My pack is better than your pack...

So, big game Saturday with alot of bragging rights on offer plus a chance to to see if certain players fit in the respective RWC squads.

Forwards win matches, the backs just decide by how many

How confident are English supporters that their pack can do the job ? Are Welsh players confident that their front row will survive without Smiler ?

What are the guesses for the Forwards selections and how they'll fare against their opponents ?

English pack should be stronger whoever you pick. Especially if rumours of the Welsh pack are too.

A front five of Stevens,Hartley,Cole,Palmer and Lawes could deal with anything the Welsh conjure.

Wales won't beat England as they're backline have no moves and Howley is an idiot.

I'll be looking for a a triple header leading into the RWC.

And that of course means a front five that dominates, a back row that at least equates with the opposition and let the fancy-dancy girls in the backs do the rest.

So that'd be just like everyone's wet dream. Globally.

beshocked wrote:English pack should be stronger whoever you pick. Especially if rumours of the Welsh pack are too.

A front five of Stevens,Hartley,Cole,Palmer and Lawes could deal with anything the Welsh conjure.

You weren't in the Six Nations. And rumours of Welsh pack ?

I think Behocked's front five with a backrow of Croft, Wood, Easter (c) with Robshaw coming on second half for Croft. Get Deacon on in the second half for Lawes as Deacon needs some game time. Like to see one of Wilson or PDJ given a run out as well as the back up to Cole needs to be established.

Fairly first team pack should allow for a little experimentation in the backs, give Sharples and Manu a start and see what they can do.

You weren't in the Six Nations. And rumours of Welsh pack ?

I think England did the job up front seeing as they came away with the win from Cardiff. Set piece was edged by England and breakdown was fairly equal. The rumours surrounding the Welsh pack have come from the press and involve fringe players the likes of the Dragons number 8 etc.

Anyhow its Wales vs the Kiwis on Saturday so who gives a monkeys about the english pack?

https://www.606v2.com/t10675-josh-turbul-and-faletau-starting-for-wales-this-weekend-in-what-appears-an-experimental-selection

Munkian I thought England won in the 6 nations vs Wales. We obviously won the important battles.

Scrums are a gamble anyway. Just flip a coin it's easier.

The English pack is very mobile too as well as strong in the lineout and having a lot of power.

Sam I absolutely agree with you there!

Looking forward to this as a neutral

Not saying anything till both teams announced though.

beshocked wrote:https://www.606v2.com/t10675-josh-turbul-and-faletau-starting-for-wales-this-weekend-in-what-appears-an-experimental-selection

Munkian I thought England won in the 6 nations vs Wales. We obviously won the important battles.

Scrums are a gamble anyway. Just flip a coin it's easier.

The English pack is very mobile too as well as strong in the lineout and having a lot of power.

Theres winning by 7 points and then theres 'dealing with anything the Welsh conjure' which implies we'd be scraping the barrell.

The 'fringe' number 8 player was voted the young player of the year by his peers.

Theres also Delve who was voted player of the year for his club and former Welsh Captain and B&I lion Ryan Jones.

I think Wales do have strength in depth issues and the pack isn't as great as you might think.

Leaving out your bright sparks like Warburton and Lydiate would be a bad mistake.

You do lack the strength in depth of England in the front five.

Ryan Jones is hugely overrated and probably the worst starting no 8 in the 6 nations. Delve has been in good form for Rebels but has he played much for Wales?

The "fringe" number 8 is only 20 years old. If he gets a chance we'll see if he lives up to the hype or is just another damp squib.

If I was Gatland I would pick the backrow of Lydiate,Warburton and Delve but will he?

Warburton has been named captain so yes.

Lydyate is in the in form 6 but Tupiric has also impressed during training

He'll go with Faletau or Delve I hope

and the pack isn't as great as you might think.

Same could be said for yourselves...

Theres winning by 7 points and then theres 'dealing with anything the Welsh conjure' which implies we'd be scraping the barrell.

I read that as a good containing effort by the English forwards. Forced the Welsh to look wider for spaces to attack. When generally the Welsh have two or three big ball carriers that thunder over the gain line around the rucks and then spin it wide to the often free flowing often mecurial backs who then try a sweeping wide move which results in a try or a chip and chase.

