Ireland to finish

[Spiffy]

No f…in internet connection this afternoon, probably due to those on strike against that tw@t Macron. Anyway, before the totally unjustified red, the game was nicely balanced and England were in with a chance if spoiling the party. Surely it should’ve been judged as a «rugby collision » and play continued? I can’t remember the number of penalties against both teams but as sure as night follows day the ref had it in for England. Peyper deserves to be excluded from any involvement at the World Cup.

You think Peyper was poor - did you see Angus Gardner ref the Scot/Italy game?

[FKAS]

No f…in internet connection this afternoon, probably due to those on strike against that tw@t Macron. Anyway, before the totally unjustified red, the game was nicely balanced and England were in with a chance if spoiling the party. Surely it should’ve been judged as a «rugby collision » and play continued? I can’t remember the number of penalties against both teams but as sure as night follows day the ref had it in for England. Peyper deserves to be excluded from any involvement at the World Cup.

You think Peyper was poor - did you see Angus Gardner ref the Scot/Italy game?

It's not boding well for the world cup with some many referees performing so poorly. Officiating over the 6N period has not been particularly good though I'm mainly taking people's word on Peyper today as I only saw the first 15 mins and then a clip of the farcical red card. Well there's a clip doing the rounds of an Irish forward steaming into a ruck and going shoulder to head on Ludlam with Peyper 2m away that presumably he missed.

Been a great 6N for Tigers. Lost two key coaching staff members, Dan Kelly out for a few more weeks yet with a thigh injury, Chessum is out for the season and now Steward is likely to pick up a ban. Wonderful.

[stepsider]

No f…in internet connection this afternoon, probably due to those on strike against that tw@t Macron. Anyway, before the totally unjustified red, the game was nicely balanced and England were in with a chance if spoiling the party. Surely it should’ve been judged as a «rugby collision » and play continued? I can’t remember the number of penalties against both teams but as sure as night follows day the ref had it in for England. Peyper deserves to be excluded from any involvement at the World Cup.

We were never going to get many marginal calls in our favour at the Aviva with a GS on the line. But what's England's record with Peyper officiating? Suspect not good.

[p/d]

Not read all the posts but, sorry, that red card and subsequent yellow really highlight how the game is on its arse. These laws have killed the game and those who have brought it to this need to hang their heads in shame.

This is not to take anything away from Ireland who ere clearly the better side

[Spiffy]

Not read all the posts but, sorry, that red card and subsequent yellow really highlight how the game is on its arse. These laws have killed the game and those who have brought it to this need to hang their heads in shame.

This is not to take anything away from Ireland who ere clearly the better side

You have a point, but increasing evidence of permanent injury (brain and other) means that something has to be done about reckless/dangerous play. Unfortunately, many players do not seem to get the loud-and-clear message that you just don't put yourself in anything remotely like a red card situation. There are a lot of thickos out there.
For me, other factors are killing the game. A couple of examples would be the tedious resetting of umpteen scrums and the awarding of random scrum penalties that could go either way on the ref's whim (we saw several today); and the unbelievable number of awarded turnovers, most of which are not proper turnovers at all.
Not to mention the sad lack of basic skills - passing, catching, good tackle technique, accurate tactical kicking etc.. Too much time in the gym and not enough with the ball.

[morepork]

Not read all the posts but, sorry, that red card and subsequent yellow really highlight how the game is on its arse. These laws have killed the game and those who have brought it to this need to hang their heads in shame.

This is not to take anything away from Ireland who ere clearly the better side

It's on its are because of dull, dull coaches and aversion of risk associated with actually playing, not because of the aversion of risk associated with repeat head trauma verified by data. First risk context, you might lose, second risk context, you might promote accelerated cognitive decline in young athletes.

Cowboy up and learn to play.

[Cameo]

I genuinely didn't realise the red card was controversial until I came on here. It was a bit of an odd one given the context, but Steward had several things he could have done when he saw Keenan drop the ball and try to regather (try to make a tackle, try to dive on the ball, or step away and accept the scrum). Instead he turned the shoulder so his shoulder/elbow caught Keenan square on the head. I don't believe for a minute that it was malicious - more instinctive self defence, but if you are advancing in a defensive line, your default when something unexpected happens can't be to lead with the shoulder or elbow.

