Looking towards Samoa and QFs

[Banquo]

If Botia walks out of the tunnel I pass a small bit of wee

I stopped myself responding to the above post about Muntz because I got hit with a real sense of deja vu, but weren’t Fiji without both Botia and Tuisova when we played them before? Or they were just returning from injury perhaps.

I’d have thought that more than makes up for it, especially as they seem to have found another half decent goal kicker.

We were without a few players as well - probably 5 of the starting XV from that game will be unlikely to make a quarter final lineup, some of them not even making the bench. More pertinently, we were probably playing with an air of complacency about it "only being Fiji", no matter how much lip service was paid in the pre-game press. Fiji might not have the same fear now that they've beaten us, but I doubt we'll have the same complacency. It's a game that we should, as fans, be expecting to win.

Puja

It'll be tough- they turned over oz and should have beaten a much improved wales. Behind the sofa time if we don't start well.

[16th man]

I stopped myself responding to the above post about Muntz because I got hit with a real sense of deja vu, but weren’t Fiji without both Botia and Tuisova when we played them before? Or they were just returning from injury perhaps.

I’d have thought that more than makes up for it, especially as they seem to have found another half decent goal kicker.

We were without a few players as well - probably 5 of the starting XV from that game will be unlikely to make a quarter final lineup, some of them not even making the bench. More pertinently, we were probably playing with an air of complacency about it "only being Fiji", no matter how much lip service was paid in the pre-game press. Fiji might not have the same fear now that they've beaten us, but I doubt we'll have the same complacency. It's a game that we should, as fans, be expecting to win.

Puja

It'll be tough- they turned over oz and should have beaten a much improved wales. Behind the sofa time if we don't start well.

They definitely looked a bit jaded against Georgia though. Playing at the speed and intensity they do, and have had to do so far, may well be taking it out of them. There's no way they don't get at least a losing BP, so we're definitely going to be playing them. How much they have left in the tank could be interesting to see.

[Mellsblue]

I wonder how much their performance was affected by this:

https://www.fijivillage.com/news/Tuisov ... Ba-x8r45f/

[Scrumhead]

I stopped myself responding to the above post about Muntz because I got hit with a real sense of deja vu, but weren’t Fiji without both Botia and Tuisova when we played them before? Or they were just returning from injury perhaps.

I’d have thought that more than makes up for it, especially as they seem to have found another half decent goal kicker.

We were without a few players as well - probably 5 of the starting XV from that game will be unlikely to make a quarter final lineup, some of them not even making the bench. More pertinently, we were probably playing with an air of complacency about it "only being Fiji", no matter how much lip service was paid in the pre-game press. Fiji might not have the same fear now that they've beaten us, but I doubt we'll have the same complacency. It's a game that we should, as fans, be expecting to win.

Puja

It'll be tough- they turned over oz and should have beaten a much improved wales. Behind the sofa time if we don't start well.

I don’t doubt it will be tough.

I just wouldn’t put too much emphasis on our last meeting. It’s fair to say we were at a very low ebb and while I’d be very reluctant to say we’ve turned a corner, I do think we’re in a very different place from a confidence/mentality POV.

A good performance and solid win vs. Samoa would see us going in to the game with the momentum we’ll probably need to see us through. That’s not a formality though. As poor as Samoa have been, they’ll still want to make a statement so we can’t take a win for granted.

[Oakboy]

We'd all have taken this position if we were offered it before the warm-ups - a QF v Fiji. It gives us a SF spot if we play up to or close to our best. That is not arrogance, just a factual statement.

Then, though, the doubts and dislikes hover. Somebody suggested to me recently that if Farrell is at 12 and Vunipola at 8 he won't watch and hopes we lose. I certainly would not go that far but I have some sympathy with the view. On the one hand a win is a win and that is all that matters. On the other hand, please at least edge towards giving us something worth watching.

I now just hope that SB knows his best XV and plays it, starting with this last group game. He needs to be ruthless in selection and justify it with results.

[Mellsblue]

It gives us a SF spot if we play up to or close to our best. That is not arrogance, just a factual statement.

Not sure about this. I’d argue Fiji are the better team player vs player - certainly 11 through 15 and the backrow - and a core play club rugby together.

[Mikey Brown]

But we’re English…

[Puja]

It gives us a SF spot if we play up to or close to our best. That is not arrogance, just a factual statement.

Not sure about this. I’d argue Fiji are the better team player vs player - certainly 11 through 15 and the backrow, imo - and a core play club rugby together.

I don't know that I agree with the player vs player argument - the more exciting players, sure, and certainly the players I'd want to have in a position where a 14 point deficit needed making up, but they have significant limitations elsewhere (for some - obviously Radradra, Tuisova, Botia are clearly superior). As for their cohesion, they have shown some rank average play amidst the brilliance - awful passes, both in decision and execution, losing the ball in contact, a non-existent lineout at times, sudden spates of clog-hands.

