RWC: England v New Zealand (SF1)



  • Cane starts, B Smith instead of Bridge, probably enough there.

    That said, I thought the biggest issue wasn't the cattle so much as our inability to protect our ball in tackles. The English used a swarm defence to nullify our offloading game, and then outnumbered us in the resulting tackles for turnovers. Can't do much about the swarm preventing offloads, but we didn't have to also lose the ball, and should have adapted by committing more numbers to our own rucks.



  • Having watched the final gives me more perspective, there is not much between ABs , Boks and England, if any team is slightly off their game they will get beat and sometimes it will not be pretty. Barrett over Cane was probably a mistake but watching the final I can understand what Hansen was thinking of even though it did not work. The two brutes in the back row at were very effective or the Boks. BFA was never an option once Bridge played that Bledisloe and backed it up, it wasn’t realistic to drop him but I was puzzled that BFA wasn’t on the bench.

    However all that said honestly think the high intensity wins against Wallabies, Boks and Ireland just left us drained and we were flat for the England game. Likewise the AB game drained England and the Boks built just right, obviously with a little bit of good fortune too which you need to win a World Cup.



  • Headline inaccurate as always given it should include Farrells name.



  • @DMX said in RWC: England v New Zealand (SF1):

    Barrett over Cane was probably a mistake but watching the final I can understand what Hansen was thinking of even though it did not work. The two brutes in the back row at were very effective or the Boks. BFA was never an option once Bridge played that Bledisloe and backed it up, it wasn’t realistic to drop him but I was puzzled that BFA wasn’t on the bench.

    Yeah - there was some logic to the Barrett selection. I guess the plan/hope was that we'd do the England lineout what the Jaapies managed to do to their scrum. Unfortunately, it didn't come close to working.

    The Jordie over BFA thing - I can mainly think it was in case Richie or Beaudy got injured early, he would be a better fit to carry on with the two playmakers pattern - or maybe, as Hansen mentioned - they wanted the option of him being able to bang over a late penalty from 60 metres.

    With the benefit of hindsight, probably two selections Hansen would change - but, unfortunately he doesn't get that chance.



  • @Chris-B

    Yeah - there was some logic to the Barrett selection. I guess the plan/hope was that we'd do the England lineout what the Jaapies managed to do to their scrum. Unfortunately, it didn't come close to working.

    The main issue was we didnt evan appear to attack their lineout, sometimes didnt even contest...imo made a mockery of the supposed advantage there.



  • @taniwharugby Yep - I don't know what they were doing.

    It was almost as if having a new system with four good jumpers confused them!



  • @sparky said in RWC: England v New Zealand (SF1):

    Crotty Vs SBW on the bench was a closer call, but Crotty was the better option against that opponent. I remember Crotty being superb from the bench against England in 2018 when he came on and turned the game.

    I can understand why they wanted SBW in the mix as he offers something different to the other 3 midfielders. Neither ALB, Goodhue or Crotty are particularly big so I am sure they wanted SBW's greater size to allow them to play more direct, if needed, and to counter Tuilagi. The problem to me, outside the non-selection of Cane, was more about tactics and how they didn't maximise the strengths of the player that were selected.



  • @Bovidae said in RWC: England v New Zealand (SF1):

    @sparky said in RWC: England v New Zealand (SF1):

    Crotty Vs SBW on the bench was a closer call, but Crotty was the better option against that opponent. I remember Crotty being superb from the bench against England in 2018 when he came on and turned the game.

    I can understand why they wanted SBW in the mix as he offers something different to the other 3 midfielders. Neither ALB, Goodhue or Crotty are particularly big so I am sure they wanted SBW's greater size to allow them to play more direct, if needed, and to counter Tuilagi. The problem to me, outside the non-selection of Cane, was more about tactics and how they didn't maximise the strengths of the player that were selected.

    @sparky said in RWC: England v New Zealand (SF1):

    My review:

    Not starting Cane at 7 and not having BFA on the bench were dreadful decisions.

    Crotty Vs SBW on the bench was a closer call, but Crotty was the better option against that opponent. I remember Crotty being superb from the bench against England in 2018 when he came on and turned the game.

    It was obvious from their earlier performances that the big improvement in England's game at RWC 2019 was at the breakdown. Why was there more work on the week before on preventing Curry, Itoje, Underhill and the Vunipolas becoming dominant there? This makes the non-selection of Sam Cane even more baffling.

    Why didn't we attack England's lineout more and earlier?

    What was up with Aaron Smith's and Beauden Barrett kicking games? Both kicked too short and at times away from the chasing players.

    Why was the All Blacks discipline so poor, especially at key moment of the game before and after half time and after the Savea try when they were hauling themselves back into the contest? Was thorough analysis done of Nigel Owens and his decisions as referee?

    The All Blacks ran over 680 metres in that game. Why were they unable to turn that into points?

    In short, our opponents seem to have been much more thoroughly prepared for this game.

    @sparky said in RWC: England v New Zealand (SF1):

    My review:

    Not starting Cane at 7 and not having BFA on the bench were dreadful decisions.

    Crotty Vs SBW on the bench was a closer call, but Crotty was the better option against that opponent. I remember Crotty being superb from the bench against England in 2018 when he came on and turned the game.

    It was obvious from their earlier performances that the big improvement in England's game at RWC 2019 was at the breakdown. Why was there more work on the week before on preventing Curry, Itoje, Underhill and the Vunipolas becoming dominant there? This makes the non-selection of Sam Cane even more baffling.

    Why didn't we attack England's lineout more and earlier?

    What was up with Aaron Smith's and Beauden Barrett kicking games? Both kicked too short and at times away from the chasing players.

    Why was the All Blacks discipline so poor, especially at key moment of the game before and after half time and after the Savea try when they were hauling themselves back into the contest? Was thorough analysis done of Nigel Owens and his decisions as referee?

    The All Blacks ran over 680 metres in that game. Why were they unable to turn that into points?

    In short, our opponents seem to have been much more thoroughly prepared for this game.

    To me there's no discussion about SBW. To me he ought to have started or not played at all. I'd have been entirely happy with SBW and either ALB OR Goodhue starting. That said, Crotty ought to have been on bench, and come on around the 50.

    One question for me was whether SBW and Jack were 100%.



  • Apart from the tactical and selection errors,

    I think the Ireland game may have messed with us mentally, and taken away some competitive edge as well , with Ireland being our bogey side in recent times , to beat them the way we did , had us feeling a little too comfortable and happy with where we were placed im guessing

    A very similar thing happened with England after beating us



  • Bit more on the England response to the Haka:






Log in to reply