Are England really as good as some commentators have suggested? Are they worse? While the Six Nations has not definitively answered this question, England are still well below the All Blacks’ standards.
After struggling to impose themselves for much of the matches against both France and Wales, England eventually squeaked past with points at the very end of the matches.
Against Ireland, the English were completely uninspiring. After the opening few minutes, they never looked remotely capable of breaching the Irish try-line.
In all three games, England reverted back to the 2004-15 attitude of running the ball through the forwards, kicking away possession more than they should, and playing for penalties.
Aside from the fact that this style of rugby is truly a snore-fest, it is a poor gameplan against an extremely disciplined Irish side who possess fantastic defence. Despite being on such a long winning streak, and after having played so well in Australia and November, as well as against Scotland, England lack the confidence to pass the ball through the backs when the pressure is on.
Given this, all of the talk of England troubling the All Blacks is premature. Whether England can hold onto their No.2 status also remains to be seen.
Ireland were over-reliant on set piece
Like England, Ireland are still too predictable on attack, rarely threatening to score tries.
This has been the same story for most of the last two years – even most of Ireland’s tries against Australia and New Zealand in 2016 were off the back of the set piece. This is somewhat odd, considering they possess such skilful playmakers in Johnny Sexton and Paddy Jackson, as well as strong runners in the centres.
Regardless, this needs to be addressed. If Ireland wants to win consistently, rather than continue to suffer poor losses as in the 2015 World Cup, as well as the 2016 and 2017 Six Nations, then coach Joe Schmidt should adopt a more pragmatic game-plan.
Like Robbie Deans in 2012-13, Schmidt has a choice to make, between playing a conservative brand of rugby that produces a great performance every couple of matches, mixed in with a few average ones and a number of stinkers, and a proactive brand of rugby that will see Ireland consistently overwhelm their opponents.
Ireland and England will make up the majority of the Lions
That may come across as overly critical of England and Ireland, but they are very strong. Both boast excellent defences and powerful forward packs, as well as a number of talented backs
Scotland have been much improved, but showed against England how far many of their players – such as the Gray brothers – have to come before they should be considered over their English and Irish counterparts. Wales, meanwhile, despite a brave showing against England and strong performance against Ireland, seemed to continue their malaise (or is it long decline?) against a resurgent French side.
England and Ireland should make up the entire forward pack, with the possible exception of Sam Warburton at 7 and perhaps Alun Wyn Jones at lock.
The back-row is a fight between a number of good English and Irish options plus Warburton. It will be a hard decision for Warren Gatland to make.
It’s between Johnny Sexton and Owen Farrell at fly-half, with my nod going to Sexton. Conor Murray, if fit, should start at scrum-half and Ireland and England should share the centres between Jonathan Joseph and Robbie Henshaw.
The one place that Wales and Scotland will impose themselves is in the outside backs, with Stuart Hogg almost certain to start at fullback and George North and Liam Williams on the wings.
[latest_videos_strip category=“rugby” name=“Rugby”]
Lions possess no clear area of dominance over New Zealand
Some have claimed that it looks like the Lions, or even England, will have a superior forward pack to the All Blacks. This is mistaken, and unless significant injuries affect New Zealand, their starting XV will be stronger than the Lions.
Owen Franks, Dane Coles and Joe Moody appear better in the set piece and around the field than any of their competitions in the British and Irish Isles, as are Ardie Savea, Jerome Kaino and Kieran Read better than any of their competitors up north.
In the backs there is simply no contest.
The only area where the Lions possess a significant advantage is their better forwards depth off the bench, particularly in the front row.
I predict a 3-0 series win for the All Blacks over the Lions.
bess1939
Guest
I disagree, read that http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/08/why-british-singers-lose-their-accent-when-singing/
P2R2
Roar Rookie
so do you not think they may go the route and have Barrett off the bench?? and what about his younger brother - Jordie----big strapping lad who can KICK if needed
P2R2
Roar Rookie
....Sexton in current form is as good as Barrett. However Sexton gets ahead by a nose becoz he is a much better goal-kicker than Barrett.... NZ dont rely on kicks at goal - they always score more tries...isnt that the essence and philosphy of RUGBY....if I wanted to see kicks at goal I would watch SOCCER
Samuel Honywill
Roar Pro
Surely then you have to argue the same for Ireland, who ran in nine tries against Italy but only five in their other four games? England were top try scorers and averaged four tries a game over the tournament - suggests to me they're quite a bit more clinical ball in hand than then other 6N teams if anything.
