[November Tests 2017 EOYT] England vs. Australia (18/11/2017)

[MarkyH]

I thought that the Aussie whinging may have calmed down today but if anything it's gone next level, it's been literally stupefying reading some of the s*** that I have over the last 48 hours. I think I'd have more luck debating with devotees from the Flat Earth Society...the saltiness is strong for sure.

On a seperate note having watched the game again, I'm relatively pleased in England's performance, I thought that they actually played quite intelligently in the conditions (one or two exemptions). Itoje will be disappointed in himself for butchering a great opportunity but apart from that I felt that we were pretty clinical when we had chances apart from when the Aussies cynically infringed resulting in the 2 YCs or when the ref called Launch for a knock on with the try line beckoning (Aussies have been extremely diligent for the most part in completely ignoring this instance when berating the ref for his one sided and incompetent reffing.)

I was really pleased with how the second row went, I thought that they were both superb.

Scrum wise, who the hell knows. The ref was extremely officious here and IMO didn't seem to have the faintest idea what was going on but massively favoured Australia.

Bench impact, fitness, superior speed and spot on decision making were the really enjoyable things about the last 10 minutes or so which amounted to three really well taken tries.

I've read a number of comments today on Aussie forums that Australia can take a moral victory from the fact that they were still very much in it at the 70 minute mark...which IMO is great as it shows how far we have come that teams can take moral victories from losing to us by 24 points, that sort of reasoning is usually reserved for valiant efforts against the ABs.

That's a good point actually. Referee didn't even TMO that one, or let the advantage pan out to a conclusion where he could go back to it. He was sure Launch knocked on and blew the whistle. We're not exactly going on about it. But the saltiness remains and a lot of what ifs etc... We have what ifs too

Last year we were down to 14 then 13 Vs Argentina, Daly didn't show intent to take the man in the air, but he did and the rules say he should be sent off. We accepted the rules of the game and adapted. Or was the ref biased because of Twickenham, or pressure from the RFU to not let England win? The bounce of a ball is one thing, but the referees are actually making the correct calls based on the rules of the game.. This thread really has been amazing at times...

Can someone create one for the Samoa game, with the rule being we can't talk about the referee decision in the Aus game

 

[Pom in Exile]

I'm game, we won, who cares.

 

[Pom in Exile]

I'm game, we won, who cares.

When I said I'm game I meant that I'm in agreement, not that I'd start a thread...I'm a complete Luddite you see and the inter web still seems like witchcraft and sorcery to me so when I see a gif or a link in a post, I assume that the person who posted it is Harry Potter.

 

[TommiG88]

Valley Commando, apologies if I offended you, not a member of the Flat Earth Society perchance?

.... not going to say anything

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Valley Commando, apologies if I offended you, not a member of the Flat Earth Society perchance?

I'm pretty sure Valley Commando founded the Flat Earth Society..

 

[The Jones Boy]

Oh Valleys alright, he gets his dander up every now and then but he's part of the firmament.

 

[ncurd]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/42058084

Good remonstrating with officials during the match is completely no go area.

 

[Goodey]

Sorry for the delay - but I only noticed this morning.
Aus nabbed the Raeburn Shield of the All Blacks in the 3rd and final Bledisloe Cup match of the year; then defended it against Wales; and handed it over to England.
So we've got to defend the shield against Samoa, and then hopefully carry it through the 6N!

[www.raeburnshield.com]

For those who don't know:
The Raeburn Shield is a Challenge Trophy to be put up by the current holder, or defender, in every match it plays home or away (in the same manner as a world boxing ***le). The winner would either remain or become the holder.

It stretches back in this manner from the very first game of International Rugby Union in 1871 between Scotland and England played at Raeburn Place in Edinburgh (Hence the name).

This is cool, I like how a few tier 2 nations have ended up with it at times.

 

[Nudger]

So do we keep care Farrell slade jj
3 tries in 10mins?

 

[ncurd]

So do we keep care Farrell slade jj
3 tries in 10mins?

Nope most of that was due to Australia giving up and Danny Care. Shouldn't mistake the opposition losing the plot as the way forward.

I'd rather we carry on how we mean to go on against Somoa. It's a mistake to I knew jerk like that.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Nope most of that was due to Australia giving up and Danny Care. Shouldn't mistake the opposition losing the plot as the way forward.

I'd rather we carry on how we mean to go on against Somoa. It's a mistake to I knew jerk like that.

I agree, we had the Argentina tour to test our depth, I really don't think putting out a B team now is going to benefit anyone. I would say however that if ideas such as starting a lock at 6 or giving Slade a run at 13 are going to be tested then now is the time to do it. So not putting out any 2nd choice players necessarily but going the other way on some 50/50 calls.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

We had a whole six nations with a lock at 6, it's hardly a wacky and wild idea.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Nope most of that was due to Australia giving up and Danny Care. Shouldn't mistake the opposition losing the plot as the way forward.

