Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Sports, Hobbies & Interests => Topic started by: Hope on February 08, 2016, 10:33:19 AM
-
Who would have thought that England would head the Six-Nations' table at the end of the first weekend - even if only on points difference ;)
-
I would have, given the failure of the French to stuff the Italians.
-
I would have, given the failure of the French to stuff the Italians.
I was impressed with the Italians - we'll have to see how things pan out, and whether they were having a good day, but the French didn't appear to have a shocker, they were just pushed hard by what looks like a promising Italian side.
Disappointed with Scotland; too many simple handling errors let them down.
O.
-
I was impressed with the Italians ...
I did wonder whether England's record of being the only 6-Nations/Home Nation not to have been beaten by Italy in the competition is at stake!!
-
I predict that this years Wooden Spoon" will go to Scotland.
Shame but they simply have too small a player base.
Good because their fans are horrible, more like soccer fans. Booing opposition kicks, bad mouthing visiting supporters etc.
-
I did wonder whether England's record of being the only 6-Nations/Home Nation not to have been beaten by Italy in the competition is at stake!!
No.
-
No.
Looks as if you're correct, PD ;)
Can't say that they impressed in the first half, but after about 15 minutes of the second half it looked as if they had started to play.
Not sure I'd have given the Man of the Match award to Ben Youngs, though. Billy V, perhaps even Mahler seemed to be far more influential from what I saw.
-
Looks as if you're correct, PD ;)
As ever ;)
Can't say that they impressed in the first half, but after about 15 minutes of the second half it looked as if they had started to play.
Not sure I'd have given the Man of the Match award to Ben Youngs, though. Billy V, perhaps even Mahler seemed to be far more influential from what I saw.
Didn't see any of it so can't comment.
Interesting that at the moment it seems like England are the only side able to come away with a comfortable win. Everyone else seems to be struggling to beat anyone else.
-
Not sure I'd have given the Man of the Match award to Ben Youngs, though. Billy V, perhaps even Mahler seemed to be far more influential from what I saw.
Apparently they started the vote only 60 minutes into the match and that skewed the result
-
Apparently they started the vote only 60 minutes into the match and that skewed the result
But that was not long before Youngs went off!!
-
But that was not long before Youngs went off!!
And Joseph only had one try at that point.
-
Can't say that I was very impressed by the Welsh today. They required a massive non-tip tackle to gain their 7th, 8th and 9th points, some appalling referring to keep the French out in the early part of the 2nd half - Falatau offside on numerous occasions - and how come a scrum is given thirty yards out when Falatau was apparently 10m offside, when about 8m from his own line.
For all that Barnes is English, I'm not sure that he should being asked to referee any more games in this year's tournament.
-
Can't say that I was very impressed by the Welsh today. They required a massive non-tip tackle to gain their 7th, 8th and 9th points, some appalling referring to keep the French out in the early part of the 2nd half - Falatau offside on numerous occasions - and how come a scrum is given thirty yards out when Falatau was apparently 10m offside, when about 8m from his own line.
For all that Barnes is English, I'm not sure that he should being asked to referee any more games in this year's tournament.
A very uninteresting game.
And not helped by the endless periods with nothing happening - I made that point about the France Ireland game and it happened again last night. Constant resetting of the scrum and the replay official being involved in incidents ages after they happened. If you are going to have TV replay for incidents (and I think it is a good idea) you have to stop the game straight away and go to the reply. Keeping the game going and then effectively reversing the last game play is just nonsense and completely breaks up the flow of the game.
So the most obvious example being an (eventual) penalty for France. It wasn't given at the time, play went on and Wales got a penalty which they took and then the ref asked for the replay and awarded France a penalty for something that must have happened 2-3 minutes earlier in play. That's way too long.
Let's hope the England Ireland game is more interesting and not marred by endless breaking up of the play.
-
some appalling referring to keep the French out in the early part of the 2nd half
The problem is that unless the ref is going to give a penalty try when the opposition know that the attacking side will opt for a scrum to try to score a try from a penalty there is no disadvantage to simply giving away penalty after penalty on scrum infringements. You are just back where you were and a few more minutes less on the clock. Something needs to be done about this.
