RBS 6 Nations - England vs Wales - 25/02/2012, 16:00

[SelimNiai]

What is with this place, idiots making deliberately making wrong and inflammatory statements then throw their hands up when we try to defend ourselves and our team

 

[smb64]

What is with this place, idiots making deliberately making wrong and inflammatory statements then throw their hands up when we try to defend ourselves and our team

What was wrong and inflammatory about - "Disappointing that North deliberately slapped the ball out of play after the kick?"

 

[Draggs]

What is with this place, idiots making deliberately making wrong and inflammatory statements then throw their hands up when we try to defend ourselves and our team

Stop that. No need for common sense in this thread.
On your way now.

 

[Mike Haville]

Gents

While admitting it was a very good game, for both sides and that I could not moan at
referee Steve Walsh for most of the game, the last 2 minutes caused most concern.

We might ignore George North deliberately tapping the ball into touch as the officials
were unsighted, but the 3 offences by the Welsh in the Red zone, should have raised
at least a yellow card and at worst an admittedly harsh penalty try.

At the last ruck, Steve Walsh raised his arm for another England penalty and whilst
playing advantage, he allowed the ball to be spread wide for Strettles 'inconclusive'
try. As a qualified referee, I interpret the laws after a penalty is signaled that
the referee should play advantage until the attacking team has gained a 'tactical or
positional' advantage. England moved 3 yards forwards from the penalty position and
scored an 'inconclusive try. No tactical or positional advantage was gained and
yet the TMO told Steve Walsh that a scrum should be awarded, but as it was over 80
minutes the game should be ended.

Sorry gents, the penalty still stands and Steve Walsh should have returned to the original
offence. Some may call this sour grapes, but tough, the penalty was awarded advantage was
played and none was gained, the crux is if Steve Walsh signaled a penalty, it still stands,
disallowed try or not.

Comments welcome.

 

[Feicarsinn]

Stop that. No need for common sense in this thread.
On your way now.

Hey! That's my bit!

 

[Draggs]

Oh, I can't do anything right!
I might as well just make up another hemisphere and claim it is better than the other two. You can't prove me wrong!

@Mike Haville
First of all welcome to TRF!
Secondly, very good post, I really appreciate the common sense and non-inflammatory statements, lord knows I needed to see that!

 

[Robert Prosser]

Gents

While admitting it was a very good game, for both sides and that I could not moan at
referee Steve Walsh for most of the game, the last 2 minutes caused most concern.

We might ignore George North deliberately tapping the ball into touch as the officials
were unsighted, but the 3 offences by the Welsh in the Red zone, should have raised
at least a yellow card and at worst an admittedly harsh penalty try.

At the last ruck, Steve Walsh raised his arm for another England penalty and whilst
playing advantage, he allowed the ball to be spread wide for Strettles 'inconclusive'
try. As a qualified referee, I interpret the laws after a penalty is signaled that
the referee should play advantage until the attacking team has gained a 'tactical or
positional' advantage. England moved 3 yards forwards from the penalty position and
scored an 'inconclusive try. No tactical or positional advantage was gained and
yet the TMO told Steve Walsh that a scrum should be awarded, but as it was over 80
minutes the game should be ended.

Sorry gents, the penalty still stands and Steve Walsh should have returned to the original
offence. Some may call this sour grapes, but tough, the penalty was awarded advantage was
played and none was gained, the crux is if Steve Walsh signaled a penalty, it still stands,
disallowed try or not.

Comments welcome.

This would be the same ref that told England players numerous times to get their hands out fo the rucks but never once penalised them or gave a yellow card also the same ref who failed to seeor give any sort of decision against Robshaw for the lineout foul on Warburton accidental or not a yellow card offence that was once again not given so lets stop this the ref said this done that, the ref in general was rubbish end of really.

Wales won the game where have the days gone where people say well done lads well see you next time out there.

sorry its last but welcome to the forum.

 

[Saintjay]

This would be the same ref that told England players numerous times to get their hands out fo the rucks but never once penalised them or gave a yellow card also the same ref who failed to seeor give any sort of decision against Robshaw for the lineout foul on Warburton accidental or not a yellow card offence that was once again not given so lets stop this the ref said this done that, the ref in general was rubbish end of really.

Wales won the game where have the days gone where people say well done lads well see you next time out there.

sorry its last but welcome to the forum.

