Who mentioned sour grapes?

The IRB should insist that the Georgians get decent amounts of AIs

Scheduled to beat Wales this year!!

Jambas - a weaker side outsmarted a superior side for 40-50 mins. That's very smart coaching that deserves and earned a "well done". Save the criticism for our guys and their coaching team that they took so long to work it out. Still don't get the Hasskell flak for asking the ref. what's more stupid, carrying on in ignorance or admitting your stuck and asking the ref for clarifications?? Not hard that one.

[b]People who don't undertstand the game[/b]

Three strong contenders for Lions places already - Farrelt, Itoje and Hogg

[b]Experts who demonstrate vastly superior knowledge[/b]

Adopting new lingo for effect: Youse don't know what youse talking abooot (delivered with tell tale English accent)

They gave us a fright for 30mins as well.

Well the Chiefs have deployed it frequently in Super Rugby and they've consistently been one of the top sides in recent years, winning the title twice.

Despite looking miserable most of the match, Galtand must be happy that he has such fierce completion for places (even if the mid week captain has now picked itself)

Ok the quality has been down at times a good teams have managed to snatch losses from the jaws of victory but the rugby has been pretty entertaining this year.

@wrecker - they can't challenge for the ball - which is why the Italians were just running round and trying to block passes.

[i]15.6 (d) At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the ball and from directly behind the tackled player or the tackler closest to those players’ goal line.[/i]
Only the tackler can play the ball from any side once on his feet as long as it's before the ruck is formed.

It was rubbish to watch (aside from laughing at how bad Farrell was, it was clear we would run out winners) and I'm glad I didn't spend £90 and take most of a day out to do so.

On another note wliiams and O'Connor have been charged. I didn't realise Carter was arrested for Drink Driving in January. Long shot the club ditches both for Gross Misconduct, Williams looks toast and Carter has been an expensive spectator.

I have a question for duckman:
If there is a tackle with only the tackle and tacklee, can a defending player just take the ball from the attackers side? No gate or anything?

Yup; give him a second of an opportunity to play it.Offside line only kicks in when there is a ruck or maul formed,until then it is open play. I think England were getting confused by the fact that there has to be players from BOTH teams to constitute a ruck or maul. The Italian tackler wouldn't have counted in the refs eyes.

Well the Chiefs have deployed it frequently in Super Rugby and they've consistently been one of the top sides in recent years, winning the title twice.

Not really. They used it occasionally mainly to mess with the minds of the opposition and force a mistake but I understand they have stopped bothering as opposition teams have worked it out so it's proving counter productive.....for a team trying to win the match.

They only tried it with conviction once and it didn't work out for them, although it's fair to say that the ref reacted very differently to poite and perhaps had he been approached beforehand as poite was the chiefs may have got more mileage from it.

I think the referee for that may have been Steve Walsh, in which case the decision would invariably have been the most nobbish one possible.

As well as pick and drive, could a counter tactic be to prepare your forwards behind the false ruck, pick up the ball into this wedge of forwards who immediately then drive as a moving maul - the defending forwards would have to commit to that otherwise you just carry on to the line and the moment they do then you have an offside line and either 4 backs are now out of the game or giving away penalties.

wouldn't work if they didn't engage - ball at the back obstruction. Ball at the front then its a cavalry charge

Listening to the eng team via ref-Mike, they seemed to think the Italians were "in then getting out" so they weren't sure whether it was going to be a ruck or not.

Isn't it only the tackler who can enter from the wrong side? Any other player in a tackle situation can't come within a metre unless entering via the back feet gate?

[i]Yup; give him a second of an opportunity to play it[/i]

I got loads of shit from one of those "sideline experts" when a tackle landed at a lad's feet and he picked the ball up instantly and sprinted off. And he wasn't on the "attackers side", just next to the tackle! You reckon you'd let them play the ball if they're behind the tackle?
What about this 1m Poite said? What was he on about?