piru
Roar Rookie
i was going to suggest you might want to start using cuck like the rest of your little MRA friends You're not in an echo chamber here, boy
Badger Bob
Guest
You make some fair points. I'm of the view that if a player wishes to represent another nation, once he chooses, he cannot change to another nation and the 3 year rule is fair. Not everyone was born in a country they feel attached to, and if they have the ability, they should not be 'forced' to only play for their nation of birth. I would rather not see their ability wasted. The person with the biggest bee in his bonnet about the residency rule seems to be Aguston Pichot, and I feel it is mainly based on the inability of Argentina to attract foreign players. In my view, Argentina need to 'play by the rules' and put these structures in place, so as to attract this talent and make itself stronger as a rugby nation. Don't really see what Pichot is so worried about anyway, Argentina are more than capable of holding their own as Worldcups have proven. The important thing is to grow the game, that is the bigger picture. Aki is a perfect example. In combination with Pat Lam, transformed a whole province, people who would have never watched rugby, into rugby enthusiasts by playing winning rugby. There is no one who deserves more than Aki (if he chooses) to play for Ireland, he has bled in a Connacht jersey for 3 years, that's enough for me. 5 years is too much, there probably aren't many international careers that last that long, and the best of the talent of that players career would likely be wasted.
Mark Williams
Guest
piru, cute name. Tried to man up for the two other cucks. What a white knight.
adastra32
Guest
As has been said, the hype is nearly all media-driven: and you are either heroes or zeros. This week it is the latter for us. England are not currently up to the AB standard. Eddie says it. Keeps saying it. He's right. The rest is puff and posturing, mixed with a large dollop of schadenfreude for many in the SH. As ever though, the wheel turns for everyone...
cuw
Guest
Lions will struggle becoz of the tour itinerary. they will need about 60 players to get thru all the matches. by the time they get used to the conditions and gel as a team and build cohesion, the tour will be ending and lost. ...
piru
Roar Rookie
You know who uses the term Alpha and Beta? Insecure little fellows whose mums wouldn't let them play rugby Off you go champ
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
'Sexton in current form is as good as Barrett', sorry, I think that's absolutely incorrect. The number of tires that Barrett sets up, and also scores himself, relative to Sexton means that I think it's virtually impossible to say Sexton is as good. Barrett might have a better team, but he is almost certainly the best back in the world, rivalled only by perhaps Ben Smith. I would say Sexton is better than Sopoaga because his head is screwed on better, but Cruden and Barrett are the two best in the world. I wouldn't play A Smith, I think TJP is a better scrumhalf than Smith or Murray. TKB might be better as well. Crotty, again, I would say is at least on par with Henshaw. Smith just got back, and I am sure either him or Dagg or Milner-Skudder will be fit in June. They're the 3 best fullbacks in the world (despite what the Folau pundits say). Again, I fail to see how one can think that the NH backs are better than the New Zealanders. As I said before, New Zealand almost won that first test despite their forwards getting annihilated by Ireland's. NZs backs scored a bunch of tires in open play. Ireland scored all their tries off the back of the set piece. I just don't see a comparison. That's my two cents anyway. I think that if the Lions don't dominate up front then they've got no hope, backs don't throw it around enough and don't take enough risks to match it with the Kiwis.
