Forum menu
Quite the start from Italy at the Library!
They've come on leaps and bounds to keep the mighty England hemmed in their own half.
Tackle only
Is England confuse?
Tackle only
replacing the choke tackle as the tactic du jour?
The way this is going I'm starting to think the Calcutta Cup might be heading north in a couple of weeks 😀
Haskell confirming for the few who didn't already know it that he is indeed thick as mince.
And then playing like a donkey as well.
H-Ass-k
^Lolz at Haskell!! Can't decide if I'm enjoying this or not!
And a most basic schoolboy error to finish the half.
Italy playing a good basic game here.
Chase penalty attempts. Rebound. Score.
Would you Adam & Eve it?
😆
5-6 would have been fair and can't complain about 5-10 either really. Italy playing well, England well below par. Sums up why I would never part with £90 to watch this fixture.
Someone will have to explain how Italy 9 isn't persistently offside
I'm enjoying the match because Italy are still in it.
A few England players not looking too brilliant. Aside the aforementioned culprits Farrell has been totally pish and why didn't Te'o manage to put May in for a try? Has he been taking tips from Brown?
I'd love to hear EJ's half time talk......
Someone will have to explain how Italy 9 isn't persistently offside
I think the ref has explained that already.....
That was brilliant.
Is anyone remotely surprised that haskell doesn't know the rules?!?
I'm predicting a very, very different 2nd half.....
Someone will have to explain how Italy 9 isn't persistently offside
You are James Haskell, I claim my £5, and suddenly a lot of things I've seen on this forum become clear 😀
[quote=namastebuzz ]
I think the ref has explained that already.....
"I am the ref not the coach"
Brilliant
Don't know why England are so frustrated by that tactic. My understanding is.. No ruck just a tackle you don't have to play the ball and opponents can't come within 1 metre. So do nothing!!!
Brilliant - first advert after the halftime analysis is for confused.com
Maybe the ad agency had a tip off about Thursday's referee's meeting too
So do nothing!!!
That's what England have done so far - nothing! 😆
Nothing indeed...x2
LOL. Sucker punch
Boom.
Commentary is nauseating...
Or just run through the middle!!!!!! 🙂
There's going to be a IRB look into this, I'm sure. Ten out of ten to Italy for having the nous to spot a loophole but it's the kind of loophole that makes a mockery of the game.
There was a rule when I was at school that a scrum couldn't be pushed backwards more than five metres. Our first XV had a very lightweight pack so they just let the opposition push them back. It was playing within the rules, but also undermined the basics of the game. I don't know if it was just junior rugby that had the rule.
it's the kind of loophole that makes a mockery of the game.
Rubbish.
Italy are playing within the Laws. No loopholes, just good knowledge of the game. Applaud it, don't whine about it!
Oooh, hello...
I have seen John Hardie do this a lot
Total bollox from Poite on the Nowell "try".
He'd already blown the whistle before any try could have been scored so why waste everybody's time going to the TMO and why waste even more of everybody's time by discussing the finer points of the decision after he's already agreed with him not to award a try which couldn't have been awarded anyway......
Kwalitee defending from Ford and Brown there.
Why did they try and tickle that Italian as he ran past?
It's up to players/coaches to find a solution.
Interesting how, after half time, Care had a grip on it and how to deal with it, then Youngs gets in a muddle over it first few times - shows how uninstinctive it is to see opposition players that side of the breakdown. But fair play to Italy for doing it.
Why did they try and tickle that Italian as he ran past?
Aussie coach. Confused by the accent.
I agree it isn't a loophole but if this becomes a common tactic it will completely change the game. The principle is that you have the ball and are given the space to play it backwards. If that changes, the whole game changes.
The principle is
And The Laws are......
I agree it isn't a loophole but if this becomes a common tactic it will completely change the game.
The W.Chiefs were doing this two years ago.
And The Laws are......
Too many!
Commentators fawning over the quality of England. No mention of the fact they've taken 70 mind to get one score clear of the bottom of the table side...
I agree it isn't a loophole but if this becomes a common tactic it will completely change the game. The principle is that you have the ball and are given the space to play it backwards. If that changes, the whole game changes.
Precisely. Leg theory / bodyline was also within the rules of cricket by the letter of the law, but the laws had to be changed to stop it becoming a boring coconut shy.
Aussie coach. Confused by the accent.
Kiwi, Shirley.
Haha quality of England, its only in the last 5 mins that they seem to have woken up
....to a bonus point win.....
Highlight reel from Parasee 🙂
Agree with Mol, commentary is so awful stopped watching.
Easily Farrell's worst ever kicking game
I want Brian Moore for commentating on this, it would have been awesome.
Dallaglio clearly found it hilarious at half time
What a wonderful, wonderful, wonderful weekend of rugby. I have a lovely fuzzy feeling.
Comedy gold these last 10 mins really
That was fun !
+1 wrecker
I didn't see the Ireland France game, but the other two have been brilliant.
Anyone looked at the AP results? 😆
Big gav still gots it!
Good fun and well done Italy for thinking; really enjoyable weekend of rugby.
CaptainFlashheart - Member
The principle is
And The Laws are......
Quite, I'm not denying that it isn't entirely within the Laws & it has made for an interesting match as England struggled to understand what was going on. But it is essentially a spoiling tactic. If it catches on I think it will wreck the game as you can just stop an attack by utilising this particular aspect of the Law.
Well, at least Hartley understood what was going on 😉 🙂
Routine bonus point win for England. As I expected.
