Wales forwards coach Robin McBryde fears loose-head prop Gethin Jenkins' scrummaging is being singled out for punishment by referees.

First topic message reminder :

Hmmmmmm, so two refs are wrong and RM knows better. May I suggest Mr McBryde you get on with your job of coaching Gathin to overcome this problem

BlueNote,

Rather than Jenkins choosing to bore in, I suspect he was folding in under pressure. The question the Welsh coaching panel will want answered is whether the pressure on him was legal or illegal.

LondonTiger, that's sort of what I was trying to say, whether there was something that was causing him to be at that body angle. It may be Wilson was just too strong for him.

McBryde is entitled to ask. It's possible that he may even have a point; his argument is that Wilson wasn't lining up straight, thereby forcing Jenkins to come in at an angle. I am not sure about that, but he's allowed to ask them to look into it.

However, if we concede that McBryde is entitled to ask, Rowntree was also entitled to ask. Perhaps some of the posters who objected to that last year will be so good as to withdraw their objections? Until then, perhaps you will forgive us a little schadenfreude now the boot is on the other foot?

There are some important differences between this year and last, though. For one, "is this prop pushing straight enough?" is something that a referee has to judge in the course of the scrum and there's no absolute standard. Binding on the end of the sleeve is much more clear cut: it is an undeniable offence, it was the first offence and should have been the first thing penalised.

Secondly, Poite was quite prepared to penalise England if he saw something wrong: he let Jenkins' and James's body angles go when Wilson wheeled and Vunipola had an even worse angle.

Thirdly, Poite was clear from the outset what he was looking for, warned Warburton before he had penalised Jenkins at all, continued to warn him and gave a final warning before the YC. He couldn't have done much more to give them a chance to correct it. I also didn't pick up Warburton trying to alert Poite to Wilson's alleged angling in, but he had several chances (whereas Robshaw audibly tried to raise the binding issue with Walsh and was repeatedly waved away).

One of Gethin's penalties was for not binding (early 2nd half). And guess what - Poite was spot on, Jenkins never made any effort to bind and then collapsed the scrum before the feed.

Other scrums I'm not sure whether he was really the cause of the problem or if Wilson was splitting him from Hibbard, making Hibbard pop up and meaning Gethin had to come inwards because he had no support on his inside shoulder.

Agree though with the general consensus - he's been a great player over the years and still shows glimpses of what he can do in open play (there was one great tackle on Sunday stopping an England breakout from their 22, and another quality bit of breakdown work winning a penalty), but even at his best he was only an adequately good scrummager.

Poite talked to the players. Walsh didnt (or if he did it wasnt to England).

The communication between Walsh and England was very poor, for whatever reason (maybe Warburton told him that England were laughing at his hair or something). It was a big deal on the day and he shouldnt have ended up in that position.

As for the scrums in both cases the relevant coaches have every right to raise questions, but they are questions not FACT.

As for McBryde claiming Wales had an edge in the scrum, well they did win a couple and put England under pressure, but it went both ways. I can't remember which scrum (2nd, 3rd?) but seeing the whole welsh front row pop straight up did bring a little smile to my face.

It does sound a bit like sour grapes coming out of the Welsh camp.

Jimpy wrote:

offload wrote:Get real will you, the truth was plain to see, it's not my fault you don't agree with it.    

Jimpy, unlike Quins, I have little respect for your posts and I can't be bothered to enlighten you further.  I'm pleased to learn that so much in your world is plain to see and not your fault.     

What you actually mean is 'I was wrong but wont dare admit it'. Whether you respect me or not (I couldn't care less about you personally, so its mutual), it doesn't alter the fact that my opinion is more than valid and in line with what many others have written, so i'm not sure what your problem is.

Sorry Jimpy, one opinion is never more valid than another, we are all entitled to hold our own opinions equally. Your opinion may be part of a greater consensus of opinion, but not a more valid one.


Bluenote,

"I find the idea it was the refereeing that lost England last year's game a bit pathetic (as pathetic as any suggestion it was the ref who lost Wales the game this year). It was obvious before the game we'd munch your props. At that point in time and under the old rules, Marler's scrummaging compared to Adam Jones was just too weak, and as for Vunipola..."
.

