I was interpreting Marshall when he was playing. I still think that England are more comfortable with a direct approach at heart. It’s not so much a ? of ‘finding top class centres’ as a distrust of creativity (high risk?) 1st as opposed to the bludgeon 1st through midfield. Creativity needs to come from the philosophy & coaching of the management as much as the skill of the individual. Injuries play a part, but only a part, I think it’s more fundamental than that tho. The wings ran E 2 W because tHey got ball too late & were hemmed in by the sideline & so had to run in/aross field. That’s still the REAL issue as I see it. The wingers were partly scapegoated IMO. Regds offloading, England probably do do so more now, but it’s also about the quality & timing of the offload. This still needs adressing I think, e.g., does it put a man into space & potentially set him up for a try scoring op, or ‘EFFECTIVE’ break? I exclude MIke Brown from being lumped with the midfield in this however, as he is effective, certainly in beating people & in making line breaks.

All this ought to be seen in the context of a WC & v SH oppo too as I think they are harder to break down.

Nonu; as ‘evidence of how a player can start as a bosh merchant’. Well he can do that, but he could always step in or outside & had/has acceleration off the mark. As you allude to, he has now dev an accurate passing game & latterly a kicking string to his bow. In his early career, he slipped over of knocked on too often for me, but I guess the AB selectors saw something more than I did back then.

I ‘harp on about the tui’ because I still think it’s his 1st instinct to run over people. He needs to address this IMO. It is unlikely to be enough in June. Regds an ‘arcing run’, you sure I wasn’t reffing to Cipriani?

Yes, sometimes we can get too heated, too wedded to an opinion, especially when the heat is up. And as I said, I can see how England press talking themselves up can be irritiating. But from what I’ve seen here, few of the posters or writers are as bombastic as that. mostly I think I tend to see people praising a developing squad. As you’ve said you don’t see it that way, but I don’t think it’s useful to lump us all together as one, perhaps taking your frustration of the press out on us poor fans! ;)

With the route 1 England idea, I agree that has been England’s classic weakness – finding top class centres hasn’t been England’s forte. But I do disagree that Marshall quote sums up England now. I do think that England’s inability to set up midfield tries has been partially down to annoying injuries that first robbed England of a settled midfield, then, when 36 and Burrell began to settle, with injuries and loss of form for the wings, leaving them with rookie wings who haven’t been able to set the world alight. you may see this as an excuse, but I would still point out that England’s backs still made a good ammount of line breaks and scored a number of tries, notably from outside centre and fullback, and you can defineitly see the ideas behind a playmaking 12 giving options each side of the breakdown.

on the question of the summer tour, do I see 36 and Burrell/tuilagi as having the same skills as their NZ counterparts? Well, no. Not yet. None of those guys is the complete player yet, but I would argue certainly Tui and Burrell have shown plenty of evidence they can be much more – my jury is still out on 36. I’d go back to Nonu for evidence of how a player can start as a bosh merchant and then add layers to his game. It was a good 4/5 years of internationals before NZ started trusting him to pass! And I do think it’s a little silly to harp on about the tui arcing run on his comeback (which I saw and agree wouldn’t work at international level) when we’ve plenty of evidence that isn’t his normal mode of play.

This summer tour will tell us a lot about these backs, which is why I am very excited – though as I have 2 young kids and no sky, i may not be able to see them live. I wouldn’t expect England to win, but I would say that there’s a good chance of them nicking one test. You may not see that as good enough, as settling for second best, but for now, I’d be very happy for that – always assuming the other 2 weren’t blow outs.

That was a long, honest and really good post to read. Thanks. I’m sorry I didn’t see it before. For some reason I’ve checked this thread but it never showed it. Then I flushed my cache and here it is, a week later.

I will digest and get back to you, definitely some interesting stuff. But yes, living in a country where the press is as insuffereable as the British press must be hard. I find it hard believing that Stephen Jones, for example, isn’t a straight up troll. But I lived in Australia circa 2000-2003 and believe me, the Aus and NZ press are no better when you are an Eng fan. The Irish seem to get a much easier ride, though that’s more down to condesension than anything else.

