RugbyRebels

DrG wrote:If we prefer Farrell at 10 (rather than 12) and Manu at 13 - who plays 12 ?

Oakboy wrote:

p/d wrote:

Danno wrote:
I'm sort of newish but feel like I've been lurking and occasionally posting long enough to finally ask: Dors?

Ha!!! Back to original 'rugbyrebels when Oakboy was Dorset, Banquo was Tim and Mellsblue was Veronicapreparedtotravel

Edit. Veronica beat me to it

Sighs!

Then, there was Beefeater.

twitchy wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:As an aside Farrell made 17 tackles today. That’s seriously impressive. Still missed three, but forgivable with those figures and to be fair your going to miss more Vs a team like Aus.

Goal kicking was excellent as well. Makes me think he was definitely concussed against argentina.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

If you mention something it doesn’t mean you’re excited. FFS! And if you’d noticed you have seen his scramble defence which accounted for a number of tackles.

And no, let’s not praise doubling everyone else’s tackles. That’s not impressive at all. It’s not praiseworthy in any regard. And again you can praise something as it is notable without being excited.

But then if praising something praiseworthy is what’s wrong with English rugby that I’m hugely proud to be wrong.

So we’re just noting random stats that standout, regardless of context? His scramble defence is good but, if you’d noticed, that’s the 10’s role in England’s defence.

It’s like noting Marler made 100 yards whilst stood in the open spaces. Well done but it’s not what you’re there for, you’re in the wrong place.

I’ll go back to not wanting at 10 under that many breakdowns and not praising a 10 for his tackle count. I’ll praise for the pass to Sinckler, his kicking off the tee and his overall performance. I’ll not randomly praise something that ranks very low on my wish list from a 10.

Just catching up with this. Hopefully you’ve managed to clear the sand from your vagina by now.

We’re not going to agree. You think a fly half putting in a serious defensive shift when we only had 36% possession isn’t praiseworthy, or even simply a random stat. When the opposition made over double the carries we did. For me that shift defensively is praiseworthy. Defence was kind of important yesterday, and that isn’t just down to the big fellas. Everyone played their part in restricting Aus to 16 points and a single try. Making 17 tackles from FH is something of note, especially when compared with the players around him.

His kicking was spot on, overall play decent and the pass to Sinkler a thing of beauty, which I remarked at the time.

Mellsblue wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: So we’re just noting random stats that standout, regardless of context? His scramble defence is good but, if you’d noticed, that’s the 10’s role in England’s defence.

It’s like noting Marler made 100 yards whilst stood in the open spaces. Well done but it’s not what you’re there for, you’re in the wrong place.

I’ll go back to not wanting at 10 under that many breakdowns and not praising a 10 for his tackle count. I’ll praise for the pass to Sinckler, his kicking off the tee and his overall performance. I’ll not randomly praise something that ranks very low on my wish list from a 10.

Just catching up with this. Hopefully you’ve managed to clear the sand from your vagina by now.

We’re not going to agree. You think a fly half putting in a serious defensive shift when we only had 36% possession isn’t praiseworthy, or even simply a random stat. When the opposition made over double the carries we did. For me that shift defensively is praiseworthy. Defence was kind of important yesterday, and that isn’t just down to the big fellas. Everyone played their part in restricting Aus to 16 points and a single try. Making 17 tackles from FH is something of note, especially when compared with the players around him.

His kicking was spot on, overall play decent and the pass to Sinkler a thing of beauty, which I remarked at the time.

Sand from your vagina?!?! How old are you?

We aren’t going to agree....apart from the last para. Happy to praise him when deserved. I just don’t think a high tackle count is something worth noting and think it symptomatic of English rugby’s poor priorities.

twitchy wrote:For all their faults aus have incredibly impressive runners out wide. We were hanging on at times. I don't think that defensive performance was anything to be sniffed at.

Digby wrote:For the 2nd May try what are the rules on playing the 9 when Itoje does a number on Genia?

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:For the 2nd May try what are the rules on playing the 9 when Itoje does a number on Genia?

Both Australians had dived right over the ruck, meaning the ball was behind the back foot and completely out. So Genia was fair game the minute he touched the ball.

Puja

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:For the 2nd May try what are the rules on playing the 9 when Itoje does a number on Genia?

Both Australians had dived right over the ruck, meaning the ball was behind the back foot and completely out. So Genia was fair game the minute he touched the ball.

Puja

I had in mind two Aussies were still on their feet in front of Genia?

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
Both Australians had dived right over the ruck, meaning the ball was behind the back foot and completely out. So Genia was fair game the minute he touched the ball.

Puja

I had in mind two Aussies were still on their feet in front of Genia?

Screenshot_20191021-111629_YouTube.jpg
This is the best I can do on my phone - it's about half a second too early to be exact, but you can get the idea. In the next frame, no 4 continues running forward past the breakdown and the ball is placed back by the tackled man. Then Genia put his hands on it and Itoje moves. The no 2 does go in to make a ruck just after that, but it's too late by then.

Gamble from Itoje though - he's technically right, but there'd be a lot of occasions where a ref would give a penalty there regardless just for the picture it created.

Puja