RWC: England - Scotland (01-10-2011, 20:30)

[TRF_Olyy]

since when have we ever seen a team in an arm-wrestle succeed by chucking the ball about in the latter stages?

England vs Argentina/Scotland

Agree with the lot of what you said though

I was saying before - Start Flood and if he's playing crap bring on Wilkinson. Wilkinson will be Wilkinson no matter whether he starts or not, whereas Flood can be a bit hit or miss. Start him and if he's great then hurray, if not then you've got Dropgoal on the bench to bring on.
Better to do that then have to bring him on if the games already lost and we've got 3 6 9 12 or 15 pts on the board compared to Frances 4 tries

 

[Dougydeluxe]

Scotland deserved the win... don't think they could have ever gotten the 8 points. But I think they deserved the win.

 

[Teh Mite]

Scotland deserved the win... don't think they could have ever gotten the 8 points. But I think they deserved the win.

If that were the case they would have scored more points.

 

[donmcdazzle]

If that were the case they would have scored more points.

Agreed. Scotland simply weren't good enough to finish them off and England showed (again) that they're very good at keeping it close and finding a way to win.

 

[j'nuh]

Who would get called up if Tindall had to go home? It won't happen as at best we're here for another 3 games, one of which the new player couldn't play due to jetlag/travel etc. and they'd be new to all the calls etc.etc. so they probably wouldn't bother and just use Hape and Banahan....blech

Flutey is injured atm, so would it be Barritt?
That'd be class.

I'd imagine that if Tindall is injured, Hape will slot in and Flood/Wilkinson considered the "emergency 12", with Hodgson called up to go on the bench as the 10 on the bench. Barritt might get a call if Wilkinson and Tindall are both injured, but I doubt he'll be used either way. A full international debut in the quarters/semis having had such little time to learn England's gameplan would probably be an awkward experience that MJ wants to avoid.

 

[j-dawg]

I'd bring in Twelvetrees, in my blissfull ignorance.

 

[JW.]

I'd bring in Twelvetrees, in my blissfull ignorance.

Why are we discussing a replacement for Tinds btw?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Leg injury picked up in the last match, they're reassessing in a few days, but as it stands he's out of contention for the France match

 

[JW.]

Leg injury picked up in the last match, they're reassessing in a few days, but as it stands he's out of contention for the France match

Just a deadleg I thought? If he hasen't picked up a really bad one he could be oke for france? If not he should be fine after?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

No idea, I just read that they're reassessing later on....

Presume it is a deadleg but the report I read specified they're reassessing "the damage" later, could have torn something
Apparently Tuilagi trod on him, or something, so that's going to do some damage

 

[JW.]

No idea, I just read that they're reassessing later on....

Presume it is a deadleg but the report I read specified they're reassessing "the damage" later, could have torn something
Apparently Tuilagi trod on him, or something, so that's going to do some damage

Hehe, beast!

But Hape could start against France then, big loss for our defence if we lose Tindal. On attack Hape does offer more, he's got a great offload if England run onto it.

 

[JW.]

HAhaha the new O2, James Haskell: ''He's still walking around with his ball just dominating the airport, at any moment Manu Tuilagi could burst into a full ball carry''.

About Corbs, 'he's like a fat clark kent'

 

[Seaton]

Agreed. Scotland simply weren't good enough to finish them off and England showed (again) that they're very good at keeping it close and finding a way to win.

Or is it rather a case of Scotland not closing it out and finding a way to lose?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

How can a team deserve to win if they threw the game away?

 

[JW.]

Or is it rather a case of Scotland not closing it out and finding a way to lose?

England changed in the second half. And won the game, how would Scotland have won, they never really threatend to score a try? Couple of dangerous moments through kicks but not much else.

 

[Seaton]

England changed in the second half. And won the game, how would Scotland have won, they never really threatend to score a try? Couple of dangerous moments through kicks but not much else.

How would they have won? By not conceding that try of course Or actually learning from the same exact same mistake we made the week before, and at least attempt to secure the opposition kick-offs in the last few minutes.

And as for the never threatening to score a try, I presume you never saw the knock-on as de Luca tried to pick up and dot the ball down?

Make no illusions, we cocked up and got the result we deserved for cocking up.

 

[Tricia McMillan]

The thing about the match to me is, watching it, I believe that Scotland had it in them to hold the lead if they wanted to. The bonus point system, if you ask me, is why England won. The match was not at all about winning or losing in those final minutes. Scotland were up 12-9 but playing like they were down by 4 (which they "effectively" were because of needing to win by more than 7 to advance).

Had that not been a factor, Scotland would have been playing to hold on to the lead starting from about when it was 12-6. They would not have been taking chances late in the game with the lead, and I think they would have held on for the win.

 

[Seaton]

The thing about the match to me is, watching it, I believe that Scotland had it in them to hold the lead if they wanted to. The bonus point system, if you ask me, is why England won. The match was not at all about winning or losing in those final minutes. Scotland were up 12-9 but playing like they were down by 4 (which they "effectively" were because of needing to win by more than 7 to advance).

Had that not been a factor, Scotland would have been playing to hold on to the lead starting from about when it was 12-6. They would not have been taking chances late in the game with the lead, and I think they would have held on for the win.

There are a couple of key things, one of which you have highlighted, but for me over the years it has come down to two things:

We panic when in the lead in the last few minutes.
The players lack the confidence to either close out the game, or comeback and win it.

Scotland vs. Italy 2008- 20-23 last minute drop by Italy secures win
Scotland vs. Argentina 2008- 15-21 after leading 15-10 well into the second half
Scotland vs. South Africa 2008- 10-14 after leading 10-0 at half time, Godman misses penalty from right in front of the posts.
Scotland vs. Argentina 2009- 6-9 last few minutes drop goal, dominated match
Scotland vs. Wales 2010- 24-31 after leading by two scores in 70th minute
Scotland vs. Argentina 2011- 13-12 after leading 12-6 72nd minute
Scotland vs. England 2011- 16-12 after leading 12-9 75th minute

All these were games we were well in top in, should have but ultimately lost in those last 10 minutes or so going back to 2008. Games which our immediate 'comparables', Ireland and Wales, most likely wouldn't have lost.

Meh, I think it is just more hurtful to say the English deserve credit than to say we are sh*te

 

[JW.]

How would they have won? By not conceding that try of course Or actually learning from the same exact same mistake we made the week before, and at least attempt to secure the opposition kick-offs in the last few minutes.

And as for the never threatening to score a try, I presume you never saw the knock-on as de Luca tried to pick up and dot the ball down?

Make no illusions, we cocked up and got the result we deserved for cocking up.

Wilko was there to make the tackle . Watch it back if you want, he trys to pick it up knocks on and gets hit.

 

[Seaton]

Wilko was there to make the tackle . Watch it back if you want, he trys to pick it up knocks on and gets hit.

If it was any other player than de Luca, I would have had money on scoring from there, and any the miraculously unlikely event he didn't, we had more players closer than England, as well as the advantage of the English players having to go around the ruck to enter the gate.

Either way, point is I am disputing that we never threatened to score, if whilst watching that you were confident at every stage that an English player would make the tackle, from behind less than two meters from the try-line, well then you are a psychic or extremely overestimate the abilities of your players.