Here's an option. If you opt for a scrum rather than kick for goal then your option to kick is held - so that if there is another infringement in the scrum, before the ball is in open play you now get not just the new penalty, but the original one. Do it again and you get three penalties. So rather than constantly being back to - sure fire 3 points but can try to get 7, you'd end up at sure fire 6 points, sure fire 9 points. No penalty try threat needed, and straight away the defending side would suddenly find themselves able to prevent all those scrum infringements (which lets face it are deliberate).
-
Now, perhaps not quite so technically perfect, but that Italy/Scotland match was much more interesting to watch. I was disappointed for Parisse, in that I think he played an even better game than Laidlaw - but failed to get the Man of the Match (though that award almost always goes to the victors).
I strugge to see why we don't see more teams using the short kick-off as Italy did; its so much more 'in the face' of the receivering team.
-
England win the 2016 6-Nations Championship; roll on the Grand Slam.
-
Dear John,
I predict that this years Wooden Spoon" will go to Scotland.
( cough )
Well done Engerland, three lions on a shirt Jules Remit still gleaming, sorry sorry, wrong shaped ball, Swing low sweet chariot.
Gonnagle.
-
I bet the Scots fans are over the moon that their (super) win in France has helped to secure The Championship for their best mates south of the border.
Thanks Scotland...... wanna put a smiley here but can't get em to work.
-
I constantly struggle with the inconsistency of action from the refs in rugby. Last Staurday's gouging incident being a good case in point.
So Tomas Francis was guilty of gouging, sufficient to receive an 8 week ban. And everyone, including the ref saw this on Saturday, many times on TV replay. Yet he was let off scot free in the actual match for something serious enough to warrant a long ban.
I can understand it when an incident wasn't seen in the match and subsequently comes to light afterwards, but this wasn't the case here. I don't suppose those involved in imposing the post-match sanction had any more evidence than the ref did on Saturday. How on earth Francis didn't receive a straight red card during the actual match is beyond me.
-
I constantly struggle with the inconsistency of action from the refs in rugby. Last Staurday's gouging incident being a good case in point.
So Tomas Francis was guilty of gouging, sufficient to receive an 8 week ban. And everyone, including the ref saw this on Saturday, many times on TV replay. Yet he was let off scot free in the actual match for something serious enough to warrant a long ban.
I can understand it when an incident wasn't seen in the match and subsequently comes to light afterwards, but this wasn't the case here. I don't suppose those involved in imposing the post-match sanction had any more evidence than the ref did on Saturday. How on earth Francis didn't receive a straight red card during the actual match is beyond me.
On the assumption that he is guilty (I haven't seen the footage), the explanation is simple: the referee's decision in the match was mistaken.
-
What surprises me is that the ban is only eight weeks given that rugby is played by such delicate flowers that calling somebody a naughty name on the pitch could get you a four week ban.
-
On the assumption that he is guilty (I haven't seen the footage), the explanation is simple: the referee's decision in the match was mistaken.
But that is shear incompetence. It wasn't as if the ref had only one angle in real speed. The game was stopped, the incident went to the TMO, who (along with the ref and everyone else) saw exactly what happened, and probably saw exactly the same as the post match panel who decided it was an 8 week ban.
How can the decisions from people looking at exactly the same evidence be so different, from no sanction at all (not even a yellow card) to an 8 week ban.
-
But that is shear incompetence. It wasn't as if the ref had only one angle in real speed.
You seem to be implying that referees are incapable of shear incompetence.
The game was stopped, the incident went to the TMO, who (along with the ref and everyone else) saw exactly what happened
Does the referee and everyone else get to see exactly what happened? I was under the impression that the replays in these incidents were not put on the big screens at the ground.
How can the decisions from people looking at exactly the same evidence be so different, from no sanction at all (not even a yellow card) to an 8 week ban.
Again, you seem to be implying that the match officials were not capable of being incompetent.
-
You seem to be implying that referees are incapable of shear incompetence.
Indeed, my mistake.
Does the referee and everyone else get to see exactly what happened? I was under the impression that the replays in these incidents were not put on the big screens at the ground.
The on filed ref referred it to the TMO, who, of course has access to all the footage, but I'm pretty sure they show it on the screen in the ground - certainly that seems to be the case given the response of the crowd to the replay footage that is being shown as a TV viewer - that the crowd cheers and boos just as you are seeing replay footage on TV suggests they must be seeing it too - and that would of course also involve the ref.