Having Matthew Rees out is a massive loss for Wales and Gethin is just coming back from injury will certainly weaken the Welsh pack.
If Paul James and Adam Jones start then the key selection will be Hooker. If it's Huw Bennett then our Scrum won't suffer but our Lineout will. Rees gets through masses of work in the loose as well and I Hibbard is really the closest we have to his work rate.
AWJ needs to put in a big performance as does Bradley. Neither set the world alight in the six nations or the domestic.
Our back row is probably our strongest area and England will under estimate Faletau at their peril. He is a great strong ball carrier and has some pace and great hands.
Lydiate and Warburton are building a fantastic partnership between them and will be a handful for any pack.
Having said all that I expect England to win. They have a much more settled team and confidence from the six nations. It should be close but that very much depends on selection in the backs for Wales.

Let's not be under any illusions. Wales never looked like winning that game in the 6 nations. Englands defence was far too organised and Wales had no answer to it. So while the score was close England were a far better team. Even my wife who knows nothing about rugby felt sorry for Wales...pitiful

Munkian England are the 6 nations champions for a reason.

As we are the better team you would expect us to have a better pack. Unsurprisingly we do.

It is particularly our hooker and 2nd row which out trumps yours.

Our tight 5 options:

Gethin Jenkins / Paul James / Ryan Bevington
Mathew Rees* / Richard Hibbard* / Huw Bennett / Lloyd Burns
Adam Jones / Craig Mitchell / Paul James

I'm very happy with our 1st and 2nd choice front row. I'm also happy with our 1st choice locks, but will admit we don't have great depth there.

The back row is exciting to be sure. Warburton will be there no doubt. I'd like to see Toby start as he has the potential to be the best ball-playing 8 we've had in a while. Not sure about Turnbull.

Last time you didn't face Adam in the scrum and Gethin in the loose. Should be interesting, to say the least.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Theres winning by 7 points and then theres 'dealing with anything the Welsh conjure' which implies we'd be scraping the barrell.

I read that as a good containing effort by the English forwards. Forced the Welsh to look wider for spaces to attack. When generally the Welsh have two or three big ball carriers that thunder over the gain line around the rucks and then spin it wide to the often free flowing often mecurial backs who then try a sweeping wide move which results in a try or a chip and chase.

Hmmm, you read it with alot more good will than me then

mckay1402 wrote:Let's not be under any illusions. Wales never looked like winning that game in the 6 nations. Englands defence was far too organised and Wales had no answer to it. So while the score was close England were a far better team. Even my wife who knows nothing about rugby felt sorry for Wales...pitiful

Can't agree with this at all. I'd say the sides were very equal actually. England won because they took their chances, simple as. The first came when Mitchell wen't AWOL in the defensive line and the second a simple, well-created overlap. Wales mucked up a few, most obviously Shane kicked it at 40mins. Game England, deservedly. But only just.

This game is a different kettle of fish. Untried combinations, untested players. It should be more open, and more exciting.

If I was English I'd be sweating over Floods form, Lawes' possible injury and Youngs absence.

beshocked wrote:Munkian England are the 6 nations champions for a reason.

As we are the better team you would expect us to have a better pack. Unsurprisingly we do.

It is particularly our hooker and 2nd row which out trumps yours.

Fair play for winning but it was your 1st in a long time and hardly dominating, the Irish creamed you.

I really don't think theres much difference in the packs. You aren't the dominant force up front you used to be.

And the arrogance of some posters is really showing, jesus....

We should play Bennet if he is our strongest scrummager. This game will have a few knock-ons due to rust so more scrums then normal and England I doubt will kick to touch that often as they will want to attack from all over the park and prove points to MJ to get on the plane.

I don't think there's much between the 2 packs however I do feel England have an edge in the set piece. Maybe not so much the scrum but in the line out. Matthew Rees' withdrawal will hurt us a fair bit here. I would love to see Faletau get some game time to see how he performs. He's quite a laid back fella and the occasion probably won't bother him at all.

beshocked

I wouldn't go as far as to say unequivocally that the England pack is better. I would say that both first choice packs are fairly equal. You only have a better hooker by default of Rees being injured. Second rows I concede but I do think our backrow is probably marginally better.

deadfred

You are literally the only welshman who thinks that.

It is particularly our hooker and 2nd row which out trumps yours..

I'd take Rees over Hartley and Thompson in a heartbeat. After Rees England certainly have the edge though. Agree about the second row, it's not that Wales don't have good second rows it's just that they don't seem to have a combination that produces more than the sum of its parts.

