Rate the Match: England 31 Argentina 12

Let us know what you thought of England’s performance against the Pumas at Twickenham.

It was a game of two halves, with plenty of cause for optimism at half-time, but perhaps less so at full-time.

Who stood out for you? Should Stuart Lancaster be making some changes ahead of next weekend’s showdown with the All Blacks?

Give the match a score out of 10 and then justify your selection in the comments below.

Rate the Match: England v Argentina

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

16 thoughts on “Rate the Match: England 31 Argentina 12

  1. Second half was poor, Morgan’s try was one of the only positives. Tompkins isn’t doing anything wrong really but not doing a huge amount to press his case. Shame Burrell wasn’t given a chance but I think it’s because he is seen as a 12 and Lancaster wants 12trees due to his distribution which Farrell lacks

  2. I understand that it could be damaging to throw christian wade in against New Zealand but I am so keen to see him play! Maybe a bench spot? Against argentina we saw that Ashton’s defense was poor (again) but they could not exploit it. The all blacks most certainly will!

  3. Personally, I don’t see any reason why Christian Wade shouldn’t be starting against NZ. We’re unlikely going to win, so what have we got to lose with Wade and Yarde on the wings? Who knows what might end up happening? Wade has got some serious creativity in his arsenal too.. He’s been doing lots of link work and setting others up for tries in the premiership

  4. Not much to take from the match. Did what we needed to and then dropped our intensity, it’s annoying but everyone does it now and then.

    As a short term measure I’d stick with Foden on the wing for NZ, as a natural 15 he’ll be better equipped to deal with NZ’s territorial game which they do so well. I’d like to see him at 14 with Yarde back at 11, obviously with Brown staying where he is. And then looking forwards to the 6 nations and beyond we can move to Yarde, Wade and Brown as a back 3.

    If Yarde is still injured but Wade recovers we may as well chuck Wade in at the deep end. If they’re both out I guess we’ll have to stick with Ashton, and pray Savea doesn’t get over his illness.

    Midfield looked atrocious but I don’t see anything we can do. We have no regular structure because the it used to be ‘give it to Manu and hope for something ridiculous’, so we can’t expect two new guys to invent an entire playbook from scratch in the space of a couple of weeks. Especially playing outside a 10 with little passing/running game. Hoping Twelvetrees goes ok though, because him and Manu should be a fantastic pairing.

  5. The Wales SA game showed the gulf in class between the top 2 teams and the rest. Ditto for S15/RC versus the Premiership/Six Nations. England are lucky to have had two warm up games against lesser SH opposition before tackling NZ, to adjust to the pace of SH test rugby.

    This was a middling game with about 35 minutes of decent rugby. Hartley, physically is in a different league to Youngs and hopefully will start on Saturday. BV worries me, as he appears way to one dimensional for test rugby, but may need more time. Morgan’s try would in my opinion not have been scored by BV. Dickson looked better but then the pace of the game was slower than against Oz, so hopefully Youngs is fit again as he has the class necessary to play against NZ. Farrell is good to decent at everything except that he will never be a FH to create much space for those outside and around him.

    Whoever gets picked in the back three this coming Saturday better be prepared to do lots of catching and contesting in the air. If the crowd is to be given its head and Wade and/or Yarde make the team, I hope that their aerial skills are not badly exposed. I liked the balance in the back three in yesterdays game and hope they start again against NZ. 12T and Tomkins however remain a WIP.

    Those that watched how much less spectacular North looked in the Wales game against SA, when fronted by proper competition, may want to reconsider how easy Wade/Yarde will adjust to the pace and intensity of a NZ game.

  6. Mixed bag, but some good rugby played in parts. I’m sure everyone would have finished the game much more positive if we had played the two halves the other way round, so I’m relatively happy. Decent win against a stubborn opponent, although look how the aussies bullied a stubborn opponent and you do wonder quite how good we are. The answer is good in the pack and decidedly average behind.

    Would have no hesitation in starting Wade next week. If he’s good enough to play, let him play. The game isn’t for anything but pride. Can’t see us winning but at least get our best team on the pitch to give it a go.

    Have to say that I might be changing my tune on Lawes, although he did give away an early penalty and would be worried the ABs will wind him up.

    Would start the following team next week, injuries permitting:
    Corbs, Hartley, Cole
    Lawes, Launchbury
    Robshaw, Vunipola (close with Morgan), Wood
    Youngs, Farrell
    36, Tomkins
    Foden, Yarde

    Just want a good performance next week really, although a win would be nice!

