NZ v England

[Browner]

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/27707207

Looking at the absences and inclusions, and bench 'strength' , surely a moral victory if England dont lose by 50 pts?

 

[Toby Warren]

NZ by 30+.

Full strength England NZ by 10-15

 

[Dickie E]

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/27707207

Looking at the absences and inclusions, and bench 'strength' , surely a moral victory if England dont lose by 50 pts?

Sounds like Adolph in 1945: "Eva baby, if only we'd been at full strength we'd have won this @#$%^& war. Maybe I could call it a moral victory"




NB: '@#$%^&' is German for 'flipping'

 

[Ian_Cook]

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/27707207

Looking at the absences and inclusions, and bench 'strength' , surely a moral victory if England dont lose by 50 pts?

Its always good to get the excuses in early

Despite the media in both countries writing this team off, we are not making the mistake of underestimating this England team. They will be well-motivated, with something to prove, and nothing lose, a dangerous combination.

Last night on "Sky Rugby Engage", Steve Lancaster was on a panel discussion as a guest along with Mick Cleary and Stuart Barnes. Interestingly, he talked about England not making the mistake of kicking the ball away, and I agree with him on that. If they kick, and kick poorly, they will likely get slaughtered.

I expect it to be quite close for the first 50 minutes, with NZ pulling away in the last half hour. However, its a test match, and anything can happen. I recall very well back in 1986, after the bulk of the All Blacks were serving a suspension for being involved in the rebel "NZ Cavaliers" tour of South Africa, New Zealand played a test match against a full strength France (the Five Nations Champions at that time) with a team that was missing 24 of its top 26 players. Most of what they had were either players on debut or ones with just a few test caps. Most of them would have been rank unknowns at the time, and the team, which became known as the "Baby Blacks" was written off by French media.

Among that team were players most casual followers of test rugby at the time would hardly have heard of; Sean Fitzpatrick, Andy Earl, Mike Brewer, John Kirwan, David Kirk, Frano Botica, Terry Wright & Joe Stanley. They won 18-9 in a match that kick started a lot of All Black careers, and formed the core of a team that won the Rugby World Cup the following year and then went on an unbeaten run of 50 matches including 23 tests.

Like I said earlier; it a test match, anything can happen!

 

[winchesterref]

Last night on "Sky Rugby Engage", Steve Lancaster was on a panel discussion as a guest along with Mick Cleary and Stuart Barnes. Interestingly, he talked about England not making the mistake of kicking the ball away, and I agree with him on that. If they kick, and kick poorly, they will likely get slaughtered.

First Brodie Retallick, now Ian Cook!

..... Stuart Lancaster!

 

[talbazar]

New Zealand played a test match against a full strength France (the Five Nations Champions at that time) with a team that was missing 24 of its top 26 players. Most of what they had were either players on debut or ones with just a few test caps. Most of them would have been rank unknowns at the time, and the team, which became known as the "Baby Blacks" was written off by French media.

Among that team were players most casual followers of test rugby at the time would hardly have heard of; Sean Fitzpatrick, Andy Earl, Mike Brewer, John Kirwan, David Kirk, Frano Botica, Terry Wright & Joe Stanley. They won 18-9 in a match that kick started a lot of All Black careers, and formed the core of a team that won the Rugby World Cup the following year and then went on an unbeaten run of 50 matches including 23 tests.

Like I said earlier; it a test match, anything can happen!

I agree with you... Even if I prefer the examples of 1999 or 2007 on the NZ-FR games :biggrin: :france:

 

[Simon Thomas]

Last night on "Sky Rugby Engage", Steve Lancaster was on a panel discussion as a guest along with Mick Cleary and Stuart Barnes. Interestingly, he talked about England not making the mistake of kicking the ball away, and I agree with him on that. If they kick, and kick poorly, they will likely get slaughtered.!

Who is Steve Lancaster ?

Cleary and Barnes are hardly the most respected of the UK TV and Press. BT Sport and ITV have far better match analysts and commentators. :biggrin:

 

[Ian_Cook]

Who is Steve Lancaster ?

