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

[jack6161]

By your logic though Walsh made the correct decision, because he was being consistent with what had happened in the Scotland v England game where the ref didn't come back for the advantage after a dissallowed try. Ok, that's tongue in cheek, but still a valid point.

Like many things in rugby, this could be debated to death, because many of the laws are open to interpretation. Some will say that England had enough advantage, some will say they didn't (this includes ref's), and both are correct really. As you say, consistency is all we ask for.

Well I didn't know that, but its debatable whether Scotland would have scored even with the penalty But yes I would of wanted the ref to come back for it just for consistency.

I would argue to the death that it should of come back for the advantage. The ball went forward 3m and then a try was disallowed, and following every other advantage that is ever played, if you go forward 3m and play stops or slows down to a point where the advantage is not needed, then play should be brought back for the penalty.

As regards the North incident, after watching it back it looks like North sees that Strettle has a chance of getting it, so he slaps it out at last minute.

 

[dullonien]

I would argue to the death that it should of come back for the advantage. The ball went forward 3m and then a try was disallowed, and following every other advantage that is ever played, if you go forward 3m and play stops or slows down to a point where the advantage is not needed, then play should be brought back for the penalty.

I've asked this a few times, but no-one's answered it. How much further forward would have been acceptable for advantage to be over?

 

[coonor]

I've asked this a few times, but no-one's answered it. How much further forward would have been acceptable for advantage to be over?

Generally 10m for a penalty but thats not the point, this is clearly tactical advantage in this circumstance.
-There are two types of advantage: tactical and territorial.
-Tactical advantage is when a team puts them selves in a position to score
-Walsh clearly interpreted that England put themselves in a position to score, which in my opinion they did..... now is it Walsh's fault that Strettle couldn't ground the ball?

I'm not saying I wouldn't have gone back for the penalty but as long as Walsh was consistent then I have no problem with his interpretation.

 

[Macsen]

I seem to have entered a parallel universe where England talk about positives and moral victories and Wales are accused of winning ugly against the run of play.

I’m not convinced about this English revival. Martin Johnson must be fuming that Lancaster is being cut so much slack. If he had lost by 7 points against Wales at home they’d have had his head on a pike.

In truth the fan’s perception of the two teams seems to be a creation of the media. Wales were actually predicted to finish fourth before the tournament began, yet somehow after they beat Ireland they were the All Blacks of the north and anything but a 20 point win at Twickenham would be a disappointment.

This is a venue Wales have only won once at since I was 4 years old. I’d have taken a one point win, thank you very much.

England on the other hand seems to have been shamed by the media into throwing the baby out with the bathwater and starting from scratch after the World Cup. I’m sure England will be a force to be reckoned with in future, as they should be â€" up there with the SH sides.

But they were a better team last year. They should have stuck two fingers at the naysayers and picked up where they left off, rather than sacrificing this Six Nations to appease Guardian and Telegraph column writers who will probably turn on them again anyway in a few months. This isn’t restoring pride in the shirt; it’s a sign of weakness and caring more about good PR than winning games.

Andy Powell and Mike Phillips have done far stupider things but are still sitting pretty in the Wales squad.

Seriously, I think England has got a bit soft. They need to believe they are up there with the SH sides and field the best, most competitive side in every game. England has no excuse not to be world beaters, all the resources are there.

Wales are going through a good patch but with the present structure they’re never going to be the All Blacks of the north. The whole country gets excited about the national teams but where are the fans when the four regional teams play? We’ve become a country of watching rather than playing rugby. In fact the pendulum seems to be swinging increasingly towards football, with Swansea in the Premier League and Cardiff moral victors in various cups.

Anyway that’s my halfpennies worth.

 

[jack6161]

I've asked this a few times, but no-one's answered it. How much further forward would have been acceptable for advantage to be over?

