Well maybe you'll be flattened by SA or torn apart by the French, but this has happened before, so I doubt change happens if either of of those 2 things happen.It's the biggest tournament in our sport and England are in the semi finals of it, you'd think we'd just been kicked from the group. People talk about context yeah England haven't been great and Bothwick probably isn't good enough but who cares semi final man I'm here for it.
I get people want change but if England got kicked early from the group or an embarrassing QF to Fiji, imo I doubt Borthwick gets sacked anyway so I doubt change happens if either of of those 2 things happen.
England fans are notoriously hard to please regardless of the sport. I think it's the performance that counts as well as the win, which is why a lot of England fans will still not be happy. Yes, semis, but lucky with the pool and getting Fiji. The performances v them and Samoa were not good, but neither has last 4 years really.It's the biggest tournament in our sport and England are in the semi finals of it, you'd think we'd just been kicked from the group. People talk about context yeah England haven't been great and Bothwick probably isn't good enough but who cares semi final man I'm here for it.
I get people want change but if England got kicked early from the group or an embarrassing QF to Fiji, imo I doubt Borthwick gets sacked anyway so I doubt change happens if either of of those 2 things happen.
I know I'm being ridiculous, but if I entered a tennis tournament against 5 year olds and got to the SF I wouldn't be saying, look at me, I got to the semis. Yes, England are playing international teams, but in terms of the draw it is by far and away the easiest draw England have ever had. They have only had one toughish game and Argentina **** the bed. A semi-final with England's resources and the draw is just about par.It's the biggest tournament in our sport and England are in the semi finals of it, you'd think we'd just been kicked from the group. People talk about context yeah England haven't been great and Bothwick probably isn't good enough but who cares semi final man I'm here for it.
I get people want change but if England got kicked early from the group or an embarrassing QF to Fiji, imo I doubt Borthwick gets sacked anyway so I doubt change happens if either of of those 2 things happen.
Just goes back to borthwicks bizzare squad management.So Dan has been in all 5 match day squads.
He was entrusted with a whole 55 minutes against Chile, otherwise got 8 against Arg, 6 against Jap, 0 v Samoa and 0 against Fiji.
Utterly ridiculous.
This guy has clearly been nominated as our number two number two and could be called upon in the 2nd minute of a RWC semi against the powder puff front rows and feeble line outs of France or the Boks. What sort of preparation has he had?
Quite apart from the confidence factor of Borthwick yelling from the rooftops "I DON'T TRUST YOU".
I know I'm being ridiculous, but if I entered a tennis tournament against 5 year olds and got to the SF I wouldn't be saying, look at me, I got to the semis. Yes, England are playing international teams, but in terms of the draw it is by far and away the easiest draw England have ever had. They have only had one toughish game and Argentina **** the bed. A semi-final with England's resources and the draw is just about par.
Come on man you can't compare that to beating Argentina and Fiji in a WC. If you think I'm silly for being happy at a SF after the year England has had then I guess I'm silly.
Look yes England have been on the good side of the draw clearly. People will argue do the draw closer like 6 months earlier rather then years like football but I would argue same thing happens, look at England got France in the QF last year in Qatar when they probably would have beaten at least 5 of the other 6 QF teams. The luck of the draw is just part of any major sports world cup.
Who?If you where going to have a guy sit on the bench I would of thought a vet would of been a better call for that.
Where in the laws does it say that a deliberate knock on needs to prevent what would have been a significant line break to result in a yellow card?If the ball isn't going to hand, or even particularly close to the recipient, how confident can you be that the delay to backtrack, the clean pick-up, and the accelerating forwards again, is going to lead to a significant line-break?
Wasnt there a game where Jonny May got a red card for a deliberate knock on?Where in the laws does it say that a deliberate knock on needs to prevent what would have been a significant line break to result in a yellow card?
The laws actually state penalty but it a YC has been consistently and repeatedly been shown when this happens. I havent read all the inplementation guidances given to refs. Maybe mole can help?
Point is it was a knock on and it was deliberate, even by the refs admission. The rationale they used to avoid issuing a yc for it what is unheaed of. But hey, i am willing to be proven wrong. Give me one example of this happening before (the rationale give by the ref) and i will stand corrected
Come on man you can't compare that to beating Argentina and Fiji in a WC. If you think I'm silly for being happy at a SF after the year England has had then I guess I'm silly.
Look yes England have been on the good side of the draw clearly. People will argue do the draw closer like 6 months earlier rather then years like football but I would argue same thing happens, look at England got France in the QF last year in Qatar when they probably would have beaten at least 5 of the other 6 QF teams. The luck of the draw is just part of any major sports world cup.
I see your point, but when a draw stacks the top 5 ranked teams in one half that is not normal. No draw is perfect, but this was particularly bad.
I wonder if Kiwi fans would keep bringing up an easy draw? Did they in previous World Cups?
Where in the laws does it say the sanction for a deliberate knock on is a yellow card? https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/law/11Where in the laws does it say that a deliberate knock on needs to prevent what would have been a significant line break to result in a yellow card?
The laws actually state penalty but it a YC has been consistently and repeatedly been shown when this happens. I havent read all the inplementation guidances given to refs. Maybe mole can help?
Point is it was a knock on and it was deliberate, even by the refs admission. The rationale they used to avoid issuing a yc for it what is unheaed of. But hey, i am willing to be proven wrong. Give me one example of this happening before (the rationale give by the ref) and i will stand corrected
Well, at least it's not that I've missed something. You just think that penalty-only offences are consistently given as yellows, whilst I don't, and am using the justification ref,.s use in their discussions with TJs and TMOs.Where in the laws does it say that a deliberate knock on needs to prevent what would have been a significant line break to result in a yellow card?
The laws actually state penalty but it a YC has been consistently and repeatedly been shown when this happens. I havent read all the inplementation guidances given to refs. Maybe mole can help?
Point is it was a knock on and it was deliberate, even by the refs admission. The rationale they used to avoid issuing a yc for it what is unheaed of. But hey, i am willing to be proven wrong. Give me one example of this happening before (the rationale give by the ref) and i will stand corrected