collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Recent Topics

Villa Park Redevelopment by Nev
[Today at 01:18:45 PM]


Happy Easter everyone - Wolves at home by Legion
[Today at 01:17:36 PM]


Chris Heck - President of Business Operations by Ducksworthy
[Today at 01:01:39 PM]


Other Games - 2023/24 by devilla
[Today at 01:00:58 PM]


Gordon Cowans by Flamingo Lane
[Today at 12:56:46 PM]


All aboard the shuttle bus. by dave.woodhall
[Today at 12:23:44 PM]


Champions League Contention by AV82EC
[Today at 12:09:23 PM]


FFP by thick_mike
[Today at 10:19:47 AM]

Recent Posts

Follow us on...

Author Topic: International Rugby  (Read 381899 times)

Offline PaulWinch again

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 49021
  • Location: winchester
  • GM : 25.05.2024
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2250 on: February 25, 2018, 09:07:23 AM »
England has three key area of failure yesterday. We were rubbish at the breakdown, Scotland kept turning us over. Our tackling was poor, Scotland kept breaking tackles. We didn't appear to have any real attacking shape and aligned to that the bench didn't bring much improvement when players were replaced.

Offline UK Redsox

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 41289
  • Location: Forest of Dean & 'Nam
  • GM : 10.02.2025
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2251 on: February 25, 2018, 02:20:51 PM »
Yes but should the tries have been disallowed?

Yes

Offline UK Redsox

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 41289
  • Location: Forest of Dean & 'Nam
  • GM : 10.02.2025
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2252 on: February 25, 2018, 02:22:45 PM »
England has three key area of failure yesterday. We were rubbish at the breakdown, Scotland kept turning us over. Our tackling was poor, Scotland kept breaking tackles. We didn't appear to have any real attacking shape and aligned to that the bench didn't bring much improvement when players were replaced.

When England got on top in the second half, their discipline was terrible and prevented them from turning the domination into points.

Specifically, Laws kicking the ball out of the scrum half's hands and Underhill's shoulder assault.

Offline aev

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5265
  • Location: Beckenham
  • GM : 01.09.2024
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2253 on: February 26, 2018, 08:34:59 AM »
Too much isolated running which meant they bossed the breakdown.

Scotland were very good I thought, and from an English perspective a bloody nose once in a while could actually do more good than harm.

Offline paul_e

  • Member
  • Posts: 33280
  • Age: 44
  • GM : July, 2013
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2254 on: February 26, 2018, 09:45:49 AM »
England has three key area of failure yesterday. We were rubbish at the breakdown, Scotland kept turning us over. Our tackling was poor, Scotland kept breaking tackles. We didn't appear to have any real attacking shape and aligned to that the bench didn't bring much improvement when players were replaced.

not pointing fingers but it's interesting that this was a huge problem under Lancaster and has happened again almost as soon as Robshaw is back at 7.  I have a lot of time for Robshaw but if you don't play him at 6 you don't play him at all.  Square pegs to get as many of his favourites in the pitch at once isn't something I expected on Jones but I right now his inability to pick 2 from 3 in the 2nd row is costing us at the breakdown.

The lack of impact from the bench is no shock to me, I feared that might be the case, if you go with his term of finishers I'd say George adds dynamism at the cost of some control (which is fine), Nowell is busy and offers a different type of threat from the wing and T'eo can have some impact as a wrecking ball but the rest of the bench feels like substitutes and it shows.  It's chalk and cheese to the bench we had a year or so back when we were bringing on people like Hughes, Mako, Sinckler and making tired players face aggressive dynamic runners from all angles.  It's was no coincidence just how strongly we ended games and this squad just doesn't have the gas for it.

I've still not seen the full game but I did watch the last 20 because I thought that was where the real England would've won this game and it was as predictable and easy to defend as I expected.  He needs to do something and if nothing else a 9 with pace and vision (rather than so/so passer with a good kicking game) could come in and generate some buzz. 

Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 14179
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2255 on: February 26, 2018, 02:26:13 PM »
Scotland deserved win after first half,  but, I fell that Nige got a major decision wrong. 
Danny Care should have been allowed to touch down then he should have gone to the TMO. I don't think Launchbury should have been penalised. That would have put England level and I'm pretty sure we'd have gone on to win.
In my defence I was a winger/full back so maybe a forward could clarify that one.

