[2017 RBS Six Nations] Round 4: England vs Scotland (12/03/2017)

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I certainly didn't - most impressive - now if only he had passed immediately afterwards.........................................
Mike

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and another point - look at Scotland on Saturday. OK - they were smashed - but do you really belive that they would have lost by 40 points if they hadn't suffered so many injuries? I don't.
Mike

Scotland having to rebuild their backline certainly made a difference. But not 40 points difference. Also, out tries were either scored through the forwards or through the centre. Neither of which are where Scotland sustained injuries. The tries we scored would've been scored regardless. Maybe if they had a real FB JJ wouldn't have gone all the way to the try line each time, but the Watson try proved that even if he's stopped, the move will continue.

 

[ALJ]

Not one of you pommie mongrels has bothered to mention it but in the first ten minutes Hartley was shouting at his team, barking orders on defence in particular and making sure everyone knew their role and was in position. Thats an old head and you need good communication right through the team to be a top side.

You mean like a captain?

I mean great but that's what any captain is supposed to do when it's needed, I don't see that particularly marks him out as special so why would we all be on here saying "did you see how the captain was acting like a captain in that game?"

 

[Ospervat]

You mean like a captain?

I mean great but that's what any captain is supposed to do when it's needed, I don't see that particularly marks him out as special so why would we all be on here saying "did you see how the captain was acting like a captain in that game?"

Well put Captain.

Typical Kiwi. Wanting to make a point about the bleeding obvious in an attempt to make themselves look more knowledgeable than they actually are.

 

[barkinghooker]

It's tuesday now. Can we have an Ireland v England thread yet?

 

[ALJ]

It's tuesday now. Can we have an Ireland v England thread yet?

Oh come on, there must be at least one more day's basking to be done

 

[ncurd]

Usual underestimation of Ford's ability.

Lets put it this way if (and it a big IF) England win the upfront battle and Youngs had one of those games where he actually remembers he can pass reasonable well. England will win comfortably, Ford's ability to unlock defences when he has front foot ball is second to none at that point I don't think it matters how good Scotland's backline is they'll have to be momnumental in defence to stop what our is capable of in that situation.

Felt like basking in my own prediction this morning.

 

[Wendigo7]

Felt like basking in my own prediction this morning.

He's our best player and my favourite player.

Would love to see him and Barrett go toe to toe.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

He's our best player and my favourite player.

Would love to see him and Barrett go toe to toe.

The number of times I see people write Barrett and have to remember we aren't talking about Brad...

 

[ALJ]

The number of times I see people write Barrett and have to remember we aren't talking about Brad...

Yep, I had the precise same thought, got confused, realised, felt stupid.

 

[Goodey]

The number of times I see people write Barrett and have to remember we aren't talking about Brad...

It can usually be gleaned from context though.

e.g. the claim 'Barrett is the finest playmaking back I have ever seen' is clearly talking about Brad

 

[Scotty]

When is someone going to create round 5 threads? If already done and i missed it my appologies

 

[welshoptimist]

He's our best player and my favourite player.

Would love to see him and Barrett go toe to toe.

I still cant see it :/ I'm trying to see ford as the player you make him out to be but Farrell provided all the creativity in that game, all I felt ford offered was an opportunity for Scotland to score tries when they got the ball by running at him,
fair play though England , that was an epic performance,
still think its a bit dirty to take the world record off new zealand without beating them though
eddie has dodged that game better than a chav dodging child support

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I still cant see it :/ I'm trying to see ford as the player you make him out to be but Farrell provided all the creativity in that game, all I felt ford offered was an opportunity for Scotland to score tries when they got the ball by running at him,
fair play though England , that was an epic performance,
still think its a bit dirty to take the world record off new zealand without beating them though
eddie has dodged that game better than a chav dodging child support

Except Eddie has no say in the fixtures and the only reason we haven't played NZ is because they demanded more than we pay everyone else to play outside the usual test window. I never cease to be amazed by how there is always some little card to be played against England. When we lost the world cup it was all singing about how **** we were. We then won the 6N and were told we didn't deserve it and the Aussies would thrash us. We thrashed Wales and beat the Aussies and were told it was a poor Aussie team and didn't matter. We then had the end of year tests where we beat South Africa, Australia, Argentina and Fiji but were then told all those were poor sides too and it didn't matter. Come into the 6N and have 3 bad games where we are told we didn't deserve to win and it was luck. Now? Well the excuse are we are dodging New Zealand because we are afraid, our winning streak isn't that great because we haven't beaten New Zealand and still claims we didn't deserve it.

