[November Tests 2016 EOYT] England vs. South Africa (12/11/2016)

[TRF_Olyy]

It wasn't like he knocked it on into Lambie - if anything it would be considered a rip, even if it only lasted a fraction of a second, not a knock on.

 

[RoosTah]

It wasn't like he knocked it on into Lambie - if anything it would be considered a rip, even if it only lasted a fraction of a second, not a knock on.

lol well I'm obviously not going to have you English blokes agree with me on this one.
Anyway, ultimately you won by enough that it didn't matter.

 

[Zed]

If you fumble forward it's a knock on and that's what happened. If that happened in League there'd be no chance it was given. The knock on law is the same in both codes - the only difference is League places a greater premium on control and any hint of a drop or fumble is called a knock on unless it's blatantly backwards

Looked like a knock one even in slo mo, but just had another look and I can see why it was given, Brown's hands go under the ball and don't actually touch it Lambe knocks it forward (or back in his case). I wouldn't want to be the TMO though, making that call.

1.09

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdPNu_TlEX0

- - - Updated - - -

I thought England played OK, but they need to be more clinical and learn how to put away weaker sides like the All Blacks do. If they smell blood they go for the throat.

I thought the England forwards were OK, Billy Vunipola gets better with each game, he could do with losing a few kgs though. I thought England's first try was all class, probably a try previous England teams wouldn't have been able to execute. Not a May fan, but you can't question his finishing ability. Yarde was a bit of a disappointment, his pass and running line for May's try was superb though. If they can get Tuilagi back in and a replacement for Brown, someone in the mould of Israel Folau they will be very tough to beat. Where's the black winger who played against in the 3 test series - Watson is it? Can he play fullback. He played well over here.

 

[RoosTah]

Looked like a knock one even in slo mo, but just had another look and I can see why it was given, Brown's hands go under the ball and don't actually touch it Lambe knocks it forward (or back in his case). I wouldn't want to be the TMO though, making that call.

1.09

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdPNu_TlEX0

1.22 fullback clearly touches it and it rolls forward. Seriously how is that not a knock on? This isn't AFL guys

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Watson's out injured atm,
He's played a decent amount of 15 for his club and I'm pretty sure EJ has mentioned him as a possible 15 going forwards.

 

[TommiG88]

The World Cup groups are drawn in May if I read correctly...

Could South Africa fall into the second seeds?

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

The World Cup groups are drawn in May if I read correctly...

Could South Africa fall into the second seeds?

Considering Ireland will be unbeaten til then and England will only lose once its likely!

 

[TommiG88]

Considering Ireland will be unbeaten til then and England will only lose once its likely!

That will be interesting, and there's a good chance France / Scotland will be a 3rd seed.

There is going to be one really tough group. Hope England avoid it this time around.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I would have have itoje in the locks with Launchbury. Why play a top player out of position?

Partly to get all your best players on the pitch

Partly because I think his ceiling is higher at 6 than lock. I don't see it as out of position at all for him, but I would like to see him play there for Sarries

Partly because it would enable him to become even more involved and exert more influence on the game.

Partly because playing him alongside Billy could bring back row balance that we haven't had in years. Playing those 2 means that the 7 wouldn't need to be powerful, or a line out option....

 

[smartcooky]

Haven't read through the thread but how could the 1st Saffa try be given when the pass went 3-5m forwards? Unbelievable..

As soon as I hear people say the ball went (insert distance here​) forwards, I know immediately that they don't understand either the forward throw Law or the guidance to referees.

I presume you are talking about this try?

https://youtu.be/kdPNu_TlEX0?t=126

There is nothing wrong with the pass.

1. It was made to look worse because the passer was falling and slowing, thereby exaggerating the apparent forward travel of the ball.

2. The forward travel of the ball was purely down to momentum of the passer. If the passer was standing still and he executed the exact same passing action, the ball would not have gone forward from him.

The issue is, and has been ever since 1948 (when the RFU issued a Case Law Ruling), whether the ball was thrown in a forward direction, NOT whether the ball traveled forwards.

[TEXTAREA]Case Law: "If a player passes to one of his own team who is in line with him parallel to the dead ball line, both players running towards the opponents goal line, must not the pass be a forward pass in relation to the ground, owing to their forward movement?"

R.F.U. Ruling: "Yes, but it is pointed out that the definition of a throw-forward is not decided on relation to the ground, but on the direction of the propulsion of the ball by the hand or arm of the player passing the ball"
- as published in Royds, 1948[/TEXTAREA]

Saying that the ball traveled x metres forwards has no relevance to Law 12.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Ok Itoje, I think his future is at lock. We have a good enough crop of young flankers coming through that I don't think we need Itoje to make up that balance in the long run, plus Kruis may not be in the fold for too much longer (Still got a couple of years left in him) so keeping locks at lock is valuable. If we are able to have a lock that is as good in open play as a back rower, but doesn't sacrifice the set piece, then they should be at lock so we can get more genuine back rowers on the pitch. But yes, for now while we don't have many in the flanker stocks and 6 international quality locks, than a temporary shift to the back row for Itoje would make sense. I think we should be working towards a pack of:

1. Vunipola
2. Taylor
3. Hill
4. Itoje (c)
5. Launchbury
6. Williams/Jones
7. Underhill/Evans
8. Vunipola

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Toby, Kruis is 26! Might seem ancient from where you're lucky enough to be, but he's probably not even at his peak yet.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Toby, Kruis is 26! Might seem ancient from where you're lucky enough to be, but he's probably not even at his peak yet.

