Wales v England - 6 February 2015 - Match thread

[BamBam]

First topic message reminder :


Wales v England
6 February 2015
Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
Kick off at 20.05

Referee: Jérôme Garcès (FFR)
AR1: Romain Poite (FFR)
AR2: Mathieu Raynal (FFR)
TMO: Simon McDowell (IRFU)

Live on BBC1

Wales

01. Gethin Jenkins
02. Richard Hibbard
03. Samson Lee
04. Alun Wyn Jones
05. Jake Ball
06. Dan Lydiate
07. Sam Warburton (c)
08. Toby Faletau

09. Rhys Webb
10. Dan Biggar
11. George North
12. Jamie Roberts
13. Jonathan Davies
14. Alex Cuthbert
15. Leigh Halfpenny

16. Scott Baldwin
17. Paul James
18. Aaron Jarvis
19. Luke Charteris
20. Justin Tipuric
21. Mike Phillips
22. Rhys Preistland
23. Liam Williams

England

15. Mike Brown
14. Anthony Watson
13. Jonathan Joseph
12. Luther Burrell
11. Jonny May
10. George Ford
09. Ben Youngs  

01. Joe Marler
02. Dylan Hartley
03. Dan Cole
04. David Attwood
05. George Kruis
06. James Haskell
07. Chris Robshaw (captain)
08. Billy Vunipola

16. Tom Youngs
17. Mako Vunipola
18. Kieran Brookes
19. Tom Croft
20. Nick Easter
21. Richard Wigglesworth
22. Danny Cipriani
23. Billy Twelvetrees

[Guest]

Ok...what happened Haskell when he made a play for the point four feet above the bottom of the post he was looking for???

There - that's a non moan topic.

Woz that lad concussed when doing that?

He might have been a bit dazed. I didn't see what Cuthbert did to get his yellow card, but question arises, did he prevent the try?

If Haskell had slid in, he was there. I think also he bounced back and instinctively turned to lay the ball back. If he'd landed the other way, it would have been a simple push to the base of the post.

I do wonder whether the posts should be suspended / cantilevered out in rugby. I think American football does that.

Good idea. In American football they sort of bend/curve over from off field to have the uprights suspended in the right place. Not sure why it hasn't been considered in rugby?

[BamBam]

Ok...what happened Haskell when he made a play for the point four feet above the bottom of the post he was looking for???

There - that's a non moan topic.

Woz that lad concussed when doing that?

He might have been a bit dazed. I didn't see what Cuthbert did to get his yellow card, but question arises, did he prevent the try?

If Haskell had slid in, he was there. I think also he bounced back and instinctively turned to lay the ball back. If he'd landed the other way, it would have been a simple push to the base of the post.

I do wonder whether the posts should be suspended / cantilevered out in rugby. I think American football does that.

Posts are at the back of the in goal area in American Football. It happens I guess, another day he would have scored, just unlucky

[milkyboy]

... as bambam says, they could just put them at the dead ball line and make the kicks a bit harder. Haskell would probably still run into them though.

[TJ]

Is debating key decisions ref whinging? .

One is " I think the decision should have been "x" for reason "Y" " and accepting others may differ in their views
The otehr is "we wuz robbed by a biased incompetent ref who hates us again" and then claim " you hate us as well" if anyone tries to disagree.

[mystiroakey]

Yep posts don't need to be there. They could be fitted from miles back and just get propelled forward with a horizontal post with only the top the h present

[TJ]

In american football the posts were moved back 10 yards a few years ago to make field goals harder. they also have the single upright below the crossbar and that bends forward so the post is not in the field of play

[HammerofThunor]

Sorry - no way on earth was it worth a card.  its a complete accident unlike many " accidental" things that get cards which are actually reckless.

Yep. At the moment kicking a ball in open play is not considered reckless. Unlike blindly running for a ball in the air. Both are actions that may result in injury to an opposition player based on their actions (jumping for a ball in the air or on the deck). One has been deemed reckless by the IRB and one hasn't.

