Great analysis that shows how hard it is to ref the scrummage correctly. Notice most of the English power came from the tighthead side, people should watch that before criticizing Dan Cole as much as they do.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
[EOYT] England vs. Australia 02/11/13
- Thread starter LittleGuy
- Start date
j-dawg
Bench Player
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2010
- Messages
- 724
- Reaction score
- 125
Long, long, long before that. As far back as 2003 world cup. Their 'non scrummaging' finally got found out in the Autumn internationals 2005 when France and England particularly tore their scrum to shreds.
Chikwa
Academy Player
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2013
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 0
Dan Coles match temperament was poor.Thus affecting his whole game.He is still in the squad and he had an opportunity to prove himself.If his performance including scrummaging was that effective he would have started in the crucial games.Frankly he currently does not make the grade in his core roles as hooker.
I think you are confusing Dane Coles (the New Zealand hooker) with Dan Cole (the English prop)...
yes i think he is
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2013
- Messages
- 16,966
- Reaction score
- 4,334
- Location
- Propping up the bar in the Clubhouse
Agree with Darwin.
Chikwa -you're in the wrong thread, talking about the wrong team and talking about completely the wrong player. LMAO.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
Tallshort - Cole is our best tighthead when on form, the trouble is that he isn't on form and Wilson is.
It's really as simple as that - we have two very good TH's and one is in really good form the other is below his best (not bad).
It seems completely unnecessary to constantly start Cole when he could be rested.
Wilson is the stronger, more aggressive scrummager and ball carrier so is arguably better suited to this game than Dan is.
We know the Argentines are going to scrum all day, and Mako is injured so we lose a little in the ball carrying department.
Cole can come on with 20 mins to go (or not at all) and be nice and fresh for the AB's.
It's really as simple as that - we have two very good TH's and one is in really good form the other is below his best (not bad).
It seems completely unnecessary to constantly start Cole when he could be rested.
Wilson is the stronger, more aggressive scrummager and ball carrier so is arguably better suited to this game than Dan is.
We know the Argentines are going to scrum all day, and Mako is injured so we lose a little in the ball carrying department.
Cole can come on with 20 mins to go (or not at all) and be nice and fresh for the AB's.
Chikwa
Academy Player
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2013
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 0
Yep. You are right. Apologies trying to work whilst blogging!!!!
Big Ewis
Hall of Fame
yeah, huh...
Well I saw a couple of early 2000's matches in the past year and their scrums weren't nearly as terrible as they have been more recently.
Nationalism? Corks up bums? LIVING IN QATAR?! WHAT MADNESS IS ALL THIS?!?!?!
Okay yeah. I saw the game at the local rugby club and apart from one very excited fellow - who insisted that all Australians and Irish referees Cee You Next Tuesday much to the embarrassment of everyone around him - the feeling of the game was that England pulled it out of the fire. Still nowhere near what we'd need to win a Six Nations or beat the ABs in a week and a half though.
Still though, both Vunipola's had a good laugh and I think Mako had great fun putting the tighthead in front of him to the sword. I think he's totally come on leaps and bounds since his baptism of fire in the Lions series this year where it looked like he was like the last guy manning the walls in the Alamo at times with his beleaguered defence in the scrum. Billy was rampaging at times and loved the break he made which linked up well with Launchbury...one of the few times England really gelled in that first half.
Farrell though frankly didn't have a very nice time in the first half. Missed three penalties and Dickson's..controversial service at times meant he gave just as crap service to his centres. That whole combination just didn't work and to be frank I don't think parachuting in Burns or Ford would have solved anything. Despite what many people believe, just going "***** the system" and running it yourself every time because your scrumhalf can't pass and your center pairing are handling things like the White House is handling Obamacare isn't the answer to everything.
So I'd rather bring Farrell up on his kicking and even though his radar came back in the 2nd half that was 9 points he shipped in the 1st. He's our most accurate kicker and if he misfires against New Zealand like he did against Australia - a game where frankly every point counts - then we're screwed and again the supposed plan B (have Freddie Burns run 99% of the time) will look even more silly against a Kiwi defence eager to turn over opposition ball more than they do their pancakes on a cold shrove tuesday.