Err...... Bluenote, Adam Jones (stupidly in my opinion) admitted cheating in the Wales / England game last year, he was not binding correctly and admitted it was illegal. I would not say that the refereeing cost England the game, but the inability of the officials (all of them) to spot it, did have a major effect on the game.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

offload wrote:Get real will you, the truth was plain to see, it's not my fault you don't agree with it.    

Jimpy, unlike Quins, I have little respect for your posts and I can't be bothered to enlighten you further.  I'm pleased to learn that so much in your world is plain to see and not your fault.     

What you actually mean is 'I was wrong but wont dare admit it'. Whether you respect me or not (I couldn't care less about you personally, so its mutual), it doesn't alter the fact that my opinion is more than valid and in line with what many others have written, so i'm not sure what your problem is.

Sorry Jimpy, one opinion is never more valid than another, we are all entitled to hold our own opinions equally. Your opinion may be part of a greater consensus of opinion, but not a more valid one.


Bluenote,

"I find the idea it was the refereeing that lost England last year's game a bit pathetic (as pathetic as any suggestion it was the ref who lost Wales the game this year). It was obvious before the game we'd munch your props. At that point in time and under the old rules, Marler's scrummaging compared to Adam Jones was just too weak, and as for Vunipola..."
.

Err...... Bluenote, Adam Jones (stupidly in my opinion) admitted cheating in the Wales / England game last year, he was not binding correctly and admitted it was illegal. I would not say that the refereeing cost England the game, but the inability of the officials (all of them) to spot it, did have a major effect on the game.

An opinion can be more valid if it is demonstrable that that opinion is actually an opinion based on fact (which then makes it a statement of fact now I think about it), and is certainly more valid than the offered counter opinion, which seemed to be revolve around the premise that it's holder is just plain wrong, wouldn't admit it and chose an attempt to avoid discussion by claiming some kind of intellectual superiority instead. I doubt anyone was fooled, I certainly wasn't.

Jimpy wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

offload wrote:Get real will you, the truth was plain to see, it's not my fault you don't agree with it.    

Jimpy, unlike Quins, I have little respect for your posts and I can't be bothered to enlighten you further.  I'm pleased to learn that so much in your world is plain to see and not your fault.     

What you actually mean is 'I was wrong but wont dare admit it'. Whether you respect me or not (I couldn't care less about you personally, so its mutual), it doesn't alter the fact that my opinion is more than valid and in line with what many others have written, so i'm not sure what your problem is.

Sorry Jimpy, one opinion is never more valid than another, we are all entitled to hold our own opinions equally. Your opinion may be part of a greater consensus of opinion, but not a more valid one.


Bluenote,

"I find the idea it was the refereeing that lost England last year's game a bit pathetic (as pathetic as any suggestion it was the ref who lost Wales the game this year). It was obvious before the game we'd munch your props. At that point in time and under the old rules, Marler's scrummaging compared to Adam Jones was just too weak, and as for Vunipola..."
.

Err...... Bluenote, Adam Jones (stupidly in my opinion) admitted cheating in the Wales / England game last year, he was not binding correctly and admitted it was illegal. I would not say that the refereeing cost England the game, but the inability of the officials (all of them) to spot it, did have a major effect on the game.

An opinion can be more valid if it is demonstrable that that opinion is actually an opinion based on fact (which then makes it a statement of fact now I think about it), and is certainly more valid than the offered counter opinion, which seemed to be revolve around the premise that it's holder is just plain wrong, wouldn't admit it and chose an attempt to avoid discussion by claiming some kind of intellectual superiority instead. I doubt anyone was fooled, I certainly wasn't.

Definition of Opinion:

1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

An opinion is a belief held by someone it does not have to be valid. Hitler had a lot of opinions, very few could be validated, but they were still HIS opinions.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

offload wrote:Get real will you, the truth was plain to see, it's not my fault you don't agree with it.    

Jimpy, unlike Quins, I have little respect for your posts and I can't be bothered to enlighten you further.  I'm pleased to learn that so much in your world is plain to see and not your fault.     

