RugbyRebels

Beasties wrote:Watching on delay, just seen the Willis incident. Absolutely heartbroken for the lad, just as he was finally getting his chance after his previous injury.

Plus I thought he took backrow play up a gear, really awful thing to happen for him and for England team.

We got the backrow that should have started last week for about 10 mins and it looked handy.

jngf wrote:

Beasties wrote:Watching on delay, just seen the Willis incident. Absolutely heartbroken for the lad, just as he was finally getting his chance after his previous injury.

Plus I thought he took backrow play up a gear, really awful thing to happen for him and for England team.

Small mercy in one sense at least it isn’t the same knee as last time. Such a bastard of a thing to happen to him though.

If Slade stands in front of Farrell he can make all those metres, release runners outside, and compensate for the block of concrete inside of him.

morepork wrote:If Slade stands in front of Farrell he can make all those metres, release runners outside, and compensate for the block of concrete inside of him.

I think we've successfully hammered all that nonsense out of Slade, thank you very much.

I thought Slade had a good game. He makes things happen and looks dangerous every time he gets ball in hand.

Because we actually had some intent to play and move the ball this week was much easier to see the players who are playing well and those struggling. I’d say Billy and Daly look the most obviously out of touch at the moment, although Daly continues to look infinitely better whenever he’s moved to the wing. Maybe there’s something in that Eddie? Billy was just a passenger. Well off the pace.

I think Lawrence would have had some fun today and might have actually had some opportunities to show his attacking abilities.

Billy aside I Iiked the starting pack. LCD & Johnny Hill are first choice players now. Sinks and Mako a step up on last weeks props. Lawes is nobody’s idea of a perfect 6, but he’s undoubtedly a bloody destructive international forward.

Gutted for Willis. Got to think there’s every chance he’s done multiple ligaments and significant meniscus damage with the way his knee buckled in and rotated. The positive is that it’s the other knee and he’s been through it before and come back even better.

Oh, and Ford makes such a MASSIVE difference.

I see Nigel Owens is saying in the Mail that May's try shouldn't have been allowed as he was "jumping to avoid a tackle".

Jonathan Kaplan disagrees in the DT and says he knows of nothing in the laws to justify disallowing it. He did say that the tackler could justifiably have tackled May in the air and knocked him into touch.

Beasties wrote:I see Nigel Owens is saying in the Mail that May's try shouldn't have been allowed as he was "jumping to avoid a tackle".

It's an interesting one. You are allowed to dive for the line but jumping into/over a tackle is considered dangerous play. The Italian player could have tackled him but given the angle of the jump any contact and May comes down on his upper body and maybe his head. The Italian player is then carded because May dived for the line? I think that one is open for interpretation.

Any news on jack?

twitchy wrote:Any news on jack?

He is due to get a scan today, according to EJ.

Let's be honest, the knee doesn't do that without being proper fucked. He's out for a long time, potentially gone forever.

FKAS wrote:

Beasties wrote:I see Nigel Owens is saying in the Mail that May's try shouldn't have been allowed as he was "jumping to avoid a tackle".

It's an interesting one. You are allowed to dive for the line but jumping into/over a tackle is considered dangerous play. The Italian player could have tackled him but given the angle of the jump any contact and May comes down on his upper body and maybe his head. The Italian player is then carded because May dived for the line? I think that one is open for interpretation.

For all the questions over legality I hope it will be remembered for just being a bloody good finish

I'd have pinged May for jumping into a tackle, but May would have a point hardly anyone gets done for jumping into a tackle, indeed you're more likely to be rewarded for jumping into a tackle. of course Fagerson would have a point hardly anyone gets done for flying into a ruck, so sometimes you still end up on the end of the oddly discordant decision

Technically tackle actually started with May's foot on the ground, so I don't see how you can do him for jumping into a tackle.

In a different scenario that jump isn't safe for may or the tackler, a dive should be downwards not jump and dive surely?

Was there anything in the Farrell clash of heads yesterday?

There's not a law about jumping into a tackle though. There's acting recklessly and dangerous to others (my reckoning is that's called being a player).

paddy no 11 wrote:In a different scenario that jump isn't safe for may or the tackler, a dive should be downwards not jump and dive surely?

Was there anything in the Farrell clash of heads yesterday?

I think a penalty for just being so careless would have been reasonable. I don’t think it was a particularly bad hit or a cheap shot, but just another sign he does not learn. If they want to avoid head on head clashes it seems reasonable to ping people for those chest tackles that inevitably end up in head contact.

The laws around jumping in/out of tackles seem very unclear in the way they are applied and it won’t surprise me if somebody soon lands directly on their head/neck in a bad way because of it.

Reds - these decisions often have an 'end of contest' and maybe 'out of the running' consequence - the escalating numbers due to the welfare concerns presumably were to be expected, but it is giving more of a lottery element it seems.

Rugby Union is the only oval ball sport where, upon seeing some incredible feat of athleticism, a large percentage of fans initial reaction is whether it should be banned because it could maybe, potentially, theoretically be a little bit dangerous.

Raggs wrote:Let's be honest, the knee doesn't do that without being proper fucked. He's out for a long time, potentially gone forever.

Yes, not good at all.

Dan Leavy has come back this year from something similar and seems to be slowly getting back to his previous level, although it’s 2 years in March since his injury.

Ellis Jenkins played his first game in about 27 months after his knee reconstruction.

How long was Jack out last time?

Galfon wrote:Reds - these decisions often have an 'end of contest' and maybe 'out of the running' consequence - the escalating numbers due to the welfare concerns presumably were to be expected, but it is giving more of a lottery element it seems.

Players will hopefully continue to learn that you have to be careful about going into situations where heads are possibly involved.

paddy no 11 wrote:In a different scenario that jump isn't safe for may or the tackler, a dive should be downwards not jump and dive surely?

Was there anything in the Farrell clash of heads yesterday?

Who cares about any of this.

Timbo wrote:

Raggs wrote:Let's be honest, the knee doesn't do that without being proper fucked. He's out for a long time, potentially gone forever.

Yes, not good at all.

Dan Leavy has come back this year from something similar and seems to be slowly getting back to his previous level, although it’s 2 years in March since his injury.

Ellis Jenkins played his first game in about 27 months after his knee reconstruction.

How long was Jack out last time?

9-12mths IIRC.

Obviously we don’t know exactly what Jack has done at this point in time so it’s hard to say. However, his lower leg was at least facing the right way which wasn’t the case for Leavy.

Beno Obano completely ruptured his ACL and LCL and had major tears in his PCL and MCL. Basically everything in the knee. He was out for 9mths and doesn’t seem to have suffered any ill effects since returning. He was obviously pretty lucky with that but it shows it can be done.

Let’s keep our fingers crossed for him.