Second rows I concede but I do think our backrow is probably marginally better. .

Depends entirely on who's selected could go either way. England are a big ploddy at 8 with only Easter as the positional specialist and we do also lack a scrapper at the breakdown, there's no old school fetcher ala Back. Wales options will be somewhat untested and the big Dragons no 8 was anything but effective in the LV Cup game vs Gloucester which is the only time I've seen him play so I will be interested to see how he goes. Think Wales might suffer with no Lydiate he is a real work horse.

Think Wales might suffer with no Lydiate he is a real work horse.

Lydiate will def have a starting position in at least one game, but we need to try other options out.

No Lydiate? Why no Lydiate?

You Welsh seem to think you are the only side that has injuries. We don't moan about injuries as we absorb them.

We comfortably won away from home in Wales. I am pleased with that.

Is it really that arrogant to say that England who are the 6 nations champions and who have beaten Wales in their last two meetings have a better pack? Wow that's really arrogant of me.

Your lineout is not as good as the English one - simple as that really.

Rees is overrated anyway. He isn't as good as Hartley or Thompson.

A backrow combo of who is better?

England had injuries in the 6 nations like Lawes,Croft and Sheridan but who cares? With Stevens and these players back our pack is stronger too.

Dragons no 8 was anything but effective in the LV Cup game vs Gloucester which is the only time I've seen him play

In fairness to him he was on the back of a retreating scrum and it's hard for a no.8 to get into a game going backwards.

As a netural I find this an interesting post on the forum. To me it seems to highlight the mindset of England and/or Wales supporters.

That is a strong forward pack is the begin and end of a good rugby side. Maybe I read it wrong but it looks as if saying the strongest pack wil win the game.

Where as I think maybe that is too 2003? Sure a strong pack gives you a good platform, but basing game plan on that could backfire if you're so used to it that when you meet a side that either match or better the forwards then there may not be a gameplan v2.

Better to play the game with the intention of trying other plays than forward based.

Anybody agree?

We comfortably won away from home in Wales. I am pleased with that.

A score is not a comfortable win. Christ, 1 Six Nations championship in 7(!) years and you think you are chocolate.

Rees is overrated anyway. He isn't as good as Hartley or Thompson.

Really ? REALLY ? Judged by what exactly ?

And I really wasn't actually referring to you as being arrogant but you are quickly changing my mind

England have just beaten Wales home and away. It's not being arrogant to suggest we've been better than you recently.

OzT wrote:As a netural I find this an interesting post on the forum. To me it seems to highlight the mindset of England and/or Wales supporters.

That is a strong forward pack is the begin and end of a good rugby side. Maybe I read it wrong but it looks as if saying the strongest pack wil win the game.

Where as I think maybe that is too 2003? Sure a strong pack gives you a good platform, but basing game plan on that could backfire if you're so used to it that when you meet a side that either match or better the forwards then there may not be a gameplan v2.

Better to play the game with the intention of trying other plays than forward based.

Anybody agree?

A strong pack has always been England's game plan, its only recently they seem to have remembered its not a 10 man game. I made the topic as I don't think the English pack can dominate ours like it used to.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Theres winning by 7 points and then theres 'dealing with anything the Welsh conjure' which implies we'd be scraping the barrell.

I read that as a good containing effort by the English forwards. Forced the Welsh to look wider for spaces to attack. When generally the Welsh have two or three big ball carriers that thunder over the gain line around the rucks and then spin it wide to the often free flowing often mecurial backs who then try a sweeping wide move which results in a try or a chip and chase.

Didn't England get a bit of the rub of the green on a forward pass to Ashton? I seem to recall the game was all upside down with Wales winning the breakdown and matching in the set piece, but England scoring a couple of tries against the run of play from turn over ball. With the Welsh backs looking fairly ineffective. I seem to recall that Wales finished the stronger, just failing to find an ellusive late try to snatch a draw.

OzT wrote:As a netural I find this an interesting post on the forum. To me it seems to highlight the mindset of England and/or Wales supporters.

That is a strong forward pack is the begin and end of a good rugby side. Maybe I read it wrong but it looks as if saying the strongest pack wil win the game.

Where as I think maybe that is too 2003? Sure a strong pack gives you a good platform, but basing game plan on that could backfire if you're so used to it that when you meet a side that either match or better the forwards then there may not be a gameplan v2.