Oh he is as well, for some reason I thought he was 29. I still think Itoje is best at 2nd row though and is where he should remain.

 

[TommiG88]

As soon as I hear people say the ball went (insert distance here​) forwards, I know immediately that they don't understand either the forward throw Law or the guidance to referees.

I presume you are talking about this try?

https://youtu.be/kdPNu_TlEX0?t=126

There is nothing wrong with the pass.

1. It was made to look worse because the passer was falling and slowing, thereby exaggerating the apparent forward travel of the ball.

2. The forward travel of the ball was purely down to momentum of the passer. If the passer was standing still and he executed the exact same passing action, the ball would not have gone forward from him.

The issue is, and has been ever since 1948 (when the RFU issued a Case Law Ruling), whether the ball was thrown in a forward direction, NOT whether the ball traveled forwards.

[TEXTAREA]Case Law: "If a player passes to one of his own team who is in line with him parallel to the dead ball line, both players running towards the opponents goal line, must not the pass be a forward pass in relation to the ground, owing to their forward movement?"

R.F.U. Ruling: "Yes, but it is pointed out that the definition of a throw-forward is not decided on relation to the ground, but on the direction of the propulsion of the ball by the hand or arm of the player passing the ball"
- as published in Royds, 1948[/TEXTAREA]

Saying that the ball traveled x metres forwards has no relevance to Law 12.

By passing out of the back of hand the ball was propelled forwards as he over rotated his wrist. Therefore, by your definition of rules - it is forwards. Secondly, they were parallel, and the receiver had to stretch forward to catch the ball so law 12 doesn't cover it.

2 points there for you to consider and find a law to counteract me with.

 

[smartcooky]

By passing out of the back of hand the ball was propelled forwards as he over rotated his wrist. Therefore, by your definition of rules - it is forwards. Secondly, they were parallel, and the receiver had to stretch forward to catch the ball so law 12 doesn't cover it.

What a load of cock!

2 points there for you to consider and find a law to counteract me with.

There is nothing to consider. Nothing you have said counteracts the guidance referees receive from WR via their unions.

What the receiver had to do is irrelevant; the receiver is not mentioned in Law 12

(In fact, I will be adding that clip to my collection of examples of passes that look forward but aren't for the next time I hold a training session on Law 12.)

 

[ratsapprentice]

1.22 fullback clearly touches it and it rolls forward. Seriously how is that not a knock on? This isn't AFL guys

You mean from his legs? You know that's not a knock on?

 

[BPM]

That will be interesting, and there's a good chance France / Scotland will be a 3rd seed.

There is going to be one really tough group. Hope England avoid it this time around.

Definitely - thought this yesterday ...

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Looked like a knock one even in slo mo, but just had another look and I can see why it was given, Brown's hands go under the ball and don't actually touch it Lambe knocks it forward (or back in his case). I wouldn't want to be the TMO though, making that call.

1.09

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdPNu_TlEX0

- - - Updated - - -

I thought England played OK, but they need to be more clinical and learn how to put away weaker sides like the All Blacks do. If they smell blood they go for the throat.

I thought the England forwards were OK, Billy Vunipola gets better with each game, he could do with losing a few kgs though. I thought England's first try was all class, probably a try previous England teams wouldn't have been able to execute. Not a May fan, but you can't question his finishing ability. Yarde was a bit of a disappointment, his pass and running line for May's try was superb though. If they can get Tuilagi back in and a replacement for Brown, someone in the mould of Israel Folau they will be very tough to beat. Where's the black winger who played against in the 3 test series - Watson is it? Can he play fullback. He played well over here.

Watson is injured. Broke his jaw during an England training session.

 

[TommiG88]

What a load of cock!



There is nothing to consider. Nothing you have said counteracts the guidance referees receive from WR via their unions.

What the receiver had to do is irrelevant; the receiver is not mentioned in Law 12

(In fact, I will be adding that clip to my collection of examples of passes that look forward but aren't for the next time I hold a training session on Law 12.)

Haha, your word is nonsense and no more important than others so hop off that mighty big horse of yours.

The ball went forward, the propulsion of the was forward. So it's forward, and the law you dug up has no bearing on this situation. If the pass had not come from the back of hand and was normally moved on and ended up in the exact same place, and motion it would have been forward.

 

[McTallshort]

Anyway......

Overall a pleasing performance
Robshaw and Launchbury were excellent as was Youngs and May. Yarde isn't an international class wing I'm afraid and looked like a rabbit in the headlights. Anyone know when Watson is back?