[MarcusHalberstram]

Well played England - totally outmuscled us in the second half.

[milkyboy]

Is debating key decisions ref whinging? .

One is " I think the decision should have been "x" for reason "Y" " and accepting others may differ in their views
The otehr is "we wuz robbed by a biased incompetent ref who hates us again" and then claim " you hate us as well" if anyone tries to disagree.

ok, i'm debating individual decisions today then and accepting other views.... and definitely whinging whenever steve walsh refs england. But with some justification I might add.

[Poorfour]

Sorry - no way on earth was it worth a card.  its a complete accident unlike many " accidental" things that get cards which are actually reckless.

Yep. At the moment kicking a ball in open play is not considered reckless. Unlike blindly running for a ball in the air. Both are actions that may result in injury to an opposition player based on their actions (jumping for a ball in the air or on the deck). One has been deemed reckless by the IRB and one hasn't.

The critical difference is that in running for a ball in the air, there's a good chance that you will be in the path of a player who is already in the air and therefore vulnerable. When kicking at a loose ball, it's pretty unusual for there to be someone's head going for the same space on the pitch. It's also a spur of the moment act, unlike a kick chase. A player can't reasonably be expected to check for a flying head in those circumstances - hence, it's much tougher to pin the blame on them.

[TJ]

Is debating key decisions ref whinging? .

One is " I think the decision should have been "x" for reason "Y" " and accepting others may differ in their views
The otehr is "we wuz robbed by a biased incompetent ref who hates us again" and then claim " you hate us as well" if anyone tries to disagree.

ok, i'm debating individual decisions today then and accepting other views.... and definitely whinging whenever steve walsh refs england. But with some justification I might add.

[TJ]

MY dad tells a story of kicking a player in exactly the same circumstances when he played. the guy he kicked was fine after a few mins, Dad was out for the season with a damaged knee cos kicking a player is an awful lot more likely to injure you than kicking a ball

[Alex_Germany]

I don't think any of the ref's decision were obviously wrong (apart from Mike Brown's long kick to touch).

But as pointed out above, it would be the same if Faletau had been pinged and Easter hadn't. Neither decision wrong, England 14 more points up.

[Biltong]

I fear referees will determine the outcome of RWC 2015.

I fear you could be right - also putting TMOs into that equation.

So much is down to interpretation that even when watching replays often people can't agree on certain decisions - the obstruction/no obstruction last night being a case in point.

I'd also for my own interest like to understand the current guidelines on the use of the TMO e.g. some questioned how many phases they can go back - is there a fixed number?  and can or can't they intervene without being called on by the ref - I thought they could for foul play but nothing else?  Does anyone actually know the answers to these questions?  We all want consistency from the refs and I think we need the same around how the TMO is used.

For me I don't care how many phases they go back, especially if there was an important aspect missed, be it foul play, forward pass etc.

But the interpretaions of laws are wildly conflicting from one ruck to the next, never mind from referee to referee.

[TJ]

If Easter hadn't been pinged it would have been a clear mistake tho.

[Steve_rugby]

Well done England for a superb second half performance and to the person who reminded the ref about the law of supporting your own weight.

[Heaf]

I fear referees will determine the outcome of RWC 2015.

I fear you could be right - also putting TMOs into that equation.

So much is down to interpretation that even when watching replays often people can't agree on certain decisions - the obstruction/no obstruction last night being a case in point.

I'd also for my own interest like to understand the current guidelines on the use of the TMO e.g. some questioned how many phases they can go back - is there a fixed number?  and can or can't they intervene without being called on by the ref - I thought they could for foul play but nothing else?  Does anyone actually know the answers to these questions?  We all want consistency from the refs and I think we need the same around how the TMO is used.

For me I don't care how many phases they go back, especially if there was an important aspect missed, be it foul play, forward pass etc.

But the interpretaions of laws are wildly conflicting from one ruck to the next, never mind from referee to referee.

Agreed ...

[Sponsored content]