England 6 Nations Thread

[LondonTiger]

First topic message reminder :

Sunday 2nd February 15:00 - France (a)
BBC Sport

Referee: Nigel Owens (Wales)
Assistant 1: Andrew Brace (Ireland)
Assistant 2: Brendon Pickerill (New Zealand)
TMO: Brian MacNeice (Ireland)


Saturday 8th February 16:45 - Scotland (a)
BBC Sport

Referee: Pascal Gauzere (France)
Assistant 1: Mathieu Raynal (France)
Assistant 2: Federico Anselmi (Argentina)
TMO: James Leckie (Australia)


Sunday 23rd February 15:00 - Ireland (h)
ITV Sport

Referee: Jaco Peyper (South Africa)
Assistant 1: Romain Poite (France)
Assistant 2: Alexandre Ruiz (France)
TMO: Marius Jonker (South Africa)


Saturday 7th March 16:45 - Wales (h)
ITV Sport, S4C

Referee: Ben O’Keeffe (New Zealand)
Assistant 1: Romain Poite (France)
Assistant 2: Alexandre Ruiz (France)
TMO: Marius Jonker (South Africa)


Saturday 14th March 16:45 - Italy (a)
ITV Sport

Referee: Pascal Gauzere (France)
Assistant 1: Andrew Brace (Ireland)
Assistant 2: Alexandre Ruiz (France)
TMO: Brian MacNeice (Ireland)




Squad

Forwards
Luke Cowan-Dickie (Exeter Chiefs, 21 caps)
Tom Curry (Sale Sharks, 19 caps)
Tom Dunn (Bath Rugby, uncapped)
Ben Earl (Saracens, uncapped)
Charlie Ewels (Bath Rugby, 12 caps)
Ellis Genge (Leicester Tigers, 14 caps)
Jamie George (Saracens, 45 caps)
Ted Hill (Worcester Warriors, 1 cap)
Maro Itoje (Saracens, 34 caps)
George Kruis (Saracens, 41 caps)
Joe Launchbury (Wasps, 62 caps)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 81 caps)
Lewis Ludlam (Northampton Saints, 6 caps)
Joe Marler (Harlequins, 68 caps)
Alex Moon (Northampton Saints, uncapped)
Kyle Sinckler (Harlequins, 31 caps)
Will Stuart (Bath Rugby, uncapped)
Sam Underhill (Bath Rugby, 15 caps)
Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 58 caps)
Harry Williams (Exeter Chiefs, 18 caps)

Backs
Elliot Daly (Saracens, 39 caps)
Ollie Devoto (Exeter Chiefs, 1 cap)
Fraser Dingwall (Northampton Saints, uncapped)
Owen Farrell (Saracens, 79 caps)
George Ford (Leicester Tigers, 65 caps)
George Furbank (Northampton Saints, uncapped)
Willi Heinz (Gloucester Rugby, 9 caps)
Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 47 caps)
Jonny May (Leicester Tigers, 52 caps)
Ollie Thorley (Gloucester Rugby, uncapped)
Manu Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers, 40 caps)
Jacob Umaga (Wasps, uncapped)
Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 42 caps)
Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 95 caps)

Apprentice players
Alex Mitchell (Northampton Saints, uncapped)
Josh Hodge (Newcastle Falcons, uncapped)

[king_carlos]

What are the scores, George Dawes.

1.Marler - 8
2.George - 7
3.Sinckler - 7
4.Itoje - 7
5.Kruis - 7
6.Lawes - 7.5
7.Wilson - 7
8.Curry - 8.5

9.Youngs - 8.5
10.Ford - 7.5

11.May - N/A
12.Farrell - 6.5 - Silly pen early but strong kicking throughout
13.Tuilagi - 7.5 - Excellent until the obvious
14.Watson - 8.5
15.Daly - 7

16.Cowan-Dickie - 6
17.Genge - 5
18.Stuart - N/A
19.Ewels - 6 - Silly pen then good turnover
20.Launchbury - 6
21.Earl - N/A
22.Heinz - N/A
23.Slade - 9 - MOM for me

Very much an all round performance from the pack with a few of the backs shining more than others. Hence a lot of similar scores throughout.

I thought Watson was excellent on his return and showed just how much we miss without him. Daly, Nowell and Cokanasiga are all excellent wingers too but May and Watson are the standout options in my opinion.

Not quite the impact from the bench forwards I hoped. We just didn't keep the ball well enough in the last quarter.

[formerly known as Sam]

I thought we took our foot off the gas towards the end of the game. We thought it was over and were playing too open looking for the bonus point try. The try we conceded just after the break should have been the wake up call to stop that.

Poor discipline and getting on the wrong side of the ref really didn't help.

I thought Slade was the best fullback we've had this 6N. Some of his kicks didn't quite work but there was some good variation there. Ben Youngs had a great game and really has shown what he can and needs to offer going forward.

[yappysnap]

It's amazing the difference in Youngs after being dropped to the bench and credit to him for improving so much as soon as he's back in the starting side. It's a very good reflection on his character I believe.

