[Closed] Rugby Thread 2017/18.

Freddie Mercury at #10 for Aus

Better match than Eng v Arg so far

Eng v Arg was bloody dire I thought! Not hard to be better than that

Wales brave but out classed

Brave, and doing the hard stuff well but lacking some basics and basic decision making

Shit luck for Jiffy Junior there 🙁

The new starters didn't look out of place and the general new pattern of play looked much more positive and successful but ultimately they didn't engage their brains at crucial times and do the basics. Easy to say with hindsight but daft things like not putting the restart out when there was nothing to play for. Overall thought, much more encouraging than I expected.

Dear Santa,

For Christmas can I have -

1) a Welsh team that can win a game rather than 'making us really proud'
2) some refs who are competent. They don't have to be good, just competent.
3) for me to have the chance to punch Michael Cheika. Nothing more, just a punch in his irritating face.
4) for Cheika and Eddie Jones to be cited for poor conduct, because of the way they behave in front of the camera. And banned from rugby forever.
5) a new bike.

Thank you very much (and give my love to the elves)

IdleJon (aged 49 and a quarter)

for Cheika and Eddie Jones to be cited for poor conduct, because of the way they behave in front of the camera. And banned from rugby forever.

I do think your point is valid here. Whilst it's good to know they are passionate the temper tantrum attitude and obvious foul language isn't a good example.

Did anyone predict Ireland by 35? [EDIT: over an admittedly poor South African display.]

Not 35, but I thought 20+ was on the cards. The Bok back 3 would have to improve to reach woeful and Louw and Du Toit lack sufficient mobility for the back row. Jantjies is very erratic as well though better when Serfontein is at 12. I thought Ireland were excellent and picked the fights they could win clinically.

Idlejon - you have now taken over the scots mantle as plucky losers 😉

I didn't see much wrong with the reffing today

deadlydarcy - Member

Did anyone predict Ireland by 35? [EDIT: over an admittedly poor South African display.]

I had SA to win. I didn't realise quite how poor this SA team is. they were so carp I didn't even bother to watch the second half.

Wales to me looked like they were trying to play a more expansive game but breaking the habits of a decade was too much for them. Dummy runners easy to read, too many passes not going to the man. Just not the instinctive play you need.

You had SA to win?

😆

It was always going to be Ireland's to lose - but I didn't expect SA to be that poor. Lost count of the amount of times I heard "much improved" when hearing them described over the last few days.

They have much work to do. I'm delighted with the result but take no pleasure in seeing SA look so weak.

I think it was more poor decision making in when to throw it around a bit and when to be calmer and retain possession TJ. It will come with time but they tried to do too much too often as individuals and force things. Genia and Foley showed them how to boss a game and make the right decisions and not shovel on pressure. In fairness the starters must have been flippin' knackered with the weak bench forcing them to stay on so long. I'm really pleased Evans had a good game although Faletau looked uncharacteristically off and 1/2p didn't look at all comfortable with trying to be more attacking and running the ball more. It would be interesting to see him and loopy Liam switch around a bit more but it is far easier said than done!

DD - yup. I have not been following the 4 nations and had not realised how poor SA have become. they looked absolutely awful

Dan - thats really my point. Having spent a decade playing one way to try to play another way is very tricky

~so who has the happiest coach? Ireland I would assume. England looked turgid the bits I saw, Wales looked rudderless and clueless. Scotland close in defense was ermmm - crap

Genia/Beale/Foley are now seasoned internationals on top of their creative flair - very good players. Eng & Wales trying to extend their squads - a good thing for the future. Underhill & Lozowski looked good prospects for England.

I still expect us to beat Aus next week.

Genia/Beale/Foley are now seasoned internationals on top of their creative flair - very good players. Eng & Wales trying to extend their squads - a good thing for the future. Underhill & Lozowski looked good prospects for England.

I still expect us to beat Aus next week.

TJ - England rarely compete at the Breakdown. It's the EJ way. Up fast & fan out.

Fair enough. On a rugby forum I am on there has been much debate over this due to the new laws. Scotland took about 5 turnovers at the ruck. they are still playing for turnovers

I must admit I'm not up to speed on the new laws this year - been crazy busy & only watched a few games. What's the main difference?