I'd rather we carry on how we mean to go on against Somoa. It's a mistake to I knew jerk like that.

That's a good point actually. Referee didn't even TMO that one, or let the advantage pan out to a conclusion where he could go back to it. He was sure Launch knocked on and blew the whistle. We're not exactly going on about it. But the saltiness remains and a lot of what ifs etc... We have what ifs too

Last year we were down to 14 then 13 Vs Argentina, Daly didn't show intent to take the man in the air, but he did and the rules say he should be sent off. We accepted the rules of the game and adapted. Or was the ref biased because of Twickenham, or pressure from the RFU to not let England win? The bounce of a ball is one thing, but the referees are actually making the correct calls based on the rules of the game.. This thread really has been amazing at times...

Can someone create one for the Samoa game, with the rule being we can't talk about the referee decision in the Aus game

I think someone had the idea of confining referee talk to a special referee thread during the six nations....worked a bit, although it meant the match day threads were like a graveyard.

 

[ncurd]

I don't think we'll start with a lock at 6. But I genuinely worry about our depth at lock we've got a point where I genuinely want to play 3 second rows, Robshaw but also have a proper openside. We at beginning to stuggle to fit all the player in.

My money says we will play Launchbury, Lawes and Robshaw with Itoje on the bench.

If we try Slade at 13 it'll be dropping JJ and I honestly don't know what we learn by trying players against Tier 2 opposition. Only that they can beat Tier 2.

We've got a point in this cycle where only injury or a massive drop of form should see players replaced. JJ might be in for that one.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

We had a whole six nations with a lock at 6, it's hardly a wacky and wild idea.

Yes but never with constantly alternating 7s so the balance was never really able to be found as well as that up until that point Itoje and Lawes had both been playing almost exclusively at lock for their clubs whereas this season both have been deployed more as back rowers (think Lawes has been exclusively a 6 so far? Saints fan correct me if I'm wrong) so whichever of those 2 was to go to 6 (likely Lawes) would be much more adjusted to it than in the 6 Nations.

That said, against Samoa is hardly a fair test and Underhill is also likely to be out so my point about a settled back row is also moot. Sorry for wasting your time.

 

[ncurd]

I think someone had the idea of confining referee talk to a special referee thread during the six nations....worked a bit, although it meant the match day threads were like a graveyard.

The special referee thread was for discussing controversial calls. Not Flat out denying the laws of the game exist

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

The special referee thread was for discussing controversial calls. Not Flat out denying the laws of the game exist

Ideally, yeah, but then derpus would have no place to go. Maybe we create a separate thread in the off-topic section entitled the "flat rugby ball society."



In seriousness, one of the few teams currently bearable in defeat is ireland, and I reckon it's because they don't have any insecurities about beating england. They know they can beat us roughly 50% of the time so it doesn't stress them too much when they don't. Whereas the Aussies can feel the old order slipping away I guess.
Meanwhile the kiwis are unbearable because anything less than 100% is a disaster..

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Ideally, yeah, but then derpus would have no place to go. Maybe we create a separate thread in the off-topic section entitled the "flat rugby ball society."



In seriousness, one of the few teams currently bearable in defeat is ireland, and I reckon it's because they don't have any insecurities about beating england. They know they can beat us roughly 50% of the time so it doesn't stress them too much when they don't. Whereas the Aussies can feel the old order slipping away I guess.
Meanwhile the kiwis are unbearable because anything less than 100% is a disaster..

A flat rugby ball wouldn't have bounce in field, it would have flopped over the line in a true, honest fashion.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Good remonstrating with officials during the match is completely no go area.

During the game, i agree. After the game, i think it is ridiculous.
If i were up to me, i'd give the res more resources, increase pay, better training (whatever that means), but i'd make them hold press conferences. Yes.
The idea that the ref's word if final is very important in my book. The idea that the ref's word is beyond reproach is ludicrous.
Refs sometimes have more impact than players of coaches. Let them be scrutinized. We can discuss how, but some sort of questions should be asked. People, players, coaches and staff deserve to know the rationale behind some calls and as things stand right now, we do not.
Some of the decisions they are just mind blowing, and this might shed a bit of light. WR talks (a lot) about transparency. Well, here's an area of improvement.
For example, I for one would love to hear Marius van der Westhuizen take on Tuculet's yellow card (Eng vs Arg game, was either RC or play on for me and i cannot understand the logic for a yellow).
And if it is a mistake, that's fine, but bloody say it.

Inside the pitch, they should be treated as god like creatures. Outside, nah.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

A flat rugby ball wouldn't have bounce in field, it would have flopped over the line in a true, honest fashion.

Flat earth is real because if Australia really was underneath us every time they kicked the ball itd just shoot off into space.