The Tuilagi red was very, very, very borderline to me, but then I am biased. I wouldn't have been surprised by it just being yellow, of if it is downgraded. I'll be stunned if he gets cited. Especially after what Ireland got away with in the last game, that's probably the most annoying thing, the inconsistency of it all.

[LondonTiger]

Manu will get a ban, perhaps 4 weeks. Still shocked that Parkes as good as got away with a much worse challenge on Manu 8n the first half.


Big issue for me with England in this tournament has been the lack of precision in attack. Understandable at Murrayfield, but too many chances were wasted in the other 3 matches.

[Mr Bounce]

It's amazing the difference in Youngs after being dropped to the bench and credit to him for improving so much as soon as he's back in the starting side. It's a very good reflection on his character I believe.

The Tuilagi red was very, very, very borderline to me, but then I am biased. I wouldn't have been surprised by it just being yellow, of if it is downgraded. I'll be stunned if he gets cited. Especially after what Ireland got away with in the last game, that's probably the most annoying thing, the inconsistency of it all.

I've said it before and I will say it again, Marius Jonker only ever seems to look at England's infringements when he's the TMO. He also seems to be TMO for a lot of England's matches - I think he's been TMO for the last 3 games [edit -actually 2 and the RWC semi] in a row. Whilst I appreciate that there's not a massive amount of TMOs to go round, it seems that Jonker is England's de facto TMO, and although it may not actually be the case, as an England fan it appears that he singles us out for "preferential" treatment over our opponents. The Parkes tackle and the Curry tip should 100% have been at least looked at. It's Jonker's job - that's what he's paid the big bucks for. He just doesn't appear as impartial as he should be. At the risk of sounding like a scratched record, if I were England, I would be putting in a complaint about his apparent bias.

[Guest]

If you're not surprised about it being a yellow then you must also not be surprised with it being a red. There are no mitigating circumstances for an illegal non-tackle to the head.

[No 7&1/2]

Really?

[Guest]

No. No surprises that it is a red card. I wasn't sure about the laws as I thought it was a yellow due to the 'fall' but was informed by a friend yesterday that it is irrelevant. Having since watched highlights you can also hear the referee explain this live which means there is no excuse for anyone who managed to hear the commentary clearly yesterday.

[No 7&1/2]

Indeed so tell your friend hes got it wrong in good company.

[Mr Bounce]

No. No surprises that it is a red card. I wasn't sure about the laws as I thought it was a yellow due to the 'fall' but was informed by a friend yesterday that it is irrelevant. Having since watched highlights you can also hear the referee explain this live which means there is no excuse for anyone who managed to hear the commentary clearly yesterday.

I am not talking about the Tuilagi incident at all though. I have no real problem with whatever colour card Tuilagi was given. He hit the head area, it was reckless etc. The problem I have is with the consistency. Jonker seems to do nothing when the other side contravenes the law against England. You can't deny that the Parkes tackle should have at least been looked at. The Curry tip as well.

[Soul Requiem]

[No 7&1/2]

Side note: dallaglio and Williams are now my least favourite co commentator s. I know they are aiming their analysis at the bare basic viewer but neither seem to know what they're on about.

[Guest]

Indeed so tell your friend hes got it wrong in good company.

And in English?

[Duty281]

Indeed so tell your friend hes got it wrong in good company.

And in English?

You can tell him in Welsh if you prefer.

[Guest]

No. No surprises that it is a red card. I wasn't sure about the laws as I thought it was a yellow due to the 'fall' but was informed by a friend yesterday that it is irrelevant. Having since watched highlights you can also hear the referee explain this live which means there is no excuse for anyone who managed to hear the commentary clearly yesterday.

I am not talking about the Tuilagi incident at all though. I have no real problem with whatever colour card Tuilagi was given. He hit the head area, it was reckless etc. The problem I have is with the consistency. Jonker seems to do nothing when the other side contravenes the law against England. You can't deny that the Parkes tackle should have at least been looked at. The Curry tip as well.

The Parkes tackle was looked at. It's also no more than a penalty. I agree it looked like the Curry flip merited another look but again these are exactly the things TMOs do watch. There is no way he didn't rewatch that. Has anyone seen it? It seemed to me like the two Welsh players took him out, got it wrong, but amended it mid air so he landed 'safely' and that's why the ref said play on. Has anyone got proof that that's not the case? If not then what are you arguing about? Tuilagi was a red card, Parkes was a penalty, and Curry is play on until proof is given. Let's take it on good faith that all 3 were checked. What are you arguing?

[Guest]

Indeed so tell your friend hes got it wrong in good company.

And in English?

You can tell him in Welsh if you prefer.

I'm not sure what non-sequitur is in Welsh but it applies to you! Some proofreading wouldn't go amiss...

[Soul Requiem]

The two were clearly not looked at hence the outcome or the TMO is merely incompetent.

[Guest]

This is getting in to conspiracy theory territory. 'Clearly not looked at'. Alright chaps, good night. Congrats to England on the win yesterday - looks like you've got Scotland to thank for the title as well!