I'm also confused by this idea that the game is on its arse. It faces two existential issues - concussions and community participation numbers. The first is very tricky and the second is one faced by most sports at the moment. However, the game at international level is going through an entertaining phase, contrary to the mood on here. This round wasn't a great set of games but that happens sometimes when the top three teams happen to match up against the bottom three. Generally, though, the teams that have attacked with imagination and skill have been successful. Italy are the exception, but they are so much better to watch than they have ever been.

[fivepointer]

England improved a lot from last week. There was far greater intensity, far greater cohesion and continuity. Several individuals really stepped up. The first half wasnt perfect but i thought we had a nice energy about our play and put together some good attacks. 2nd half we slipped into kick everything mode - even when there were opportunities to move the ball - and played in a highly unimaginitive way.
The red card had a massive effect on the game. I didnt see it as a red and thought it very harsh.
Overall Peyper was poor. Red aside there were a number of calls that he got flat out wrong.
That doesnt mean we were robbed: far from it. Ireland were the better side and deserved the win and GS.

[Banquo]

I genuinely didn't realise the red card was controversial until I came on here. It was a bit of an odd one given the context, but Steward had several things he could have done when he saw Keenan drop the ball and try to regather (try to make a tackle, try to dive on the ball, or step away and accept the scrum). Instead he turned the shoulder so his shoulder/elbow caught Keenan square on the head. I don't believe for a minute that it was malicious - more instinctive self defence, but if you are advancing in a defensive line, your default when something unexpected happens can't be to lead with the shoulder or elbow.

I'm also confused by this idea that the game is on its arse. It faces two existential issues - concussions and community participation numbers. The first is very tricky and the second is one faced by most sports at the moment. However, the game at international level is going through an entertaining phase, contrary to the mood on here. This round wasn't a great set of games but that happens sometimes when the top three teams happen to match up against the bottom three. Generally, though, the teams that have attacked with imagination and skill have been successful. Italy are the exception, but they are so much better to watch than they have ever been.

In real time he had no time to think about making any of those decisions you refer to- his reflex turned out badly. There used to be a time mitigation, but not sure there is any more. Anyhoo, once Peyper started down the route, red was the only outcome, sh*t happens. But what is annoying leads me to your second point- huge efforts/sanctions are going into stopping head contacts 'in the open' as it were, including tackling (frankly not sure its working given the increasing numbers of reds and yellows?) but zero into the major area of concern on concussion....rucking on both sides of the ball; players still hurtle into rucks unbound, at any old height, and the amount of jangling of brain and micro concussions (is that a thing?) when rucking and being rucked I suspect makes tackle concussions look like a tiny problem. This imo needs addressing more urgently than what already exists on head contact. Mind, how you do that is a big question.

On the entertainment front yes, but participation is a massive problem, particularly amongst the junior sides of higher tier clubs.

[Oakboy]

England improved a lot from last week. There was far greater intensity, far greater cohesion and continuity. Several individuals really stepped up. The first half wasnt perfect but i thought we had a nice energy about our play and put together some good attacks. 2nd half we slipped into kick everything mode - even when there were opportunities to move the ball - and played in a highly unimaginitive way.
The red card had a massive effect on the game. I didnt see it as a red and thought it very harsh.
Overall Peyper was poor. Red aside there were a number of calls that he got flat out wrong.
That doesnt mean we were robbed: far from it. Ireland were the better side and deserved the win and GS.

Exactly, I think the superiority of Ireland left me free to be accurately critical of the ref whereas, if it was a sudden death game with something on for both teams, I would have held back with a fear of expressing natural 'sour grapes'. The obvious question in the ref's question sequence is, 'Was there foul play?' The answer should have been 'no'. End of subject. Not even a penalty. Had Peyper also had a full speed review he would have seen an obvious rugby incident/accident caused 80%+ by the player with the ball.

[Banquo]

Not read all the posts but, sorry, that red card and subsequent yellow really highlight how the game is on its arse. These laws have killed the game and those who have brought it to this need to hang their heads in shame.

This is not to take anything away from Ireland who ere clearly the better side

It's on its are because of dull, dull coaches and aversion of risk associated with actually playing, not because of the aversion of risk associated with repeat head trauma verified by data. First risk context, you might lose, second risk context, you might promote accelerated cognitive decline in young athletes.

Cowboy up and learn to play.

My earlier point could be bollox but surely the repeated head trauma is much more driven by rucking/breakdown than by tackling?