  7. I’m actually cautiously optimistic about next week. Saturdays performance was good, not spectacular. Whilst Argentina has a couple horrible results in the Rugby Championship, they also had a good amount of games where they pushed teams very close – they aren’t a bad side.

    We do need to play a hell of a lot better to beat NZ though, and I think we will step up. I honestly believe that is this turning into a very good England side.

    Would go with the exact same team that Staggy listen above.

  8. All these comments about Farrell not being able to distribute and create space for others, and yet this is the same Farrell that has played in almost every Premiership game for Sarries so far, and Sarries and Saints have scored more tries than anyone else. So I’m pretty sure that Farrell’s distribution is fine, but maybe that’s not how England want him to play. After all these are not Premiership matches, they are International test matches. Intensity, speed of play, time on the ball are very different so the ball needs to be controlled and looked after better. I’m just saying that instead of criticising the players, maybe this is they way they’ve been told to play?

    1. I’m a Sarries supporter and made the comment about Farrell. His first instinct is to run sideways especially when he is under some pressure. I saw it in SA last year and also with the Lions. He certainly does not have Ben Fords talent for a gap. Anyway he is good at most things though but he needs to learn how to challenge the line better.

  9. I had the privilege of watching this match in person. In the second half a few things happened: the Argentinians stepped up their defensive efforts quite a bit, they were able to retain possession for much longer periods, and when we had possession we forced it wide too early. I’m inclined to attribute this to the change from Dickson to Care and I think Care was subbed on too early. I like him as a player, but his tactical decision-making was poor. Seeing 36 acting as third receiver and distributor was very interesting, a good window into what he has the ability to do when playing to his form.

    A note on Ben Youngs- he looks very good when brought in at the 60 minute mark, when his looping breaks become very effective against a battered and tired opposition. He is nowhere near as good at 9 from the start, his passing and game management is generally poor. Dickson repaired some of the damage to his reputation this Saturday, and if Youngs is match fit then I’d still want Dickson to start and bring BY in at the 55-60 minute mark.

    A better flyhalf would also be nice. If Farrell can bootstrap himself up a level all to the good, if not we need an alternative. Freddie Burns is still an option, but has looked pedestrian (behind a truly woeful tight 5, it must be said) so far in the Aviva. George Ford has potential, but is not ready yet.

    1. Good observations Chuckles, particularly around the SH issue, to which I agree with you.

      Where did Flood play when he came on, as it wasn’t easy to see from TV. I know he replaced Twelvetrees, but was it a straight swap or did he and Farrell alternate 10/12 ?

      I do see Farrell as more of a 12 than a 10 if I am honest, and I worry that we are putting too much store in Farrell=10.

      To me; Burns/Flood/Ford/Cipriani (don’t laugh) at 10 with Farrell/Twelvetrees/Burrell/Eastmond at 12 gives us better options.

      1. The problem with Farrell at 12 is that he offers virtually no running threat. That’s not real ideal from the 12 channel, I can’t see it working. He is a good 10 right now, the best we have available. We would all love to have a Dan Carter come along, but we haven’t got that. We have a 10 with great kicking and defense (not a skill I see essential to a 10 but still), and ok distribution, not terrible, but ok. If he can improve on this then he could be brilliant. It certainly has improved over the past 12 months so he is going in the right direction. Unless Burns or Ford can put together a string of to class performances (like Farrell was doing at Sarries pre-AIs), then will be sticking with Farrell.

  10. I’m still defending Farrell at FH! Yes he needs to get better, but I think that he can do that and has age on his side still. Still think Burns should be around the set up as once again he has fantastic potential, and I think is playing better for Glos than he is being given credit for. Bit like Morgan has the potential to be very good, even if Glos are struggling this season. Don’t think Flood lets anyone down mind you and maybe we will need his experience come 2015. Ford isn’t ready yet but more time with Bath is developing him and as for Cips – please. Yes he could play a good game or it could all go horribly wrong. Just ask the aussies whether a flaky FH helps consistency. Personally I don’t want him anywhere near the team unless he can put together a solid two years of trouble free form. And even then I would be wary!

  11. I’m still unimpressed with England’s work getting over the gainline. Everyone is standing deep, no one is running onto the ball or taking it at pace and the defence know exactly where the ball is going. England really need something to draw defenders and to instigate something rather than to wait for something to happy. I think they were lucky on a few occassions against Argentina and to be fair, they took what they got well.

Comments are closed.