I think Nigel Owens got both decisions right, but the way he dealt with the Launchbury one was questionable.  Launchbury's knee touched the floor when he was competing for the ball at a ruck, which meant he was no longer supporting his weight and that is a penalty (albeit quite a harsh one considering what goes on at most rucks).  Owens should have called the penalty there and then and given the Scots the penalty advantage, but he did neither and only called it back for a penalty after the pass had been intercepted.  It was the right decision, but he had not made it clear that it was a penalty and an advantage was being played, so it was questionable.   

The knock on was clear, if again, unfortunate. 

Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 14179
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2256 on: February 26, 2018, 02:30:31 PM »
England has three key area of failure yesterday. We were rubbish at the breakdown, Scotland kept turning us over. Our tackling was poor, Scotland kept breaking tackles. We didn't appear to have any real attacking shape and aligned to that the bench didn't bring much improvement when players were replaced.

not pointing fingers but it's interesting that this was a huge problem under Lancaster and has happened again almost as soon as Robshaw is back at 7.  I have a lot of time for Robshaw but if you don't play him at 6 you don't play him at all.  Square pegs to get as many of his favourites in the pitch at once isn't something I expected on Jones but I right now his inability to pick 2 from 3 in the 2nd row is costing us at the breakdown.

The lack of impact from the bench is no shock to me, I feared that might be the case, if you go with his term of finishers I'd say George adds dynamism at the cost of some control (which is fine), Nowell is busy and offers a different type of threat from the wing and T'eo can have some impact as a wrecking ball but the rest of the bench feels like substitutes and it shows.  It's chalk and cheese to the bench we had a year or so back when we were bringing on people like Hughes, Mako, Sinckler and making tired players face aggressive dynamic runners from all angles.  It's was no coincidence just how strongly we ended games and this squad just doesn't have the gas for it.

I've still not seen the full game but I did watch the last 20 because I thought that was where the real England would've won this game and it was as predictable and easy to defend as I expected.  He needs to do something and if nothing else a 9 with pace and vision (rather than so/so passer with a good kicking game) could come in and generate some buzz.

Agree with that Paul.  I too like Robshaw and think he is a very good 6, but he struggles a bit at 7 when he comes up against players who are good at the breakdown like Watson and Barclay.  having seen him play for the Ospreys for a few years before he moved to Bath, I still think Underhill will be the long term choice at 7, but it seems a position that England have struggled with for some time now.   

Offline paul_e

  • Member
  • Posts: 33280
  • Age: 44
  • GM : July, 2013
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2257 on: February 26, 2018, 03:24:59 PM »
Scotland deserved win after first half,  but, I fell that Nige got a major decision wrong. 
Danny Care should have been allowed to touch down then he should have gone to the TMO. I don't think Launchbury should have been penalised. That would have put England level and I'm pretty sure we'd have gone on to win.
In my defence I was a winger/full back so maybe a forward could clarify that one.

I think Nigel Owens got both decisions right, but the way he dealt with the Launchbury one was questionable.  Launchbury's knee touched the floor when he was competing for the ball at a ruck, which meant he was no longer supporting his weight and that is a penalty (albeit quite a harsh one considering what goes on at most rucks).  Owens should have called the penalty there and then and given the Scots the penalty advantage, but he did neither and only called it back for a penalty after the pass had been intercepted.  It was the right decision, but he had not made it clear that it was a penalty and an advantage was being played, so it was questionable.   

The knock on was clear, if again, unfortunate. 

The bold bit is important because, for me, Barclay supported his own weight in about a third of breakdowns he contested and got away with it repeatedly.

I've finished watching it now btw, I agree Owens can say he got both decisions right but I don't think he can legitimately claim to have followed the laws consistently at the breakdown.

Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 14179
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2258 on: February 26, 2018, 10:05:05 PM »
Scotland deserved win after first half,  but, I fell that Nige got a major decision wrong. 
Danny Care should have been allowed to touch down then he should have gone to the TMO. I don't think Launchbury should have been penalised. That would have put England level and I'm pretty sure we'd have gone on to win.
In my defence I was a winger/full back so maybe a forward could clarify that one.