[Banquo]

England improved a lot from last week. There was far greater intensity, far greater cohesion and continuity. Several individuals really stepped up. The first half wasnt perfect but i thought we had a nice energy about our play and put together some good attacks. 2nd half we slipped into kick everything mode - even when there were opportunities to move the ball - and played in a highly unimaginitive way.
The red card had a massive effect on the game. I didnt see it as a red and thought it very harsh.
Overall Peyper was poor. Red aside there were a number of calls that he got flat out wrong.
That doesnt mean we were robbed: far from it. Ireland were the better side and deserved the win and GS.

Exactly, I think the superiority of Ireland left me free to be accurately critical of the ref whereas, if it was a sudden death game with something on for both teams, I would have held back with a fear of expressing natural 'sour grapes'. The obvious question in the ref's question sequence is, 'Was there foul play?' The answer should have been 'no'. End of subject. Not even a penalty. Had Peyper also had a full speed review he would have seen an obvious rugby incident/accident caused 80%+ by the player with the ball.

I'd welcome a refs view around the laws and the protocol they have to follow in this instance. There used to be a time element (reaction time) but not sure that's so any more.

[Banquo]

England improved a lot from last week. There was far greater intensity, far greater cohesion and continuity. Several individuals really stepped up. The first half wasnt perfect but i thought we had a nice energy about our play and put together some good attacks. 2nd half we slipped into kick everything mode - even when there were opportunities to move the ball - and played in a highly unimaginitive way.
The red card had a massive effect on the game. I didnt see it as a red and thought it very harsh.
Overall Peyper was poor. Red aside there were a number of calls that he got flat out wrong.
That doesnt mean we were robbed: far from it. Ireland were the better side and deserved the win and GS.

Frankly, although the impression was better, we still were pretty lame for much of the game; 10 penalties in the first half (brainless stuff from Dombrandt, Farrell, Itoje to mention 3), a ton of missed tackles (some brought about because of linespeed without taking the inside or outside man with you), and spectacularly bad kicking when down to 14 ( I was mulling over whether its better to keep the ball rather than kick it when down to 14, even in your own third, and the answer has to be yes, surely? Even then, kick it better). We did much better at the breakdown, which is what kept us close for the first half, and our pressure in defence (whilst causing holes and missed tackles) did rattle Ireland into a jittery poor first half by their standards.

The other thing that I posed earlier- surely you are better off playing with 7 forwards and 7 backs than 8 forwards and 6 backs for that length of time? On their ball, sure you risk a lot of scrum pressure, and your first line of defence has to adapt, but an open backfield and a mismatch on the set piece in the backs is a huge disadvantage. This is a back talking in fairness.

[Puja]

The other thing that I posed earlier- surely you are better off playing with 7 forwards and 7 backs than 8 forwards and 6 backs for that length of time? On their ball, sure you risk a lot of scrum pressure, and your first line of defence has to adapt, but an open backfield and a mismatch on the set piece in the backs is a huge disadvantage. This is a back talking in fairness.

Oddly enough, a forward thinks this theory is arrant nonsense.

Losing a back row leaves you at a massive disadvantage in the rucks - playing 3-on-2 with Ireland would've resulted in a massacre at the breakdown. Plus, there's a reason no-one has a 4:4 bench - forwards work harder and tire quicker, so spreading that workload amongst fewer players would leave us shattered and vulnerable in the last few minutes.

Lose a back three player however and, while the pendulum has to work harder to cover the backfield, it is doable with clever play. And the extra work isn't going to exhaust them - very rare that a winger is substituted because they've "emptied the tank".

Puja

[16th man]

Jaco obviously very hot on his refereeing of head contact, but was happy to just stand and watch this though....

[Mikey Brown]

I love the added sound effect.

Can’t see the match clock there but it’s a shame that was missed. 14 v 14 is fun.

[jngf]

Let’s be honest our wingers could take up oil painting or another second hobby during play

[Oakboy]

As for our performance, I thought Willis was our best player by some margin. Itoje played well. Slade and George stood up and removed the question marks hanging over them. Watson probably did too. Farrell, within his usual limitations did his best with some credit. Steward was fine.

As for the rest, there was some improvement from the props but they were well off their best.

Question marks remain over the other six. I'm no longer convinced that Ludlam deserves a starting slot though he remains a decent squad player. JVP was better than in the France game but not good. Ribbans is OK as 4th or 5th choice. Dombrandt drifts in and out, some good, some bad. Tuilagi is a shadow of his former self and not deserving of a squad place. Arundel leaves me with no clue. I'd restore Daly as 1st choice wing immediately.