Hope you enjoyed your swim, er, like last weekend.

Concerning England, hadn’t realised it was ALL bad from me. I just called it as I saw it.

Sometimes all our rugger opinions remind me of a time when I was in high school & saw a Punch cartoon of Gladstone & Disraeli in Parliament slinging mud at each other. Opinions here likewise sometimes degenerate into personal mud slinging contests with name calling & 1upsmanship thrown in. Hands up, it’s a fair cop Guv. I’m as guilty as anyone.

However, as I live here, I see mainly English rugger & as prev stated elsewhere, I come from a perspective of England’s, mainly media, talking themselves up; esp after that ancient chestnut of the AB win in 2012 . Perhaps this coloured my perspective on England’s abilities & fans opinions of same, many of which run counter to mine.

Justin Marshall once summed up England for me when he said; ‘You know what you’re going to get from England’. I.e., route 1 through the fwds & kicking for the corners. At least that was my reading of it & there’s nothing wrong with that up to a point, but once held up front where do they go? I & others (e.g. Greenwood, Barnes, J Robinson, Br. Ashton), see things diff. One e.g., as a fundamental issue, is the midfield’s inability to set up tries. Others here disagree (mind bogglingly for me). I hammer this because it is, I believe, a vital skill & I think this will be exposed in June. Others (& yrself?) seem to see it as an e.g. of ‘England bashing’. I find this frustrating as it’s not intended that way, I may be somewhat defensive in reading stuff into others’ views esp if they espouse endless stats & minutiae to refute my beliefs, although I see this as (mainly) missing the point, or the bigger pic.

I am aware though that England is the most successful team in the H. Nations to date. They usually compete up front i.e. @ scrum, lineout & in the loose. However, what depressed me most in the England v Wales match in Cardiff 2013, was when I saw (& this epitomised England for me), Farrell kick the 1st ball he got at the start of the game to heaven. I dunno, but they surely need more than that.

I know you (& others) say that England have improved since (before?) then. Perhaps they have, although I am not entirely convinced of this esp @ sustained test level, away from home. I see the June tour as the real yardstick for testing yr view/s (not particularly because it’s an NZ tour, but because it’s v SH oppo). Do you see Tuilagi or 12trees or Burrell @ this level (& in the end that’s what counts) having the slight of hand of their SH counterparts? Maybe, but Tui. e.g., in a recent comeback club game for Leicester, still ran across field & over people. All well & good in club matches (or maybe even the 6N). They are 1 thing, SH Int’ls, in the context I’ve mentioned, are another. For me it’s about getting into good habits, or at least out of bad ones and I just don’t see his getting away with this v an AB defence. He’ll likely be closed down & in d. quick time too. Of course he may not be picked, but I don’t see his being left out of all 3 games.

You mentioned ‘It isn’t a NH/SH perspective, neither of us are spokesmen for half the globe, it’s just different pov’. I agree, we’re not global spokesmen (& I didn’t have time to contract Mori to run any polls for me), but I think there is a diff philosophy between, esp England’s & the SH’s fundamental way of playing & thinking about the game. I’ve seen NZ in the past mainly dominate through the fwds & have some ‘journeymen’ backs outflank an oppo pulled out of posi. They’ve had to adapt though & I think they have, esp since c. pro rugby. They play an all round game now with backs & fwds interchanging & exchanging passes & getting timing of same ‘right’… or choosing an approp (hopefully) alt option, i.e. running it or kicking it (meaningfully). England do run it more now I think, but when stressed they tend to, IMO, revert to form (as per JM’s comments). Going back to, say the days of Rob Andrew & Stuart Barnes, England in the end opted for the former, a kicking fly1/2. I think that this is significant in a diff in philosophies.

On the other hand I could be wrong. And as a caveat, this last para is NOT intended as more ‘E’ bashing or waving of the Kiwi flag. It’s about a belief which I wish to air & of which I am open (no, I’m not coddin’ you) to objective debate. If this doesn’t come across as such, maybe it’s just ‘the way I tellum’!?

Anyway, I’m pooped now & am off for a swim to recharge.

Up ‘n’ under.