I think Nigel Owens got both decisions right, but the way he dealt with the Launchbury one was questionable.  Launchbury's knee touched the floor when he was competing for the ball at a ruck, which meant he was no longer supporting his weight and that is a penalty (albeit quite a harsh one considering what goes on at most rucks).  Owens should have called the penalty there and then and given the Scots the penalty advantage, but he did neither and only called it back for a penalty after the pass had been intercepted.  It was the right decision, but he had not made it clear that it was a penalty and an advantage was being played, so it was questionable.   

The knock on was clear, if again, unfortunate. 

The bold bit is important because, for me, Barclay supported his own weight in about a third of breakdowns he contested and got away with it repeatedly.

I've finished watching it now btw, I agree Owens can say he got both decisions right but I don't think he can legitimately claim to have followed the laws consistently at the breakdown.

That's the frustrating thing with the breakdown in the modern game Paul, it just seems to be refereed so haphazardly.  It is probably considered to dangerous now, but old fashioned rucking meant there weren't really the problems we see now.  By the letter of the law it was a penalty, but I still think Launchbury was unlucky to get pinged seeing what goes on at most rucks and that Nigel Owens refereed the situation badly. 

Offline UK Redsox

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 41289
  • Location: Forest of Dean & 'Nam
  • GM : 10.02.2025
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2259 on: February 26, 2018, 10:35:48 PM »
The current ruck laws make the game safer and allow the ball to be recycled quicker and more often.

However, it’s bloody complicated and completely opposite at times to my days getting kicked about on the wrong side of a ruck.


Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 14179
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2260 on: February 26, 2018, 11:34:25 PM »
The current ruck laws make the game safer and allow the ball to be recycled quicker and more often.

However, it’s bloody complicated and completely opposite at times to my days getting kicked about on the wrong side of a ruck.

As I said old fashioned rucking was dangerous and as you say, it was an unpleasant experience when you got caught on the wrong side and got the doormat treatment.  There are just so many sharp practices in and around the breakdown now though.  One of my pet peeves is the tactic used by the likes of O'Mahony and others where they make no effort to initially play the ball and go beyond it with their elbows on the floor, waiting for the hit to take them back on to it.  Highly illegal tactic, but hardly ever punished.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2018, 10:44:57 AM by tomd2103 »

Online nigel

  • Member
  • Posts: 5325
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2261 on: February 27, 2018, 09:18:32 AM »
Scotland deserved win after first half,  but, I fell that Nige got a major decision wrong. 
Danny Care should have been allowed to touch down then he should have gone to the TMO. I don't think Launchbury should have been penalised. That would have put England level and I'm pretty sure we'd have gone on to win.
In my defence I was a winger/full back so maybe a forward could clarify that one.

I think Nigel Owens got both decisions right, but the way he dealt with the Launchbury one was questionable.  Launchbury's knee touched the floor when he was competing for the ball at a ruck, which meant he was no longer supporting his weight and that is a penalty (albeit quite a harsh one considering what goes on at most rucks).  Owens should have called the penalty there and then and given the Scots the penalty advantage, but he did neither and only called it back for a penalty after the pass had been intercepted.  It was the right decision, but he had not made it clear that it was a penalty and an advantage was being played, so it was questionable.   

The knock on was clear, if again, unfortunate. 

The bold bit is important because, for me, Barclay supported his own weight in about a third of breakdowns he contested and got away with it repeatedly.

I've finished watching it now btw, I agree Owens can say he got both decisions right but I don't think he can legitimately claim to have followed the laws consistently at the breakdown.

Thanks for clearing that up, guys.
Just watched it again,  though. Launchburys knee touched the ground before he challenged, but, was off when he went for ball (I thought that was OK), Owens told him to release, which he did, pass intersepted for 'Try'
Surely  that's wrong?

Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 14179
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2262 on: February 27, 2018, 10:51:49 AM »
Scotland deserved win after first half,  but, I fell that Nige got a major decision wrong. 
Danny Care should have been allowed to touch down then he should have gone to the TMO. I don't think Launchbury should have been penalised. That would have put England level and I'm pretty sure we'd have gone on to win.
In my defence I was a winger/full back so maybe a forward could clarify that one.

I think Nigel Owens got both decisions right, but the way he dealt with the Launchbury one was questionable.  Launchbury's knee touched the floor when he was competing for the ball at a ruck, which meant he was no longer supporting his weight and that is a penalty (albeit quite a harsh one considering what goes on at most rucks).  Owens should have called the penalty there and then and given the Scots the penalty advantage, but he did neither and only called it back for a penalty after the pass had been intercepted.  It was the right decision, but he had not made it clear that it was a penalty and an advantage was being played, so it was questionable.   

