Much expected of England rugby side

Cheers. Yeah, he's a down to earth guy, is Lancaster. I was unimpressed by some of his selections last year and in the summer (and in the Autumn too if I'm honest), but it's a young side, and progress will take time. He clearly knows where he wants to go so we shall see. I fancy Ireland to do well. They've announced a good side to play Wales. Had a cheeky punt on Zebo being 6N top scorer today.

Yeah, that sounds pretty reasonable. Comparsion with this particular All Black side are also complicated by their being perhaps one of the all time great sides. Either way, best of luck in the six nations, though i support Ireland! I like the look of your new coach.

I tell you what, the Wallaby injury list has coincided with far more games than they're used to. Coincidence? Factor in the travel involved with Super and Championshio rugby and there's a serious issue building. Compare that to Ireland where the players are cotton wrapped. NZ is the leading rugby nation in the world, and always has been. It's what the country lives for (I know that sounds ridiculously simple). England and France will always have bigger playing numbers simply due to the size of the countries, but that doesn't automatically equate to quality. Rugby in England at amateur level is basically a p*ss-up. However, I would imagine that if England had 5 Super sides and were exposed to the NZ sides and played them 3 or 4 times a year that the results would improve. I just don't think being judged on results against NZ is a barometer of success re playing figures. I don't think this England side is great because it beat NZ. but it is a standout result. We shall see how things pan out over the coming weeks.

Hi Ben.S. You make an excellent point about player workload, i think that is very relevant. The French workload is particularly extreme and definately explans one reason for both English and French peformance. May of the criticism leveled at the English above is just as valid for the French. Also raises big questions about why Wallabies are so injury prone if they play much less rugby than some of their Euro counterparts. (Not sure why injuries weren´t an excuse for England in they had 25 players out, sounds like a good one to me.) Only disagreement i would have is regarding your comment that NZ and England aren´t apt comparison becuase NZ is a rugby nation and England isn´t. England is 8 times bigger? than NZ and has 4 times ? more players and much more money. How on earth is it not an apt comparison? What country makes a better comparison, Wales, France, SA, USA?

I see the christmas break has just intensified Hightackles inner rage, I see he has just picked new targets in the absence of others

In recent years England has beaten France more times than SA has. A factor in that is the simply that England faces France more frequently and English players has exposure to French players the way the SH players don't. If Australia plays NZ 4 times a season then the occasional victory is to be expected. All year long we've had to listen to Australian excuses about injuries, and yet in 2009 when England had 25 players out and were easily beaten by NZ that excuse is an irrelevance. Australia should be beating NZ more times than they have in recent years. Likewise SA. Resources don't mean anything when your best players are playing 35+ games a season. England's EPS deal is still nascent, whereas the SH teams have had years and years of the best set-up that leads into Test rugby. Let's see how things pan out in the next few seasons when the SH workload increases and the England workload lessens. NZ is a rugby country. England isn't. Not an apt comparison.

Wow, Hightackle, time to sit down with a nice cup of tea and slowly stir the sugar. Couple of points to consider as you do so. 1 I;m an Aussie and IMO no team is judged to a higher standard than the All Blacks and that is simply because in rugby terms, they are the standard. Beat them, (more than once in a blue moon) and you can call yourselves the best even without a world cup. (again IMO). 2 Why is everyone picking on me??? (Asks the English fan) because you have such a huge number of players and access to greater funds than anyone, (obviously apart from the French) and you defend a fifth ranking as adequate. Look who is behind you? Ireland, Wales and who???? These guys have a fraction of your resources and regularly beat you in six nations. Sure you beat the All Blacks recently, but even The Wallabies do that more often than you, (and again much less resources.) Oh and lets remember the gold standard, New Zealand have again, much less players and money behind them too. Sensing a pattern here Hightackle??? No one is picking on you matey, just suggesting you stop you whinging and get your house in order. Do that and maybe you might beat the All Blacks more often than you host the Olympics.

