RugbyRebels

Timbo wrote:

Banquo wrote:Bit harsh on Billy, who has been comfortably our primary yard maker up front all 6N, in every game. I do question leaving him on for 80, given his recent lack of conditioning. He makes hard yards, good yards, and handles well, and his defence has been fine generally. Suspect this is a case, as with when Itoje slightly dropped off, and with Launchbury, some are expecting more than we get....but its still better than the other options, Wilson went well, but is an entirely different kind of player- and I really like him at 6. We also know that Billy at his best is a world class 8.

Yeah, I’m not worried about Billy as long as he can stay fit.

If he’s not around at any point though I’m about done with Hughes. We have a number of exciting young back row that I would like to see given a chance.

Yep.

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

I had faz 11, Ford 7?

My bad ...... must be my mind set

p/d wrote:

Banquo wrote:

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

I had faz 11, Ford 7?

My bad ...... must be my mind set

I empathise; need to look at the root cause

Take out Billy and you simply give less space and time to those other carriers who have made ground. Billy will either make ground or attract defenders

Timbo wrote:

Banquo wrote:Bit harsh on Billy, who has been comfortably our primary yard maker up front all 6N, in every game. I do question leaving him on for 80, given his recent lack of conditioning. He makes hard yards, good yards, and handles well, and his defence has been fine generally. Suspect this is a case, as with when Itoje slightly dropped off, and with Launchbury, some are expecting more than we get....but its still better than the other options, Wilson went well, but is an entirely different kind of player- and I really like him at 6. We also know that Billy at his best is a world class 8.

Yeah, I’m not worried about Billy as long as he can stay fit.

If he’s not around at any point though I’m about done with Hughes. We have a number of exciting young back row that I would like to see given a chance.

Don't disagree but it's absolute bollix that we are fiddling at this point. Fricking Jones ought to have all his 31 firmly set. Mind you, he could have,but he's probably wrong about quite a few. I think he is pretty useless.

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

Puja wrote:

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

To be fair he would have done bloody well to get anywhere near Kinghorn

p/d wrote:

Puja wrote:

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

To be fair he would have done bloody well to get anywhere near Kinghorn

Very true.

There's a problem with the communication in midfield defence- it is a bit too much to expect Faz to be doing this, but I wonder who is doing the talking and leading. Slade probably should be, but I wouldn't want to blame him without knowing. Again, at Sarries, Barritt does this, so I wonder if Faz needs someone in his ear all game- and with respect, it won't be Manu.

p/d wrote:

Puja wrote:

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

To be fair he would have done bloody well to get anywhere near Kinghorn

I said Graham! Everybody saw it!

Puja

Puja wrote:

p/d wrote:

Puja wrote:
We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

To be fair he would have done bloody well to get anywhere near Kinghorn

I said Graham! Everybody saw it!

Puja

I'm on your side on this one. Just like I said Ford got 7 points

Puja wrote:

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

I can’t recall the first, but i’ve seen a few people blame him for the other try and I really don’t think it was.

We have the numbers but our spacing is so bad the pass to Russell takes out 3 players, leaving Scots with a 5 on 3. We then start to drift until Hughes (not Billy) goes for a big hit on Russell. If Hughes continues to drift he probably makes the tackle. From Manu’s pov, if he bites on their 12 and the ball goes out the back they have a 3 on 1 with half the field to work in. He has to hedge his bets and Hughes has to drift- Manu was in a tough spot and I think his decision making process was perfectly understandable.

Timbo wrote:

Puja wrote:

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

I can’t recall the first, but i’ve seen a few people blame him for the other try and I really don’t think it was.

We have the numbers but our spacing is so bad the pass to Russell takes out 3 players, leaving Scots with a 5 on 3. We then start to drift until Hughes (not Billy) goes for a big hit on Russell. If Hughes continues to drift he probably makes the tackle. From Manu’s pov, if he bites on their 12 and the ball goes out the back they have a 3 on 1 with half the field to work in. He has to hedge his bets and Hughes has to drift- Manu was in a tough spot and I think his decision making process was perfectly understandable.

yep

Timbo wrote:

Puja wrote:

p/d wrote:Faz 11, Ford 10 wasn’t it?

We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

I can’t recall the first, but i’ve seen a few people blame him for the other try and I really don’t think it was.

We have the numbers but our spacing is so bad the pass to Russell takes out 3 players, leaving Scots with a 5 on 3. We then start to drift until Hughes (not Billy) goes for a big hit on Russell. If Hughes continues to drift he probably makes the tackle. From Manu’s pov, if he bites on their 12 and the ball goes out the back they have a 3 on 1 with half the field to work in. He has to hedge his bets and Hughes has to drift- Manu was in a tough spot and I think his decision making process was perfectly understandable.

Having watched it again, you are absolutely correct. Good post.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Timbo wrote:

Puja wrote:
We all booed when he opted to kick the penalty at 21-0, but that three points turned out to be crucial. All hail Captain Fazlet and his foresight that there is no lead so big that we cannot piss it away under his leadership!

As we were speaking of defence, Manu's tackle stats probably look okay, but that's only because he was so far out of position that he didn't even count as missing them. He was responsible for two of their tries - overchased Kinghorn when his job was to stay inside the last defender for the step inside, and later caused the try where the Scots centre broke through by getting his positioning all wrong in the centres and leaving far too big a gap for BillyV to cover.

Puja

I can’t recall the first, but i’ve seen a few people blame him for the other try and I really don’t think it was.

