RugbyRebels

Caught that on delay with my provider buggering much of the stream for the first half, so missed virtually all the good Aussie play. With that caveat, it felt lions were winning the arm wrestle. In the second half the lions d was killing all Aussie momentum. It felt like the right result but if I were Aussie i think I'd be livid about that final call but I might not be right. But that is a tough one. Looked worse in slo mo.

The whining about Kelleher's try is quite amusing though.

UKHamlet wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:41 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:07 pm I don't think I've ever been in favour of a 6:2 split before but I am for next week. There are two reasons: Marcus instead of Diddums; and the need for two quick back-rowers to come on and step up the pace. I'd start Morgan and have Curry and Pollock to come on.

Curry's interventions won that game for the Lions today. I appreciate the reasoning of bringing on big characters to close out the game, but we might have been buried but for him. On the other hand, Morgan brings a more traditional 7 presence, with turnovers, breakdown disruption, and he has hell of an engine.

This

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 5:13 pm

R3dders wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 5:10 pm Check out the telegraph reviews.

Really quite balanced and sensible, until they come to the replacements.


https://archive.ph/eCmfb

Replacements
As a collective they were the Lions’ men of the match. Genge and Stuart took the Australian scrum to the cleaners while Kinghorn added thrust in attack and Farrell the class. 9/10

That is vomit-worthy.

As was Itoje’s; ‘but Sir, they started it’

R3dders wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 5:10 pm Check out the telegraph reviews.

Really quite balanced and sensible, until they come to the replacements.


https://archive.ph/eCmfb

Replacements
As a collective they were the Lions’ men of the match. Genge and Stuart took the Australian scrum to the cleaners while Kinghorn added thrust in attack and Farrell the class. 9/10

And yet Ryan not name checked.

I wasn’t meaning I knew of a Jones injury, I just thought it might have been confirmed one way or the other. Bizarre move to take off one of your biggest game-breakers. Then again, could he offer the ‘class’?

Only caught the highlights but how exactly did the Aussie second try stand? Referee standing in the line blocking the defending like a clown.

Final try shows the actual joke that the breakdown has become. By the letter this should be a pen surely? Aussie gets over the ball and Morgan comes in and smashes him around the neck to clear him. Problem is that every breakdown is like this now….

Don’t get me started on the Sheehan try.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 6:47 pm Only caught the highlights but how exactly did the Aussie second try stand? Referee standing in the line blocking the defending like a clown.

Final try shows the actual joke that the breakdown has become. By the letter this should be a pen surely? Aussie gets over the ball and Morgan comes in and smashes him around the neck to clear him. Problem is that every breakdown is like this now….

Don’t get me started on the Sheehan try.

What was wrong with the Sheehan try? Diving over a tackler is illegal in general play, but apparently it is not illegal when you're diving for the try line. I'm sure Oz would have enjoyed scoring one like that too.

Spiffy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 7:46 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 6:47 pm Only caught the highlights but how exactly did the Aussie second try stand? Referee standing in the line blocking the defending like a clown.

Final try shows the actual joke that the breakdown has become. By the letter this should be a pen surely? Aussie gets over the ball and Morgan comes in and smashes him around the neck to clear him. Problem is that every breakdown is like this now….

Don’t get me started on the Sheehan try.

What was wrong with the Sheehan try? Diving over a tackler is illegal in general play, but apparently it is not illegal when you're diving for the try line. I'm sure Oz would have enjoyed scoring one like that too.

It’s a huge grey area. Diving to score isn’t illegal but there’s no clarity at all on how far you can dive from or whether you can flat out jump over a tackler or just over an arm. I would at the Sheehan try definitely goes against any intention of how the law is meant to be reffed. Interesting to see if it becomes common place.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 8:06 pm

Spiffy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 7:46 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 6:47 pm Only caught the highlights but how exactly did the Aussie second try stand? Referee standing in the line blocking the defending like a clown.

Final try shows the actual joke that the breakdown has become. By the letter this should be a pen surely? Aussie gets over the ball and Morgan comes in and smashes him around the neck to clear him. Problem is that every breakdown is like this now….

Don’t get me started on the Sheehan try.

What was wrong with the Sheehan try? Diving over a tackler is illegal in general play, but apparently it is not illegal when you're diving for the try line. I'm sure Oz would have enjoyed scoring one like that too.

It’s a huge grey area. Diving to score isn’t illegal but there’s no clarity at all on how far you can dive from or whether you can flat out jump over a tackler or just over an arm. I would at the Sheehan try definitely goes against any intention of how the law is meant to be reffed. Interesting to see if it becomes common place.

I would say if you end up over the line, then you're diving in the act of scoring, no? If Sheehan's dive was out on the wing i don't think this would be much of a conversation.