Well I'd imagine that considering the position of the ruck on the pitch, the advantage would last until the ball went out of play or play stopped (eg failing to score a try) at which point the play should come back for the penalty. Normally an advantage lasts about 10m, but considering the ruck was about 3m from the line, it would be difficult to go 10m without scoring, so if they didn't score then I would of thought the play should have been brought back.

 

[psychic duck]

I'm not convinced about this English revival. Martin Johnson must be fuming that Lancaster is being cut so much slack. If he had lost by 7 points against Wales at home they'd have had his head on a pike.

this is exactly what I think, Johnson's England beat Argentina and Scotland in exactly the same way Lancaster's England beat Scotland and Italy in the 6 Nations, yet whilst Johnson was slated for those performances Lancaster was praised massively

and England had a much better team last year, and people need to think of what made that side the most successful England side in the 6 Nations since 2003

But they were a better team last year. They should have stuck two fingers at the naysayers and picked up where they left off, rather than sacrificing this Six Nations to appease Guardian and Telegraph column writers who will probably turn on them again anyway in a few months. This isn't restoring pride in the shirt; it's a sign of weakness and caring more about good PR than winning games.

Andy Powell and Mike Phillips have done far stupider things but are still sitting pretty in the Wales squad.

I agree they are trying to appease the media with selections, but I don't think the players who were supposed to have done stupid things would make a difference, Tindall arguably wasn't worth his place in the team at the World Cup and certainly isn't now

The whole country gets excited about the national teams but where are the fans when the four regional teams play? We've become a country of watching rather than playing rugby.

you say there are no fans at the regional matches, but Wales is a country of watching rather than playing???

 

[Macsen]

you say there are no fans at the regional matches, but Wales is a country of watching rather than playing???

Well, watching the national team at least. It struck me looking at the stats the other day how few registered players Wales has compared to New Zealand, and even Ireland. These countries are bigger than us but not by much. All the national pride in the team seems to be focused on dressing up like a daffodil on match day and not actually playing the game.

Stranger still is that rugby doesn't really register in the northern half of the country. I'm from north Wales and moved down south some seven years ago and have becomne a big rugby fan, but was pretty much oblivious to rugby until then. How many more George Norths and Robin McBrydes would the WRU unearth if they set up a decent team up in north Wales?

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Well, watching the national team at least. It struck me looking at the stats the other day how few registered players Wales has compared to New Zealand, and even Ireland. These countries are bigger than us but not by much. All the national pride in the team seems to be focused on dressing up like a daffodil on match day and not actually playing the game.

Stranger still is that rugby doesn't really register in the northern half of the country. I'm from north Wales and moved down south some seven years ago and have becomne a big rugby fan, but was pretty much oblivious to rugby until then. How many more George Norths and Robin McBrydes would the WRU unearth if they set up a decent team up in north Wales?

That is what's in process with RGC 1404. They have employed a young and promising coach in Chris Horsman who has built upon the hard work Clive Griffiths set out.

From what I have seen, heard and watched RGC have got a lot of things going right in their setup. What they need now is a couple of successful seasons in Div 1 East and then they can push to be included in the closed Welsh Premiership and then who knows they may well enter the Celtic - Italian League (Well I am pretty confident it won't be called the Rabo Pro in about 10 years time). They may be a long time, but they are moving in the right direction and with WRU increase in funding who knows what the future holds.

 

[dullonien]

Well I'd imagine that considering the position of the ruck on the pitch, the advantage would last until the ball went out of play or play stopped (eg failing to score a try) at which point the play should come back for the penalty. Normally an advantage lasts about 10m, but considering the ruck was about 3m from the line, it would be difficult to go 10m without scoring, so if they didn't score then I would of thought the play should have been brought back.

My point was and always has been that 3m was all that England needed to advance in order to score a try, so I don't understand people bringing up that argument here. I have no problem with people believing that he should have come back, because ref's often do, but please don't use the argument that they only gained 3m where normally that would be brought back in another area of the pitch.

I think Coonor has put it much better than I have. Ultimately, many people here believe that the only correct outcome here would have been if England scored some points. Not sure I agree with that at all. England correctly went for, and Strettle was judged to have not grounded the ball.