Farrell's try though was great. All the whinging about the supposed block would be a bit embarrassing if I was Australian but I'm not so I just laughed when I saw the comments across the media about it. Call me naive but naturally I'm thinking that if the attacking team are drifting to the right the natural thing to do for a guy defending would be to walk slight to the left straight into the back of an opposition player like Stephen Moore did.
It wasn't as if Hartley had dived in his way. He had his back to Moore and stopped. Frankly, Moore could have taken evasive action straight away and probably would have put himself directly in Farrell's path as a direct result of said evasive action. In any case, Farrell's gap was pretty small and even though both Australian players managed to get hands on him but he powered through. I liked that try and in any case, as a fan who was victim more times than I'll admit of Johnathan "x-ray vision" Kaplan - who always seemed to be able to find a ball grounded over any England line under god knows how many layers of bodies - I'm happy England got the rub of the refereeing green for once!
Anyway thats my ramble over!
Okay yeah. I saw the game at the local rugby club and apart from one very excited fellow - who insisted that all Australians and Irish referees Cee You Next Tuesday much to the embarrassment of everyone around him - the feeling of the game was that England pulled it out of the fire. Still nowhere near what we'd need to win a Six Nations or beat the ABs in a week and a half though.
Still though, both Vunipola's had a good laugh and I think Mako had great fun putting the tighthead in front of him to the sword. I think he's totally come on leaps and bounds since his baptism of fire in the Lions series this year where it looked like he was like the last guy manning the walls in the Alamo at times with his beleaguered defence in the scrum. Billy was rampaging at times and loved the break he made which linked up well with Launchbury...one of the few times England really gelled in that first half.
Farrell though frankly didn't have a very nice time in the first half. Missed three penalties and Dickson's..controversial service at times meant he gave just as crap service to his centres. That whole combination just didn't work and to be frank I don't think parachuting in Burns or Ford would have solved anything. Despite what many people believe, just going "***** the system" and running it yourself every time because your scrumhalf can't pass and your center pairing are handling things like the White House is handling Obamacare isn't the answer to everything.
So I'd rather bring Farrell up on his kicking and even though his radar came back in the 2nd half that was 9 points he shipped in the 1st. He's our most accurate kicker and if he misfires against New Zealand like he did against Australia - a game where frankly every point counts - then we're screwed and again the supposed plan B (have Freddie Burns run 99% of the time) will look even more silly against a Kiwi defence eager to turn over opposition ball more than they do their pancakes on a cold shrove tuesday.
Farrell's try though was great. All the whinging about the supposed block would be a bit embarrassing if I was Australian but I'm not so I just laughed when I saw the comments across the media about it. Call me naive but naturally I'm thinking that if the attacking team are drifting to the right the natural thing to do for a guy defending would be to walk slight to the left straight into the back of an opposition player like Stephen Moore did.
It wasn't as if Hartley had dived in his way. He had his back to Moore and stopped. Frankly, Moore could have taken evasive action straight away and probably would have put himself directly in Farrell's path as a direct result of said evasive action. In any case, Farrell's gap was pretty small and even though both Australian players managed to get hands on him but he powered through. I liked that try and in any case, as a fan who was victim more times than I'll admit of Johnathan "x-ray vision" Kaplan - who always seemed to be able to find a ball grounded over any England line under god knows how many layers of bodies - I'm happy England got the rub of the refereeing green for once!
Anyway thats my ramble over!
Big Ewis
Hall of Fame
the sad sad, realities of our world !
I've already started a petition in France to get Francois Hollande to rescue you as well because surely you're just being held hostage there...
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2013
- Messages
- 16,966
- Reaction score
- 4,334
- Location
- Propping up the bar in the Clubhouse
Correct. Geordan Murphy; 36's Irish team mate when they were at Leicester Tigers, pronounced Twelvetrees' name twelve threes. That's the Irish accent for you.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 13,716
- Reaction score
- 10,568
Welcome to the enlightened.
Big Ewis
Hall of Fame
Hollande ? since when does he get things done ?! :lol:
Thanks for your concern, but surely you must be high on cocaine at the moment.
Similar threads