Hours not days when I did

 

[Peat]

This would be the same ref that told England players numerous times to get their hands out fo the rucks but never once penalised them or gave a yellow card also the same ref who failed to seeor give any sort of decision against Robshaw for the lineout foul on Warburton accidental or not a yellow card offence that was once again not given so lets stop this the ref said this done that, the ref in general was rubbish end of really.

Wales won the game where have the days gone where people say well done lads well see you next time out there.

sorry its last but welcome to the forum.

Every ref warns players to stop committing offences at a breakdown before actually penalising these days, that's standard practice. Likewise, its quite common to see refs only give penalties for accidentally playing the man in the air - penalty given. You have no grounds for complaint on either score imo.

Finally - Mike, welcome to the forum.

 

[Mike Haville]

Those are referee's interpretation and on that we could go on all day (dont mention Wayne Barnes to me).

This is the laws of the game ie penalty awarded - advantage played - no advantage gained - return to
penalty

SW got the law wrong, I admit that there is nothing that can be done about it, and as usual the incident
will be swept under the table and never explained by anyone in authority (as André Watson in 2003 WC).

So all that is left is to add SW to the list of refs who are muppets and shout at the TV every time he refs a game.

Cheers

 

[Robert Prosser]

Those are referee's interpretation and on that we could go on all day (dont mention Wayne Barnes to me).

This is the laws of the game ie penalty awarded - advantage played - no advantage gained - return to
penalty

SW got the law wrong, I admit that there is nothing that can be done about it, and as usual the incident
will be swept under the table and never explained by anyone in authority (as André Watson in 2003 WC).

So all that is left is to add SW to the list of refs who are muppets and shout at the TV every time he refs a game.

Cheers

I agree with that and I can assure you you were not alone in England shouting at the tv as many a man in Wales was aswell.

Every ref warns players to stop committing offences at a breakdown before actually penalising these days, that's standard practice. Likewise, its quite common to see refs only give penalties for accidentally playing the man in the air - penalty given. You have no grounds for complaint on either score imo.

Finally - Mike, welcome to the forum.

I am not complaining I am just pointing out there is no need for England fans to moan about the ref because he was rubbish for decisions against both teams.


edit: I would also like to add this

What happened here is that England had their advantage (if crossing the try line isn't taking the advantage then nothing is!) so he was held up which would of made it a scrum not a pen and as the clock time was up it was game over how much more of an advantage does one team want?

 

[hemznz]

England had over 80 min to win that game, its a shame they left it till the last 5 min, to try. my Q is *should robshaw be england captain? they defo had opportunities to turn the screws on wales & i doubt his decision making not his ability.

 

[gingergenius]

As I said when I had my little moan about refereeing, I'm sure Welsh fans will have plenty of gripes with Walsh, because whenever I watch my team play I'll always see the little decisions with bias and shout at the TV for it.

The big decisions, however, I do remember clearly after the game.

Robshaw's taking out in the lineout - penalty, no yellow, fair enough. I watched Saracens play Leicester a week ago and Slater was binned for the same thing and I thought it was harsh. It's not intentional, it's just an unfortunate accident which is part and parcel of competing for the ball in mid-air.

Priestland's yellow - well Walsh had warned Wales twice for offside and he was a mile offside, so fair enough.

North's slapping the ball out - lineout to England, not fair. North prevented the scoring of a try with an illegal action. That is a yellow card, and it is a penalty try. End of. Same happened in 2010 when Hape was shoulder-barged into touch by Toeava - and again, no penalty try when it really should have been. The law's very clear - if the only way of preventing the scoring of a try is to cheat, then a penalty try should be awarded and the offending player sent to the bin.

TMO decision - I said at the time that you cannot give that - especially when you compare Laidlaw a few weeks back, which was similar. So good decision.

Those were the four biggest decisions of the game, and the officials got 3/4 right, which isn't too bad, even if one decision cost England a draw that they deserved - in fact, the more I think about that game, if ever a match deserved to end in a tie, it was that one.

I don't want this to sound bitter because Wales did brilliantly to win away from home, and spent 10 mins with a man down - they are unquestionably a better team.

Wales bloody well ought to beat what is a very poor Italy side, and will then have every chance for a Grand Slam when they play France. And if they achieve that, then they'll have matched up to all the hype they've been getting ever since they knocked Ireland out of the WC, so fair dos. I feel that after that, this Welsh side won't fade into ignominy like the last two slam winning sides have.