It used to be that a ruck was formed when one player from each side arrived at the ruck and tried to push each other off the ball. Now the ruck is formed once the first player in the side with the ball arrives. So any poacher has to be there before any of his opponents. It means the timing for a successful steal is tighter. But Watson still got 3 IIRC today and two others got them as well.

some fans seemed to think it would stop the contest for the ball and some teams would simply stop going for turnovers as England appeared to do ( from the bits of the game I saw) Whereas Scotland were still going for turnovers and got a few

I reckon both England and Scotland were just playing to their strengths. Watson is quick to the breakdown so he aims for the ball (it's the very best part of his game), no one in that England team is particularly good at the steal so they didn't bother rather than risk the penalty. If a Curry or Wilson or Itoje were playing they may have had a go.

Just watching the France game. Good luck to the Scots . . . you may need it.

England have played that way for a while. If a t/o is on they will have a go, but it isn't plan A

Idlejon - you have now taken over the scots mantle as plucky losers

I didn't see much wrong with the reffing today

It's reffing in general, not specifically the Welsh game. It always seems such confused thinking. For example, I think it was you who said what I thought - the Mike Brown incident was either no penalty or a red.

Glenda, in the Welsh game, didn't seem to understand the basic principles of scrum laws, depriving Wales of a good platform and a probable penalty try. He didn't review the possible high hit on Evans. It wasn't, but if he had looked he may have seen Beale knocking on. If this is an attempt to speed the game up, why then allow Aus to waste so much time at the end?

I was watching some League today. It looks very straightforward compared to Union these days.

was watching some League today. It looks very straightforward compared to Union these days.

That because has always been more straightforward.

Welsh pack that finished was what
Smith
Dacey
Brown
AWJ
British and Irish Lion Cory Hill
Shingler
Cross
Faletau

God thats shit. Only two of those would make another British squad.

AA - how could they lose with a pack like that ?

TMO looked at the possible knock on by Beale. Decided it wasn't. The question asked was "did he always have control of the ball" and the TMO decided he did

Yes I thought the brow tackle in the air was a poor decision. The best refs on that one go thru a process 1) was it a genuine attempt for the ball? if not 2) did he hit the player in the air? if so 3) did he land on his head. back or front? the ref failed to go thru those stages thus made IMO the wrong call. Its the ony one in all the games I saw today where I thought it definitely the wrong call. Others were much more subjective.

Dunno what you thought was wrong with the decision on the scrums on the line. the scrum was stationary, ball at the back. thats now "play it" it then collapsed. Tough - its play on.

I thought wales incredibly stupid going for that series of scrums. When it started they had 9 mins and were what 13 pts down. When the series of scrums finished 4 mins had gone. ~that cost them any chance of a win. should have tapped and gone or gone for a lineout. then there would still have been plenty of time after the restart to score again. Playing for a penalty try / yellow card is just not clever at that point. It wasted too much time. Fine ( if dull and anti rugby) if you only need 6 pts but stupid when yo need two tries

I was watching on my phone whilst trying to wrangle a house full of 7 year old boys but was Evans not hit with a high shot just before the try? Did they look at that..ref and the video ref seemed to have a pretty lax attitude to late tackles and off the ball stuff in general I thought.
Cracking finish by Amos. I wonder if Cement will consider putting Liam at 15 and starting with Amos and Evans. I reckon 1/2p would have been dropped if North was fit.

1/2p is there for points off the boot. Biggar doesn't seem to be seen as a good enough alternative. I do agree though that L Williams at 15 changes the attacking dynamic in a way 1/2p never will and gives up little if anything defensively which is why I wondered if they could interchange a bit as a game situation changes. I think Loopy Liam could do it but 1/2p less so

Australia deserved to win but the angle which showed Beale's control or lack of was only shown for a split second as the call was being made. They didn't look at all angles before moving on. I'm not convinced there was a high tackle but that was brushed over similarly quickly

Trys win matches. If you have to have a lessor player in for his kicking then you reduce your chances of tries. Bigger is a competent kicker anyway is he not?

Loopy Liam IMO is the best attacking player Wales have - get him where he is most effective. If thats 15 then thats where he should play

Put it this way - as a scots Fan I'd prefer to see loopy on the wing and 1/2p at full back when you play us

DanW the TMO sees more than we see on the big screen / telly. they sit in front of a bank of monitors with someone else to help find the right bits

I don't know if the TMo studied that angle and I agree from one it looked a bit dodgy but IIRC the TMO has to see something "clear and obvious" to rule out a try for a knock on / forward pass and the other angle it looked like he scooped it up

Aye;AB's looked really slick. Do you remember when we though Barrett was flaky...Now it is more a case of Dan who?

