RugbyRebels

Spiffy wrote:Lions Subs : I didn't count them at the end of the game but it looked as though several did not get off the bench. Just two props and a lock subbed? (Plus Nowell's brief HIA cover.) The commentators often miss subbings and are no help.
Don't think I saw Owens, Stander, Webb or Teo but maybe I just missed them.
Gatland asking a lot of the starters in the past two games.

Renniks wrote:

Spiffy wrote:Lions Subs : I didn't count them at the end of the game but it looked as though several did not get off the bench. Just two props and a lock subbed? (Plus Nowell's brief HIA cover.) The commentators often miss subbings and are no help.
Don't think I saw Owens, Stander, Webb or Teo but maybe I just missed them.
Gatland asking a lot of the starters in the past two games.

Pretty sure you're right here - no appearances from any of those 4…

I was calling for Te'o before the Faletau try which involved both Sexton and Farrell twice
And then was calling for Webb just before Murray found a (glory) hole…

Seems odd that he didn't make more changes when we were being smashed at 55 minutes…

Scrumhead wrote:It's rare I agree with Barnes.

Some may mock me for saying so, but why not start Marler with Mako on the bench? As a combination it works well for England, so why not for the Lions?

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Mauling..different story.

Contact work wasn't good from anyone today really, maul, tackles, ruck... it was all a bit nice.

There's a moment in the 23rd minute where Daly chases a box kick (so an unusual play) and the ball bobbles around with SOB managing to fall on it, and despite having the option of chasing our own kick Cane wins an easy pen with SOB forced to hold on.



And as I look at the moment before Cane gets over the ball and before Kruis can support SOB I'm looking at Kruis and how gentle he is with Daly. And maybe he should be nice, but for me Daly is in the way of a lock needing to clear out and in this moment Daly should be cleared out by the big lock which would come with the advantage of clearing out Cane too.

Digby wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Mauling..different story.

Contact work wasn't good from anyone today really, maul, tackles, ruck... it was all a bit nice.

There's a moment in the 23rd minute where Daly chases a box kick (so an unusual play) and the ball bobbles around with SOB managing to fall on it, and despite having the option of chasing our own kick Cane wins an easy pen with SOB forced to hold on.



And as I look at the moment before Cane gets over the ball and before Kruis can support SOB I'm looking at Kruis and how gentle he is with Daly. And maybe he should be nice, but for me Daly is in the way of a lock needing to clear out and in this moment Daly should be cleared out by the big lock which would come with the advantage of clearing out Cane too.

From the first game I was amused/taken by Kruis being far too soft in taking out Daly, and in being soft leaving Cane free slide away to contest the ball and force a turnover. And today we saw progress, sort of



Itoje tries to clear BB, but really only succeeds in knocking over Warburton, and Cane is left free once more to contest the ball and earn a penalty turnover. (It's a very low body position from Cane as an aside, not legal some might say, but I suppose I wouldn't object if the idea ever occurred to Haskell)

The Lions still need to work on the masterplan for the breakdown, though Warbs certainly helped

Digby wrote:Not sure Cane was a tackler, Watson just fell over didn't he? Cane is allowed to go for the ball, but not maybe going off his feet, although in this instance Watson isn't trying to regain his feet so maybe that Cane is lying atop Watson is something for the ref isn't bothered about and just wants the Lions to roll with it

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Not sure Cane was a tackler, Watson just fell over didn't he? Cane is allowed to go for the ball, but not maybe going off his feet, although in this instance Watson isn't trying to regain his feet so maybe that Cane is lying atop Watson is something for the ref isn't bothered about and just wants the Lions to roll with it

Cane is allowed to go for the ball after Watson slips, but as soon as he stops Watson from regaining his feet, he's a tackler. I think it's safe to say that's the case here.

Puja

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Not sure Cane was a tackler, Watson just fell over didn't he? Cane is allowed to go for the ball, but not maybe going off his feet, although in this instance Watson isn't trying to regain his feet so maybe that Cane is lying atop Watson is something for the ref isn't bothered about and just wants the Lions to roll with it

Cane is allowed to go for the ball after Watson slips, but as soon as he stops Watson from regaining his feet, he's a tackler. I think it's safe to say that's the case here.

Puja

Isn't this just a bloke lying on the floor in Watson, and a bloke on his feet trying to take the ball in Cane? I can't see we've even got a tackle

fivepointer wrote:Cane is in no position to legally contest possession. He may have his feet on the ground but when most of your weight is lying on top of the ball carrier you are not by any reasonable standard on your feet. Pen should have gone to Lions.

Scrumhead wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Cane is in no position to legally contest possession. He may have his feet on the ground but when most of your weight is lying on top of the ball carrier you are not by any reasonable standard on your feet. Pen should have gone to Lions.

100% this. I have never been a particularly good player by any means, but I do fancy myself as being a decent jackal. With technique like that, I would be whistled off the park at amateur level. Absolutely no way he is on his feet. Take Watson away and there is no possible way he could maintain that position or regain his feet. That one had me shouting at the TV so I'm glad I'm not the only one.

16th man wrote:

Renniks wrote:

Spiffy wrote:Lions Subs : I didn't count them at the end of the game but it looked as though several did not get off the bench. Just two props and a lock subbed? (Plus Nowell's brief HIA cover.) The commentators often miss subbings and are no help.
Don't think I saw Owens, Stander, Webb or Teo but maybe I just missed them.
Gatland asking a lot of the starters in the past two games.

Pretty sure you're right here - no appearances from any of those 4…

I was calling for Te'o before the Faletau try which involved both Sexton and Farrell twice
And then was calling for Webb just before Murray found a (glory) hole…

Seems odd that he didn't make more changes when we were being smashed at 55 minutes…

I was calling for Webb after roughly half an hour. Try aside, Murray was awful.

Spiffy wrote:Gatland picks same 23 for match day squad. If he did not trust most of his benchers last time out will they get a run in this game?

p/d wrote:Could Farrell have started more poorly

Digby wrote:

p/d wrote:Could Farrell have started more poorly

Describing Farrell's start as more poorly seems somehow appropriate

p/d wrote:

Digby wrote:

p/d wrote:Could Farrell have started more poorly

Describing Farrell's start as more poorly seems somehow appropriate

His defending this half has been more appropriately shyte

Digby wrote:

p/d wrote:

Digby wrote:
Describing Farrell's start as more poorly seems somehow appropriate

His defending this half has been more appropriately shyte

Compared to his comedy pass (?) to Watson his defending has been top tier