The knock on was clear, if again, unfortunate. 

The bold bit is important because, for me, Barclay supported his own weight in about a third of breakdowns he contested and got away with it repeatedly.

I've finished watching it now btw, I agree Owens can say he got both decisions right but I don't think he can legitimately claim to have followed the laws consistently at the breakdown.

Thanks for clearing that up, guys.
Just watched it again,  though. Launchburys knee touched the ground before he challenged, but, was off when he went for ball (I thought that was OK), Owens told him to release, which he did, pass intersepted for 'Try'
Surely  that's wrong?

If his knee touches the ground, he is no longer supporting his weight and it is technically a penalty at that point.  You normally see referees award the penalty at that point, but call advantage if the attacking team retain possession, only to call it back if they feel no advantage has been gained.  You also often hear referees shout "release" or "you've lost it now" to players in Launchbury's position and as long as they do stop competing, then play goes on with no penalty awarded.  The fact that Nigel Owens didn't do any of the above was the problem really. 

Offline paul_e

  • Member
  • Posts: 33280
  • Age: 44
  • GM : July, 2013
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2263 on: February 27, 2018, 11:54:58 AM »
Because his knee touched he's effectively made himself out of play and has to exit the ruck before he can go back in to compete (much like the tackled player releasing the ball or the tackler letting go of the player and standing up before they can compete.  The issue I have with it is that Owens calls 'lost now' and Launchbury stops competing so they get the pass away, it's not launchbury's fault the pass is shit and you never see a mistake covered for like that normally, His defence that the damage was done is just about on the side of the law but 99 times out of a hundred if the ref says it's lost and the defender backs away it's not going back as a pen if the ball gets lost, the inconsistency is the problem.


If you going to go back for stuff that is marginal like that then you have to do it regularly. For example (i'll link the video I'm going from so the times make sense):




If you go to the 2nd scottish try (about 3 minutes).  I believe the clearout on Farrell is around the neck, if they go back and look at that it's probably a penalty and that gets disallowed but because no one bothered to check they get the points.


On top of that is the Ryan Wilson citing for scratching at Hughes eyes. - https://twitter.com/bbcrugbyunion/status/967685739071721473


Owens has built his reputation of 'grow up and get on with it' which i normally agree with but when it's around the eyes you really have to check because if his little finger makes contact with the eye then he has to do more than a slap on the wrist.

Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 14179
Re: International Rugby
« Reply #2264 on: February 27, 2018, 12:25:33 PM »
Because his knee touched he's effectively made himself out of play and has to exit the ruck before he can go back in to compete (much like the tackled player releasing the ball or the tackler letting go of the player and standing up before they can compete.  The issue I have with it is that Owens calls 'lost now' and Launchbury stops competing so they get the pass away, it's not launchbury's fault the pass is shit and you never see a mistake covered for like that normally, His defence that the damage was done is just about on the side of the law but 99 times out of a hundred if the ref says it's lost and the defender backs away it's not going back as a pen if the ball gets lost, the inconsistency is the problem.


If you going to go back for stuff that is marginal like that then you have to do it regularly. For example (i'll link the video I'm going from so the times make sense):




If you go to the 2nd scottish try (about 3 minutes).  I believe the clearout on Farrell is around the neck, if they go back and look at that it's probably a penalty and that gets disallowed but because no one bothered to check they get the points.


On top of that is the Ryan Wilson citing for scratching at Hughes eyes. - https://twitter.com/bbcrugbyunion/status/967685739071721473


Owens has built his reputation of 'grow up and get on with it' which i normally agree with but when it's around the eyes you really have to check because if his little finger makes contact with the eye then he has to do more than a slap on the wrist.

Agree Paul and there were some decisions around the breakdown in the Ireland v Wales game that were baffling as well.  I would never accuse a referee of bias or deliberate cheating, but as someone said on a blog I was reading yesterday, it is sometimes as if referees have decided which team are on top at a point in the game and then only start looking for offences by the team they consider are under the cosh at the time.  It can be highly frustrating as a constant stream of penalties can influence a game so much.       

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal