Timotheos wrote:Good rugby means you should have good defence and attack.
How does a team win rugby tests without a good attack? Did you
see the English pack? forcing the other team to give away kickable penalties or creating drop goal opportunities is part of the game.
Wilkinson and Robinson? Sure. You picked the kicker and the best runner from deep, and I guess from that POV JR is the prettiest player. But you haven't mentioned sheridan's/easter's ball carrying, or shaw/corry at the attacking lineout, or gomersall's passing and pack management...
i think the game is a lot more subtle than you give it credit for. Rugby scorelines tend to reflect the teams' ability. Would england beat france 10/10 times? of course not. Would france beat NZ 5/10 times? Probably not. But each game was won tactically.
If England win on saturday it will be the same way they have won the last two games - using the power of their pack to create platforms. Why would a win that way change your mind? (and they are going to pwn the SA pack, which was creaking horribly yesterday...)
I think SA will win, but that's not to detract from england. At all.