RugbyRebels

Oakboy wrote:Where are the finishers?

They’ve been renamed fluffers.

F*** me!

Coka will be jealous that he's off the pitch by the first time the ball goes lef without a backrower trucking it up, but still...
F*** me

Anyone know who’s on for Coka?

Mellsblue wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Where are the finishers?

They’ve been renamed fluffers.

I take it back!

lipstick on a pig. we were poor second half

Fair to say no one from the other big nations will be worried by what they've seen

Where do you even begin with how broken we are

Why did Stuart do 80?

He didn’t Heyes got about 5mins

Scrumhead wrote:He didn’t Heyes got about 5mins

Sorry, didn't notice.

Banquo wrote:lipstick on a pig. we were poor second half

Yep.

That was bad. Arundell in particular scored a neat try and there were some decent individual efforts but the way we lost any kind of control in the 2nd half to 14 men was terrible.
Whats disappointing is that i dont think the Aussies were that good.

It was a cripple fest of a game. Both sides looked pretty awful. Start of the second half for me told. Terrible kick from Care, Itoje with a stupid pen and Aus take the lead.

Bright lights? We actually started in attack quite well and then just telegraphed everything thereafter. A few individuals from the starters. LCD and Mako were lively. Chessum too. JVP did well with what time he had and Arundell is just another level.

It was almost worth 79 minutes of shit for that alone.

question is where does arundell start?

positives- arundell, Billy mostly, good ruck ball for a while some decent carrying, Care's tempo mostly
negatives-set piece, defence, didnt score points when on top, balance in the backs

(mind, had faz kicked his points, we win )

Epaminondas Pules wrote:It was a cripple fest of a game. Both sides looked pretty awful. Start of the second half for me told. Terrible kick from Care, Itoje with a stupid pen and Aus take the lead.

Bright lights? We actually started in attack quite well and then just telegraphed everything thereafter. A few individuals from the starters. LCD and Mako were lively. Chessum too. JVP did well with what time he had and Arundell is just another level.

It was almost worth 79 minutes of shit for that alone.

That said Chessum should have been pinged for a double roll when he was tackled the phase before, but I don’t care cause the finish was superb! The step on O’Connor is crazy!

Banquo wrote:question is where does arundell start?

positives- arundell, Billy mostly, good ruck ball for a while some decent carrying, Care's tempo mostly
negatives-set piece, defence, didnt score points when on top, balance in the backs

(mind, had faz kicked his points, we win )

On the pitch!

Wing probably just cause of Steward. Still a big call to start him cause he’s raw as fuck.

Losing Curry hurt. Although Ludlum was very busy the breakdown got messier and messier.

Australia just took the piss out of our breakdown. They were allowed to get away with murder by the referee, but we still failed to get a grip. Lawes is still not an international quality flanker and it would've been very different with Willis or Underhill wearing 6 instead.

Thought Marchant was a bright light. Aggressive in defense, looked good with ball in hand on the rare occasions we passed down the line, showed great hands for the Arundell try.

Puja

Oh and how many scrum halves have now scored on England debut? It’s almost worth picking an uncapped scrum half for each game!

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Banquo wrote:question is where does arundell start?

positives- arundell, Billy mostly, good ruck ball for a while some decent carrying, Care's tempo mostly
negatives-set piece, defence, didnt score points when on top, balance in the backs

(mind, had faz kicked his points, we win )

On the pitch!

Wing probably just cause of Steward. Still a big call to start him cause he’s raw as fuck.

Losing Curry hurt. Although Ludlum was very busy the breakdown got messier and messier.

looked like we were putting less bodies in- possibly cos we ran out of options in the 1st half.

Steward was mixed, but so solid under kicks.

I thought there were a few other bright spots.

Stuart probably had his best performance for England by some distance. Yes, he was dominated in one scrum but that was also the one we decided to win with 7 players and no-one standing in at flanker.

I thought Nowell had his best game in a while. He was busy and pretty effective.

Ultimately, in a 3 game series, there’s still an opportunity to come out with a win. Playing against the odds probably added an extra 10% to the Aussies. They probably won’t have that again. I think we win next week and it goes down to the 3rd test.

Puja wrote:Australia just took the piss out of our breakdown. They were allowed to get away with murder by the referee, but we still failed to get a grip. Lawes is still not an international quality flanker and it would've been very different with Willis or Underhill wearing 6 instead.

Thought Marchant was a bright light. Aggressive in defense, looked good with ball in hand on the rare occasions we passed down the line, showed great hands for the Arundell try.

Puja

we stopped putting numbers in i thought

Scrumhead wrote:I thought there were a few other bright spots.

Stuart probably had his best performance for England by some distance. Yes, he was dominated in one scrum but that was also the one we decided to win with 7 players and no-one standing in at flanker.

I thought Nowell had his best game in a while. He was busy and pretty effective.

yeah will give you stuart; issue with nowells game/tasking and coka t an extent) is sometimes you have nothig useful out wide when needed.

Mellsblue wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Have we had many chances or did we just look good for 20 mins without actually creating any real clear cut chances?

Best chance was Curry's break, then passing wide to Marchant with 2 defenders, unaware of Smith inside unopposed

That might be about it and I’m not convinced Smith wasn’t well covered.

There was definitely some players back to challenge Smith. Whether he could have stepped a tackle or two at pace who knows, his footwork wasn't working for the rest of the game.

There was the 3 on 3 where Smith went himself and we ended up with a penalty from which we took 3. Had that pass gone there were two forwards outsides running at Aussie backs metres from the Aussie try line.

England were just not clinical enough, was it two or three occasions we were turned over a metre or two from the Aussie line?

Poor to lose in that manner. Some really thick stuff from both sides.

Banquo wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:I thought there were a few other bright spots.

Stuart probably had his best performance for England by some distance. Yes, he was dominated in one scrum but that was also the one we decided to win with 7 players and no-one standing in at flanker.

I thought Nowell had his best game in a while. He was busy and pretty effective.

yeah will give you stuart; issue with nowells game/tasking and coka t an extent) is sometimes you have nothig useful out wide when needed.

I think Marchant received ball as the last/widest man more than either winger. Certainly so when were on top in the opening stages and running through our phases.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:I thought there were a few other bright spots.

Stuart probably had his best performance for England by some distance. Yes, he was dominated in one scrum but that was also the one we decided to win with 7 players and no-one standing in at flanker.

I thought Nowell had his best game in a while. He was busy and pretty effective.

yeah will give you stuart; issue with nowells game/tasking and coka t an extent) is sometimes you have nothig useful out wide when needed.

I think Marchant received ball as the last/widest man more than either winger. Certainly so when were on top in the opening stages and running through our phases.

lot of trade offs to enable carrying