What you actually mean is 'I was wrong but wont dare admit it'. Whether you respect me or not (I couldn't care less about you personally, so its mutual), it doesn't alter the fact that my opinion is more than valid and in line with what many others have written, so i'm not sure what your problem is.

Sorry Jimpy, one opinion is never more valid than another, we are all entitled to hold our own opinions equally. Your opinion may be part of a greater consensus of opinion, but not a more valid one.


Bluenote,

"I find the idea it was the refereeing that lost England last year's game a bit pathetic (as pathetic as any suggestion it was the ref who lost Wales the game this year). It was obvious before the game we'd munch your props. At that point in time and under the old rules, Marler's scrummaging compared to Adam Jones was just too weak, and as for Vunipola..."
.

Err...... Bluenote, Adam Jones (stupidly in my opinion) admitted cheating in the Wales / England game last year, he was not binding correctly and admitted it was illegal. I would not say that the refereeing cost England the game, but the inability of the officials (all of them) to spot it, did have a major effect on the game.

An opinion can be more valid if it is demonstrable that that opinion is actually an opinion based on fact (which then makes it a statement of fact now I think about it), and is certainly more valid than the offered counter opinion, which seemed to be revolve around the premise that it's holder is just plain wrong, wouldn't admit it and chose an attempt to avoid discussion by claiming some kind of intellectual superiority instead. I doubt anyone was fooled, I certainly wasn't.

Definition of Opinion:

1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

An opinion is a belief held by someone it does not have to be valid. Hitler had a lot of opinions, very few could be validated, but they were still HIS opinions.

Great, can you now look up semantics and annoying pedant for me?

Is this a discussion about rugby, scrummaging and whether coaches have the right to seek clarity on refereeing decisions, or is it now simply a pi$$ing competition?

#JustAsking

Ozzy3213 wrote:Is this a discussion about rugby, scrummaging and whether coaches have the right to seek clarity on refereeing decisions, or is it now simply a pi$$ing competition?

#JustAsking

I don't know, you'd better ask Well Past It if he's happy with your analogy?   

Ospreys won a Pro12 final by a point off the back of Adam Jones constantly getting away with cheating at the scrum under the old rules which left Leinster down a man for 20 minutes. Hard to have sympathy with the Welsh props now that the hit has been taken away and they can't get up to their old tricks.

Was interesting to read Adam Jones' column on the BBC earlier, where he says a loosehead can't physically bore in, unless a tighthead I doing similar. I would love for that to get confirmed by more tightheads and see whether more are of the opinion. Easy job for Ryan Grant on Saturday now all he has to do is bore in and it's obviously Adam's fault Best bring your kicking boots Mr Welr.

i also enjoyed Adam Jones' piece. I did think it was a bit revealing buried midway through the article when he said

"We've always joked that he's the one that does all the work around the field and I'll do all the work in the scrum, that's what we've always played on."

seems like that echoes a lot of what has been said by welsh posters on here about Gethin.

 

 

Risca Rev wrote:Was interesting to read Adam Jones' column on the BBC earlier, where he says a loosehead can't physically bore in, unless a tighthead I doing similar. I would love for that to get confirmed by more tightheads and see whether more are of the opinion. Easy job for Ryan Grant on Saturday now all he has to do is bore in and it's obviously Adam's fault ;)Best bring your kicking boots Mr Welr.

Well we can put to rest the idea that MV bores in then...

Gethin is a poor srummager imo and is getting worse. He was crumbling under the pressure from Wilson most of the game.

It's simple for Wales really, do they take a hit in the scrum, try to get parity and get the extra work from Gethin?

Or do they start with James who's a rock in the scrum but doesn't add as much work around the park.

I'd go James every time personally.

lostinwales wrote:

Risca Rev wrote:Was interesting to read Adam Jones' column on the BBC earlier, where he says a loosehead can't physically bore in, unless a tighthead I doing similar. I would love for that to get confirmed by more tightheads and see whether more are of the opinion. Easy job for Ryan Grant on Saturday now all he has to do is bore in and it's obviously Adam's fault ;)Best bring your kicking boots Mr Welr.

Well we can put to rest the idea that MV bores in then...

Yeah, it's a funny one, that. If that's the case, how come Mako bores in but Marler, facing the same TH, goes straight. Are the THs afraid to cheat when Marler's around?

