England 2003 did it and they played NZ in NZ Aus in Aus (twice) and SA in Brisbane iirc.

As an England fan my opinion is this, Australia’s problems start with selection and as result their team has no balance and consequently no plan B. The Pooper selection has resulted in a weakened set pace and a lack of ball carriers in the pack. Fardy is left trying to pick up the work of 3 men and no one is helping him out so it is not really a surprise that he is a bit of penalty machine.The second row is a major problem as most of the WB locks would not make the squad of the other top 5/6 sides in world rugby and no pairing offers decent balance of loose and set piece which further exposes the back row.

The backs meanwhile have been starved of what they need a regular fast supply of go forward ball with which they can breech any defence in the world and mean that Australia can still win even if the pack is well beaten. That is not say the Aussie backs are blameless far from it. The lack of balance here means that while they possess very dangerous runners they have very little genuine pace and very few kicking options. This often means that the Australian pack are put under pressure and the Wallabies are throttled out of the game due to poor exit strategies and a poor lineout.

I confess to know very little of Australian domestic rugby but if they want to improve they need to pick a second rower who can call and jump well alongside a more physical partner select a a back row that includes a specialist 8. Pick 2 kicking options and play an out and out winger. This will fix the balance problems and then you will see a different team.

There is not much difference between the quality of players in the 2 squads but the biggest contrast I see between English and Australian rugby is that while England are greater than the sum of their parts Australia are less than the sum of their parts and for that the responsibility rests with the coach.

moaman

No one inside English rugby could see it. Eddie tells a story about watching Hartley at breakfast and deciding to make him captain.

The balance in the pack is fixable. Just select a back row that offers
Line out option
Ball carrying
Defense
Strong breakdown presence.

Just pick a proper 8 and get over the fixation on back row that does not offer all of those 3 especially when effectively playing 6-7-7.

Really Skelton was an awful selection and one that played straight into England’s hands he is slow and weak for his size plus he is weak in the line out, which had shown signs of more consistency and potency for your forwards. I am amazed at how many people seem to rate him he does not bring anything. He would struggle to get a game in the Saxon’s if he was English.

Who would you make captain and who would not survive the cull.

No it was a pragmatic choice. Hartley has always been a good leader and always been a smart player it made sense for him to be considered captain. Yes he has done despicable things but he has always want to become a better player and has a team that want to play for him and buy into his ethos with the added bonus of not being at the RWC.
Hartley was the best man for the job when Jones took over.

Disagree Foley is good fly half and has brought your backs into the game well if not always in the right areas but he has to work on his kicking game if he can sort it he will be a very good fly half.

There is plenty to like about the Aussie side. You have some very good players and produce another fine display of attacking back play. The big issue is in your forwards and the balance of your pack. Sort it out and stop expecting Fardy to pick up the slack of his back row colleagues and the second row is just asking way to much of any player. They also need to start trusting the defence instead of continually take a risk at the breakdown and listen to ref when he is telling you what to do carry on and they will ping you stop and you get a little more leeway
Get he balance of the pack right and you will win rugby matches.

So Skelton played and made….absolutely no difference…sorry he weaken the Aussie linout which for the first time actually was flaky this series.

No mate you are wrong. He is a big lad who will slow your game down, he does not carry well for his size and if your fitter forwards are struggling to live with the English why do you think Skelton will. You also forget that bloody big second rows trundling towards the line is bread and butter for the AP. He will have limited impact on the English pack and not suit the Aussie style of play and reduce the effectiveness of our set piece.
Please play him.

Got to say please pick Skeleton please. He is slow and for such a big man he is a bit powder puff not to mention weakening your lineout and possibly your scrum.

Roko I agree with you should have been one the tour he has everything pace power a step and is a lethal finisher. Robson I rate as our best scrum half plays for the Wasps who probably had the best back line the AP.
None of the rest would get into the current squad. Some of the forwards will come up a Borthwick’s persons of Interest list though.

Several of the advantages the Wallabies expected to have either were not there in the first place and only thought to be advantages because many have dismissed 6N’s performances because they were not against what was regarded as credible opposition. England had shown massive improvement thought out the 6N’s and the warning sides where clear to see that so many including the players did not see that can only be due to hubris.

England have several weakness but the Aussies appear not to have spotted them. We are not good under a contested high ball when defending. Playing deep fast ball though the hands creates space out wide as you saw in the first test. The Wallabies attacking patterns missed the ball has to move deep (which for some reason causes England’s defensive rush to narrow) in the second test by the way that is why you really lost the second test when you did try to move the ball out out wide it was very lateral allowing the rush defence not to over extend.

