New Zealand and England are very much at a similar stage to one another in their preparation for the World Cup in 2027. In the forwards, both teams are transitioning in a very young, talented group and have a sprinkling of experience with some old heads. In the backs, there is a mix of young an old but no really clear Bolt-on starters for many of the jerseys with the exception of who starts at 9 for both teams. So, what was the difference on Saturday? Clear identity and tactics: England were levels above NZ in their understanding of game plan and commitment to that cause. The players all looked aligned to what there jobs were and in the most part delivered. Add in a couple of magic moments from Ford and you have a very high chance of winning a test match. New Zealand looked lost at times when getting into phase play. Very over reliant on talented game breakers instead of tactics to manipulate defenses. Missing touch on penalties, tap and go's and not taking options to kick 3 points were baffling at times. Injuries: New Zealand players who are likely to be in the 23 when fit: Tyrel Lomax Fabian Holland Tupou Vaai Noah Hotham Jordie Barrett Patrick tuipolotu Asafo Aumua Caleb Clarke Emoni Narawa England players who are likely to be in the 23 when fit: George Martin George Furbank Tommy Freeman Ollie Chessum Elliot Daly Would these players have made a difference? We will never know. In match injuries: England lost Freddy Steward early which dampened some of their high ball tactics. Marcus Smith admirably filled in and got the job done. New Zealand lost Roigard and Barrett. Roigard is the linch pin of this All Blacks team and there is a huge difference between him and Ratima. This was noticeable in the game particularly clearance kicks from the ruck and set piece and passing from set piece. Word is Beauden Barrett was injured going into the test. Why play him?! He was clearly off kicking off when kicking from the tee and for touch.   submitted by   /u/Collect_the_rent [link]   [comments]