Outlook is bleak for England but the RPI offers one area of hope against New Zealand
Both England and New Zealand started their November series with wins, but they now face considerably greater challenges to keep those streaks going, as they meet at Twickenham on Saturday.
England narrowly bested South Africa last weekend, where luck, as much as resilience, helped them over the line, whilst the All Blacks sent a largely developmental side out against Japan, defeating the Cherry Blossoms, 69-31, in Tokyo.
Will the lack of rugby for New Zealand’s front-liners energise them or will it have allowed a measure of rust to creep in? As for England, have they learned – and been able to put right – enough lessons from their outing against the Springboks to genuinely challenge the world’s number one side?
These are questions we won’t know the answers to until the whistle blows at Twickenham on Saturday, but the RugbyPass Index certainly provides a revealing comparison of the two sides.
Here’s how they stack up.
Front row – Ben Moon (87), Dylan Hartley (71) and Kyle Sinckler (70) vs Karl Tu’inukuafe (85), Codie Taylor (92) and Owen Franks (89)
Second row – Maro Itoje (93) and George Kruis (88) vs Sam Whitelock (86) and Brodie Retallick (88)
Back row – Brad Shields (72), Sam Underhill (55) and Mark Wilson (64) vs Liam Squire (86), Ardie Savea (93) and Kieran Read (92)
Half-backs – Ben Youngs (79) and Owen Farrell (92) vs Aaron Smith (84) and Beauden Barrett (91)
Centres – Ben Te’o (61) and Henry Slade (79) vs Sonny Bill Williams (70) and Jack Goodhue (91)
Back three – Jonny May (80), Chris Ashton (82) and Elliot Daly (87) vs Rieko Ioane (87), Ben Smith (88) and Damian McKenzie (91)
Overall XVs – England 1,160 vs New Zealand, 1,313
Bench – Jamie George (88), Alec Hepburn (67), Harry Williams (83), Charlie Ewels (64), Courtney Lawes (77), Danny Care (67), George Ford (72) and Jack Nowell (90) vs Dane Coles (74), Ofa Tuungafasi (75), Nepo Laulala (78), Scott Barrett (92), Matt Todd (90), TJ Perenara (87), Richie Mo’unga (93) and Ryan Crotty (83)
Overall – England 1,768 vs New Zealand, 1,985
That the All Blacks’ lowest scores on the Index are offered up by Williams and Coles, who sit at 70 and 74 respectively, tells you all you need to know about the quality of the side at Steve Hansen’s disposal. Both players comfortably offer more impact and ability than those numbers suggest, and those figures are a product of their recent injuries.
With the New Zealand starting XV averaging a whopping 87.5, it is clearly a monumental task in front of England. In fact, only Itoje, Kruis and Farrell sit above that average in the England XV, whilst George and Nowell are the only two on the bench to do so.
England do post competitive numbers in the second row and their half-backs and back three are not too far behind their opposite numbers, but it is only in the replacement front rowers where England really eek out any kind of advantage over New Zealand.
England did upset the RPI odds last week, by beating a Springbok side which had them bested on the Index, but that disparity was far smaller than the one which New Zealand enjoy going into this contest.
With an advantage of over 150 points in the starting XV, a gap which grows to over 200 when the benches are also included, England look to have a mountain to climb on Saturday.
Watch: An introduction to the RugbyPass Index.
Latest Comments
I have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.
Go to commentsYeah, and ours is waaay bigger than yours. Just as you's get a semi…oh hold on that never happens
Go to comments