1/2p is there for points off the boot. Biggar doesn't seem to be seen as a good enough alternative

Thats rubbish Biggar is a top top quality kicker. Go and watch the England Wales world cup match.
You dont get much higher pressure than this game.

1/2p is there as the other options on the wing with North out are Amos or Fluffbert.

England were shit yesterday. They struggled to impose a fast game on Argentinia. On the occasions they did, they made good inroads or scored. Without Billy they lack an effective carrier; Hughes had a good game but isn't as good in heavy traffic.

Slade for all his form in the AP did not have a great game; he did some really good stuff but made some daft errors, threw some poor passes. He looked a bit happier when JJ (didn't do much either) was subbed and he went to 13. Watson looked lively and too a few good catches, Lawes has developed and looked to offload rather than just take contact, Ford's distribution was good but his kicking was poor. I'm guessing Eddie might be a but grumpy this weekend.

Scotland Samoa looked to be pretty entertaining from the bits I saw. Are the Scottish supporters worried about defence? Samoa scored a coup,e of what looked like pretty easy tries.

Thought the Wales game was pretty entertaining even though the SH hoodoo continues for them. Did Faletau have butter on his hands? He knocked on a few times without being under too much pressure.

Didn't see the Ireland game, but that's a bit of a beating for SA. Looks like a long autumn for them.

Scotland Samoa looked to be pretty entertaining from the bits I saw. Are the Scottish supporters worried about defence? Samoa scored a coup,e of what looked like pretty easy tries.

Yes in a word. The tries that Samoa scored looked easy because of earlier mistakes Scotland had made. Having said that most of the problems came from a very quick pick and go game which meant Scotland struggled to realign in defence and IMO the 6N sides don't do that pick and go at such pace.

Worried but not that worried. We scored 6 tries and we had a pretty weakened pack and Samoas fightback mainly came after the bench was emptied with some very inexperienced and fringe players coming on.

I may have to watch the NZ game from behind the sofa however

Anyone want to lend us some props? We have plenty of scrum halves to offer in exchange

We finished the game with second choice TH, 5th choice LH and 3rd / 4th choice hooker

Anyone want to lend us some props?

You can have two quality tightheads in Rhodri Jones and Scott Andrews 😆 no need for thanks you're welome!

Nanai-Williams try looked all too easy. As long as Scotland score more tries than the opposition it's not really an issue. At least they scored some and played with some pace and ambition unlike England!

a_a I've no qualms with Biggar kicking at all. I was more talking about the selectors perception. So long as 1/2p is fit he seems the preferred choice then wingers are found around him. Even with everyone fit and some decent wingers i can't see Gatland dropping 1/2p for Williams, though I completely agree with you

mindmap - the defence was in disarray a phase or two before that and the speed of the recycle meant there was a 5 on 2 on that side. Swinson had jogged out of that gap round to the other side as well. The speed at which Samoa played the pick and go was what created the spaces. No hesitation at all - arrive at the ruck at speed and pick the ball up and set off in one move unlike NH sides who seem to pause for a moment or two behind the ruck

So for me a mix of poor reset of the defence and speed of the attack. Worrying tho as in the past its been our close in defece that has been good! Everytime we iron out one weakness another appears! Apart from restarts of course where we have been useless for years. Lost 2 restarts yesterday one of which led directly to a try.

All teams should do the short contestable restart against scotland - we cock them up whereas the long restarts we will not kick away - we will counter from.

Thanks AA - do they have a scottish granny?

It seems to me Gatland has an idea of how he wants to play and selects for that. He wants a solid 15 so its 1/2p.

Toony picks the best players we have and builds a game plan to suit. Mind you its easier when you don't have much choice 😉

It seems to me Gatland has an idea of how he wants to play and selects for that. He wants a solid 15 so its 1/2p.

In the past yes, now? I'm not so sure. Didnt pick him for Lions. Without better wing options available its hard to tell.

Thanks AA - do they have a scottish granny?

It seems to me Gatland has an idea of how he wants to play and selects for that.

So it was pure luck that Phillips,Roberts, Davies, North, Fluffbert all came along at the same time aling with Forwards like, Gethin, Faletau, AWJ, Lyduate and Warburton who are not heavy carriers but have massive defensive work rate?
Or is it that Cement used a game plan to suit the players available? Lets not forget he also chose Henson at every possible chance and he wasnt a bosher or Shane.

