Six Nations 2016

[ProfessorDavey]

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.

[jeremyp]

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...

[jeremyp]

Job done boys.

I have to say, my money, had I placed bet, would have been on Wales.

[ProfessorDavey]

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.

[jeremyp]

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.

[ProfessorDavey]

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.

[Hope]

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).

[ProfessorDavey]

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.

[Hope]

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.

[ProfessorDavey]

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.

[Hope]

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?

[ProfessorDavey]

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.

[Hope]

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.

[jeremyp]

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.

[jeremyp]

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.

[ProfessorDavey]

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.