Again, you seem to be implying that the match officials were not capable of being incompetent.
Indeed, my mistake.
-
Indeed, my mistake.
I've had a look at the incident on Youtube now and, to me it looks like Francis pokes Cole in the right eye and then drags his fingers across his left eye. I don't know what the official definition of gouging is, but I can see possible room for making the wrong decision there, although the official obviously saw some offence because a penalty was given.
-
I've had a look at the incident on Youtube now and, to me it looks like Francis pokes Cole in the right eye and then drags his fingers across his left eye. I don't know what the official definition of gouging is, but I can see possible room for making the wrong decision there, although the official obviously saw some offence because a penalty was given.
Any contact with the eyes or eye area is an offence (unless clearly accidental, which this obviously wasn't) - the sanction being a ban for up to 208 weeks. If the ref saw contact with the eyes (which he did) which wasn't accidental (which he didn't consider it to be hence the penalty), then the player involved should have been straight red carded, with subsequent post-match lengthy ban.
There was a very similar incident involving Chris Ashton recently - but he was straight red carded as well as subsequently receiving a 10 week ban. That's what should have happened to Francis.
-
Any contact with the eyes or eye area is an offence (unless clearly accidental, which this obviously wasn't) - the sanction being a ban for up to 208 weeks. If the ref saw contact with the eyes (which he did) which wasn't accidental (which he didn't consider it to be hence the penalty), then the player involved should have been straight red carded, with subsequent post-match lengthy ban.
There was a very similar incident involving Chris Ashton recently - but he was straight red carded as well as subsequently receiving a 10 week ban. That's what should have happened to Francis.
So we have to say that the referee and the TMO, in this case, both got it wrong. Fortunately, England still won the match, otherwise...
-
Job done boys.
I have to say, my money, had I placed bet, would have been on Wales.
-
Job done boys.
I have to say, my money, had I placed bet, would have been on Wales.
Indeed - well done to England, and also delighted for a school near me (who plenty of my friends send their kids to) that provided three of the key players in the successful England side. Quite an achievement.
But we shouldn't get too excited - I doubt New Zealand, Australia, South Africa or even Argentina will be quaking in their boots too much just yet. There is a long way to go before England (or any NH side) are competitive against the SH giants.
-
But we shouldn't get too excited - I doubt New Zealand, Australia, South Africa or even Argentina will be quaking in their boots too much just yet. There is a long way to go before England (or any NH side) are competitive against the SH giants.
I was thinking about that earlier today as I watched the England France match (I was unable to see it last night). They were very wobbly in the first half and the half time score flattered them. I think the best we can say is that Australia might get a game in the summer.
-
I was thinking about that earlier today as I watched the England France match (I was unable to see it last night). They were very wobbly in the first half and the half time score flattered them. I think the best we can say is that Australia might get a game in the summer.
England comfortably won the second division.
And they won't get a proper competitive crack at a SH side until the next world cup - the Autumn internationals and summer tour games aren't really competitive matches, meaning ones that it really matters if you win or lose. They are more like development friendly fixtures, like the ones the England football team will be playing next weekend.
-
But we shouldn't get too excited - I doubt New Zealand, Australia, South Africa or even Argentina will be quaking in their boots too much just yet. There is a long way to go before England (or any NH side) are competitive against the SH giants.
Whilst we oughtn't to get too excited, I do wonder whether the SH nations will look at the turn-around beteen September and now and think - if EJ can produce that in 2 months (the time he's been in charge) what will he be able to do in 12 months or 40-odd months?
I still find it amazing how many penalties England (but also other nations from both sides of the equator) give away. Does this reflect the complexities of the laws. When I was playing, there were 3 levels of infringement - ones resulting in scrums; ones resulting in free kicks; and ones resulting in penalties. The second level seems to have disappeared. Is it time that it was re-introduced, as there are occasions when infringements are accidental but more serious than punishable by a mere scrum (such as taking a player out in the air when both players are making legitimate efforts to catch the ball).
-
Whilst we oughtn't to get too excited, I do wonder whether the SH nations will look at the turn-around beteen September and now and think - if EJ can produce that in 2 months (the time he's been in charge) what will he be able to do in 12 months or 40-odd months?
I don't think the turnaround is as dramatic as some are suggesting. England weren't as bad as some like to imply in the Autumn, and they aren't as good as some are suggesting now, given the rather limited quality of the opposition in the 6 nations.