HT - arent ur statements being a bit genralist? saying all kiwi's do this and that? your saying your the only kiwi in all the world who knows better? the only kiwi who thinks aus are a decent side? this kiwi has a lot of respect for aus, argentina, the boks. i aplauded englands win and hold france to a high esteem. not every kiwi is as narrow minded as u. gimme a break. your not the be all and end all of rugby knowledge. opinions differ. show a bit of respect and humility and maybe you'll get some in return. your making kiwi's look bad

60 hrs in a week? Ive had plenty of stomach bugs and I know that it doesnt take 10 days to recover. After you have it you are a bit sh#t for 1 or 2 days afterward, not 10 like doctor Nick proclaimed. All but 2 had stopped vomitting by Wed. McCaw stated it wasnt a factor. You are proclaiming to be the expert and dispute all of the facts, not me Nick, YOU are the one who proclaims to know more than everyone else on the bug. I just go off experience, McCaws words and the information Ive read. Im sorry I didnt think to ask your expert opinion.

Tbh, I'd just like to move on from the victory over NZ because all you seem to get is jibes over the virus and Tuilagi. It's boring frankly. It was a great win, but it's over. Move on, nothing to see here. However, one thing worth considering is that despite the comparative cr*piness of Australia over the past few seasons (and SA) whenever there is a result against NZ all is well in the world, so what do people expect? Different standards. England will lose games over the next few seasons. Of course they will. But those losses won't render them terrible, just as the NZ victory doesn't render them great. So many extreme responses out there - it's a misuse of imagination, people. I'm looking forward to the 6N even though it will be played out in terrible weather (at some point) and includes sides intent solely on spoiling. Let's see how it goes.

The top 3 are not international rugby and Im sure Ire, Eng, Sco, Ton, Sam, Arg, Wal, Ital, Fiji, Can, Jap, Fra agree with me. To even think that the top 3 represent international standard is absurd. Nick I dont think we are ever going to see eye to eye...becuz Im reasonable. Hey everyone, Nick thinks only 3 teams are international standard! Pfffft Hey Nick, pro era Eng 9 Aust 12 1 draw. Eng 8 SA 14 1 draw. Eng 3 NZ 13 1 draw. Thats Eng 20 SANZAR 39. To say Eng doesnt compete is wrong no matter what conditions you place on it Nick.

Typically well put, RF. If we put aside the other 6N teams for a minute it's going to be a big tournament for England. A player like Marler has to show his worth; Dylan Hartley (who prior to his injury/suspension) was in exceptional form) now has genuine competition at 2; Joe Launchbury is now a proven Test performer and has high standards to maintain; Geoff Parling and Tom Wood likewise; Ben Morgan has to deliver consistency in all facets of his game; Care and Youngs are battling each other; Farrell vs Flood (kicker vs playmaker if we simplify); is Barritt the answer at 12?; with Tuilagi injured for the Scotland Test does Lancaster trust Joseph to step up despite him playing little rugby at 13 for London Irish; how does Lancaster combine 3 excellent 15s - the left-wing conundrum; can Ashton play off Barritt and Farrell? What we saw against NZ was basic rugby: aggression at the breakdown - quick ball; strong set piece; aggressive direct lines when carrying and 80 minutes of tenacity. Sides like Scotland and Italy will likely try and spoil, whereas NZ don't, so fans expecting Harlem Globetrotter rugby will probably be disappointed. Personally I think the pack has a good balance now, but worry about the midfield and the left wing, and, as you say, losing games shouldn't be a surprise. It's a young side and very inexperienced. I just want to see the basics done well consistently because then good habits develop and results will follow.

Wtf are you talking about nick? I dont follow. Justin said they beat NZ and havnt come close since. I reminded him of the draw. You went on some weird rant about where Im from and my mentality. Whats your problem? You dont make any sense. A points win? Wtf are you on? This is no game. This is you making excuses for NZs loss and putting Eng down with ridiculous claims that quite frankly are absurd imo. I dont know why I bother.

