Wallabies vs England: The jolly in West London

I knew you knew stuff Funbus BUT cork is so yesterday. It's all screw caps now so there. Even better. No flies and a pleasant wind chime effect with every sip. Gotcha..........waltzuuurping mabuurrrpppptilda aaaaaah

"There’s only so many times a man can hear a red-faced Englishman remind them of 2003, which is believed to be the year rugby was invented for roughly 80 per cent of English fans." ABSOLUTE GOLD

The skin is thin on this one.

Really enjoyed that,Andrew.You have set the scene nicely for what should be a great test.Don't take any notice of spoilsports like Funbus.

Geez Funbus you have me all nostalgic over a rugby game and summer hasn't even started yet.

Harry, Neds' efforts are commendable but as I it he is not a backrower. watching recent games he looks somewhat lost at rucks and mauls, often arriving late then looking undecided at what to do. instead of pilfering or cleaning out, his tendency is to "flop" onto the ruck/maul which often ends in a penalty against. A great example (never quoted) was v. the S. Africans when his penalty for not moving away denied a match winning try to Will Genia. I'm not so sure that test matches of this level are the places to learn a trade.

Hi Andrew. I well know that walk. Used to live in Orleans Road in Twickers. I'm afraid we're in for a licking on Saturday. Their front five is pretty damn good (they can even afford to bench Itoje). And their backrow is going to pain us. Robshaw is always good value for England, Underhill hits hard and Hughes is Mr. Go Foward. Not too many weaknesses in the backs either. Ford will pin us with kicks to the corner, and their back three is probably as fast as any AB back three at least until Smith comes back. We have to hope that England have another klutzy game as a team, and that the WBs will put it all together for 80 minutes. Go Wallabies. With Farrell around puleese cut down on the penalties.

NoFunBus

I'm sure no one is trying to claim the "better behaved yoobo fan" trophy here, but if they were it's a no contest. As hard as we Aussies try and to get drunk and disgrace ourselves we are rank amateurs. But at least Ingerland has shipped out the hardcore yobbos to the Barmy Army and to the bovver booted soccer mob, so Rugby should be safe, Right Funbus?.

Different name, same turgid prose and leaden, mean streaked sarcasm.

Keep your shirt on fun bus it's just a rugby game.

Exactly, Harry. If only Cheika would read this and, at least, put Mcal in the starting team and bench Ned. Ned has a chance in the power stakes when he comes on as a sub, given the starting opposition, in theory, should be a little more spent. Probably just makes for parity. Ned's l/o work has been good, though.

Arguably the Author is stereotyping English Rugby fans not Englishmen. If you wanted to the same thing back to Australian Rugby fans you actually wouldn't change much of what the Author wrote. I.E. Bruce and Shiela wouldn't be caught dead at the Rugby. They would be watching League or Australian Football. Rupert and Poppy would definitely be making an appearance at the Rugby.

'Close to 82,000 people will fill the iconic West London stadium, with many of those in attendance christened with such intimidating names as Henry, Tarquin, Poppy and Rupert. Retina-burning red trousers will be worn in abundance, and the hordes will arouse once every five minutes to drunkenly belt out the song which shall not be named...' It reminds me of my day at the Allianz stadium. Walking passed the lines of kangaroo meat stalls, listening to 'tie me Kangaroo Down Sport' by Rolf Harris. Getting to the stadium and being faced with drunken hordes of foul-mouthed, spittle-flecked rednecks called 'Bruce' and 'Sheila' all decked out in cork hats, hurling abuse at poms and any indigenous bloke they happened to see while belching Waltzing Matilda into everyone's faces. Of course, that could be a pathetic national stereotype I exaggerated for effect - who knows?

England were turgid last week but I think a lot of credit goes to Argentina for that - they came with a simple, back-to-basics gameplan, picked a massive pack (Kremer at 7!) and turned the game into a stop-start slugfest. Australia could learn something from that but Cheika would rather take a cheese grater to his naughty bits than do something similar, and to be fair it wouldn't be playing to his team's strengths. For all their size and power it was quite telling that Argentina didn't manage to dominate the gainline though, and especially in defence England didn't look like conceding for the vast majority of the game. Given Aus are coming with a big beefy centre pairing that doesn't necessarily bode well, and I reckon Koroibete and Beale could be in for an Ireland-esque high ball assault, especially with Watson and May being good in the air. If Aus can recapture the energy they showed against NZ and England haven't improved on last week though then it'll be a fairly comfortable victory for the Wallabies. England team was announced earlier: Vunipola, Hartley, Cole Lawes, Launchbury Robshaw, Underhill, Hughes Youngs, Ford, Daly, Farrell, Joseph, May, Watson. Replacements: George, Marler, Williams, Itoje, Simmonds, Care, Slade, Rokoduguni. Watson at full back is interesting - plays there for Bath but has never started there for England so I'm sure there'll be nerves, something Aus could exploit. Offers a much different counter-attacking threat to Brown though, and with May and Daly on the wings too any loose kicks could be punished badly, either through pacey counter-attacks or Daly's monster boot pinning Aus back in their own 22. Prefer the starting front row for Aus - we're obviously in the Twilight Zone. That England bench is pretty serious - has a bit of everything: pace, finishing, creativity, thunderbeast carrying. Could well swing the game in England's favour.

Rob Simmons plus Ned Hannigan both lack impact in contact and will again need to be carried by the others to compensate. I simply dont get Cheika and his policy of picking “the thirteen best men” (plus two Waratahs). Regardless should be a cracking game.

If Hanigan runs at underhill he's gonna get levelled. He's also doesn't have the footwork he'll just run straight and get poleaxed

Ned had his best game, and yes, I still agree with you that he flails around in contact, far too upright, and seems to lack "farm" strength or core power or something. I think he could get really hurt by the Poms, or at the very least, suffer an extreme mental scarring, if it has not already occurred to him. Don't fault his effort; he just needed 2 years of hardening in the SR trenches before he starting running into these monsters.