As for England, winning in Paris will be a tough ask. Building on this performance should be the main focus, similar to the 2010 game in Paris. But we really should expect to beat Ireland at Twickenham, even though I sense it might be another cracker like yesterday.

And if ever there was a reason to drop Ashton and a reason to have a proper openside in the team, look no further than Farrell had to after he regathered his chip and had nobody around him. On form, that's where Ashton scores half his tries.

 

[dullonien]

At this point I definitely have to admit to Dullonien that I was completely wrong about the front row. I said that Corbs Hartley and Cole were a trio who would never be dominated by any other front row, but I was proven wrong yesterday.

I never expected us to dominate England's scrum in a such a way either, I thought it would have been very equal, but it was obvious that Corbisiero couldn't deal with Adam Jones. Some props seem to struggle against certain opposition. I personally think we made a mistake at the beginning by taking a shot at goal after ruining England's scrum 5m out. We should have gone for another scrum and forced a penalty try. This was compounded by Halfpenny missing, but we completely dominated that first scrum, and it looked as if a penalty try could have been on the cards with a couple more resets.

The rest of your post was also spot on, just didn't want to quote the whole thing.

 

[TrueSlawter]

With the north thing when I attempted to slow it all down using iPlayer it looked a bit like he went to grab the ball at the same time strettle went for it of which then it hit his hand and went out.. It looked alot more accidental than it did him just hitting it out

 

[dullonien]

What happened here is that England had their advantage (if crossing the try line isn't taking the advantage then nothing is!) so he was held up which would of made it a scrum not a pen and as the clock time was up it was game over how much more of an advantage does one team want?

That's what I've been saying. How much more advantage could a team possibly have? Scoring the try is the only possible greater advantage, which would mean a penalty advantage 5m out would never end untill a try is scored. Poeple keep waying that England only moved forwards by 5m, but that's all they could move forwards, otherwise they'd be in the stands. Getting over the try line with the ball is advantage enough (this doesn't count speculative grubber kicks or drop goals, because the attacking team doesn't have the ball in their hands at that point). Davies' excellent tackle prevented a try, although I can fully understand those who think it was infact a try, but that's a seperate debate to this one, but that doesn't change the fact that Strettle getting over the try'line with the ball is when the penalty advantage should end imo.

For those that don't agree, what kind of advantage would have been fair in this case? If England had held onto the ball for 20 phases and not crossed the try-line, this would have been deemed advantage over, yet England would have had less of a tactical advantage. There was no further positional advantage for England to have gained.

 

[Peat]

I am not complaining I am just pointing out there is no need for England fans to moan about the ref because he was rubbish for decisions against both teams.

edit: I would also like to add this

What happened here is that England had their advantage (if crossing the try line isn't taking the advantage then nothing is!) so he was held up which would of made it a scrum not a pen and as the clock time was up it was game over how much more of an advantage does one team want?

I have no wish to complain about the ref, if you're complaining about the ref you weren't good enough and we weren't, however I don't see your counter-examples of how Walsh was poor for Wales as correct and will say as much. I don't agree with your/Walsh's interpretation of advantage, in that area of the pitch nothing less than a score is advantage, and that is the interpretation I see played most commonly by far.

It is done. The ref made his decision, the game has been played and Wales were the better team on the day. I do not agree with the decision, and do not agree with any argument that says the ref was equally bad for both teams as the biggest decisions went against England and there is nothing I can see of similar magnitude denied to Wales; if you disagree, so be it, and I suggest we leave it there. The argument doesn't change anything major after all; the result stands, the game entertained, the future is interesting and you're still all a bunch of sheep bothering, daffodil waving, coal munching taffs. But we like you despite that.

Sometimes.

 

[dullonien]

In the heat of the moment it looked, to me, like he punched Parling in the back, then when he didn't move he punched him in the side of the head/face.
Will have to watch again, though, but on first view it looked bad to me.

Just watched this incident again, and there really was nothing in it. Basically put his arm around Parlings shoulder, then pushed him slightly in the back.

 

[Zed]

. Some props seem to struggle against certain opposition.

Lol yeah Matt Dunnings & Sheridan!

 

[Zed]

I think both teams played well. Wales definitely seem to have a good side in the making and so do England. Barrit and Tuilagi could turn into a pretty decent centre partnership. And pretty impressed with Farrel. George North for Wales was good, Jamie Roberts was pretty disappointing though. I think Wales can definitely get the Grand Slam. Are they playing France at home?