[Closed] Rugby Thread 2017/18.

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)

Tinybits agree re Underhill. Great defensively, but not sure what else he did. Hopefully that part if his game will be developed in time.

I think Underhill - with one eye on a place in the RWC - did exactly what he was asked to do.

Probably nervous of doing a Slade and over playing his welcome.

Underhill's tackling was good, but England were not set up to take advantage of it and put pressure on the ruck. It may be a personnel thing as the back row all played well as individuals but did not seem to be a complementary unit. Perhaps it will change in the next match now that they know that his Bath/Ospreys form does translate to internationals.

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)

Its exactly what you've got...he's bloody good though and still young enough to develop other aspects.

Predictions for next week?

I will await team news for Wales before boldly predicting a Wales loss v Georgia.

Eng v Aus should be a good game. Orc horde to win
Scot 134 NZ 137
Ireland might beat Fiji
FRA 0 SA 0

Scot 134 NZ 137

*s****s*

England to win if they can get the ball a bit more often than last time.
France to win provided that their 10 has been taking the medication.
Ireland to win - not sure how pretty it will be.
Scotland to not win - score dependant on Kiwi selection/attitude.
Wales will get confused but win anyway.

Additional predictions:
All teams will push in scrums before the ball is in.
No scrummage put-ins will be straight.
Aussie props will go to ground as soon as they think they can get away with it.
Very few line out throws will be straight.
TV cameras will be trained on the coaches during the game !!!
All 50:50 decisions will go to the ABs.

Lolz at a_a's predictions

Eng v Aus.....too close to call.
Wales should win, I really hope Georgia give them a good game (and not because I hate Wales....which I do 😆 but because I really want them to get some more games against Tier 1 teams)
Ireland by a boat load
NZ by 15
France v Saffas god knows and don't care!

Edit....and agree, Underhill looks like another classic English 6.5 at the minute.