Philips suited how he wanted to play. there were good alternatives available were there not? Wee nippy guys?

anyway - just to show how far scotland have come here are a few guys who had good international careers for Scotland while making Cuthbert look like a World beater. 10 / 15 years ago these were our best backs

10 - Godman / Parks
Centres - De Rollo, Laney, Morrison, Henderson
wings - Danelli, walker, Webster
FB the wonderful ~Rowan Shepard!

Now its not their fault these were the best we had but jeepers thats a huge steaming pile of mince. Thom Evans maybe the best back of that era got 3 tries in 44 caps

In the past yes, now? I'm not so sure. Didnt pick him for Lions. Without better wing options available its hard to tell.

It was more that you had the points from either Sexton or Farrell so he could pick the best full back available I reckon

there were good alternatives available were there not? Wee nippy guys?

Peel ****ed off to England and until Webb got his head together there wasnt much else. Certainly not anyone as good as Phillips

Besides picking someone just because they were small and fast would not be picking the best player it would be doing exactly the thing you criticise Gatland for doing. Phillips was a multi test Lion before Gatland was Lions head coach.

Phillips was bloody brilliantly in his day and would likely have made it into any international match day squad. Yeah he was a bit of a jeb but a lot of good players are.

It was more that you had the points from either Sexton or Farrell so he could pick the best full back available I reckon

Not sure I follow your reasoning, Biggar can kick for Wales and is as good a kicker as Faz and better than Sexton. I realise people like to be critical of Cement but the bottom line is 1/2p is being picked for Wales purely because the other options involve Fluffbert or Amos. Fluffbert is poor now he has lost a yard if pace and Amos is solid if unspectacular and lacks gas for the wing at the top level so Liam plays wing. If 1/2p is picked when Liam, North and Evans are fit then we can start being critical.

Just watched brief highlights of the england game. What was the justification for Tucalets yellow card?

Ref said " no realistic chance of getting the ball, Brown landed dangerously

Poor decision for me. should be worked out on 1) was it an honest attempt for the ball / fair contest? if not 2) did he tackle the player in the air? if so 3) did he bring him down safely? if not 4) did he land on front / arm ( no card) back? ( yellow) head? ( red)

From my understanding thats the process the ref shuld follow so it should either have been honest attempt for the ball ( I think that right as he did get his hands to it) no foul play on or if it wants to see it as a foul then its a red as Brown landed on his head first. A poor decision. Either no pen or red.

Ref said " no realistic chance of getting the ball, Brown landed dangerously

So Tucalet needs to know how high Brown is going to jump? Very much a home town decision.

So Tucalet needs to know how high Brown is going to jump? Very much a home town decision.

Its the wrong decision because it has to be either "no foul" if it was a fair contest or red 'cos brown landed on his head.

Its a subjective judgement tho as to if its a fair contest for the ball

Daly got a red as he played the man Tucalet went for the ball. Looked like a fair contest and an accident to me.

Edit...and as TJ said if it wasnt a fair contest it should have been a red

debatable and subjective if it wa a fair contest. I think the wrong decision but I understand why the ref disagrees as he thought the argentinian had no chance of getting the ball. Its not enough to be going for the ball - you have to get close to getting it

I think if it was reffed to the letter of the law then it was either a red or no card.

But the ref showed an understanding of the game and applied some common sense. If Nigel Owens made the decision then we would probably not be debating it so much but more applauding him for his feel for the game......

Owens wouldn't have got to a wrong decision tho he would likely have waved play on as fair contest but he would not have ignored the player landing on his head. I have seen him when reffing games go thru the sequence of decision making as above and then go to the player " sorry I have no option, red card"

Realistic chance of getting the ball for me. Agree with everyone who says red or nothing

I've said it before, but rugby the laws protect a reckless catcher whereas more open laws mean common sense generally protects both even if there is a good scrap for the ball. It's gone too far to go back to that but if a catcher knows they are protected as much as they currently are then they take risks they otherwise wouldn't do

Yep, agreed should be no foul or red card. I’m actually in favour of the former, 2 players jumping, both going for the ball. One is certain to be in a better position than the other. It’s something that’s almost been removed from the game, yet there never used to seem to be an issue in the competition for a high ball? Maybe rose tinted glasses...

How many days till Wales announce some complete dross of a reserve team to lose to Georgia?