To be honest, though Adam lost just a tiny bit of credibility when he described Gethin as the best NH loosehead of the last 20 or 30 years. Maybe over the last 10, but longer than that and I think the Funbus may have something to say about it.

And that Phil Vickery fella that is still kicking around. Poor Beast got loads of blame after the Lions game for boring in (and the ref got flack for not seeing it). But it WAS Phil all along.

HammerofThunor wrote:And that Phil Vickery fella that is still kicking around. Poor Beast got loads of blame after the Lions game for boring in (and the ref got flack for not seeing it). But it WAS Phil all along.

Of course! It's all clear now. So does that mean the referee got it wrong in the 3rd test, then? Are refereeing standards declining game-by-game?

Even worse, does that mean that Brian Moore is wrong? As an atheist, Englishman and rugby fan, I feel like my whole belief system may be under attack.

[/remove tongue from cheek]

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Gethin is a poor srummager imo and is getting worse. He was crumbling under the pressure from Wilson most of the game.

It's simple for Wales really, do they take a hit in the scrum, try to get parity and get the extra work from Gethin?

Or do they start with James who's a rock in the scrum but doesn't add as much work around the park.

I'd go James every time personally.

You clearly don't get why he is picked….it isn't primarily his scrummaging. I think Gtaland knows best.

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Gethin is a poor srummager imo and is getting worse. He was crumbling under the pressure from Wilson most of the game.

It's simple for Wales really, do they take a hit in the scrum, try to get parity and get the extra work from Gethin?

Or do they start with James who's a rock in the scrum but doesn't add as much work around the park.

I'd go James every time personally.

You clearly don't get why he is picked….it isn't primarily his scrummaging. I think Gtaland knows best.

Scratch,

You're right and for years it hasn't mattered because of his all-round game but I just don't think even that is there now or not to the level it was, yes he had great game against France but been poor in others so a return of 1 game every so often isn't good enough.

For me I think him and James would work much better the other way round now, James doing what a prop should do firstly (scrummage) for 50 odd minutes then bring a fresh Jenkins on for me that would work better.

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Gethin is a poor srummager imo and is getting worse. He was crumbling under the pressure from Wilson most of the game.

It's simple for Wales really, do they take a hit in the scrum, try to get parity and get the extra work from Gethin?

Or do they start with James who's a rock in the scrum but doesn't add as much work around the park.

I'd go James every time personally.

You clearly don't get why he is picked….it isn't primarily his scrummaging. I think Gtaland knows best.

Scratch,

You're right and for years it hasn't mattered because of his all-round game but I just don't think even that is there now or not to the level it was, yes he had great game against France but been poor in others so a return of 1 game every so often isn't good enough.

For me I think him and James would work much better the other way round now, James doing what a prop should do firstly (scrummage) for 50 odd minutes then bring a fresh Jenkins on for me that would work better.

I read Gats words about Geth this morning, i have never read a more sentimental tribute by Gats and was surprised

I think Geth has alway been his absolute favorite, he was there when Gatland arrived and was to all intents and purposes another keith Wood, a superb all round rugby player who could have covered at centre if necessary…..now it is true his star has waned bu thats believes he brings more than his scrummaging or those other fading skills, he is a bedrock of the pack, perhaps a talisman.

I predict this may be his swan song, i don't think he will make RWC so he will not go to SA and then may only be called on to cover the bench when required

But 105 caps, what an achievement

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Gethin is a poor srummager imo and is getting worse. He was crumbling under the pressure from Wilson most of the game.

It's simple for Wales really, do they take a hit in the scrum, try to get parity and get the extra work from Gethin?

Or do they start with James who's a rock in the scrum but doesn't add as much work around the park.

I'd go James every time personally.

You clearly don't get why he is picked….it isn't primarily his scrummaging. I think Gtaland knows best.

You haven't read what I stated.

I said do Wales take a hit in the scrum (as Jenkins isn't a strong scrummager) and hope his extra work around the field makes up for possible issue in the set piece if he doesn't get parity.

Does Gatland know best? Wales scrum struggled massively against England, it wouldn't if James had of played imo.

