Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 341 | 342 | 343 | 344 | 345 | 346 | 347 | 348 | 349 | 350 | 351 | ... | 639

5872 posts

Uber Geek

#2347636 2-Nov-2019 16:51

tdgeek:

Its a gane of strategy, if slowing it down works, and within the rules then do it.

When the ball has been clearly won by a team at the ruck, and is available to be played, the referee calls “use it”, after which the ball must be played away from the ruck within five seconds. Sanction: Scrum.

Owens barely called this in the ENG game and it let them dictate the pace, which was a slow grind and crowding the hit-up area. It's a rule that exists specifically to stop one team from slowing play down to a crawl.

Barnes actually policed it (possibly an outcome of the match review from the English game?) and all of a sudden the game was much more free-flowing.

This is the problem with the rules - they are there, but refs seem to be so inconsistent in applying them and it can (and does) hand a massive advantage to certain teams. It shouldn't be on the other team to find a way around a ref not correctly applying rules to their opposition.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

tdgeek

29585 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347651 2-Nov-2019 18:44

GV27:

tdgeek:

Its a gane of strategy, if slowing it down works, and within the rules then do it.

When the ball has been clearly won by a team at the ruck, and is available to empty be played, the referee calls “use it”, after which the ball must be played away from the ruck within five seconds. Sanction: Scrum.

Owens barely called this in the ENG game and it let them dictate the pace, which was a slow grind and crowding the hit-up area. It's a rule that exists specifically to stop one team from slowing play down to a crawl.

Barnes actually policed it (possibly an outcome of the match review from the English game?) and all of a sudden the game was much more free-flowing.

This is the problem with the rules - they are there, but refs seem to be so inconsistent in applying them and it can (and does) hand a massive advantage to certain teams. It shouldn't be on the other team to find a way around a ref not correctly applying rules to their opposition.

ENG vs NZ was a crawl?

Well, all I hear is that refs favour AB's, now all I hear is when its not a good game its the refs fault. If we only engage rubbish refs, amateur refs and we don't police the referrering at a high level, the game is a farce? Maybe World Rugby should employ good refs, not poor refs? Apparently Nigel Owens is regarded as a top referee. Is that wrong? I read here about other games and all I read is its "this" ref, so "this" will happen. IMHO, a ref will never be 100% accurate, in any sport. But rugby seems to be run by refs. If we have some poor refs discard them. It does seem like sour grapes, its either that or the referring in international rugby is a joke. Which is it?

Batman

Mad Scientist
29690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347654 2-Nov-2019 19:03

England slowed it down legally. Their giant 6 & 7 & 4 & 13 & 8 & any number you can count out were legally entitled to challenge. If we wanted faster ball, let me correct - if we wanted our ball back, we would have committed more forwards to make sure English forwards are not entitled to anything for a start. Then you can talk about penalties that should be awarded.

tdgeek

29585 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347657 2-Nov-2019 19:17

Batman: England slowed it down legally. Their giant 6 & 7 & 4 & 13 & 8 & any number you can count out were legally entitled to challenge. If we wanted faster ball, let me correct - if we wanted our ball back, we would have committed more forwards to make sure English forwards are not entitled to anything for a start. Then you can talk about penalties that should be awarded.

When E NG had the ball they control the game. They kick it away as part of their "lets play the game in your half" strategy. If NZ wanted a faster game, dont kick it back.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347688 2-Nov-2019 23:51

As I said scrum penalties are a lottery apart from the obvious, congratulations South Africa you have done your country proud. Enjoy the four years.

tdgeek

29585 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347689 3-Nov-2019 00:06

Batman: As I said scrum penalties are a lottery apart from the obvious, congratulations South Africa you have done your country proud. Enjoy the four years.

Lottery? More iike an artform. RSA were hungrier from the opening whistle. ENG upped the ante 12 out when it was desperate, then coughed it up, but they can't expect a result of they play tentative. Pity the game was about drawing penalties, but the team that played best tonight, won.

tdgeek

29585 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347691 3-Nov-2019 00:18

Stuff say it was a controversial final. Wrong.

MileHighKiwi

782 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2347694 3-Nov-2019 06:38

Congratulations to South Africa, totally dominated England, who looked like a shadow of the team that beat us. I said to some mates last night that England wouldn't back up from last week, didn't expect that though. That's now 3 world cups without conceding a try in the final. Impressive.

Handle9

11158 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347696 3-Nov-2019 06:54

Congratulations to South Africa. They dominated the world cup final and were thoroughly deserving winners. Unfortunately England played their final last week while South Africa had their narrow escape.