I'm not only saying this because it's England, and because it enabled us to win. I feel the same no matter what the circumstance. I don't agree with ref's calling play back because a player has knocked the ball on with the try-line at his mercy, that's just tough luck, the advantage was there to be taken. It's all part of the same thing, and in every case some ref's call advantage over quickly after a relatively small tactical or positional advantage, and other's seem to play advantage for an age and pull play back for an infringement half the crowd has already forgotten what for.

The advantage rule is a good one, but it shouldn't be abused by ref's. Here I feel Walsh made the correct call. I'm a little more in two minds about Laidlaw's non-try because he simply put in a speculative kick that almost came off (i.e. didn't have the ball in his hands going over the try-line), but ultimately he Laidlaw chanced his arm which came within a wisker of coming off, so he's gotta also live with the fact that it was deemed advantage over.

 

[mike0443]

scotland played only 30 seconds with 13 men

 

[Macsen]

That is what's in process with RGC 1404.

What is up with them? I registered as a fan as soon as they set up but got a letter a year later saying they had gone into administration. A friend of a friend (the best kind of source) said there was some ill-will towards a gaggle of Canadians who had been bused in and were being picked instead of the local boys.

I hope they're back on their feet as they would get my automatic support as a gog.

 

[dullonien]

I seem to have entered a parallel universe where England talk about positives and moral victories and Wales are accused of winning ugly against the run of play.

I'm not convinced about this English revival. Martin Johnson must be fuming that Lancaster is being cut so much slack. If he had lost by 7 points against Wales at home they'd have had his head on a pike.

In truth the fan's perception of the two teams seems to be a creation of the media. Wales were actually predicted to finish fourth before the tournament began, yet somehow after they beat Ireland they were the All Blacks of the north and anything but a 20 point win at Twickenham would be a disappointment.

This is a venue Wales have only won once at since I was 4 years old. I'd have taken a one point win, thank you very much.

England on the other hand seems to have been shamed by the media into throwing the baby out with the bathwater and starting from scratch after the World Cup. I'm sure England will be a force to be reckoned with in future, as they should be – up there with the SH sides.

But they were a better team last year. They should have stuck two fingers at the naysayers and picked up where they left off, rather than sacrificing this Six Nations to appease Guardian and Telegraph column writers who will probably turn on them again anyway in a few months. This isn't restoring pride in the shirt; it's a sign of weakness and caring more about good PR than winning games.

Andy Powell and Mike Phillips have done far stupider things but are still sitting pretty in the Wales squad.

Seriously, I think England has got a bit soft. They need to believe they are up there with the SH sides and field the best, most competitive side in every game. England has no excuse not to be world beaters, all the resources are there.

Wales are going through a good patch but with the present structure they're never going to be the All Blacks of the north. The whole country gets excited about the national teams but where are the fans when the four regional teams play? We've become a country of watching rather than playing rugby. In fact the pendulum seems to be swinging increasingly towards football, with Swansea in the Premier League and Cardiff moral victors in various cups.

Anyway that's my halfpennies worth.

I disagree completely regarding your views on the England team and Lancaster. Johnson was slated because he had a couple of years to build a competative team for the WC, yet failed to adress many of his problems. He brought in a few new faces in Ashton and Foden etc. but no more. He continued to pick out of form, and over the hill players despite it being completely obvious to most that there were better options available. He also failed to control his squad.

In contrast Lancaster should be applauded for the changes he has made. Not every decision he has made has been correct, but he's understood that and further changed the team for the better. His decision to bring on Youngs was a bit of a shocker though. England's results in last years 6 nations may have been better, but sometimes you've gotta sacrifice a year or so of results to build a new team (especially when there was precious little in place to begin with). This new Engand squad is full of young players who have been selected on merit (mostly), not on reputation. They are bound to take a little while to gain experience, but they're already showing signs of becoming a great team.