DezB - thats the laws on this. If they get within 1m its considered ruck is formed - and they would be offside unless they came in from behind the rearmost feet. really good explanation in picture form further up in this thread

(I was also catching up last night on the post match stuff, and the suggestion that one of the props should have 'gone down injured' giving the rest of the pack chance to convene an emergency meeting and decide how to counter it - I thought it was only football that did feigning injury to gain an advantage? Or is this again 'don't do as i do, do as i say?' 😉 )

I didn't have a problem with asking the referee to clarify the situation, and fair enough for him to give the details of the Law without the advice how to overcome it - how close must they be to be considered part of / approaching the tackle area, the 1m / 2m clarification, and the question about grabbing an opponent and adding him to the ruck against his will, etc. If i have a criticism it's that England were too set into 'we want there to be a ruck, how can we make it into one' instead of trying to find a completely different solution. That said - I've never played a test match before but i have worked in some pretty decent organisations and getting anyone to go beyond the mindset of 'well, this is how we do things around here' isn't easy, particularly when you aren't quite sure what is legit or not.

Ball at the front then its a cavalry charge

Yep - and?

If no-one engages, charge to the line. As soon as they engage move the ball to the back but you've had the effect of creating the offside situation you want anyway.

cavalry charge is not allowed under the laws

Regarding the Chiefs there's a good article by www.the42.ie being referenced on Twitter

http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-no-ruck-blues-backfired-2715116-Apr2016/?

Couple of things form the weekend from me
1) AW Jones again was over ruled by his kickers/made what turned out to be wrong call. Yes Robshaw did it against Wales in RWC, but he was flayed for it. If AW can't tell his own players what to do, I can't see him as Lions captain. Gatland may think otherwise and that is what counts but for me that was it. Poor game and poor management
2) I am fine with the Italian tactics, however it did ruin the flow of the game. England took too long to cop on, but I can see why as there was a certain amount of drifting in and out of the area; at one point the ref called "tackle" and then had to correct himself, which doesn't help; and also the Italians several times walked round to employ their tactic, but were told it was a ruck and to return. Surely as soon as they stray offside it should have been a penalty for offside, not just a friendly word to get back onside? And because of the confusion for the offside line the Italians in the centre crept up and didnt seem to get blown up for it.

England need to wake up if they are to beat Scotland

It is with the ball with the front man I believe.

Tim - modern rugby seems to be that as long as you respond to the ref and don't interfere you are ok.

Regarding the Chiefs there's a good article

I linked that yesterday and someone beat me to the Chiefs reference even during the game on here IIRC 😉 🙂

[i]tjagain - Member
DezB - thats the laws on this. If they get within 1m its considered ruck is formed[/i]

It's not though - 1m is not mentioned in the laws. It's the refs interpretation (as explained in the Chiefs article).
I still think the law I posted above applies if a non-tackler wants to challenge for the ball.
(Anyway, all this discussion has confirmed that I got it right in the couple of matches where it came up! 🙂 )

On 1), the mitigating factors are the position of the kick, wind, time in the game it was, momentum was with Wales, off form of the kicker. It wasn't an awful decision and wasn't the pnly reason Wales lost but didn't help. The England one was very different with a completely different match situation, poor game awareness compounded by the awful lineout.

On 2) I would love to know Duckmans interpretation but if the defenders use the no offside line at the tackle to get in to an annoying position can't they just stay there after a ruck is formed in the same way the tackler can get to their feet and do what they want in a ruck when it forms around them??? Maybe the contesting for the ball part is what allows the tackler to do this and the Italians should make their way back when the ruck is formed???

So, you can stand where you like if a ruck isn't formed, but if you encroach within 1m, you are deemed to be joining the tackle, making it a ruck, and you must join through the gate.

If you do stand on the wrong side, and your players join a ruck, you become offside if you interfere.

dantsw13 - yup agreed, but if part of your tactic is to cause an obstruction, then be going offside and waving your hands around is "interfering", so if you try it and a ruck forms you get to retreat with no penalty? Seems to be a no lose situation? I think that is what annoyed me. If you look at some of the examples in the 42 article then the Chiefs were caught a few times, but Italy seemed to wander around, in and out, and confusion reigned and the ref didn't seem too bothered

Listening to the eng team via ref-Mike, they seemed to think the Italians were "in then getting out" so they weren't sure whether it was going to be a ruck or not.

Happened several times - more than one Italian player in on the "tackle", one rolls away and stays up a meter away from the contact area. That was Haskells clarification - How far away should the be to be considered "out", and if he's cleared them, whens its a ruck? - "1m", said the ref and "if another (Italian) play joins [b]after [/b]the initial tackle.

Vis a vis, now more than 1 Italian within 1M of the ball and no more in after the tackle, its a tackle.