The posts just keep moving. Say we go on to beat New Zealand, what then? I would be prepared to bet money the ultimate fallback of "we are the biggest and richest union therefore we should win" or "it is a one-off" will be used. I don't exactly want anyone to go round saying what a great team England are but constantly finding excuses to diminish the achievements are getting silly. Had any other team done what we had done there would not be the same treatment. Look at how Wales and Ireland were treated when each of them went through their golden 2 years. Funny enough England actually won more games than either of them over that 4 year period.

 

[Josht36]

No one mentions New Zealand not playing England in their winning streak (tongue in cheek)

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

No one mentions New Zealand not playing England in their winning streak (tongue in cheek)

You say tongue in cheek, but it is true. I've seen a few people from Nee Zealand complain about the streak, saying it's been against easy opposition, but it's been the same opposition as what they faced.

Correct me if I'm wrong, this is off the top of my head but -
England:
Australia - 4
Ireland - 1
Wales - 3
Scotland - 2
France - 2
Italy - 2
South Africa - 1
Argentina - 1
Fiji - 1
Uruguay - 1

New Zealand:
Australia - 5
South Africa - 3
Argentina - 3
Namibia - 1
Georgia - 1
Tonga - 1
France - 1
Wales - 3

Don't think either of those can be argued to be significantly harder a run than the other, and if you look at it regarding rankings then the average rating of England's opponents has been 7.4 whilst the All Blacks' has been 6.6. So, your move NZ.

 

[Ospervat]

still think its a bit dirty to take the world record off new zealand without beating them though

To be fair NZ as the IRB ranked no 1 side did set the record of 18 without playing England the no 2 side.

 

[corny]

You're both ****e then so.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

You say tongue in cheek, but it is true. I've seen a few people from Nee Zealand complain about the streak, saying it's been against easy opposition, but it's been the same opposition as what they faced.

Correct me if I'm wrong, this is off the top of my head but -
England:
Australia - 4
Ireland - 1
Wales - 3
Scotland - 2
France - 2
Italy - 2
South Africa - 1
Argentina - 1
Fiji - 1
Uruguay - 1

New Zealand:
Australia - 5
South Africa - 3
Argentina - 3
Namibia - 1
Georgia - 1
Tonga - 1
France - 1
Wales - 3

Don't think either of those can be argued to be significantly harder a run than the other, and if you look at it regarding rankings then the average rating of England's opponents has been 7.4 whilst the All Blacks' has been 6.6. So, your move NZ.

Australia couldn't beat themselves (they're a top 4 side afterall) and should be discounted. Englan's 14 games unbeaten is therefore better.

 

[Raggs]

Our streak consisted of beating teams that had beaten us in the previous fixture, it included beating teams that were above us in the rankings at the time of the match also. NZ only ever beat teams ranked below them .

 

[Goodey]

Moaning about England achieving this has only come about because of NZers making a huge deal out of the 18 test run legitimising them as the best side ever. It didn't, what made them the best side ever is having some of the best players ever at their best and winning them two world cups.

Now people are trying to come up with reasons England's matching that record 'doesn't count' because England are not the best side ever, which is dumb as ****. Winning sequential matches isn't supposed to make you the best side ever. No one ever said it did before the NZers started it. It's a distinct record in its own right.

Ultimately any argument along the lines of it 'not counting' is just pandering to the widely unnecessary treatment of NZ as special and to be treated differently from everyone else. and they already get enough of that.

NZ are better than everyone else, by a distance. Let that be enough for you, you *****.