I think rugby in the NH as a whole is looking very strong for the future. Wales, England, France and Scotland are on the up, and Ireland could easily join them with a few changes / new coach. Italy is stil improving imo, but are at risk of getting left behind by the rest even so.

Edit. Nice to see you back posting anyway.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

What is up with them? I registered as a fan as soon as they set up but got a letter a year later saying they had gone into administration. A friend of a friend (the best kind of source) said there was some ill-will towards a gaggle of Canadians who had been bused in and were being picked instead of the local boys.

I hope they're back on their feet as they would get my automatic support as a gog.

Well they went into administration, mainly because of what they were paying and giving (luxuries e.g. cars) the Canadians. The holding company with the rights to the RGC 1404 went bust but somehow the name still exists :s. The WRU bailed them out and named them something like North Wales Regional Development Team XV. But then all of a sudden the 1404 name was resurrected.

Since this, Chris Horsman was named coach. The Canadians were shipped out. Local players given a better opportunity within the setup and more involvement and help from the WRU which meant they would enter Division 1 East next season and their position reviewed on a annual basis to determine their best course of action for them. Not to mention the development of Parc Eirias, which looks like a wonderful re-development.

The strategic plan can be found here: http://northwalesruc.pitchero.com/p...-plan-2010-2014/strategic-plan-2010-2014-690/

and if you sign up to the website: http://www.nwru.co.uk/ you will receive newsletters from there.

 

[mike0443]

i thought the only ''cynical'' part of the game was when robson deliberately took out warburton when in the air at a line out, as brian moore said, it should have been a red card, not even a yellow. The referee's interpretation left a lot to be desired. I think this part of the game should be looked at more closely, as some referees give cards for it, while others don't. It is every bit as dangerous as a spear tackle.

 

[Peat]

I seem to have entered a parallel universe where England talk about positives and moral victories and Wales are accused of winning ugly against the run of play.

I’m not convinced about this English revival. Martin Johnson must be fuming that Lancaster is being cut so much slack. If he had lost by 7 points against Wales at home they’d have had his head on a pike.

In truth the fan’s perception of the two teams seems to be a creation of the media. Wales were actually predicted to finish fourth before the tournament began, yet somehow after they beat Ireland they were the All Blacks of the north and anything but a 20 point win at Twickenham would be a disappointment.

This is a venue Wales have only won once at since I was 4 years old. I’d have taken a one point win, thank you very much.

England on the other hand seems to have been shamed by the media into throwing the baby out with the bathwater and starting from scratch after the World Cup. I’m sure England will be a force to be reckoned with in future, as they should be â€" up there with the SH sides.

But they were a better team last year. They should have stuck two fingers at the naysayers and picked up where they left off, rather than sacrificing this Six Nations to appease Guardian and Telegraph column writers who will probably turn on them again anyway in a few months. This isn’t restoring pride in the shirt; it’s a sign of weakness and caring more about good PR than winning games.

Andy Powell and Mike Phillips have done far stupider things but are still sitting pretty in the Wales squad.

Seriously, I think England has got a bit soft. They need to believe they are up there with the SH sides and field the best, most competitive side in every game. England has no excuse not to be world beaters, all the resources are there.

Wales are going through a good patch but with the present structure they’re never going to be the All Blacks of the north. The whole country gets excited about the national teams but where are the fans when the four regional teams play? We’ve become a country of watching rather than playing rugby. In fact the pendulum seems to be swinging increasingly towards football, with Swansea in the Premier League and Cardiff moral victors in various cups.

Anyway that’s my halfpennies worth.

Interesting points. A lot of it I reckon you're pretty much spot on with, but some of it you miss important points.

Johnson's victories over Argentina and Scotland were the result of a lot of short-termism, a lot of very ugly play and unpopular selections, all with the promise of the World Cup being when it would come together; it didn't. Lancaster's victories were from a far less nascent position. That makes a huge difference in what is acceptable.

