Six Nations 2018

bendertherobot

I think 99% of people would agree. Twitter seems to. Loads of guff about downward pressure, which isn't required, for those who argue against.

Pross

bendertherobot wrote:

Pross wrote:

England winning the kicking battle, something Wales did very well in last week and another area where we are missing Halfpenny. Not protecting the ball well enough at the breakdown either. Very frustrating first half.

Brown is an interesting player, either brililant, 2 years ago, or gash, last year. He's rotating his seasons it seems. Very good today. Anscombe is, IMO, out of position. Maybe him and Patchell should swap

Anscombe is out of position being on an international rugby pitch.

Pross

bendertherobot wrote:

I think 99% of people would agree. Twitter seems to. Loads of guff about downward pressure, which isn't required, for those who argue against.

Yep, the ball is on the ground and you deliberately put a hand on it so you must be in control. It would be different if the ball was bouncing about but it was just sat there waiting to be touched.

crispybug2

I’m starting to worry about England not putting this game away!

Pross

Everything Wales did well last week is missing. They chased the kicks brilliantly last week and did well with Scots high balls and the handling was fast and accurate. England are doing a great job of stopping them getting any momentum.

mrb123

Vintage Brown today. Was starting to think he was past it.

Pross

Yeah, much as it pains me to say it as I can't stand him he had a cracker.

Wales took far too long to realise they were losing at aerial tennis and looked much more of a threat at the end but I always felt England would wake up again if they went behind. Brilliant try, and possibly match, saving tackle by Whitehall. I don't think the TMO decision would have changed the result as I can't imagine Patchell or Anscombe kicking the conversion from out there. Wales are still doing better than I'd expected but they need to be quicker to adapt when necessary before they can become a good side.

pblakeney

Wales could still be playing now without finding a way to cross the line.
And if they did, it would be ruled out by TMO.

figbat

Time I came out. My name is figbat and I don’t think it was a clear try. I wouldn’t describe a glancing blow off the side of the ball as “grounding”. I also think that the slow-mo showed both hands on the ball as it hit the ground.

I know it’s an unpopular opinion but the TMO agreed with me so...

In other matters, it was quite a game for such a low score.

coopster_the_1st

figbat wrote:

Time I came out. My name is figbat and I don’t think it was a clear try. I wouldn’t describe a glancing blow off the side of the ball as “grounding”. I also think that the slow-mo showed both hands on the ball as it hit the ground.

I know it’s an unpopular opinion but the TMO agreed with me so...

In other matters, it was quite a game for such a low score.

The Welsh will whinge about it but unless they are alleging that the TMO does not know the rules it was not a try. There was plenty of clear slow motion video footage to make the correct decision

Pross

It's not an unpopular opinion just a wrong one

All the Law requires is that you have control of the ball which I think it is arguable you have as soon as you deliberately lay your hand on the ball.

Incidentally, I've seen something suggesting the ball didn't touch the ground at all on England's first try. At the time it was scored I thought it was on top of May's arm as he slid across the line but assumed that as he wasn't under pressure he simply rolled over at the end of the slide. Has anyone else seen anything about that?

Ultimately, Wales were too slow to move to plan B when the aerial kicking game was obviously not working and ended up being outplayed for an hour. They defended well but England should really have been out of sight by half time.

Pross

Coopster the 1st wrote:

figbat wrote:

Time I came out. My name is figbat and I don’t think it was a clear try. I wouldn’t describe a glancing blow off the side of the ball as “grounding”. I also think that the slow-mo showed both hands on the ball as it hit the ground.

I know it’s an unpopular opinion but the TMO agreed with me so...

In other matters, it was quite a game for such a low score.

The Welsh will whinge about it but unless they are alleging that the TMO does not know the rules it was not a try. There was plenty of clear slow motion video footage to make the correct decision

The TMO just said he couldn't see it clearly, had the question been 'is there any reason why I can't award the try' it would have been given.

bendertherobot

Law 21.1b requires pressing down. It requires no control, no degree of pressure. Simply pressing down. Which can be with arm, hand or even the front of the body. In this case the hand. What I missed yesterday, was that the TMO said that the Watson grounded it first rather than there being no clear evidence of grounding (which, I recall, he reverted to later)

Pross

bendertherobot wrote:

Law 21.1b requires pressing down. It requires no control, no degree of pressure. Simply pressing down. Which can be with arm, hand or even the front of the body. In this case the hand. What I missed yesterday, was that the TMO said that the Watson grounded it first rather than there being no clear evidence of grounding (which, I recall, he reverted to later)

Yep, the commentators made several references yesterday that the law had changed from downward pressure to having control but the actual law is:-

The ball can be grounded in in-goal:

By holding it and touching the ground with it; or

By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.