Cleary and Barnes are hardly the most respected of the UK TV and Press. BT Sport and ITV have far better match analysts and commentators. :biggrin:

Steve Lancaster is a former Professional Player, Coach and Referee Manager at New Zealand Rugby Union and was most recently Professional Development Manager at Crusaders Rugby Franchise, before taking up a role as High Performance manager at Rugby Canada.
epper:


Having said that, I really did mean England coach, Stuart Lancaster :biggrin:

PS: If you want to see why we NEVER underestimate an England Rugby team, look no further than this

1973 England Rugby Team short tour of New Zealand

v Taranaki	3	6	1 September 1973	Rugby Park, New Plymouth	LOST
v Wellington	16	25	5 September 1973	Athletic Park, Wellington	LOST
v Canterbury	12	19	8 September 1973	Lancaster Park, Christchurch	LOST
v New Zealand	16	10	15 September 1973	Eden Park, Auckland	WON

 

[Dixie]

And has England won at Eden park since 1973? If so ... not often!

 

[Browner]

Sounds like Adolph in 1945: "Eva baby, if only we'd been at full strength we'd have won this @#$%^& war. Maybe I could call it a moral victory"




NB: '@#$%^&' is German for 'flipping'

Add Dickie E to that list ...... Adolph?!

 

[Toby Warren]

Can you imagine the screams of 'how arrogant' if an England player failed to name a member of the opposition team?

 

[Ian_Cook]

And has England won at Eden park since 1973? If so ... not often!

No team has beaten the All Blacks at Eden Park since they lost to the French in 1994, and it took "the try from the end of the world" for it to happen.....

Can you imagine the screams of 'how arrogant' if an England player failed to name a member of the opposition team?

No, I can't actually, and why would we expect them to know?

I would no more expect English players to closely follow NZ rugby than I would expect NZ players to follow the Aviva Premiership. Fans and pundits know; fans simply because they are fans, pundits because its their job.

Players have a different job, and it doesn't involve answering noddy quiz questions from sports-jocks.

 

[Toby Warren]

No, I can't actually, and why would we expect them to know?

I would no more expect English players to closely follow NZ rugby than I would expect NZ players to follow the Aviva Premiership. Fans and pundits know; fans simply because they are fans, pundits because its their job.

Players have a different job, and it doesn't involve answering noddy quiz questions from sports-jocks.

:clap: That is classic.

So the AB's don't use video analysis of their opposition, or if they do they don't share it with their players (especially the line out experts).

That's given me a top chuckle

 

[RobLev]

Can you imagine the screams of 'how arrogant' if an England player failed to name a member of the opposition team?

No, I can't actually, and why would we expect them to know?

I would no more expect English players to closely follow NZ rugby than I would expect NZ players to follow the Aviva Premiership.

You'd not expect an England player to be able to name, say, Richie McCaw? "Closely follow NZ rugby" (or "follow the Aviva Premiership") isn't the issue; it's who they're playing tomorrow that matters.

Fans and pundits know; fans simply because they are fans, pundits because its their job.

And what's a player's job? To go out on the park knowing nothing about his opposition and simply play what's in front of him? Maybe a century ago, but not nowadays.

Players have a different job, and it doesn't involve answering noddy quiz questions from sports-jocks.

But it does involve knowing their opposition. Surely. Like (for example) not assuming the 10 channel is an easy option because the fly-half is only 177cm tall; or that giving away penalties in midfield is safe; because no-one needs to know anything about Jonny Wilkinson?



EDIT: Please fix your quotes so that your post makes sense Done - HTML brainmelt

 

[Ian_Cook]

:clap: That is classic.

So the AB's don't use video analysis of their opposition, or if they do they don't share it with their players (especially the line out experts).

That's given me a top chuckle

Of course they do, but they won't necessarily know the names of some of their opposition, particularly as, in this case, many of them are players they probably haven't seen before

For example

The players in red I know of and would recognise on sight
The players in green I know of or have heard the name but probably would not recognise if I met them in the street
The players in blue, I have never heard of. Without their jersey numbers, I couldn't even tell you whether they were forwards or backs.