The World Cup campaign wasn't acceptable. Not in terms of performance, not in terms of pride, and not in terms of what the sponsors were prepared to put up with. There were several players in that squad who weren't good enough, weren't fit enough (largely due to being rushed back from injury) and who weren't motivated enough. Forget the scandals, most of which were blown out of proportion, the rugby was not acceptable. The baby hasn't been chucked out with the bathwater; most of the players in the EPS either went to the World Cup or were in the training squad. Rowntree's still here. We've just chucked most of the bad and kept most of the good.

Now we have to start again in terms of a lot of vital combinations, a squad culture, accumulating experience. Yes, the media are being kinder on Lancaster than they were on Johnson, but a lot of its deserved due to the difference in circumstances - and the rest is why PR isn't completely useless. Even before the World Cup I was hoping for a new dawn afterwards due to the amount of **** involved, just now my expectations are dialed down. We should be world beaters maybe, but we're not. I'm not certain we do have all the resources actually, I'm not certain we have a large enough pool of elite coaches.

As for Wales - yes some papers said they'd finish 4th, but lets not forget the massive amounts of praise their World Cup campaign drew. They were being talked up then and by some before this 6N as well. There were a lot of people jumping the gun and declaring Wales to genuinely be a match for the Tri-Nations teams; and if that is true, then comfortably beating a poor raw England side anywhere is part of the remit. Whether it actually is so is another matter, but that view was sold in more than a few places.

I am now rambling and have lost the thread somewhere... but yeah, England are actually that low, regardless of where we should be, and people were saying Wales are that high, regardless of where they might actually be.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

i thought the only ''cynical'' part of the game was when robson deliberately took out warburton when in the air at a line out, as brian moore said, it should have been a red card, not even a yellow. The referee's interpretation left a lot to be desired. I think this part of the game should be looked at more closely, as some referees give cards for it, while others don't. It is every bit as dangerous as a spear tackle.

Well no, as it was an accident, so it wasn't cynical.
Possibly did warrant a yellow card, but it wasn't cynical.


Also, who's Robson?

 

[mike0443]

sorry, robshaw, but imo it was cynical he jumped in to him then pulled him over.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Also, who's Robson?

 

[Saintjay]

Well, watching the national team at least. It struck me looking at the stats the other day how few registered players Wales has compared to New Zealand, and even Ireland. These countries are bigger than us but not by much. All the national pride in the team seems to be focused on dressing up like a daffodil on match day and not actually playing the game.

Stranger still is that rugby doesn't really register in the northern half of the country. I'm from north Wales and moved down south some seven years ago and have becomne a big rugby fan, but was pretty much oblivious to rugby until then. How many more George Norths and Robin McBrydes would the WRU unearth if they set up a decent team up in north Wales?

The North might have changed in a few years then

Old Colwyn and the Bay were all red at the weekend. The pub I was in was packed, at least ten people I spoke with whilst sober told me they do not follow the regions. Over half of those regulary go to watch Wales in the six nations in Cardiff. Interest in rugby and the national team is hugh, Parc Eirias is sold out pretty much for all the U20 six nations games. The problem is the regions are so far away and the WRU need to resolve the lack of cross over from national to regional support.

Regarding Johnson the team took a step backwards in the world cup. He also had the issues over cheating and the players conduct to deal with. Lancaster has had none of these issues and with a new team you can't expect his head to be on the block after three games and you must remeber he is a care taker not the full time coach/manager yet.

As has been said about Wales today they are a young team still building. They still expect to lose games so why should England be any different?. I see no point in England keeping old players who would not be in the 2015 world cup and past there prime.

RGC 1404 played a North Wales XV at Eirias last week, free admission and a decent crowd. They won 39 - 17. They are due to play Georgia and enter the national league next year.

http://northwalesruc.pitchero.com/news/rgc-1404-39-v-north-wales-presidents-xv-17-1089/

 

[jack6161]

I seem to have entered a parallel universe where England talk about positives and moral victories and Wales are accused of winning ugly against the run of play.