Having to bed in a new centre pair before the next WC is a tall order. But that said, he does seem to have the knack of making sure he doesn’t ask players to do things they can’t so maybe my pessimism isn’t warranted.

Much food for thought. Tried a reply yesterday, but got wiped, so here goes again.

Regds Ireland, agree with Murray, Sexton, Best and Carney, good spine, but, for me too early to say the team will underperform again. They may have an O’Driscoll/Darcey hangover but JS @ Clermont Auvergne told an underperforming, ‘jinxed’ team to team to forget all that bizzo & stick to their game plan. I.e. perform on the field & the result would take care of itself. Made some sense to me, esp as Cl Auvergne finally won the Top 14 comp in 2010 after 11 finals appearances! He also dun good with Leinster. Had their backline purring like a Roller. We’ll see, but some room for optimism yet I think.

Out of time like Chris Farlowe, more 2 follow.

Dunno what the prob is. I agree with yr ‘Facts'; ‘NZ’s preparation in 2012 was impacted by a virus’ & ‘NZ won (fairly narrowly) in 2013′.

However regarding yr ‘Fantasies'; ‘Had they not had they virus they would have won’ & ‘Winning in 2013 proved that without a virus NZ would have won in 2012′, where did I ever express these contentions?

Altho I don’t recall my precise words, my gist was simply that the virus, which you acknowledge, had AN effect on NZ’s game & therefore England’s win wasn’t ENTIRELY merited… that’s all. The 2nd ‘Fantasy’ is yr take on what I said. All I actually stated was that without the virus in 2013, NZ won.

People could & did read what they perceived into my blogs… & I don’t exclude myself of being completely objective in this matter either.

Please don’t tell me that we’ve really been in agreement all along regds this marathon of a subject. Blimey, I need a pint!

Dunno what the prob is. I agree with yr ‘fact’ regds the virus. It happened, as you acknowledge, but where did I ever say; ‘Had they not had they virus they would have won’? That’s not my fantasy. Whilst I can’t recall my exact words, the gist was that the virus made A diff to NZ that’s all & logically therefore the win by England was not ENTIRELY merited… that’s it.

Regds yr 2nd ‘fact’, I also agree that ‘NZ won (fairly narrowly) in 2013′. However in respect of yr contention; ‘Fantasy: Winning in 2013 proved that without a virus NZ would have won in 2012′, is yr take on the 2013 match, not mine. As I recall, I stated that without the virus NZ won. Again, that was it.

People sometimes seem to read what they will into things… & I don’t entirely exclude myself from this.

After all this marathon of 2ing & froing don’t tell that we were really in agreement all along?! Blimey! I need a pint.

Fact: NZ won (fairly narrowly) in 2013 against a side missing some key players that didn’t play as well (behind the pack) as the year before.
Fantasy: Winning in 2013 proved that without a virus NZ would have won in 2012.

You accuse a number of England fans for being delusional, denying fantasists for actually believing we won a game in 2012 and that win was merited. But I think our opinions are based on fact, so you may need to find a mirror to locate the fantasist. Nor will what happens June change history, nor will it prove or disprove that England can win a world cup. I’m looking forward to enjoying it for what it is, a test against the best. The probable smug gloating to follow with the ‘logical’ conclusion that the 2003 win in Wellington was clearly a fluke and should be expunged from the record books hopefully won’t take too much of a shine off it.

Not when it’s as muddled as yrs when you ‘believe that England merited that win’. It’s this sort of thinking, in denying a truth, i.e. that yr team is unlikely to be affected when playing with a virus, that seems to permeate English rugby thinking & begs the ? as to why yr lot have only lost 75% of the games v the ABs. Why do I or NZ need to make excuses, when they’ve already expunged that loss, away from home & with their aforementioned record?
It’s just that I detet bs merchants who talk themselves up – like you.

As I’ve said before, you only talk the best game in the world, ‘bless you’ indeed (knicked this from Stephen Joines did you?), but we’ll see who talks most soon enuff.

And I don’t believe you’re looking fwd to the June tour. Put a few bob on an England clean sweep did you? If it comes off, you’ll never need work again.

What? Aspire to be more like yrself? How odd.