🙄
Quite, I'm not denying that it isn't entirely within the Laws & it has made for an interesting match as England struggled to understand what was going on. But it is essentially a spoiling tactic. If it catches on I think it will wreck the game as you can just stop an attack by utilising this particular aspect of the Law.
It's only a spoiling tactic if your team is too thick to understand that they can't construct a set-piece effectively when there is no off-side line.
Were people talking about the Lions having a good chance of beating NZ? The only chance they've got is if the All Blacks stop training now and spend the next few months in the pub.
This is the worst quality 6N I can remember, in pretty much every respect.
As a one off it was an interesting watch but if long term we have teams electing to choose not to compete in the ruck some of the time I think it will reduce the sport as a visual spectacle. The way to counter it is immediate action. The way to make the most of a ruck is to create a pause whilst the backs setup. This often generates some of most visually pleasing rugby union. If it's a 50/50 of ruck or no ruck the result will be a mush of ad hoc ball carrying.
electing to choose not to compete in the ruck some of the time I think it will reduce the sport as a visual spectacle.
Thete was no ruck, hence no off-side. If England had chosen to play the ball quickly instead of slowing it down each time a player was tackled then it would have made a better visual spectacle.
This is the worst quality 6N I can remember, in pretty much every respect.
I am LOVING it and I suspect many others are too.
[i]This is the worst quality 6N I can remember, in pretty much every respect.[/i]
Sorry, nope I would say it has been one of the most Interesting.
. If England had chosen to play the ball quickly instead of slowing it down each time a player was tackled then it would have made a better visual spectacle.
This, people want to see the ball being moved and yards gained.
Thete was no ruck, hence no off-side. If England had chosen to play the ball quickly instead of slowing it down each time a player was tackled then it would have made a better visual spectacle.
Which would be fine if the ruck was then banned and rugby was always played like that. As England showed in the 2nd half the tactic can be overcome if the opposition do the same every time. If it's a 50/50 if a ruck will form I don't think it's positive for the sport as a visual spectacular.
Sorry to bring people down but this is very sad 🙁
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/welsh-international-rugby-player-elli-12659638
This is the worst quality 6N I can remember, in pretty much every respect.
I remember the early 90's!!!
[img] 
[/img]
Rugby matches across the country are going to be an absolute debacle next weekend.
#prayforthereferees
Which would be fine if the ruck was then banned and rugby was always played like that. As England showed in the 2nd half the tactic can be overcome if the opposition do the same every time. If it's a 50/50 if a ruck will form I don't think it's positive for the sport as a visual spectacular.
Why would it be 50/50 if a ruck forms? A ruck only forms if a certain amount of players form it. It's easy to see when a ruck forms, and deal with it accordingly. It's not a random reffing decision. (There are enough if those already!) Italy simply didn't play the way England wanted and England took forever to work out why.
I remember the early 90's!!!
I think plenty of us do. At least England AND France were quality back then. The refs knew the laws, and we all knew better. This year the team who are likely to win a GS have to ask the ref how to play. 😆
Thete was no ruck, hence no off-side. If England had chosen to play the ball quickly instead of slowing it down each time a player was tackled then it would have made a better visual spectacle.
So would a game where a player runs into contact, goes to ground, lays the ball back with no ruck being formed so another player can then quickly pick it up and run again be more attractive?
Isn't that broadly speaking rugby league?
I thought the tactic was a joke (yes @theotherjohn it would effectively be League then) and Ventner should be ashamed. Eddie Jones was not impressed either
“If that’s rugby then I’m going to retire, because that’s not rugby,” Jones said in his post-match press conference. “Once you lose the ruck, you don’t have a game anymore.
“There was no rugby, so I’m not going to answer any questions about rugby.
“Quote me on that, I don’t think it’s smart rugby.”
Anything that pisses of that whiney toad Jones is good for me!!
Isn't that broadly speaking rugby league?
No it's not, it's closer to SH Super rugby.
thought the tactic was a joke (yes @theotherjohn it would effectively be League
It wouldnt be league as league has an offside line at the tackle
and Ventner should be ashamed.
Who?
Didn't england bore the pants off everyone not so long ago by rejecting proper rugby in favour of the kicking game?
TBH. If you are going to have defenders standing anywhere on the pitch then you might as well allow the attackers to do the same and take out the rule about passing backwards. Then you have American Football.
Let's face it.. This was a one off attempt by the Italians to not get stuffed 60-0 & to head off the suggestions that relegation should be allowed. To that extent it worked very well & they were helped by a rubbish first half performance from England. However, as I said earlier, if this tactic gets widely used it will end up getting banned. It is effectively 'gaming' the offside Law.
t wouldnt be league as league has an offside line at the tackle
Yes, but to a degree so did what we saw today, in that it's only after the tackle where offside becomes 'irrelevant' - the Italians could only move past the 'offside' line when the faux-ruck slowed the ball down - if they'd been ahead of the ball while it was being run at them it would be a massacre, so in essence they have to respect an offside line of sorts.
If the tackle, layback, pick up and go again was instant then they can't run past the ball and disrupt passing.
Interesting that people more knowledgable than us (I'm on catchup BTW) are of the opinion that anyone would have scratched heads a bit on being faced by it for the first time - it's not (in their opinion) England's failing, just that England happened to be the ones who were first up when the plan was hatched.
I don't see it changing the game as it isn't a particularly good tactic. A decent team that played what they saw and understood the rules would run riot. It was England being muppets that was the problem.
England v Scotland looks like a proper big game now.
just that England happened to be the ones who were first up when the plan was hatched.
Wrong. See image above.