I was at Twickenham yesterday. Even with a ref link I had no idea what was going on. Blue shirts in apparently offside positions getting away with it, constant discussions between the ref and English senior players, and hearing the bizarre (at the time) "I'm a a ref not a coach comment'. It just looked like the ref had a shocker.

Got home, watched the game on the TV and of course it all made sense. The ref wasn't bad and fair play to Italy for coming up with a game plan to confuse and frustrate England. Yes a little disappointing that none of the senior players had the nouce to sort out a plan to counter on the pitch and it had to take the coaching staff at half time to do that. A simple pick and go up the middle would have worked and made Italy think twice about using the tactic.

The tactic is a one trick pony. Now it's been seen on the International stage teams will be wise to it. It's not a bad tactic to use once in a while to mix things up but all the time...?

The thing I think is a bit disappointing is that Twickenham tickets are a little easier to obtain for the Italy match. The atmosphere is different with a lot more regular fans, families and children at the match compared to the usual 'green jacket' brigade. The 1st half was just an appalling stop start affair and fans were denied a decent flowing running game of Rugby. But of course the Italian fans were loving the first half!

Italy next match?

Italy were pinged a few times when a ruck formed and they got it wrong.

TBH I think it's a bit of a sideshow. It didn't really impact the game. England's issue in 1H was missing touch and dropping the ball, plus giftingvthe italians a try by switching off at the pen.

I love a bit of innovation - like the sco lineout v Ire.

The thing I think is a bit disappointing is that Twickenham tickets are a little easier to obtain for the Italy match

As I said even as a Debenture Holder for 20 years I didn't generally bother to apply for Italy tickets, one year I had some and couldn't resell at face to friends. The days of Twickenham being an automatic sell out are gone especially for pre-Christmas internationals. With Austrailia coming every year that fixture has lost some of its special appeal. IME those of us in Green jackets sing and make as much noise as anyone.

Duckman as our resident laws expert, picture in the online version of the times shows an Italian tackler, England players over the ball, 2 Italian guards, one of which appears to have his hand on an England player. Surely that is a ruck? And the players look within this 1 m area too.
The problem is it must be a nightmare to decide what is and isn't a ruck for the ref let alone the players. The example in the Times would appear to indicate it was a ruck but what is your interpretation. Sorry can't link to the picture but I'm sure someone will be able.

Agreed Dan, the tactic didn't keep the game close, that was due to English inaccuracy etc as you say. The tactic was really boring and hugely negative. England where slow to react, they could have just got a big forward to take the ball and smash the 9 every time he was stood there then a few more lads over the ball. 2 or 3 big hits and he'd have been off or at least not stood there.

You reckon you'd let them play the ball if they're behind the tackle?
What about this 1m Poite said? What was he on about?

If you mean retreating back and picking up the ball from the attacking teams side, no. However if there are not enough participants from both teams then there isn't a ruck or maul, therefore no gates/offside line for a player coming forward. BUT...It is one of those ones isn't it? I didn't see the 1m incident, was he maybe wanting a metre round the tackled player to allow him the chance to play it?

From your description Bear; sure is!
Ruck; two or more players COMPETING for the ball.
Maul; THREE or more players COMPETING for the ball. Competition is the key word.

Maybe they should print the rules of rugger on the packets of the prawn sandwiches.

I reckon it's this: "[i]Most referees view the ‘tackle zone’ as being within a 1 metre radius or rectangle of the tackled player/tackler/both, and view any step inside that area as intent to approach the tackle"[/i]
[url= http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-super-rugby-tactics-2013507-Mar2015/ ]sauce[/url].
Yep, 'one of those' many situations 🙂

As I said even as a Debenture Holder for 20 years I didn't generally bother to apply for Italy tickets, one year I had some and couldn't resell at face to friends. The days of Twickenham being an automatic sell out are gone especially for pre-Christmas internationals. With Austrailia coming every year that fixture has lost some of its special appeal. IME those of us in Green jackets sing and make as much noise as anyone.

That may have been in the past but fans who don't have access to tickets via the traditional routes (clubs / old boys network etc) are now wise that tickets for some of the less 'traditional' matches are now on public sale via ticketmaster etc.