Adam_P wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 9:10 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 8:06 pm

Spiffy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 7:46 pm
What was wrong with the Sheehan try? Diving over a tackler is illegal in general play, but apparently it is not illegal when you're diving for the try line. I'm sure Oz would have enjoyed scoring one like that too.

It’s a huge grey area. Diving to score isn’t illegal but there’s no clarity at all on how far you can dive from or whether you can flat out jump over a tackler or just over an arm. I would at the Sheehan try definitely goes against any intention of how the law is meant to be reffed. Interesting to see if it becomes common place.

I would say if you end up over the line, then you're diving in the act of scoring, no? If Sheehan's dive was out on the wing i don't think this would be much of a conversation.

That was my take. Sheehan's timing was such that he suckered them going for a chop tackle. If he'd got it wrong then the complaint would have been valid.

Faz passed three times, made one tackle and missed 2. Quality

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 10:29 pm Faz passed three times, made one tackle and missed 2. Quality

It's called class, apparently

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 8:06 pm

Spiffy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 7:46 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 6:47 pm Only caught the highlights but how exactly did the Aussie second try stand? Referee standing in the line blocking the defending like a clown.

Final try shows the actual joke that the breakdown has become. By the letter this should be a pen surely? Aussie gets over the ball and Morgan comes in and smashes him around the neck to clear him. Problem is that every breakdown is like this now….

Don’t get me started on the Sheehan try.

What was wrong with the Sheehan try? Diving over a tackler is illegal in general play, but apparently it is not illegal when you're diving for the try line. I'm sure Oz would have enjoyed scoring one like that too.

It’s a huge grey area. Diving to score isn’t illegal but there’s no clarity at all on how far you can dive from or whether you can flat out jump over a tackler or just over an arm. I would at the Sheehan try definitely goes against any intention of how the law is meant to be reffed. Interesting to see if it becomes common place.

Yep. It’s just so unclear. We’re supposed to promoting tackling low, but there’s an undefinable point on the pitch where suddenly tackling low means that’s it’s legal for a player to jump straight over the top of you.

I’m not saying it was technically wrong, but it certainly didn’t feel right to me either.

This BIL team may not (oops.) have the class and flair of earlier versions (yet..) but they have shown mettle -the Beirne try and Curry tackle on Sua'alii, in the context of the game showed great determination and awareness.Priceless.

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 6:47 pm Only caught the highlights but how exactly did the Aussie second try stand? Referee standing in the line blocking the defending like a clown.

Final try shows the actual joke that the breakdown has become. By the letter this should be a pen surely? Aussie gets over the ball and Morgan comes in and smashes him around the neck to clear him. Problem is that every breakdown is like this now….

Don’t get me started on the Sheehan try.

There is debate over the laws and their application. In the DT this morning there is a reference to Law 15.3 ... at all stages of the ruck a player's head and shoulders should be no lower than his hips (or something like that). Currently, referees do not apply that it seems. Why not? Technically, was Morgan clearing out a player acting illegally? Or, was the Aussie player squatting so low that his head was not too low per the law? Where does all that pan out in a case of serious injury?

At the time, I thought the ref handled the whole issue well within current application but what the hell do I know?

It was a good watch, that game. Outside of that simple fact, determining standards is not easy. Were the Aussies good in establishing that lead or were the Lions poor? Had it been England I would definitely have been whingeing about a porous defence but being less emotional about a jamboree side, I just applauded the attacking side. Maybe, it was all down to physicality. For a long period the Aussies won most of the collisions and looked a yard faster. The likes of Beirne and Conan struggled in pure pace over the ground for the early part yet reigned supreme in stamina over 80.

It was a mistake to not start Genge (as a lot of us thought). His absence from the pace/impact equation was a factor. McCarthy was missed too.

I think most of us are on the same page about that game.

One thing I have not seen mentioned is how good Russell's kickoffs were throughout. The Lions blew the resulting field position a few times, but they were just pin point - to the point I was getting worried as I thought one had to go out on the full if he kept doing it.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 8:59 am It was a mistake to not start Genge (as a lot of us thought). His absence from the pace/impact equation was a factor. McCarthy was missed too.

I really think Genge was tactical, once Valentini and Skelton were off and he came on there was almost no-one left to stop him. If that is the case it's pretty shrewd management

Danno wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 9:41 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 8:59 am It was a mistake to not start Genge (as a lot of us thought). His absence from the pace/impact equation was a factor. McCarthy was missed too.

I really think Genge was tactical, once Valentini and Skelton were off and he came on there was almost no-one left to stop him. If that is the case it's pretty shrewd management

Shrewd or lucky as it turned out? As ever, saving a player for bench impact means something like 55-60 with the lesser player and 20-25 with the better one. With Aus always going to have a re-surge and with physical guys returning from injury, that decision was so close to mis-firing, IMO. For the neutral, it made for a better game, I suppose.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:43 pm

UKHamlet wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:41 pm

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:07 pm I don't think I've ever been in favour of a 6:2 split before but I am for next week. There are two reasons: Marcus instead of Diddums; and the need for two quick back-rowers to come on and step up the pace. I'd start Morgan and have Curry and Pollock to come on.