It's funny how it seems to work out like that - the winner of the world cup will always have one narrow escape.

I liked that South Africa won playing a very South African style - strangling sides with physicality and pressure. You don't have to play one particular style to win, you just need to be great at whatever style suits your team

Handle9

11158 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347697 3-Nov-2019 06:57

tdgeek:
Batman: As I said scrum penalties are a lottery apart from the obvious, congratulations South Africa you have done your country proud. Enjoy the four years.

Lottery? More iike an artform. RSA were hungrier from the opening whistle. ENG upped the ante 12 out when it was desperate, then coughed it up, but they can't expect a result of they play tentative. Pity the game was about drawing penalties, but the team that played best tonight, won.

I don't think they were hungrier - just better. Being hungrier implies that England weren't trying as hard. England climbed the mountain last week, they just couldn't quite get there again this week.

SA weren't that great last week but won. England weren't as good this week and couldn't get to as good a performance.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347698 3-Nov-2019 07:03

i thought half the scrum penalties were given when England wasn't going backwards.

The SA props popped up without England going backwards.

half the penalties England went backwards the other half they didn't.

but then again i never understand the scrum so i see it as a dark art to fool the referee.

was SA the better team - YES. but i still don't agree with half of the scrum penalties.

did the "right" team win? yes. i couldn't stand the english media bragging for four years, but i still don't agree with half of the scrum penalties.

someone could use the scrums from yesterday to educate me however!

Handle9

11158 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347700 3-Nov-2019 07:07

There were a couple that were dodgy, it is Garces Afterall, but by and large Mako Vunipola got crushed. He couldn't take the pressure and either went down or stood up. They were much better once Marler came on.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347704 3-Nov-2019 08:11

I was very touched by the SA captain's story. His family was so poor they had no TV to watch the RWC in 2007. He had no money for food in university

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-kids-had-to-buy-siya-kolisi-lunch-he-had-nothing-sz38c6tb7

GV27

5872 posts

Uber Geek

#2347706 3-Nov-2019 08:26

Handle9: There were a couple that were dodgy, it is Garces Afterall, but by and large Mako Vunipola got crushed. He couldn't take the pressure and either went down or stood up. They were much better once Marler came on.

Frequently it looked like the penalty was for folding inwards. Vunipola was horrible, if he wasn't pinged for that, he should have been pinged for his binds. They were nowhere near legal. I'm guessing most of the time he wasn't square and when he was, he couldn't bind and it just melted down.

Also, the English front-foot defence theory collapses once you slow the ball down as much as they do and when they actually get whistled for offside. It was an absolute technical masterclass from the South Africans in controlling the pace of the game, I loved it.

Overall these two areas of the game were policed for more strictly than last week and it led to a much better game. After all the worldpolitik of the last four years with the Pacific Islands and the World Comp and the ridiculously soft interpretation of yellows and citings when it came to English players compared to T2 nations, South Africa were definitely moral as well as actual victors. I could have been happier with the result of the tournament as a whole, but not with the result of that match.

tdgeek

29585 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2347712 3-Nov-2019 09:12

Handle9:
tdgeek:

Batman: As I said scrum penalties are a lottery apart from the obvious, congratulations South Africa you have done your country proud. Enjoy the four years.

Lottery? More iike an artform. RSA were hungrier from the opening whistle. ENG upped the ante 12 out when it was desperate, then coughed it up, but they can't expect a result of they play tentative. Pity the game was about drawing penalties, but the team that played best tonight, won.

I don't think they were hungrier - just better. Being hungrier implies that England weren't trying as hard. England climbed the mountain last week, they just couldn't quite get there again this week.

SA weren't that great last week but won. England weren't as good this week and couldn't get to as good a performance.

Better yes. ENG was nervous. Last week, there territory game worked, last night they tried but RSA's territory game was better. Its a pity it was more a game of dont bother with tries, just read the rule book and create penalty after penalty, but, hey, its in the rules. However, two teams of big boys went to toe to and one was better.

I dont fully subscribe to the final last week comment that we have read all week. In any final, someone has to lose, so their final could have been last week? . Is it a mental thing or a physical thing? Perhaps the final should be 10 days after the semi's?

If we believe that teams try to peak, RSA improved hugely. Weak against Wales, NZ thrashed Wales, ENG beat NZ. Perhaps their coach's focus on supporting their country was the cream on top that lifted them

1 | ... | 341 | 342 | 343 | 344 | 345 | 346 | 347 | 348 | 349 | 350 | 351 | ... | 639