mzilikazi
Roar Pro
"Ireland and England will make up the majority of the Lions" Someone posted last week that if England won in Dublin, then the whole England team should be selected. I feel it is a very good thing that did not happen...not that I think for a moment the Lion's selectors have not made their minds already on many of the players to go, and one extra game would not change a lot. The Lions have been at their best through history with a good balance from the four nations. And there is no doubt that the coach has a big influence. Therefore I would expect there will be Welsh players in the Test team, plus a good number in the full squad. Don't watch enough NH rugby to be really certain, but is Warburton the only true 7 around, and the others playing 7 really 6's eg Sean O"Brien ? If the bulk of the test team is English and Irish, it will be interesting to see if they can change from being very risk averse, forward driving, penalty seeking to playing a more expansive game, and using their good backs..Joseph, North, Hogg etc. If they can't, then the AB's will roll them big time IMO. One other point...what sort of team will the Lions be able to field fpr the first test ?...read somewhere that club commitments may mean some players only available later.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Yeah, the only way I can see the Lions winning is through set piece dominance and goal-kicking. Well, set piece dominance is possible but I think it is more likely that they are about parity. And they will have to kick a lot of goals, and have a really fantastic defence to win kicking 3s given how many 5s and 7s the All Blacks score.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Point taken, Nabley. Anyone can beat anyone on their day (Japan vs Springboks!). That being said I don't think this English side yet has the quality to consistently beat or challenge the All Blacks unless England is have a very good day.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Cheers Mzilikazi. It's a depressing time to be an Australian rugby fan, isn't it? I do agree completely about the first Test, the Wallabies lost it completely after what should have been a virtually unassailable position. Folau's pass particularly was the turning point in that match, possibly cost us the series then and there - yet people seem to only talk about how well he played?? I thought they played much better in Tests 2 and 3 though. Yeah, it'll be interesting to see where England go from here, isn't it? They definitely could be number 2 by the RWC, but I can also see them falling down in the pecking order, especially if South Africa get a new coach by then.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
I don't think England have been talking themselves up overly—but many other people have (such as the boys on the GAGR podcast). Hopefully an awesome series, and let's hope it comes down to match 3 at Eden Park!
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Darwin Stubbie, mathematically, goal-kicking doesn't make as much difference (3 vs 5-7) if Barrett is 10% or even 20% a worse kicker than Cruden it probably leads to 3-6 points max per Test. If having Barrett at 10 leads to 1-2 extra tries per match then he has already proven his worth over Cruden. Also, I don't think he is pathetic a kicker as you suggest, and I think he is so much more prolific than Cruden at scoring and setting up tries that I would be shocked if Hansen doesn't select him at 10 unless his form collapses. How can you say of Barrett 'there is no way NZ could go into a test with him as their primary kicker' - New Zealand did it in all but two of their Tests last year and won all but one of those matches, and they didn't lose that match through lack of ability to kick goals?
cuw
Guest
Sexton in current form is as good as Barrett. However Sexton gets ahead by a nose becoz he is a much better goal-kicker than Barrett. Surely NZ would have seen how Sexton was targeted for special attention by England - and very cleverly , since the same guy did not go after him , the ref could not card someone for marginally late hits ( though i thought the last Wood hit was a shoulder charge). Is A Smith back in form after toilet-gate? if not Murray may be again ahead. I have been impressed by both TJP and Gus Pulu - very quick and physical. will be interesting to see if reputation will get Smith ahead of the other 3 guys. Robbie henshaw is good and also be ahead of his NZ counterpart - mainly becoz NZ are playing many at centers since the departure of Nonu -Smith. Again , Moala has shown some form while Fekitoa has been yo-yo. even the other guys like Crotty, Tamanivalu, ranger .... have not had great time. SBW is still out and some newbies like Laumape and aso have played well. so it will be interesting to see who plays in centers. Hogg has been the best 15 in 6N, but is no where near an inform Smith or Dagg. but Smith this year has not been at the high standards yet and i think Dagg is out. i would think little Barrett may be a dark horse, given his last show.
BBA
Guest
He certainly is impressive, but is he the standard or considered exceptional? Plus I think it is fair to say that England having good forwards is not exactly a game changer for them. For me it is their link play between backs and forwards, and there ability to play and win in more than one style against quality opposition that it will start to feel like there is a sustainable change. What is hard to tell is whether England's success at U20 level is due to them taking it more seriously selecting and training better or is it that players are better then what they were before but the RFU didn't put much resource into U20. I don't know. But am looking forward to the rivalry lifting between the 2 teams.
BBA
Guest
OB Agree with all your points, and certainly NZ are more dangerous in the dry, but we do get plenty of rain so we are not bad in the wet. However the wet it can come down to more of a lottery of a wet ball and which way it lands / skids. And even despite the history would feel more nervous in a torrential downpour then on a hard field.