Aye - I agree its gone too far but it has made the game safer. You used to see players jumping for the ball being cartwheeled thru the air often - really dangerous. Its ages since I have seen a really bad one. Maybe make more of the " no jumping into a tackle" law to even it up ie the jumping player also has a responsibility not to land on someone and they certainly should not be allowed to jump " studs up"

Ref player the rules which rightly or wrongly outcome based

He said that Brown fell on his shoulder. So on that basis he was right. Given that he landed on his head he probably made a mistake but hey the victim was English!!!

And a pit bull used to say, the only opinion that matters is the ref. He made the call. The rest is history.

Hope Brown is ok

Amos is solid if unspectacular and lacks gas for the wing at the top level

It feels like almost two minutes since you expertly told me that he was young and inexperienced after I made a similar comment. I reckon he's had two or three caps since.

Dunno what you thought was wrong with the decision on the scrums on the line. the scrum was stationary, ball at the back. thats now "play it" it then collapsed. Tough - its play on.

Since when has that been 'play on'? Especially when one side deliberately collapses? It all depends on the ref - and that's sort of my point.

The ball tends to get to the back foot before dominant scrums start pushing. That's always been the same. Calling play on when the ball reaches the 8 de-powers a dominant scrum or means that packs will put the power on before a strike is made, something the authorities are supposedly promoting. Confused thinking, see!

Since the last few years. If the ball is at the back and the scrum is stationary its play on. Been going on for years.

Happens a lot. YOu get the chance to push but if you are going nowhere and the ball is playable you have to play it. refs have been calling "play it" in this situation for a couple of years now.

When a team has the ball at the number 8’s feet, and is trying to move forward but is not succeeding in doing so, the referee will call “use-it” once the ball has been at the number 8’s feet for a reasonable amount of time (3-5 seconds). The team must then use the ball immediately.

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=20&language=EN

Yeah, what's your point?

The scrum ends when the ref calls 'Use it' or it has been stationery for 3-5 seconds. Not when the Australians collapse it to prevent a push-over. Refs at the moment are allowing the weaker side to collapse and then calling 'use it' because it's easier. That's weak reffing.

It had been stationary tho before the collapse hence the "use it". correct application of the law

Ffs, it's 00.26, do I really need to rewind the game (after undeleting it) and break it down to slo-mo just to win an internet argument? 😆

71 minutes. Scrum 5, Welsh put in. Ozzies collapse, Welsh penalty. They opt for another scrum. Ball goes in, scrum moves forward, Ozzies collapse [i]when the ball is in the second row[/i]. Glenda does not call 'Use it'. Ball is passed away from scrum. Glenda has an easy out. No penalty awarded.

Wales didn't lose this game because of this decision but this is the sort of scrappy, poor reffing that has me scratching my head.

Same as in the Irish game. SA backrower penalised for hands in the ruck. The Irish player was tackled, SA went in for a steal, O'Brien dived in at 90 degrees to the tackle and flopped over, killing the ball. He did that directly in front of the ref and won a penalty against the SA player who had committed no offence. There were only three players involved - the ref can't be that unsighted, surely.

I have to explain this crap to my kids - a lot of the time I just give up.

I reckon he's had two or three caps since.

Still only 23 and was out injured after the last woeld cup for a long time.

AA - seen Navidis stats? He didn't impress me much in the game but his stats say otherwise

6 passes 9 carries for 30m 1 clean break 2 defenders beaten
1 turnover conceded. 18 tackles none missed

top tackler, most yards made of the forwards

Guscott has him in the team of the week

Whats your view?

From what I saw....all of Eng game, first half of both Scotland and Wales games it'd be between Underhill and Watson for team of the week at 7 imo. Hoping that Underhill goes well against Australia this weekend again....him Billy V and Robshaw would be a great back row!

AA - seen Navidis stats? He didn't impress me much in the game but his stats say otherwise

6 passes 9 carries for 30m 1 clean break 2 defenders beaten
1 turnover conceded. 18 tackles none missed

top tackler, most yards made of the forwards

Guscott has him in the team of the week

Whats your view?

He was hard working but no real massive impact. He's ok nothing more.

He had a great game by his standards and didn't look at all out of place. Lacked impact as a_a says but it he's at least holding firm and helping the team get parity. Not likely to set the world alight any time soon but did a job.

Underhill looked pretty good didn't he? Can certainly see what the fuss is about in defence, would like more attack / link play (unless I missed it) and a bit of work over the ball or what we've got is a 6.5 (again)