Italy was as good as sold out yesterday as were all of the autumn internationals including Argentina and Fuji.

http://www.autumn-internationals.co.uk/2016/england-fixtures.html

The 42 article refers to the 1m rule too. I think they are saying within 1m you are deemed to have engaged, making it a ruck.

[i]The 42 article refers to the 1m rule too[/i] - that was my sauce.

Got that eventually - I'm as slow thinking as the England pack this morning!

Ah but Dez...Does that include the player acting as scrum half? Is he or she in the case of Connor Murray, joining the breakdown and counted as such or attempting to play the ball out and not counted? (there is an answer to this one)

A ruck is when 1 or more players from each side are [b]bound[/b] over or competing for the ball. The tackler and the tackled player are both discounted if they are on the floor. The scrum half is not bound, therefore not part of the ruck. If no ruck is formed the player has to place the ball immediately, as soon as the scrum half picks up the ball it is then considered open play. The offside line has not been established because there was no ruck.

I've been involved in numerous discussions with the ref when the opposing player is tackled, the tackler is still on the ground. I've stepped over the ruck to kick the ball away as the tackler was placing it, only for him to grab the ball back. I was pinged a few times until it was pointed out that the tackled player was playing the ball / holding on.

I can't see in any way there'll be a rule change..

In the same way I can't see Italy getting away with that tactic again.

Sour grapes from Jones!

Apart from the ruck issue, what happened to Farrell's kicking yesterday, both off the tee and out of hand he was shocking. It wasn't that windy. I live a couple of miles away from Twickenham and the trees were barely moving, also since they completed the stand making it one continuous structure with no gaps the stadium provides shelter from the worst of the wind anyway.

Apart from the ruck issue, what happened to Farrell's kicking yesterday, both off the tee and out of hand he was shocking.

All I can think is that the whole 50th cap thing got to him - he's a player who divides opinion but is normally pretty reliable when it comes to kicking. He looked nervous probably for the first time in his international career.

Or maybe he's had some kicking pointers from Ford! 😆

Kicking by his normally high standards was poor, but there was apparently more wind than it seemed too.

Slightly off form / occasion pressure X tougher than average conditions = looked bloody useless

The Italians couldn't even kick straight from almost directly in front! Oh......

Was Farrell rattled? Usually very calm but I have seen him get rattled and then his game goes to pieces.

This makes nice reading today! IRB rankings

1 New Zealand 94.78

2 England 91.02

3 Australia 86.35

4 Ireland 84.18

5 Scotland 82.18

tjagain - Member
DezB - thats the laws on this. If they get within 1m its considered ruck is formed - and they would be offside unless they came in from behind the rearmost feet. really good explanation in picture form further up in this thread

POSTED 6 HOURS AGO #

Not quite true.
As above, ruck is formed when two opposing players are bound/engaged competing over the ball.
The 1m area, is the space in which you can bind/engage with the opponent in order to form that ruck (whether they like it or not). Their presence within being enough "competition".
If they're further away from the tackle and you attempt to engage/bind, you're not rucking, you're taking a player out off the ball.

BREAKING NEWS: World Rugby and police investigating suspicious betting activity relating to 6N kicking. Both Farrell and Dunbar rumoured to be involved. Farrell has been released but Dunbar still helping with enquiries. Sun Bet allegedly offered 8:1 on midfield player kicking ball backwards by more than 10m during open play.

Neither player has been available for comment and more news is unlikely to follow later.

Sun Bet allegedly offered 8:1 on midfield player kicking ball backwards by more than 10m during open play.

Dunbar had this nailed too 🙂

Interestingly after three rounds, I would suggest that the four pre-tournament front runners for Lions captain have already seen their respective cases weakened - not least since none of them are secure in their place in the 1XV line up.

Interestingly after three rounds, I would suggest that the four pre-tournament front runners for Lions captain have already seen their respective cases weakened

Who are they then?
I still think Warburton will be captain.

Breaking News (ish..)

Josh Strauss will be announced as a signing for Sale Sharks tomorrow, for the 17/18 season.

Good, but we've needed a big powerful lock so i wonder if Beaumont will move to Lock? Wonder how much Strauss will be on?

Thats a pity. Bluto has been good up north but glasgow and Edinburgh had 50 players whos contracts were up this year and as their stock has increased there is no way we can hang on to them all. Just don't leave him on the bench please.