Which to me makes it an even more clear try.

coopster_the_1st

Pross wrote:

Incidentally, I've seen something suggesting the ball didn't touch the ground at all on England's first try. At the time it was scored I thought it was on top of May's arm as he slid across the line but assumed that as he wasn't under pressure he simply rolled over at the end of the slide. Has anyone else seen anything about that?

Whoever is suggesting this is showing themselves to be a bad loser. May did not ground the ball as he was sliding over the line but you can clearly see from the footage that as his slide was finishing he adjusted to ground the ball.

bendertherobot

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Pross wrote:

Incidentally, I've seen something suggesting the ball didn't touch the ground at all on England's first try. At the time it was scored I thought it was on top of May's arm as he slid across the line but assumed that as he wasn't under pressure he simply rolled over at the end of the slide. Has anyone else seen anything about that?

Whoever is suggesting this is showing themselves to be a bad loser. May did not ground the ball as he was sliding over the line but you can clearly see from the footage that as his slide was finishing he adjusted to ground the ball.

Well now. There's absolutely no need to carp about May's try, if you clearly cross the line with zero interference you're going to be given a try. End of. However, have a look. Though, we'd need to see the reverse video clearly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zq4BXku8ou4

coopster_the_1st

bendertherobot wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Pross wrote:

Incidentally, I've seen something suggesting the ball didn't touch the ground at all on England's first try. At the time it was scored I thought it was on top of May's arm as he slid across the line but assumed that as he wasn't under pressure he simply rolled over at the end of the slide. Has anyone else seen anything about that?

Whoever is suggesting this is showing themselves to be a bad loser. May did not ground the ball as he was sliding over the line but you can clearly see from the footage that as his slide was finishing he adjusted to ground the ball.

Well now. There's absolutely no need to carp about May's try, if you clearly cross the line with zero interference you're going to be given a try. End of. However, have a look. Though, we'd need to see the reverse video clearly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zq4BXku8ou4

Look at 19 seconds on that video and if you pause the correct frame(s) you can see the ball is grounded underneath May's right armpit.

I'm detecting a lot of sour grapes that this was even raised by some of the Welsh

crispybug2

Scotland 32-26 France

Enjoyable match, France rather fell apart in the second half

Between France and Italy for the wooden spoon now, and they have a Friday night showdown next at the spectacular Stade Velodrome in Marseille

Pross

I was disappointed with the French, they came out like a French team of old running the ball well but seemed to run out of steam. Dogged performance by the Scots though still not as good as they looked in the autumn. The tactic with France seems to be put them under pressure and they give penalties quite easily.

crispybug2

The Welsh supporters, former players and current coach who are loudly bemoaning the decision of the TMO yesterday should realise that most contentious decisions even themselves out over time and maybe they would like to cast their minds back to 2011 when an illegal line-out resulted in the winning try against Ireland, I don’t suppose that they complained then!!

pblakeney

crispybug2 wrote:

The Welsh supporters, former players and current coach who are loudly bemoaning the decision of the TMO yesterday should realise that most contentious decisions even themselves out over time and maybe they would like to cast their minds back to 2011 when an illegal line-out resulted in the winning try against Ireland, I don’t suppose that they complained then!!

Really? Going back 7 years to justify a wrong decision. Two wrongs do not make it right. Even Jonny Wilkinson and Clive Woodward said it was a try. Nothing will change the result but that should have been a try.

crispybug2

PBlakeney wrote:

crispybug2 wrote:

The Welsh supporters, former players and current coach who are loudly bemoaning the decision of the TMO yesterday should realise that most contentious decisions even themselves out over time and maybe they would like to cast their minds back to 2011 when an illegal line-out resulted in the winning try against Ireland, I don’t suppose that they complained then!!