Better to play the game with the intention of trying other plays than forward based.

Anybody agree?

I think from an English perspective at least we want both, but this article is centred on the forwards.

We didn't have too many problems with our backs when you fellas came to Twickenham last year anyhows.

And unless you are amazing, you wont win when your pack is under the hammer, look at the turn around from Oz-SA last year, or Wales/Italy-Ireland.

Even Oz this season have had a stronger pack then before and they bullied SA

"Even Oz this season have had a stronger pack then before and they bullied SA"

We all know it wasn't an SA pack, just players who didn't make the grade.

I wasn't comparing this game to any Eng-Oz game, just a comment that on this board at least there does seem a fascination with having a dominant forward pack in the side.

Whereas I was suggesting that forward dominations does not equate sure fire wins.

Draigoch wrote:

If I was English I'd be sweating over Floods form, Lawes' possible injury and Youngs absence.

If I were Welsh I'd be sweating over the fact that there are easy and equal replacements.

TheGreyGhost wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Theres winning by 7 points and then theres 'dealing with anything the Welsh conjure' which implies we'd be scraping the barrell.

I read that as a good containing effort by the English forwards. Forced the Welsh to look wider for spaces to attack. When generally the Welsh have two or three big ball carriers that thunder over the gain line around the rucks and then spin it wide to the often free flowing often mecurial backs who then try a sweeping wide move which results in a try or a chip and chase.

Didn't England get a bit of the rub of the green on a forward pass to Ashton? I seem to recall the game was all upside down with Wales winning the breakdown and matching in the set piece, but England scoring a couple of tries against the run of play from turn over ball. With the Welsh backs looking fairly ineffective. I seem to recall that Wales finished the stronger, just failing to find an ellusive late try to snatch a draw.

That may be how you saw it, but then you aren't exactly un biased now are you?

Wa;es did have more possesion, but they could not convert it to points. England made sure they got points when ever they had the chance.

Much like the AB's actually, they don't need a hundred phases, they can strike from anywhere.

yappysnap wrote:

TheGreyGhost wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Theres winning by 7 points and then theres 'dealing with anything the Welsh conjure' which implies we'd be scraping the barrell.

I read that as a good containing effort by the English forwards. Forced the Welsh to look wider for spaces to attack. When generally the Welsh have two or three big ball carriers that thunder over the gain line around the rucks and then spin it wide to the often free flowing often mecurial backs who then try a sweeping wide move which results in a try or a chip and chase.

Didn't England get a bit of the rub of the green on a forward pass to Ashton? I seem to recall the game was all upside down with Wales winning the breakdown and matching in the set piece, but England scoring a couple of tries against the run of play from turn over ball. With the Welsh backs looking fairly ineffective. I seem to recall that Wales finished the stronger, just failing to find an ellusive late try to snatch a draw.

That may be how you saw it, but then you aren't exactly un biased now are you?

Wa;es did have more possesion, but they could not convert it to points. England made sure they got points when ever they had the chance.

Much like the AB's actually, they don't need a hundred phases, they can strike from anywhere.

Did you just compare England's counter attacking skills with New Zealand's ?

yappysnap wrote:

TheGreyGhost wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Theres winning by 7 points and then theres 'dealing with anything the Welsh conjure' which implies we'd be scraping the barrell.

I read that as a good containing effort by the English forwards. Forced the Welsh to look wider for spaces to attack. When generally the Welsh have two or three big ball carriers that thunder over the gain line around the rucks and then spin it wide to the often free flowing often mecurial backs who then try a sweeping wide move which results in a try or a chip and chase.

Didn't England get a bit of the rub of the green on a forward pass to Ashton? I seem to recall the game was all upside down with Wales winning the breakdown and matching in the set piece, but England scoring a couple of tries against the run of play from turn over ball. With the Welsh backs looking fairly ineffective. I seem to recall that Wales finished the stronger, just failing to find an ellusive late try to snatch a draw.

That may be how you saw it, but then you aren't exactly un biased now are you?

Wa;es did have more possesion, but they could not convert it to points. England made sure they got points when ever they had the chance.

Isn't that exactly what I said?