We now have a underperfoming/struggling player at L/Head and a novice converted L/Head playing at T/Head.

If this goes wrong then coaches have to take the blame for selecting them.

This is such an apologist attitude on the part of McBryde (and other coaches who endorse his view) it's unreal. I'm not implying that he might be entirely wrong but this one-sided focus on referee interpretation without any reference to Jenkins' scrummaging in itself or any perceived need to play to the interpretation rather than just stubbornly contesting it at every opportunity can't possibly be productive. It goes the opposite way from encouraging players to take responsibility for below-par performances and to adjust their approach when it's coming up short of requirements.

To make an allusion to the selection against Scotland, Jenkins has picked up 2 yellows in his last 2 games and he gets to keep his place. For all intents and purposes, Hibbard and Jones have been scrummaging much better (they certainly haven't been pinged as many times)and both have been omitted. Even Paul James, when he came on, instantly showed that he knows what "drive straight" actually means, something which cannot be said for Jenkins based on recent performance. It's completely baffling

Knowsit17 wrote:This is such an apologist attitude on the part of McBryde (and other coaches who endorse his view) it's unreal. I'm not implying that he might be entirely wrong but this one-sided focus on referee interpretation without any reference to Jenkins' scrummaging in itself or any perceived need to play to the interpretation rather than just stubbornly contesting it at every opportunity can't possibly be productive. It goes the opposite way from encouraging players to take responsibility for below-par performances and to adjust their approach when it's coming up short of requirements.

To make an allusion to the selection against Scotland, Jenkins has picked up 2 yellows in his last 2 games and he gets to keep his place. For all intents and purposes, Hibbard and Jones have been scrummaging much better (they certainly haven't been pinged as many times)and both have been omitted. Even Paul James, when he came on, instantly showed that he knows what "drive straight" actually means, something which cannot be said for Jenkins based on recent performance. It's completely baffling

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/rugby-union/26565070

gatland reveres geth.

That article needs to be tweaked, the author forgot to insert the word 'blind' before the word 'faith'

Yeah look it's his swan song right, Geth is probably done after this game. We have an impact bench if needs be, can't see us losing to Scotland at home if we cut out the errors in possession that cost us the game v England, but post ireland that team chat clearly didn't have a long term impression.

Scratch wrote:Yeah look it's his swan song right, Geth is probably done after this game. We have an impact bench if needs be, can't see us losing to Scotland at home if we cut out the errors in possession that cost us the game v England, but post ireland that team chat clearly didn't have a long term impression.

do you not think they'll eek another year out of him?

Nobody has said anything about this being Geth's last game for Wales as far as I'm aware.

Oh it's his swan-song!? Bravo, bravo, let's centre this game around him individually. Screw merit and the result, Saturday's all about Jenks. Spread the word before then so everyone knows

nathan wrote:

Scratch wrote:Yeah look it's his swan song right, Geth is probably done after this game. We have an impact bench if needs be, can't see us losing to Scotland at home if we cut out the errors in possession that cost us the game v England, but post ireland that team chat clearly didn't have a long term impression.

do you not think they'll eek another year out of him?

they'd like to but he won't go to SA in my opinion, just no point. Fact is his loss of pace around the park is telling and he no longer acts like a back row despite occasional brilliance at the breakdown.

He will be kept warm as back up but with 11 games out now is the time to forge our RWC front row

Who the f%^& that should be i don't know.

I think Jenkins has struggled for a while. His scrummaging has never been great but it seems to have took a backwards step over the last year or so.

Getting hammered off a half fit Wilson is not what you need at the top level.

bedfordwelsh wrote:We now have a underperfoming/struggling player at L/Head and a novice converted L/Head playing at T/Head.

If this goes wrong then coaches have to take the blame for selecting them.

Gethin is playing purely because Saturday is his record cap and Roger the Dodger is banking on a few extra bums on seats to boost his bonus. Why a novice converted loosehead, who is clearly struggling with the transition is playing tighthead, I have absolutely no idea!