Really? Going back 7 years to justify a wrong decision. Two wrongs do not make it right. Even Jonny Wilkinson and Clive Woodward said it was a try. Nothing will change the result but that should have been a try.

I agree that it was a try, we both do

But neither of us is a TMO, and that’s all there is to it

p.s My main reason for highlighting the 2011 match is that Warren Gatland said after the match that the match officials decisions should be respected, he can’t have it both ways and accuse the officials of making a terrible decision when the decision goes against him!!

vimfuego

Lots of lively debate about the non try still then. You don;t need to cast your mind back 7 years either, a week would do. 4th try vs Scotland, forward pass. Clearly didn't affect the result, but got them the BP. Swings & roundabouts.

And I've still yet to see a legitimate feed into a scrum. I know the laws were updated around the scrum half's positioning at the feed, but it still requires a 'straight' feed & not one at 45 degrees that goes straight into the second row. Time after time after time.

bendertherobot

vimfuego wrote:

Lots of lively debate about the non try still then. You don;t need to cast your mind back 7 years either, a week would do. 4th try vs Scotland, forward pass. Clearly didn't affect the result, but got them the BP. Swings & roundabouts.

And I've still yet to see a legitimate feed into a scrum. I know the laws were updated around the scrum half's positioning at the feed, but it still requires a 'straight' feed & not one at 45 degrees that goes straight into the second row. Time after time after time.

Hands backward motion, ball travels forward, not forward pass?

veronese68

vimfuego wrote:

And I've still yet to see a legitimate feed into a scrum. I know the laws were updated around the scrum half's positioning at the feed, but it still requires a 'straight' feed & not one at 45 degrees that goes straight into the second row. Time after time after time.

This is something that really irks me, imagine a line out being thrown at the kind of angles that are deemed acceptable in a scrum.

bendertherobot

Veronese68 wrote:

vimfuego wrote:

And I've still yet to see a legitimate feed into a scrum. I know the laws were updated around the scrum half's positioning at the feed, but it still requires a 'straight' feed & not one at 45 degrees that goes straight into the second row. Time after time after time.

This is something that really irks me, imagine a line out being thrown at the kind of angles that are deemed acceptable in a scrum.

It was done fairly well for 20 minutes (Wales v Scotland) in the first game. Then clarified, then ignored. This weekend, back to the ref not caring again. Very irritating.

The off feet arrival at the ruck is also a complete lottery.

Pross

vimfuego wrote:

And I've still yet to see a legitimate feed into a scrum. I know the laws were updated around the scrum half's positioning at the feed, but it still requires a 'straight' feed & not one at 45 degrees that goes straight into the second row. Time after time after time.

The ref in Wales v Scotland pinged the Scots at their first scrum (straight to the second row) but also Wales at their first scrum (fed just behind the hooker's heel). It was refreshing to see and after that the feeds were straight. I can't understand why more refs don't do this, get everything right at the first attempt and set the tone.

veronese68

Pross wrote:

vimfuego wrote:

And I've still yet to see a legitimate feed into a scrum. I know the laws were updated around the scrum half's positioning at the feed, but it still requires a 'straight' feed & not one at 45 degrees that goes straight into the second row. Time after time after time.

The ref in Wales v Scotland pinged the Scots at their first scrum (straight to the second row) but also Wales at their first scrum (fed just behind the hooker's heel). It was refreshing to see and after that the feeds were straight. I can't understand why more refs don't do this, get everything right at the first attempt and set the tone.

Completely agree, didn't watch that match so can't comment. Hopefully if more ref's do that things will improve.

lostboysaint

Pross wrote:

vimfuego wrote:

And I've still yet to see a legitimate feed into a scrum. I know the laws were updated around the scrum half's positioning at the feed, but it still requires a 'straight' feed & not one at 45 degrees that goes straight into the second row. Time after time after time.

The ref in Wales v Scotland pinged the Scots at their first scrum (straight to the second row) but also Wales at their first scrum (fed just behind the hooker's heel). It was refreshing to see and after that the feeds were straight. I can't understand why more refs don't do this, get everything right at the first attempt and set the tone.

Amen.

mudsucker

If you watch the player before you can see it comes off his knee, then hand. So its a knock on.

Doesn't matter if it was grounded or not (it wasn't in my opinion).