England won everywhere but on the scoreboard in the first test. Can England end the All Blacks 15-match winning streak in Dunedin and send the series to a decider in Hamilton? Join The Roar for live scores and coverage from 5:30pm (AEDT).
England have got their regulars back but coach Stuart Lancaster has made the bold move of picking blockbusting centre Manu Tuilagi on the wing and sticking with Geoff Parling, Ben Morgan and Rob Webber in the pack instead of Courtney Lawes, Billy Vunipola and Dylan Hartley, respectively.
First-five Owen Farrell and halfback Danny Care will steer the ship, while Billy Twelvetrees and Luther Burrell reunite in the midfield and Tom Wood takes over from James Haskell at blindside flanker.
All Blacks coach Steve Hansen has made minimal changes to his starting line-up despite an error-ridden performance last week.
Fullback Israel Dagg (knee) is out so Ben Smith gets to play in his best position in front of his home crowd. Dagg hasn’t scored a try in 16 Tests; Smith has scored 13 tries in 27 Tests.
Julian Savea is back from a knee injury and slots in on the left wing allowing Cory Jane to shift to his preferred spot on the right. Savea (19 tries in 20 Tests) will add some much needed thrust to an All Blacks attack that struggled to breach the English defence. England’s line speed in Auckland was especially outstanding.
The All Blacks won’t play as poorly as they did in the first Test. However England has massive improvement in them which makes this one of the most eagerly anticipated June tests in a long-time.
Expect the All Blacks to kick less and try and build phases more, involving Savea and Ben Smith.
Expect England to really pressure at scrum time.
You can also be sure the benches will have an impact. The All Blacks got great contributions from Victor Vito and Wyatt Crockett last week.
This match should provide another tight tussle!
All Blacks by 6.
robert sportfolio
Guest
We must to admit, All Blacks played fantastic in the first 45 minutes! England's back in the second part of the game but it was too later, All Blacks won! goo.gl/i7ZUsw
Jerry
Guest
Fekitoa was on his feet.
Digby
Roar Guru
No problems Sam. Unfortunately I was having connection issues last night so couldnt quite get the detail I wanted across. Hope the wedding was a great day!!
Kane
Roar Guru
Made more tackles and missed less than Hooper, maybe he should retire too.
Sam Taulelei
Guest
Thanks mate for keeping diligent record of this, appreciate it.
Sam Taulelei
Guest
All Blacks scrum simply continued on from its strong performance last week (not that ill informed journalists reported it as such) The last two tests has been our most consistent scrummaging since new engagement rules were introduced.
WQ
Guest
Agreed West, the tight five got the job done.
The
Roar Rookie
This is the same situation as Fekitoa last week.
Farrel was carded for not rolling away.
Jerry
Guest
So, from...."a) If a maul collapses and the ball does not touch the ground the player on his feet is not obliged to release the ball or ball carrier unless the ball touches the ground and a ruck is formed." We can then infer that a player who is NOT on his his feet IS obliged to release. Farrell wasn't on his feet.
“Law 17.6(g) says: “If the ball carrier in a maul goes to ground, including being on one or both knees or sitting, the referee orders a scrum unless the ball is immediately available.” Often situations arise in the game when a ball carrier in a maul (especially when the maul consists of only 3 or 4 players) goes to ground with an opponent remaining on his feet with his arms wrapped around the ball. ARU asks the following questions: a) Does the opponent on his feet need to release the ball carrier given that this is a collapsed maul and not a tackle? b) Does the ball carrier have to release the ball to the opponent on his feet? Law 17.6 (g) indicates a scrum unless the ball is immediately available but places no obligation on the ball carrier to make it available by releasing it. c) When a maul collapses, is there any obligation on players to roll away from the ball in order to make the ball available? d) When a maul collapses, are players who go to ground able to interfere with the ball as it is being made available while they are still off their feet? If not, what is the sanction and what is the basis in Law?” Clarification of the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee Questions (a), (b) and (c) relate to questions of Law and (d) relates more to the application of Law. There is a further variable to be taken into account when the ball goes to ground at a collapsed maul and there are players from both sides on their feet bound over the ball so that Law 16 – Ruck becomes applicable. (a) If a maul collapses and the ball does not touch the ground the player on his feet is not obliged to release the ball or ball carrier unless the ball touches the ground and a ruck is formed. (b) The original ball carrier who goes to ground (knee or sitting) who can play the ball must do so immediately and the referee then has a judgement to make: i. When the ball carrier goes to ground and the ball is unplayable (i.e. the ball is not available immediately), through no fault of the ball carrier, then the referee awards a scrum as per 17.6(g). ii. When the ball carrier goes to ground and that player fails to make the ball available the sanction is a penalty kick to the opposition as per 17.2(d) (c) At a collapsed maul there is no obligation in Law for players to roll away unless a ruck subsequently occurs. (d) If this occurs Law 17 has not been applied because the ball has not been made available immediately and the referee should have stopped the game and awarded a scrum or a penalty sanction dependent on the actions of players before.
Jerry
Guest
You have to release if you're off your feet.
Jerry
Guest
I wouldn't be very confident at all - there were two hands under the ball, one directly under it and the other in front. But even accepting your assertion, that's the nature of the TMO - if you're gonna use it, you have to rely on what you can see. There's loads of potential tries referred to the TMO where there's a very very high likelihood the ball was grounded but you can't see it through a tangle of bodies. In this case, the video evidence clearly pointed to a decision of no try, but due to poor communication between the AR, Ref & TMO a wrong decision was made.
No, you need not roll away from a collapsed maul.
Jerry
Guest
So you're saying it was still clearly a maul when both Kaino and Farrell were lying prone on the ground? It was a maul, the ball carrier then went to ground. If this happens, a defender on his feet doesn't have to release the ball, but Farrell wasn't on his feet.
Lassitude
Guest
You mean until the subs were made ? Unimpressed with the whole right side after that - they might be big but they weren't very effective.
Lassitude
Guest
It was a maul that had gone to ground - he's still required to make an attempt to move away. Still IMO the ref should have blown immediately for unplayable and England get the put in.
ShaunSpangenberg
Guest
As a neutral that is utter rubbish. The ABs were outplayed in the first half completely and absolutely. Not the sort of performance the rugby world has come to expect of the ABs. But the end score ironically flattered the poms because of one shocker by the tmo and one soft soft try in the last minute. The first half was just poor to watch. The second half was interesting. It wasn't the spectacle it is being touted as, but to admit this is to admit that the ABs again could have lost to a rapidly improving but still not clinical England. And if you're England you want to believe you nearly beat an AB team at the peak of its game. Neither is true.
dwayne_board
Guest
England were 10-15 points better last week by that standard. Irrelevant.
JimmyB
Guest
I said that earlier today and got shouted down. Btw Steve, I understand Mars have a very good rugby team. I think I can speak for the English here when I say that, we would really really appreciate your support though Steve, because it really would make such a difference. We're so sad without you Steve, please Steve. Oh Steve, you silly sausage you!