Sale will still have possibly the smallest squad in the Prem, so I expect him to get lots of game time. Will possibly mean Cameron Neild moving up to hooker, which is where he apparently wants to be anyway.
Also, suspect the wage bill will mean he's a regular starter.

Just seen this:

Bristol (9) 12
Pens: Henson 3 Drop-goal: Henson
Bath (3) 11
Tries: Rokoduguni Pens: Priestland 2

😆

In other news Sam Underhill is a ****ing monster, how is he not the England 7?

how is he not the England 7?

😉

The rule is so clear Connor O'Shea made absolutely sure he discussed the specific rule and how Italy would play it with the Ref before the game.

Can't see Farrell being involved in any betting scandals, too much to lose and little to gain financially on a relative basis.

M-dwarf; Strauss could look pretty uninterested at times, Munster at a bouncing Scotstoun; immense..Connacht in front of 10 Irishmen and a dog; not so much.

Bollocks to that ruck shit..
I present Bristol v Bath man of the match
[img] [/img]

Gotta share this. You need the sound on.

https://twitter.com/btsportrugby/status/836276003475439616

Disgraceful. Change the rules. Refund the fans. Etc.....

Thats brilliant!!!

Why haven't I seen a clip of Murray putting his hand on the face of a Frenchman in the 22nd minute. Pretty certain it was contact with the face which is an immediate citing according to here....

Thanks CHF 😆

Bollocks to that ruck shit..
I present Bristol v Bath man of the match

I know a man in bristol with the strangest...

And he and I, as Wuss/Brizz adversaries, will be sharing a cot come Sunday when the sides meet at Sixways, but we'll be 1,000 miles away from the grounds. It's gonna be tense, and that's just his butt cheeks.

Jambas, I had hoped that

more news is unlikely to follow

Was enough. 😉

Right - I've just re-watched the game with 20-20 hindsight, and I can see why England are upset. There were many many occasions where Italy started with men in the ruck then withdrew. They then went offside and werevallowed to do so. Surely once a ruck is formed, it remains, even if one side roll out. Italy seemed to make the tackle with 2 or 3, let England form the guards, then withdraw and place a man between the England 9 & 10. That's clear offside in my book.

Haven't watched it again dan, but once a ruck or maul is formed, there is an offside line until the ball is played out. Generally speaking Italy's tactics were legal yet England still won with a bonus point, I don't get the refund comments from the likes of Jones,or the RFU's PUBLIC announcement of "seeking clarity." Something done by every int team after every test...quietly. What do they expect to accomplish other than looking like having a hissy fit because Italy didn't allow them to blood fringe players in the way they wanted?

That's my thinking too Duckman. It certainly wasn't every tackle, but there were multiple times it started with more Italians, who then left the tackle zone.

I agree about the whinging though. I guess he either was really angry, or was deflecting.

That's my thinking too Duckman. It certainly wasn't every tackle, but there were multiple times it started with more Italians, who then left the tackle zone.

You can have more than one tackler dont forget.

At the moment the ref calls ruck or tackle which helps the defending side know what to do. This would seem to help the defending team, surely the ref is there to ensure an even contest?
A simple rule change would be to stop that call and make it a player decision, although this would make for a penalty fest I suspect, especially when the brainless men in white play as they are clueless about the rules anyway.....

Just leave it as is. Any team tries to do an italy would see the oppisition pick and drive down the middle as the attacking teams " tackle attenders" can just pick the ball up and go forward.

AA I think you are right however the danger is teams will analyse when to ruck and when not to and it may make for a disjointed game.
I can imagine teams not contesting rucks in opponents 22 therefore making a pass back and a clearance kick much more difficult. You might then be faced with teams punching up the middle till they are in a position to attack. Surely less up the jumper rugby is better.

Both teams will be defending at some point Bear, so it evens itself out.

If you pick and go up the middle, force a tackle and a ruck all the defenders are offside. Its a non issue imo. It was just funny that England couldnt think on their feet but I reckon wvery one even Hask and Hartley will know what to do now!

[i]There were many many occasions where Italy started with men in the ruck then withdrew. They then went offside[/i]

coulda sworn I said that already!

The Nathan Hughes clip shows that it can be effective if used sparingly (and correctly) - and the Toulouse players clearly knew the law... Funny that Hughes was on the pitch during that whole first half and didn't explain to his Captain what was going on!