England:
15-Mike Brown,
14-Marland Yarde
13-Manu Tuilagi,
12-Kyle Eastmond,
11-Jonny May,
10-Freddie Burns,
9-Danny Care;
8-Ben Morgan,
7-Chris Robshaw (captain),
6-James Haskell,
5-Geoff Parling,
4-Joe Launchbury,
3-David Wilson,
2-Rob Webber,
1-Joe Marler
Replacments:
16-Joe Gray,
17-Matt Mullan,
18-Henry Thomas,
19-Dave Attwood,
20-Tom Johnson,
21-Ben Youngs,
22-Danny Cipriani,
23-Chris Pennell

 

[RobLev]

Of course they do, but they won't necessarily know the names of some of their opposition, particularly as, in this case, many of them are players they probably haven't seen before

...

I think that the point here is that he didn't know the names of any of the opposition he will be playing tomorrow. He could only come up with the mangled name of the player to whom he will be in direct opposition next week.

 

[Browner]

Perhaps he thinks you can know too much about your opponent ....!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IZqojAuWxE0

 

[Ian_Cook]

The bitching from the British media was because Brodie Retallick got Courtnay Lawes' name wrong. Well so fvcking what?

England have been gifted their team talk for Saturday's first Test against New Zealand after blundering All Black Brodie Retallick failed to correctly name a member of Stuart Lancaster's squad.Asked if he knew any of the tourists ahead of the series opener at Eden Park, Retallick responded 'a couple'. When pressed for a name, the second row said 'Michael Lawes'.

Retallick appeared to be referring to Courtney Lawes, who is en route to New Zealand having helped Northampton win the Aviva Premiership final last weekend and consequently is unavailable for the first Test.

Personally, I think it was a piss-take, and the Daily Flail fell for it. Must have been a bloody slow news day if that is all they have to write about.

Retallick is well known as a comedian and joker with a warped sense of humour in this current All Black squad, behind Ma'a Nonu and Cory Jane. You wouldn't realise it in your part of the world, but "Michael Lawes" is a very well known personality in NZ; former MP, former Mayor of Wanganui and currently a district councillor, journalist. He was a Radio Live morning talk-back host and is a long-standing Sunday Star-Times columnist.

Everyone in NZ knows who Michael Lawes is, and Retallick would be no exception.

 

[Browner]

But Ian isn't a "pro elite" player, so his personal recollections aren't wholly relevant.

Both launchbury and Parling were 2nd row opponents (albeit at 5) in the last meeting, so I'd suggest it was a deliberate superiority/dismissive jibe attempt ( that hopefully will help fuel the chariot) rather than Bloodie Turdlicker actually forgetting Robshaw or Tuilagi ....

Good banter by him I say

X ........ : )
swing low

 

[Toby Warren]

The bitching from the British media was because Brodie Retallick got Courtnay Lawes' name wrong. Well so fvcking what?

England have been gifted their team talk for Saturday's first Test against New Zealand after blundering All Black Brodie Retallick failed to correctly name a member of Stuart Lancaster's squad.Asked if he knew any of the tourists ahead of the series opener at Eden Park, Retallick responded 'a couple'. When pressed for a name, the second row said 'Michael Lawes'.

Retallick appeared to be referring to Courtney Lawes, who is en route to New Zealand having helped Northampton win the Aviva Premiership final last weekend and consequently is unavailable for the first Test.

Personally, I think it was a piss-take, and the Daily Flail fell for it. Must have been a bloody slow news day if that is all they have to write about.

Retallick is well known as a comedian and joker with a warped sense of humour in this current All Black squad, behind Ma'a Nonu and Cory Jane. You wouldn't realise it in your part of the world, but "Michael Lawes" is a very well known personality in NZ; former MP, former Mayor of Wanganui and currently a district councillor, journalist. He was a Radio Live morning talk-back host and is a long-standing Sunday Star-Times columnist.

Everyone in NZ knows who Michael Lawes is, and Retallick would be no exception.

Which was it Ian? A pisstake as per this post. Or that he was being serious and doesn't need to know the oppo as per your first reply?

Personally I think it was a piss take and thought it was quite funny. There is no modern day international player who won't know their oppo for a major test.

What I was highlighting was the different standards different nations get held to due to stereotypes.