I’m not convinced about this English revival. Martin Johnson must be fuming that Lancaster is being cut so much slack. If he had lost by 7 points against Wales at home they’d have had his head on a pike.

In truth the fan’s perception of the two teams seems to be a creation of the media. Wales were actually predicted to finish fourth before the tournament began, yet somehow after they beat Ireland they were the All Blacks of the north and anything but a 20 point win at Twickenham would be a disappointment.

This is a venue Wales have only won once at since I was 4 years old. I’d have taken a one point win, thank you very much.

England on the other hand seems to have been shamed by the media into throwing the baby out with the bathwater and starting from scratch after the World Cup. I’m sure England will be a force to be reckoned with in future, as they should be â€" up there with the SH sides.

But they were a better team last year. They should have stuck two fingers at the naysayers and picked up where they left off, rather than sacrificing this Six Nations to appease Guardian and Telegraph column writers who will probably turn on them again anyway in a few months. This isn’t restoring pride in the shirt; it’s a sign of weakness and caring more about good PR than winning games.

Andy Powell and Mike Phillips have done far stupider things but are still sitting pretty in the Wales squad.

Seriously, I think England has got a bit soft. They need to believe they are up there with the SH sides and field the best, most competitive side in every game. England has no excuse not to be world beaters, all the resources are there.

Wales are going through a good patch but with the present structure they’re never going to be the All Blacks of the north. The whole country gets excited about the national teams but where are the fans when the four regional teams play? We’ve become a country of watching rather than playing rugby. In fact the pendulum seems to be swinging increasingly towards football, with Swansea in the Premier League and Cardiff moral victors in various cups.

Anyway that’s my halfpennies worth.

Well that is because under Martin Johnson we entered the World Cup as the best NH side. We had just won the six nations, and beat Australia on their home ground, and came reasonably close to beating NZ in 2010. We expected to win big against Scotland and Argentina, when in fact the players under performed. I don't think it was Johnson's fault, I think it was the players. And largely the reason why the players have been dropped is 1) poor form and 2) the way the acted in NZ and the way they represented England as a nation. Also many of the players who played in the RWC were old, and looking ahead to 2015 it was time for a new slate. Lancaster isn't getting slated because we can into this championship expecting to see a developing team, and hopefully win ourselves a few matches, which we have done. When Lancaster or whoever gets the permanent job we will expect to see silverware and not just good rugby. We will start to expect to see regular experienced players playing so we can build our hopes up for 2015, like we had hopes last year.

My point was and always has been that 3m was all that England needed to advance in order to score a try, so I don't understand people bringing up that argument here. I have no problem with people believing that he should have come back, because ref's often do, but please don't use the argument that they only gained 3m where normally that would be brought back in another area of the pitch.

I think Coonor has put it much better than I have. Ultimately, many people here believe that the only correct outcome here would have been if England scored some points. Not sure I agree with that at all. England correctly went for, and Strettle was judged to have not grounded the ball.

I'm not only saying this because it's England, and because it enabled us to win. I feel the same no matter what the circumstance. I don't agree with ref's calling play back because a player has knocked the ball on with the try-line at his mercy, that's just tough luck, the advantage was there to be taken. It's all part of the same thing, and in every case some ref's call advantage over quickly after a relatively small tactical or positional advantage, and other's seem to play advantage for an age and pull play back for an infringement half the crowd has already forgotten what for.

The advantage rule is a good one, but it shouldn't be abused by ref's. Here I feel Walsh made the correct call. I'm a little more in two minds about Laidlaw's non-try because he simply put in a speculative kick that almost came off (i.e. didn't have the ball in his hands going over the try-line), but ultimately he Laidlaw chanced his arm which came within a wisker of coming off, so he's gotta also live with the fact that it was deemed advantage over.

Well the main problem I have with it is that I don't think he played advantage for long enough, whether Strettle scored or not I still think it should of been brought back. On top of that I don't think he actually said 'Advantage over.' Obviously that wouldn't of mattered in the circumstances, but him not saying it kind of implies it was still going on.