Curry's interventions won that game for the Lions today. I appreciate the reasoning of bringing on big characters to close out the game, but we might have been buried but for him. On the other hand, Morgan brings a more traditional 7 presence, with turnovers, breakdown disruption, and he has hell of an engine.

Yeah thought Curry was very influential again. Such a shame his hip is clearly curtailing him.

I would agree Curry comfortably best Lions player in that second test. Felt Australia missed Valentini and Skelton badly when they came off

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 10:11 am

Danno wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 9:41 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 8:59 am It was a mistake to not start Genge (as a lot of us thought). His absence from the pace/impact equation was a factor. McCarthy was missed too.

I really think Genge was tactical, once Valentini and Skelton were off and he came on there was almost no-one left to stop him. If that is the case it's pretty shrewd management

Shrewd or lucky as it turned out? As ever, saving a player for bench impact means something like 55-60 with the lesser player and 20-25 with the better one. With Aus always going to have a re-surge and with physical guys returning from injury, that decision was so close to mis-firing, IMO. For the neutral, it made for a better game, I suppose.

Either way it worked. Genge alone wouldn't have stemmed the first half, Aus played some lovely stuff while the Lions were off the boil and ill disciplined. Skelton and Valentini were never going to play the full match as they haven't played in over 6 weeks

Danno wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 11:49 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 10:11 am

Danno wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 9:41 am

I really think Genge was tactical, once Valentini and Skelton were off and he came on there was almost no-one left to stop him. If that is the case it's pretty shrewd management

Shrewd or lucky as it turned out? As ever, saving a player for bench impact means something like 55-60 with the lesser player and 20-25 with the better one. With Aus always going to have a re-surge and with physical guys returning from injury, that decision was so close to mis-firing, IMO. For the neutral, it made for a better game, I suppose.

Either way it worked. Genge alone wouldn't have stemmed the first half, Aus played some lovely stuff while the Lions were off the boil and ill disciplined. Skelton and Valentini were never going to play the full match as they haven't played in over 6 weeks

Exactly. When we went a few scores behind it was worrying, but I was always expecting the lions bench to be more impactful. Skelton is a force of nature but not for 80 mins

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 10:39 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 8:06 pm

Spiffy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 7:46 pm
What was wrong with the Sheehan try? Diving over a tackler is illegal in general play, but apparently it is not illegal when you're diving for the try line. I'm sure Oz would have enjoyed scoring one like that too.

It’s a huge grey area. Diving to score isn’t illegal but there’s no clarity at all on how far you can dive from or whether you can flat out jump over a tackler or just over an arm. I would at the Sheehan try definitely goes against any intention of how the law is meant to be reffed. Interesting to see if it becomes common place.

Yep. It’s just so unclear. We’re supposed to promoting tackling low, but there’s an undefinable point on the pitch where suddenly tackling low means that’s it’s legal for a player to jump straight over the top of you.

I’m not saying it was technically wrong, but it certainly didn’t feel right to me either.

I take it the new pre-latching law (as practised here) was binned off several months back?
Was there an announcement? I may have missed it.

I was pulling for Aus with the hope of a decider next week. Either way, that was the most enjoyable game I can remember seeing. Outstanding play from both teams and Australia being Australia. When they play like that you could have Jesus Christ and Zeus on your team and they'd still score on you. And its fantastic! Lions power brought them back, and that was fantastic too. Shame the deciding try was contentious.

Beasties wrote: ↑Sun Jul 27, 2025 1:54 pm

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 10:39 pm

Captainhaircut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 8:06 pm

It’s a huge grey area. Diving to score isn’t illegal but there’s no clarity at all on how far you can dive from or whether you can flat out jump over a tackler or just over an arm. I would at the Sheehan try definitely goes against any intention of how the law is meant to be reffed. Interesting to see if it becomes common place.

Yep. It’s just so unclear. We’re supposed to promoting tackling low, but there’s an undefinable point on the pitch where suddenly tackling low means that’s it’s legal for a player to jump straight over the top of you.

I’m not saying it was technically wrong, but it certainly didn’t feel right to me either.

I take it the new pre-latching law (as practised here) was binned off several months back?
Was there an announcement? I may have missed it.

The interpretation of the jumper in the tackle is certainly lt variable. Blair Murray was penalised. A Scottish women’s player vs wales did pretty much the same thing a few weeks later and that was apparently fine. Does diving to score a try count here as technically the player can’t be tackled.