Much like the AB's actually, they don't need a hundred phases, they can strike from anywhere

Your boys really are getting delusions of grandeur now. "Much like the AB's" You might be wearing all black and fielding a number of Kiwis, but that's exactly where the similarity ends.

greyghost is here - may as well lock the thread now.

OzT wrote:"Even Oz this season have had a stronger pack then before and they bullied SA"

We all know it wasn't an SA pack, just players who didn't make the grade.

I wasn't comparing this game to any Eng-Oz game, just a comment that on this board at least there does seem a fascination with having a dominant forward pack in the side.

Whereas I was suggesting that forward dominations does not equate sure fire wins.

Sorry my bringing up the Oz game was a light hearted attempt at humour, difficult to convey online though and without the hated smiley.

Yep it wasn't a full strength SA pack, but i think you'll hold your own against NZ.

As to the mindset i'd say yes there is a fascination for having a dominant pack, but that's not a bad thing as long as it's not at the expense of your backs. Look at PDV.

In the past we have though been completely forward dominated, i think that's changing though, and changing quickly. Especially for England where there is a lot of rudey poo to deal with as you go.

No probs yappysnap! <-- yip the dreaded smiley

Defo a strong pack gives you a good head start in the game, but if I was English supporter I may like it better if the coach had given the side, forwards and backs, more encouragement to run for the gaps, even if it was just 2 feet advance, then offload to backing up players, then have a strong pack and go for set peices.

A strong pack I think only gives advantages in set pieces, but it's the loose forwards that I think wins the forward battles. Not saying for England to now play a running game, look what Campo did in 1991 suggesting that, but wouldn't it be more exciting if there were some incisive players in there rather than relying on set pieces? Hmmfor example just look at our prop who did score a try at the last game, doing what every good prop shoudl do and that's running support for the wingers!!! LOL!

Sorry if i wasn't clear on the above. There were similarities between the sides playing style, we did use our small possesion to put points on when it counted, the AB's do exactly the same, i phrased it like that to help people get an idea of what i meant.

Do we do that as well as NZ? No
Are we as consistent as NZ? No

But in that game our style and and game plan was similar to theirs, which is a good thing as it's a winning style. Apologies for up setting people with this.

I will of course never liken any team to the AB's again.

Sorry.

OzT wrote:No probs yappysnap! <-- yip the dreaded smiley

Defo a strong pack gives you a good head start in the game, but if I was English supporter I may like it better if the coach had given the side, forwards and backs, more encouragement to run for the gaps, even if it was just 2 feet advance, then offload to backing up players, then have a strong pack and go for set peices.

A strong pack I think only gives advantages in set pieces, but it's the loose forwards that I think wins the forward battles. Not saying for England to now play a running game, look what Campo did in 1991 suggesting that, but wouldn't it be more exciting if there were some incisive players in there rather than relying on set pieces? Hmmfor example just look at our prop who did score a try at the last game, doing what every good prop shoudl do and that's running support for the wingers!!! LOL!

Completely agree with you there OzT.

And MJ agrees too, look at our two tries away against you boys and they are both exactly as you say, short offloads and keeping the ball alive with the loose forwards involved heavily.

The problem we have is that the whole pack then decide they are centres and no one wants to be a forward any more, so we then get bent over by forward dominant teams. Eg SA game.

So we then go and get critical on on the pack and it all goes round in a circle....

yappysnap wrote:Sorry if i wasn't clear on the above. There were similarities between the sides playing style, we did use our small possesion to put points on when it counted, the AB's do exactly the same, i phrased it like that to help people get an idea of what i meant.

Do we do that as well as NZ? No
Are we as consistent as NZ? No

But in that game our style and and game plan was similar to theirs, which is a good thing as it's a winning style. Apologies for up setting people with this.

I will of course never liken any team to the AB's again.

Sorry.

Dude, I wasn't upset, I thought it was hillarious, brightened up my dull workday afternoon

I'm glad i could help.

Hopefully this Saturday we can introduce to the finer points of NZ play again.(Namely forward passes and laying on the ball while waving at the ref )

If you're lucky we'll even do a Haka. How's that for nice?

That's right, two smileys.

Lying on the ball and waving at the ref only works if you are Rugby Jesus McCaw.

And 2 smilies ? Thats just decadent

Nothing worse than forwards in the back line when on a good open attack.... except maybe for the last 2 yards crash ball onto the line.

For some reason from your username I had thought you were a saffa yappysnap, obviously from the profile you're English