The Aussie coached has been schooled and that has reflected on the field but if he can get his game plan across to his team and select forwards that have a chance to match their opposing numbers then you have the backs to win the game but from what I have seen I am not sure you have the forwards.

The penalty kinda summed up the day for the Wallabies, the touch judge called attention to potential foul play which was checked, there was contact but when reviewed from several angles and the challenge was shoulder to shoulder and therefore legal. These replays unfortunately for the Aussies also showed that Foley is not running at the ball but to block Farrell which is a penalty offence and when seen on a review have to be punished.
The following 3 pts must have been horrible to take.

Not sure Wales and Scotland do England have the Saxons and the Irish have the Wolfhounds only the Saxons have toured this year though. Beat the SA a side 2-0. Some good young players to watch out for as well Hepburn Taylor and Robson will be there or there abouts for the AIs in the Autumn
Our U20’s are going great as well Mallinder and several others look to have some serious talent and are likely to step up to senior level as well. As an England fan I can honestly say the future is bright and 8 months or so ago Rugby was thought to be in crisis in England. How quickly things can change.

Robshaw is probably the most under rated player around at the moment. He has been immense for England (RWC aside) but is never given the credit his play deserves even now the chatter in England is drop Robshaw and play Itoje at flanker.

The wrap around would not have much impact for the Aussie backs. The wings are crowded enough with you small fast back row forwards already hanging around out there.

I know they were crazy decisions absolutely crazy. You always have to take the points when they are straight in front and you less than a converted try behind. It is what we would have least liked you to do so do it.
Australia though are a good side they either can’t play to the game plan or they don’t really understand the game plan but when they find a way they want to play or select a team with better balance they will win rugby matches. I suspect at the moment the team is not sure of the game plan so Cheika needs to either explain or come up with a different game plan.
Once that is sorted the Aussies will improve so I would not go overboard on the doom and gloom.

Fardy had a good game. England would love to see him drop out of the 23.

In essence I get your point, but to allow your 7 to moonlight at 11 when he should all hands to the pump in his main job is a risky business. More so when the opposition 668 firstly came to grips with and eventually were able to control the pace of the game.

No I think that EJ knows that his forwards have to win game for England and he wants as many as possible on the bench to keep squeezing the Aussie forwards. The Aussies on the other hand will not want the ball to stay still for very long because if it does the English will suffocate them and use the penalties to build points and field position. True clash of rugby styles this match coming up and all the more fascinating for it.

So England have now named their squad and it is as I called it. Jones has gone for 6/2 bench spilt suggesting he thinks the English pack will get on top and has not intention of releasing the pressure if it happens and also gives some protection against the bigger English forwards tiring themselves out. Think this is going to be a cracker.

I can’t see England making changes to the starting pack so this is going to be a real clash of styles. Australia will want a very fast paced game and hope to tire the big English forwards and move the ball at pace both from the ruck and though the hands to stretch England out wide. If they can also show better discipline and adapt better when England change the tempo both up and down they could really leave the England grasping at shadows. England’s defensive line speed leaves them vulnerable out wide and the Aussies plan is clearly to get the ball wide quickly even if it means some very deep passing to get there. The set piece does not appear to be much stronger despite the changes in the pack England will expect to prey on the Aussie line out (the English line out was not quite right last weekend and will aim to challenge in the air more this week) Despite losing I thought Australia played well last weekend did not look very rusty to me and will cause the English defence problems regardless of how much ball they get. They must improve thier disciplne or England will use the steady stream of penalties to control the tempo of the match

England will hope to dominate the breakdown and the set piece stave Australia of procession and hopefully bring our backs into the game more. I know that you think your backs are better than ours (and are quite possibly right) but our backs are better than they showed last weekend. England will have focused on their defence in training. They will have been annoyed about the number of tackles they missed and will work on communication about when to come and make the tackle and when to hold their position although I think the defensive plan is very vulnerable to fast deep passes and tends to drift infield creating too much space out wide for our wingers to cover.

Cheika is taking a massive gamble that his side can do it for 50/60 mintues rather than the 25/30 they did in Brisbane. If it works Australia will win by plenty if it does not work than expect England by around 10pts. My heart says England but my head reluctantly says Australia.

Agreed and he played the role he was asked to do very well. No problems with that. Not convinced he was asked to play the right role in the first place mind you.