Let's not forget that in the world cup England likely went out at the group stage because of a woefully poor decision to kick for touch to try to win the game against Wales rather than take the 3 points for a draw. Had they made the right tactical decision it would have been England going through and Wales going out at the group stage. And, of course it would have been England losing in the quarter final to a far superior SH side.
-
And, of course it would have been England losing in the quarter final to a far superior SH side.
Were SA that superior a side in the quarter finals. No. Remember that Wales were playing a squad that had been decimated by injuries before and during the tournamant, and to lose by 4 points with a weakened squad wasn't that disastrous. (I don't often speak up for the welsh Rugby team, but I think that does need to be taken into account).
Equally, was Robshaw's decision that bad? If, instead of scoring an east 3 points, England had scored a converted try as a result of his call, would there have been the same outcry? Decisions in the heat of the moment can go wrong. Its to be expected.
-
Were SA that superior a side in the quarter finals. No. Remember that Wales were playing a squad that had been decimated by injuries before and during the tournamant, and to lose by 4 points with a weakened squad wasn't that disastrous. (I don't often speak up for the welsh Rugby team, but I think that does need to be taken into account).
I watched that game and SA never really looked like losing despite being behind for parts of the match. They were clearly the better side - they always looked like they had another gear if they needed it and so it proved with their try.
Equally, was Robshaw's decision that bad? If, instead of scoring an east 3 points, England had scored a converted try as a result of his call, would there have been the same outcry? Decisions in the heat of the moment can go wrong. Its to be expected.
Yes is was a disastrous and stupid decision. England didn't need to win the game, as they already had a bonus point in the bag from the Fiji game - no they needed not to lose it. Kick that 3 points and England would have gone through.
It was tactically daft.
-
Yes is was a disastrous and stupid decision. England didn't need to win the game, as they already had a bonus point in the bag from the Fiji game - no they needed not to lose it. Kick that 3 points and England would have gone through.
It was tactically daft.
It might well have been, but would the general English punter have been happy with a drew with Wales?
-
It might well have been, but would the general English punter have been happy with a drew with Wales?
If they'd have got through to the quarter finals - of course. If your greatest achievement in a tournament is a group stage win against some old foe, then you haven't had a good tournament.
The only goal at the group stage is to get out of the group stage.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35856994
"The top tries of the tournament, but which is best?"
I would have to question whether these are the best tries of the tounament - after all, where is Danny Care's opener for England v France? However, I think I'd probbly have to go for one of North's or Hoggs, because they are largely solo efforts, especially the latter. Ironically, I would probably put the two English tries as amongst the least 'best' of any of the tries scored by England.
-
Whilst we oughtn't to get too excited, I do wonder whether the SH nations will look at the turn-around beteen September and now and think - if EJ can produce that in 2 months (the time he's been in charge) what will he be able to do in 12 months or 40-odd months?
What has he done in two months? He's raised England from being a team that lost to Wales to being one that beat Wales. Everybody claims that England performed badly in the World Cup - which is true - but they were in a group with an SH side and an NH side that is currently very strong (for the NH). Given that group, qualification for the knock out stage was always gong to be difficult.
I still find it amazing how many penalties England (but also other nations from both sides of the equator) give away. Does this reflect the complexities of the laws.
Other teams don't give away as many penalties.
-
It might well have been, but would the general English punter have been happy with a drew with Wales?
As an English punter I would have been much happier with a draw than losing.
-
What has he done in two months? He's raised England from being a team that lost to Wales to being one that beat Wales. Everybody claims that England performed badly in the World Cup - which is true - but they were in a group with an SH side and an NH side that is currently very strong (for the NH). Given that group, qualification for the knock out stage was always gong to be difficult.
That's right - one of Wales or England was going out in the group stages, as neither is anything like as strong as Australia.
Aside from the poor tactical decision at the end of the England/Wales game (the decision not to kick for goal) actually I think England were rather unlucky to lose. The largely dominated the game and should have won fairly easily. Wales got lucky with their try, which lets face it, fell really kindly for them as the kick could have bounced any number of ways, but it fell just right.
Of course the biggest nonsense here is the decision to select the groupings years in advance, which mean this really was the group of death, as Fiji are no slouches either.