NZ kicked from hand more than England. "There were 2 teams out there tonight capable of winning a WC" -Steve Hansen "That was the most complete performance Ive ever seen England play" -Wynne Grey Why the hell is everyone so determined to make it about 1 game? They also drew with SA in SA and lost by 5 before losing by 1 to them at Twickers. They also came close to Aust and many felt they should have won, THEN they clicked and beat NZ. This from a team that had an ave of about 13 caps and an ave age of 24. They beat Ire, Fra, Sco and Italy and lost narrowly to Wales on the buzzer with a disallowed try. It isnt just one game that Im judging them on and I have no idea why everyone else is.

Its a passionate defense of reason. Nick and many others seem to be hell bent on putting teams down. I mean to say Tuilagi and Ashton are not as good as any SH backs is ridiculous. He also came up with the gem that the English backrow is pedestrian. WTF? They always tend to be the ones who cling to the excuses too. Kiwis do it about Australia too and when I remind them that Australia is one of the best in the world they start accusing you of being Australian. Its pathetic. Im a kiwi but Im aware that #2 or #3 doesnt suck. Im afraid its a real kiwi trait. Ausies and Eng put their own team down but kiwis (some) put everyone else down. Also to suggest Eng doesnt do well on the international front...wtf? If Eng dont then only 3 teams ever do. Its just braindead. But to say the team that just beat NZ and has done very well against SA and Aust is a good team is unacceptable to them. Hansen himself said Eng were outstanding, so did McCaw and many kiwi writers but for some fans thats not right. It was the virus, they buy players, they didnt play well, their players are not good etc etc. Its weird. This is not true any way you look at it. Eng, Ire, Fra and even Ital and Sco have players that are better than their SH counterparts. I have no problem with this. Some do and I dont know why. I dont expect Eng to win every game from here on and I dont know why anyone would. They just beat NZ in an outstanding performance but that doesnt mean they are better than NZ. Nobody thinks that. However this young Eng side has HUGE potential and imo is already competing well with NZ SA and Aust. In the next few years they will be very hard to beat, they already are. Im excited about this English side becuz this English side is not like any other Ive seen. Wales are also showing promise and France look to be improving. Ireland also look like they will be a very good team in the near future and the Lions...they should be awesome. I can say that and be a huge ABs fan and to say that I cant or that it cant be true is a shame and a maybe an indication that a few of my countrymen have their hand firmly on it.

Nick nobody is saying the teams in the north are better. Youre weird. Calm down. Wtf is your problem? So determined not to give England or the NH any credit at all. Excuses and absolute conviction that the north is bad. Why? Nobody ever said the NH was better but you seem to be hell bent on saying no player is as good from the north. If you think that Ashton and Tuilagi are not as good as McCabe, Cummins, Horne, Vuna, Tomane, Shipperly, Taute, Mvovo and a few others from SANZAR squads you have no idea what you are talking about imo. Also if you think Eng doesnt compete on the international stage well you are completely wrong. Dont tell me, SANZAR is the only teams that count right? Well Eng has won 2 out of the last 3 against Aust, 1 of the last 3 against NZ and drawn and come within 1 against SA in the last 3 against them.

So we are talking about buying and you chime in and say what? That those players that are from the south are from the south? Awesome, thanks. Atlas I know Devine wasnt purchased. If you read my post that was the whole point.

Ha ha! Love affair? No Im sorry Im a reasonable person. You are not and Im def not your cuz. You embarrass me with your small man syndrome and your need to make excuses and put other teams down. Shame on you and Nick. Lets see how your prediction of Eng coming last goes. Obviously a real rugby genius.

Nick you were the one disputing the facts on the norovirus and disputing what the ABs said and every bit of information on the Net says. Then like a whiner turns around (after giving his own expert analysis) and calls somebody who reafs a self proclaimed expert. Nick you have shown nothing but naivety. SH=SANZAR ahh no it doesnt. Tuilagi and Ashton are not as good as any SH backs. Ahh thats REALLY naive. Tuilagi is a 12. Ahh he plays 13. You obviously cant handle anyone thinking that England are good and sulk about it. You claim to be a rugby fan, so why is it you know nothing about it?

Nick doesnt include Argentina and Samoa in the SH. LOOK AT A MAP! SANZAR is not SH Nick. If you mean SANZAR say SANZAR. Its not difficult.