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah, much like with Smith it’s like we think just plonking Arundell or OHC on the wing in a side not set up to make any use of them at all is going to add some extra dimension to our play.

Watson got a few moments to show off his footwork but mostly in desperate defensive/recovery situations rather than in attack.

I was really happy with Borthwick’s choice to involve Evans but it still feels a bit muddled.

[Banquo]

The other thing that I posed earlier- surely you are better off playing with 7 forwards and 7 backs than 8 forwards and 6 backs for that length of time? On their ball, sure you risk a lot of scrum pressure, and your first line of defence has to adapt, but an open backfield and a mismatch on the set piece in the backs is a huge disadvantage. This is a back talking in fairness.

Oddly enough, a forward thinks this theory is arrant nonsense.

Losing a back row leaves you at a massive disadvantage in the rucks - playing 3-on-2 with Ireland would've resulted in a massacre at the breakdown. Plus, there's a reason no-one has a 4:4 bench - forwards work harder and tire quicker, so spreading that workload amongst fewer players would leave us shattered and vulnerable in the last few minutes.

Lose a back three player however and, while the pendulum has to work harder to cover the backfield, it is doable with clever play. And the extra work isn't going to exhaust them - very rare that a winger is substituted because they've "emptied the tank".

Puja

Clearly never tried to defend first phase with 6 backs. We will have to disagree. As do most coaches with me, cos all are forwards . Loving your throwaway remark about covering the backfield with some ‘clever play’

When Ewels got sent off last year, was a back sacrificed out of interest?

[Mikey Brown]

I’m still torn on the Steward incident.

Even assuming Steward had any time to think (or somehow predict where Keenan would move his head/body in that split second) I cannot picture what he could have done. Trying to go lower could well have meant shoulder/head on head.

I suppose he could have put his arms up and just accepted whatever part of Keenan hitting him in the body to remove any risk of stray arms/elbows, which would seem like an insane expectation of a player running at full pelt, regardless of whether they had the time to react.

In terms of receiving the red card to teach him a lesson, what lesson could he even learn from this that will avoid future head clashes?

[FKAS]

Jaco obviously very hot on his refereeing of head contact, but was happy to just stand and watch this though....

This being one of the textbook examples of what World Rugby are trying to get rid of as well. The lack of consistency in these incidents is what really galls fans. Steward gets a harsh decision and then this is completely unpunished.

[Banquo]

As for our performance, I thought Willis was our best player by some margin. Itoje played well. Slade and George stood up and removed the question marks hanging over them. Watson probably did too. Farrell, within his usual limitations did his best with some credit. Steward was fine.

As for the rest, there was some improvement from the props but they were well off their best.

Question marks remain over the other six. I'm no longer convinced that Ludlam deserves a starting slot though he remains a decent squad player. JVP was better than in the France game but not good. Ribbans is OK as 4th or 5th choice. Dombrandt drifts in and out, some good, some bad. Tuilagi is a shadow of his former self and not deserving of a squad place. Arundel leaves me with no clue. I'd restore Daly as 1st choice wing immediately.

I thought Farrell was pretty average, missed a load of tackles and a stupid penalty, and his second half tactics and kicking was poor. I thought Tuilagi was better than I thought he'd be, and did well to last 80+. George doing 80 with an injury was remarkable too. Itoje was ok, but back to old penalty habits.

[Banquo]

I’m still torn on the Steward incident.

Even assuming Steward had any time to think (or somehow predict where Keenan would move his head/body in that split second) I cannot picture what he could have done. Trying to go lower could well have meant shoulder/head on head.

I suppose he could have put his arms up and just accepted whatever part of Keenan hitting him in the body to remove any risk of stray arms/elbows, which would seem like an insane expectation of a player running at full pelt, regardless of whether they had the time to react.

In terms of receiving the red card to teach him a lesson, what lesson could he even learn from this that will avoid future head clashes?

Well yes- and for example, what would the punishment have been if Keenan had hit his hip or knee? Nil. It was head on upper arm, rather than upper arm to head.

[Banquo]

Jaco obviously very hot on his refereeing of head contact, but was happy to just stand and watch this though....

This being one of the textbook examples of what World Rugby are trying to get rid of as well. The lack of consistency in these incidents is what really galls fans. Steward gets a harsh decision and then this is completely unpunished.

They aren't trying very hard really, are they? They could just enforce existing ruck laws- imo these collisions are worse than the open play tackle type ones, and they happen more often.