That's not saying that this is a formality or anything, just that I would expect this England to be winning that quarter final and regard it as a massive failure if they didn't.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

It gives us a SF spot if we play up to or close to our best. That is not arrogance, just a factual statement.

Not sure about this. I’d argue Fiji are the better team player vs player - certainly 11 through 15 and the backrow, imo - and a core play club rugby together.

I don't know that I agree with the player vs player argument - the more exciting players, sure, and certainly the players I'd want to have in a position where a 14 point deficit needed making up, but they have significant limitations elsewhere (for some - obviously Radradra, Tuisova, Botia are clearly superior). As for their cohesion, they have shown some rank average play amidst the brilliance - awful passes, both in decision and execution, losing the ball in contact, a non-existent lineout at times, sudden spates of clog-hands.

That's not saying that this is a formality or anything, just that I would expect this England to be winning that quarter final and regard it as a massive failure if they didn't.

Puja

Getting confused. You started off talking about Fiji but then switched to England: ‘rank average play’, ‘awful passes’, ‘sudden spates of clog-hands’ etc. I obvs jest but you get my point.

[Puja]

Not sure about this. I’d argue Fiji are the better team player vs player - certainly 11 through 15 and the backrow, imo - and a core play club rugby together.

I don't know that I agree with the player vs player argument - the more exciting players, sure, and certainly the players I'd want to have in a position where a 14 point deficit needed making up, but they have significant limitations elsewhere (for some - obviously Radradra, Tuisova, Botia are clearly superior). As for their cohesion, they have shown some rank average play amidst the brilliance - awful passes, both in decision and execution, losing the ball in contact, a non-existent lineout at times, sudden spates of clog-hands.

That's not saying that this is a formality or anything, just that I would expect this England to be winning that quarter final and regard it as a massive failure if they didn't.

Puja

Getting confused. You started off talking about Fiji but then switched to England: ‘rank average play’, ‘awful passes’, ‘sudden spates of clog-hands’ etc. I obvs jest but you get my point.

I did think as I was typing that I was leaving myself wide open to the obvious quip! I would say the difference is that we haven't structured our approach around our attacking play. Fucking up an overlap with a stupid skip pass doesn't make as much of a difference for us as we've got the tight five and fly-half to allow us to play a limited, set-piece-focussed game. Whereas Fiji's strengths are in their 11-15, as you mentioned, so when they don't fire, you get things like the Georgia game, or the middle 50 minutes of the Wales game.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

I don't know that I agree with the player vs player argument - the more exciting players, sure, and certainly the players I'd want to have in a position where a 14 point deficit needed making up, but they have significant limitations elsewhere (for some - obviously Radradra, Tuisova, Botia are clearly superior). As for their cohesion, they have shown some rank average play amidst the brilliance - awful passes, both in decision and execution, losing the ball in contact, a non-existent lineout at times, sudden spates of clog-hands.

That's not saying that this is a formality or anything, just that I would expect this England to be winning that quarter final and regard it as a massive failure if they didn't.

Puja

Getting confused. You started off talking about Fiji but then switched to England: ‘rank average play’, ‘awful passes’, ‘sudden spates of clog-hands’ etc. I obvs jest but you get my point.

I did think as I was typing that I was leaving myself wide open to the obvious quip! I would say the difference is that we haven't structured our approach around our attacking play. Fucking up an overlap with a stupid skip pass doesn't make as much of a difference for us as we've got the tight five and fly-half to allow us to play a limited, set-piece-focussed game. Whereas Fiji's strengths are in their 11-15, as you mentioned, so when they don't fire, you get things like the Georgia game, or the middle 50 minutes of the Wales game.

Puja

So it’s ‘fact’ that if we ‘play up to or close to our best’ (and so do Fiji) that we win?

[Puja]

Getting confused. You started off talking about Fiji but then switched to England: ‘rank average play’, ‘awful passes’, ‘sudden spates of clog-hands’ etc. I obvs jest but you get my point.

I did think as I was typing that I was leaving myself wide open to the obvious quip! I would say the difference is that we haven't structured our approach around our attacking play. Fucking up an overlap with a stupid skip pass doesn't make as much of a difference for us as we've got the tight five and fly-half to allow us to play a limited, set-piece-focussed game. Whereas Fiji's strengths are in their 11-15, as you mentioned, so when they don't fire, you get things like the Georgia game, or the middle 50 minutes of the Wales game.

Puja

So it’s ‘fact’ that if we ‘play up to or close to our best’ (and so do Fiji) that we win?

I'm not taking accountability for Oakboy's turns of phrase. My personal position is that forwards win matches and I will be disappointed if we do not win. I'd regard this England vs this Fiji as a 7 or 8 wins out of every 10 games situation - we're more than capable of losing it, or of them producing a top performance and beating us, but I'm confident that we have enough in the bag to get the victory.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

I did think as I was typing that I was leaving myself wide open to the obvious quip! I would say the difference is that we haven't structured our approach around our attacking play. Fucking up an overlap with a stupid skip pass doesn't make as much of a difference for us as we've got the tight five and fly-half to allow us to play a limited, set-piece-focussed game. Whereas Fiji's strengths are in their 11-15, as you mentioned, so when they don't fire, you get things like the Georgia game, or the middle 50 minutes of the Wales game.

