribute their back skills to weather and local grass conditions.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The best Aussie teams I've seen have played at pace and tackled like machines. In the late 90's, the Eales team were a great example. he sorted line outs, the scrum was just a restart, Herbert and Horan made it impossible for us to get through and Roff, Tune etc all fed off the silky passing of George and Stephen.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>When they'd beat the ABs, and even lately, the knee-jerk reaction from us would be "bloody forwards too soft, get the blanket out to throw over them and we'll be right." Invariably the next game would be a marked improvement and commitment of the AB tight five and most times we'd win.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Oddly enough the Saffas still got done over more than they should have by the Wallabies but that was a pace of the game thing I reckon.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Sorry Hurricane I've used 20 times more words to verbosely say what Nick and Barbs said.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Upshot is that this Saturday the Aussies will be haring around all over the place, avoiding tight 5 trench exchanges, moaning at the refs when English players go down with "injuries" and going side to side like they did in the first 10 last week and like Cheika bemoaned in the aftermath that they didn't do enough.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Well I think so anyway but for sure it'll be riveting viewing for 80 mins this weekend. Good stuff England and Australia !! </p> -
<p>Found this on twitter, fantastic article which explains the attacking structure Cheika and Larkham are using:</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://t.co/AvGp710V41'>https://t.co/AvGp710V41</a></p> -
<p>Murray Kinsella does a lot of excellent analysis for the42.ie</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="antipodean" data-cid="588760" data-time="1466075016">
<div>
<p>Murray Kinsella does a lot of excellent analysis for the42.ie</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>That publication is brilliant, best I've seen in the rugby world by far</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="588761" data-time="1466075118">
<div>
<p>That publication is brilliant, best I've seen in the rugby world by far</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Yep, If he had his own show on Sky I'd actually subscribe. Really great examplke to the likes of Marshall re how to do that stuff.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="antipodean" data-cid="588760" data-time="1466075016"><p>Murray Kinsella does a lot of excellent analysis for the42.ie</p></blockquote>
<br>
Thanks for the tip. Interesting analysis, definitely supports the theories about why Burrell was hoiked early. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mariner4life" data-cid="588519" data-time="1466031896">
<div>
<p>But generally a bit shit. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="588535" data-time="1466033982">
<div>
<p>Mumm has the disease a lot of our locks have: stupid fucking penalties. Particularly at lineout or in the subsequent drive.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Have to say I've not seen that much of him in/for Aus, partly because he doesn't get much test time and Super Rugby is on too early for someone like me that isn't invested in it. Saw a good bit of him playing for Exeter and neither of your points seemed to apply. He's very well thought of down here. But then we do also eat our own children.</p> -
England squad for 2nd Test:<br>
M Brown (Harlequins); A Watson (Bath), J Joseph (Bath), O Farrell (Saracens), J Nowell (Exeter); G Ford (Bath), B Youngs (Leicester); M Vunipola (Saracens), D Hartley (capt. Northampton), D Cole (Leicester); M Itoje (Saracens), G Kruis (Saracens); C Robshaw (Harlequins), B Vunipola (Saracens), J Haskell (Wasps). Replacements: J George (Saracens), M Mullan (Wasps), P Hill (Northampton), J Launchbury (Wasps), C Lawes (Northampton), J Clifford (Harlequins), D Care (Harlequins), E Daly (Wasps). <br><br>
Marginally better team than last week. Nowell has the edge on Yarde, for me. Farrell for Burrell was no-brainer after the success of the tactical subbing last week. Pleased to see Daly on the bench, but he was the obvious choice with only 2 backs - hope he gets a run out and shows what he's capable of. Another big performance coming from Haskell, I think, but Brown needs to pull his finger out. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="588897" data-time="1466130540">
<div>
<p>England paying $2.10.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Not quite as enticing when you cashed in on $2.34 last week </p>
<p> </p>
<p>You can get Aussie at $2.00 for the first half if you shop around. That's what I'm on. Always like betting against the NH teams after a "statement win" - too busy patting themselves on the back after a good performance. Aussie also consistently a really good team out of the blocks and have been for almost a decade.</p> -
<p>Yeah still kind of surprising though. Would have thought they'd pull in closer to $2.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Definitely the scoreline flattered England a touch with that try at the end, and another coming off a pair of fuckups. But they played pretty well in the style they know, as well as adding a little bit of attack.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Home game I suppose, plus the bookies thinking the Wallabies will be better for the game time together.</p> -
<p>Bench finalised for Wallabies. Full XXIII is now:</p>
<p> </p>
<div>1 Slipper</div>
<div>2 Moore (skipper)</div>
<div>3 Kepu</div>
<div>4 Carter</div>
<div>5 Arnold</div>
<div>6 Fardy</div>
<div>7 Hooper</div>
<div>8 McMahon</div>
<div>9 Phipps</div>
<div>10 Foley</div>
<div>11 Horne</div>
<div>12 Kerevi</div>
<div>13 Kuridrani</div>
<div>14 Haylett-Petty</div>
<div>15 Folau</div>
<div> </div>
<div>16 Polota-Nau</div>
<div>17 Smith</div>
<div>18 Holmes</div>
<div>19 Mumm</div>
<div>20 McCalman</div>
<div>21 Frisby</div>
<div>22 Lealiifano</div>
<div>23 Morahan</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I would have started McCalman, because I think he's a better starter.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Horwill, Palu, and Gill arsed in favour of the 5-3 bench. </div> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="588934" data-time="1466136865">
<div>
<p>I like McMahon, looking forward to see how he goes. Strikes me as a real hard bastard.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't rate McMahon except for being a hard runner, will keep a watch on him tomorrow in the thread. I would say this game is his opportunity and he needs to make the most of it.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="588918" data-time="1466135820"><p>Definitely the scoreline flattered England a touch with that try at the end, and another coming off a pair of fuckups. But they played pretty well in the style they know, as well as adding a little bit of attack.</p></blockquote>
<br>
True. On the other side of the ledger, Australia opened with a speed that caught England by surprise - that won't happen two weeks in a row. Expecting that kind of onslaught is only half the battle, of course, coping with it is something else, but if the England defence sticks to the script, though, I'm optimistic-ish on that score. Then again, back the other way, if Foley brings his kicking boots..., etc.<br><br>
This will be close. Expecting one hell of a match. -
So Simmons isn't injured, he's been omitted on form. That 10 minutes he played last week must have sucked
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mariner4life" data-cid="589091" data-time="1466201526"><p>So Simmons isn't injured, he's been omitted on form. That 10 minutes he played last week must have sucked</p></blockquote>
He hasnt exactly been lighting the world on fire ever. Carter has propably been training the house down and deserves a crack. -
<p>Looking forward to seeing S McMahon have acrack. Been very goo in SUper rugby and I am not convinced on podick as an 8</p>