Scratch wrote:

nathan wrote:

Scratch wrote:Yeah look it's his swan song right, Geth is probably done after this game. We have an impact bench if needs be, can't see us losing to Scotland at home if we cut out the errors in possession that cost us the game v England, but post ireland that team chat clearly didn't have a long term impression.

do you not think they'll eek another year out of him?

they'd like to but he won't go to SA in my opinion, just no point. Fact is his loss of pace around the park is telling and he no longer acts like a back row despite occasional brilliance at the breakdown.

He will be kept warm as back up but with 11 games out now is the time to forge our RWC front row

Who the f%^& that should be i don't know.

1. Paul James, Rob Evans, Rhodri Jones (actually a very good scrumager at loose head)
2. Hibbard, Owen, Emyr Phillips
3. Adam Jones, Samson Lee, Jarvis (Osprey)

Even without Gethin 3 strong choices in each position with youngsters Lee and Evans only going to get better.

In that case i think Gethin may now even retire, i can't see him as the future. He was marginal in 2011 and his game is dropping off exponentially despite the fact i think he is still a legend and worth his weight in gold.

Seagultaf wrote:

Scratch wrote:

nathan wrote:

Scratch wrote:Yeah look it's his swan song right, Geth is probably done after this game. We have an impact bench if needs be, can't see us losing to Scotland at home if we cut out the errors in possession that cost us the game v England, but post ireland that team chat clearly didn't have a long term impression.

do you not think they'll eek another year out of him?

they'd like to but he won't go to SA in my opinion, just no point. Fact is his loss of pace around the park is telling and he no longer acts like a back row despite occasional brilliance at the breakdown.

He will be kept warm as back up but with 11 games out now is the time to forge our RWC front row

Who the f%^& that should be i don't know.

1. Paul James, Rob Evans, Rhodri Jones (actually a very good scrumager at loose head)
2. Hibbard, Owen, Emyr Phillips
3. Adam Jones, Samson Lee, Jarvis (Osprey)

Even without Gethin 3 strong choices in each position with youngsters Lee and Evans only going to get better.

I would have Rhys Gill as second choice behind James and there's still Mitchell at T/Head.

Gill is 3rd choice at Saracens. Is he moving back to Wales?

HammerofThunor wrote:Gill is 3rd choice at Saracens. Is he moving back to Wales?

He isn't long back from injury isn't he? There was rumours linking him but nothing came of any of them.

I played loosehead or hooker for several years and on occasion when the pressure from both in front and behind became too much the only way out was to bore-in. The crushing pressure on your spine was immediately relieved.  Jenkins is a poor scrummager at the highest level. His days are numbered.

Bedford, ah that might be it. He was on the bench to other day while Mako was with England and I hadn't seen him in a while. Injury would make sense.

HammerofThunor wrote:Bedford, ah that might be it. He was on the bench to other day while Mako was with England and I hadn't seen him in a while. Injury would make sense.

Not sure how far along the recovery process he is and when any player returns from injury there is no guarantee he will return to previous form but when he has been involved in the Welsh set up he has always impressed me.

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Seagultaf wrote:

Scratch wrote:

nathan wrote:

Scratch wrote:Yeah look it's his swan song right, Geth is probably done after this game. We have an impact bench if needs be, can't see us losing to Scotland at home if we cut out the errors in possession that cost us the game v England, but post ireland that team chat clearly didn't have a long term impression.

do you not think they'll eek another year out of him?

they'd like to but he won't go to SA in my opinion, just no point. Fact is his loss of pace around the park is telling and he no longer acts like a back row despite occasional brilliance at the breakdown.

He will be kept warm as back up but with 11 games out now is the time to forge our RWC front row

Who the f%^& that should be i don't know.

1. Paul James, Rob Evans, Rhodri Jones (actually a very good scrumager at loose head)
2. Hibbard, Owen, Emyr Phillips
3. Adam Jones, Samson Lee, Jarvis (Osprey)

Even without Gethin 3 strong choices in each position with youngsters Lee and Evans only going to get better.

I would have Rhys Gill as second choice behind James and there's still Mitchell at T/Head.

I forgot about those two but to be fair I haven't heard much of either for some time.

I understand both have been injured, I had high hopes for Mitchell but he seems to have disappeared from sight at Exeter, has he played much for them? If Gill is behind Mako then it does not say a lot about his scrumaging!