Puja

So it’s ‘fact’ that if we ‘play up to or close to our best’ (and so do Fiji) that we win?

I'm not taking accountability for Oakboy's turns of phrase. My personal position is that forwards win matches and I will be disappointed if we do not win. I'd regard this England vs this Fiji as a 7 or 8 wins out of every 10 games situation - we're more than capable of losing it, or of them producing a top performance and beating us, but I'm confident that we have enough in the bag to get the victory.

Puja

I’d agree with you - thought you were backing Dors’ original position. Part of me does want Fiji’s style of play to beat our ‘style’ of play, though.

[fivepointer]

I'm not sure i know what our best is.

If we can produce will it be enough to beat Fiji? Probably, though it would be nice next time out to go up a gear or two ahead of that game.

[Oakboy]

Getting confused. You started off talking about Fiji but then switched to England: ‘rank average play’, ‘awful passes’, ‘sudden spates of clog-hands’ etc. I obvs jest but you get my point.

I did think as I was typing that I was leaving myself wide open to the obvious quip! I would say the difference is that we haven't structured our approach around our attacking play. Fucking up an overlap with a stupid skip pass doesn't make as much of a difference for us as we've got the tight five and fly-half to allow us to play a limited, set-piece-focussed game. Whereas Fiji's strengths are in their 11-15, as you mentioned, so when they don't fire, you get things like the Georgia game, or the middle 50 minutes of the Wales game.

Puja

So it’s ‘fact’ that if we ‘play up to or close to our best’ (and so do Fiji) that we win?

I think we can reasonably take the warm-up match when Fiji beat us as a starting point (ahead of world rankings and other stats). IMO, on the day, Fiji were fairly close to their best whereas we were a considerable margin below ours. Allowing for good selection and preparation by both sides, a competitive meeting such as looks like happening in the QF allows them a 'puncher's' chance of beating us. We ought to be able to successfully stifle that 8 times out of 10 if our coaching crew does its job.

As you imply in a later post it probably won't be pretty.

[p/d]

What is our best? It doesn’t exist.

We are at the stage of concentrating on nullifying the opposition not on how we can score tries.

We will want to dominate the set piece, win the aerial battle and keep improving on our defence.

I believe this is is still moving in the right direction. The downside of course will be those few decisions they make on selection that will piss a few of us off.

[Mikey Brown]

Yep. Often when a team loses it’s “they played to their max and we didn’t”. It seems especially true with England fans which is probably why everyone hates us so much.

We should improve, but there’s no reason Fiji mightn’t turn up a considerably better side too. Their poor performance against Georgia is seemingly viewed as dropping back down to ‘their level’ whereas when we do it it’s grinding out a win while playing badly.

[Mellsblue]

Willis ruled out of the rest of the tournament due to injury.

[Banquo]

Willis ruled out of the rest of the tournament due to injury.

No luck that boy

[Oakboy]

Willis ruled out of the rest of the tournament due to injury.

No luck that boy

Conjecture now over who replaces him. Surely, it must be his brother.

[Mellsblue]

Willis ruled out of the rest of the tournament due to injury.

No luck that boy

Conjecture now over who replaces him. Surely, it must be his brother.

Let’s hope it’s Pearson. No point bringing in another no8.

[Beasties]

Willis ruled out of the rest of the tournament due to injury.

Oh FFS. Poor lad.

[Mikey Brown]

No luck that boy

Conjecture now over who replaces him. Surely, it must be his brother.

Let’s hope it’s Pearson. No point bringing in another no8.

Why? We barely seem to have one?

[Mellsblue]

Conjecture now over who replaces him. Surely, it must be his brother.

Let’s hope it’s Pearson. No point bringing in another no8.

Why? We barely seem to have one?

Earl is clearly first choice - in another example of Slightly Bleedingnose’s original squad not being where he ended up - and has played well, probs my Eng player of the tournament, so far. Billy is obvs nailed on to be in the 23 whilst both Ludlam & Curry can play there.

[Mikey Brown]

Let’s hope it’s Pearson. No point bringing in another no8.

Why? We barely seem to have one?

Earl is clearly first choice - in another example of Slightly Bleedingnose’s original squad not being where he ended up - and has played well, probs my Eng player of the tournament, so far. Billy is obvs nailed on to be in the 23 whilst both Ludlam & Curry can play there.

An 8 on the bench makes more sense when we have an openside starting there. Ludlam has actually looked quite good there but not quite sure if Borthwick fancies him? Vunipola has been shite for ages. I'm not really sure how else to put it.

Pearson getting ahead of Curry, Ludlam and Earl to start at 7 just seems less likely or useful to me, plus it would stop Oakboy from stating every half an hour that he'd have picked T Willis. He even plays for Saracens now.