We have the numbers but our spacing is so bad the pass to Russell takes out 3 players, leaving Scots with a 5 on 3. We then start to drift until Hughes (not Billy) goes for a big hit on Russell. If Hughes continues to drift he probably makes the tackle. From Manu’s pov, if he bites on their 12 and the ball goes out the back they have a 3 on 1 with half the field to work in. He has to hedge his bets and Hughes has to drift- Manu was in a tough spot and I think his decision making process was perfectly understandable.

Having watched it again, you are absolutely correct. Good post.

Puja

Look at a lot of our defending a couple out off loose ball and there is clearly a big problem with (lack of) communication, which is vital even when a defence is set, let alone when scrambling a little. Its another leadership problem tbh.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... hological/

good stuff on the game with Mooro and Squeaky. They think the issue is tactical and not psychological.

fivepointer wrote:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... hological/

good stuff on the game with Mooro and Squeaky. They think the issue is tactical and not psychological.

Indeed. Bloody talk of Uri Geller and his spoon bending bollocks.

This psychological claptrap is just Jones deflecting the press away from the main issue. Tactical!!

p/d wrote:

fivepointer wrote:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... hological/

good stuff on the game with Mooro and Squeaky. They think the issue is tactical and not psychological.

Indeed. Bloody talk of Uri Geller and his spoon bending bollocks.

This psychological claptrap is just Jones deflecting the press away from the main issue. Tactical!!

I keep looking for the 'like' button on this forum. And I say that as a vehement anti-fa**b**k type of person

https://rugbyreferee.net/2019/03/22/law ... cy-graham/

This video seemed interesting. I started trying to watch it but got too pissed off as soon as I saw the replay.

Will he ever get caught out? I was hoping it would happen before the world cup and he might learn. There's a part of me that would find it very funny if we lose a RWC game because of it.

Is there still anyone except Dallaglio who thinks that was a legit tackle?

Thought it was a bit unclear by ref. on the day...'bit of collision...tried to protect himself'..'penalty.'
Didn't say late or dangerous - if latter, then restart is point of collision.
If late, the 15m line may have applied rather than the infield position Laidlaw missed from.
Your right re. the risk..it will be watched for now I'm sure.

Yeah, trying to protect himself is not something I've ever heard used as mitigation in a situation like that. It's not a charge down, it's not a tackle, he's just trying to protect himself by throwing the point of the shoulder at the kicker's head?

Mikey Brown wrote:Yeah, trying to protect himself is not something I've ever heard used as mitigation in a situation like that. It's not a charge down, it's not a tackle, he's just trying to protect himself by throwing the point of the shoulder at the kicker's head?

Its strange, in real time the first time I watched it, I though he was thinking about a charge down, realised he wouldnt make that and then tried to pull out; but then watched it in slo-mo, and it looked like he half stopped but put the shoulder in. Then, having seen the slo mo, I then only saw the shoulder going in, in the real time version. I think dangerous, more than late.

Separately, can't help thinking of slightly double standards when refs talk about 'consequences', they don't give much of a fck about scatter rucking/clearing any old how.

Banquo wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Yeah, trying to protect himself is not something I've ever heard used as mitigation in a situation like that. It's not a charge down, it's not a tackle, he's just trying to protect himself by throwing the point of the shoulder at the kicker's head?

Its strange, in real time the first time I watched it, I though he was thinking about a charge down, realised he wouldnt make that and then tried to pull out; but then watched it in slo-mo, and it looked like he half stopped but put the shoulder in. Then, having seen the slo mo, I then only saw the shoulder going in, in the real time version. I think dangerous, more than late.

Separately, can't help thinking of slightly double standards when refs talk about 'consequences', they don't give much of a fck about scatter rucking/clearing any old how.

Aye. It's one of the reasons I can't stand SA rugby...they just fly into rucks like no-one else. Just insanity from so many of their players. Been watching some recently trying to get to grips with Lewies.

And it's definitely a big problem in all pro rugby. I just wish they'd ref the laws consistently...

Banquo wrote: Its strange, in real time the first time I watched it, I though he was thinking about a charge down, realised he wouldnt make that and then tried to pull out; but then watched it in slo-mo, and it looked like he half stopped but put the shoulder in. Then, having seen the slo mo, I then only saw the shoulder going in, in the real time version. I think dangerous, more than late.

Separately, can't help thinking of slightly double standards when refs talk about 'consequences', they don't give much of a fck about scatter rucking/clearing any old how.

He defo adjusts himself at the last minute to protect himself from the boot, but he's doing the opposite of avoiding contact. It's reckless. If he was genuinely trying to charge down he would've been on a different line and then wouldn't have made such a contact. In mitigation he was prob knackered and trying way too hard to salvage something and ended up seriously misjudging. Again. The fact that he keeps getting away with these is only encouraging him to think he's in the right though. Does Eddie actually talk to him about these challenges? I hinestly have no idea how anyone can watch that incident and think it's not reckless.

Beasties wrote:He defo adjusts himself at the last minute to protect himself from the boot, but he's doing the opposite of avoiding contact. It's reckless. If he was genuinely trying to charge down he would've been on a different line and then wouldn't have made such a contact. In mitigation he was prob knackered and trying way too hard to salvage something and ended up seriously misjudging. Again. The fact that he keeps getting away with these is only encouraging him to think he's in the right though. Does Eddie actually talk to him about these challenges? I hinestly have no idea how anyone can watch that incident and think it's not reckless.

I don't understand how you can be seeing that. The angle where you can see Farrell's face is damning. He has zeroed (?) in on Graham's chest area before the ball is even kicked. The ridiculous thing is he probably could have charged it down if he'd actually tried to. I certainly thought it was going to be as I watched in real time.