[No 7&1/2]

Your friend was wrong. Give the rules on the implementation a read.

[LondonTiger]

No. No surprises that it is a red card. I wasn't sure about the laws as I thought it was a yellow due to the 'fall' but was informed by a friend yesterday that it is irrelevant. Having since watched highlights you can also hear the referee explain this live which means there is no excuse for anyone who managed to hear the commentary clearly yesterday.

I am not talking about the Tuilagi incident at all though. I have no real problem with whatever colour card Tuilagi was given. He hit the head area, it was reckless etc. The problem I have is with the consistency. Jonker seems to do nothing when the other side contravenes the law against England. You can't deny that the Parkes tackle should have at least been looked at. The Curry tip as well.

The Parkes tackle was looked at. It's also no more than a penalty. I agree it looked like the Curry flip merited another look but again these are exactly the things TMOs do watch. There is no way he didn't rewatch that. Has anyone seen it? It seemed to me like the two Welsh players took him out, got it wrong, but amended it mid air so he landed 'safely' and that's why the ref said play on. Has anyone got proof that that's not the case? If not then what are you arguing about? Tuilagi was a red card, Parkes was a penalty, and Curry is play on until proof is given. Let's take it on good faith that all 3 were checked. What are you arguing?

Parkes smashed into Manu's head in a reckless manner with great force, causing him to need stitches at half time. That the contact was head on head is irrelevant as far as the laws are concerned. That the TMO and ref only penalised the shoulder to the neck instead is a complete dereliction of duty.

I have now issue with the red card (by the letter of the law it is correct, even if it was minimal contact) but the inconsistency in the application of the laws left me rather angry. Excusing Parkes tackle is imo rather pathetic.

[Sgt_Pooly]

Never a red card, very harsh on Manu imo. I do like the way he took it though, he was straight to North to apologise.

[Hoonercat]

All those white shirts huddled together could have been mistaken for a flock of sheep, maybe Marler was just making sure AWJ didn't have a reaction?

Damn this predictive text

[Gooseberry]

Pity Dan Biggar wasnt busy moaning at the ref about something else when the Tuiallagi put that tackle in. Got to feel for him that he might end up being suspended for the Italy and japan games

[SecretFly]

All those white shirts huddled together could have been mistaken for a flock of sheep, maybe Marler was just making sure AWJ didn't have a reaction?

Damn this predictive text

Damn editorialised comment.

Next time don't read through before posting.

[Guest]

Your friend was wrong. Give the rules on the implementation a read.

How have you worked that one out, sorry? He's a level 2 ref so think the onus is on you with this one!

[TightHEAD]

Never a red card

The height of contact with Manu's upper arm was barely knee height. North was falling. Crazy call.
If it had been Youngs making that tackle it would have been a yellow at most.

[Soul Requiem]

Beyond all the ref stuff have to say I was quite impressed with Slade at full back; he didn't have too many contestable high balls to deal with but looked far more assured than Daly ever has and the initial tackle on North was one I wouldn't expect Daly to make either.

[MichaelT]

Side note: dallaglio and Williams are now my least favourite co commentator s. I know they are aiming their analysis at the bare basic viewer but neither seem to know what they're on about.

I live in Ireland, so have both BBC/ ITV and Virgin Media. Alan Quinlan on Virgin Media is far too biased against England that I find it impossible to listen to him during a match. Scotland 2018 game he actually said he knows he shouldn't be enjoying it as much but he loves it (when England get beat).

On the other hand, I then turn off ITV/ BBC for the post-match stuff and watch O'Gara, Horgan and Matt Williams on the other channel as they are not interested in look-at-me analysis, just fair explanations of good and bad play. To me anyway.

And now Shane Horgan has had his hair cut he doesn't look like a reject from the T-Birds.

[R!skysports]

Well done England, fully deserved that win. Score flattered Wales, although, I think the ill disciple of England is still a worry. I do think Wales got away with a few high tackles that should have been pulled up - but as a neutral - I will remind people that you tend to only see the offences against your own team (I do all the time with Scotland :-) )

On the red card. I am sorry, but that is one of the clearest reds you can see. The reason is he puts his right arm to his body to shoulder charge North into touch. That is illegal and will likely get you a penalty every time (and a yellow on occasion). He WAS unlucky that he hit the head, as that makes it a red every time. But because it was a illegal shoulder charge, there is no other outcome. If he had his arms out to wrap, then I expect it would have been a penalty (Maybe a yellow).

I coach kids rugby and one of the first things we teach is tackle technique. Ring of steel etc. - which is arms out and around the player. If any one of our players should charges a player, they are off. It is the same for every player and every age group. Poor tackle technique will not only get you penalized but also injured


a good summary here

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2020/03/07/referees-view-manu-tuilagi-can-have-no-complaints-red-joe-marler/

[LondonTiger]

I have no quibbles about the validity of the red card - just feel the laws are wrong and contact with the head should not be relevant when that low (I have never been part of the "head is red" crowd who have stated any contact with the head should be red no matter how far the head is from the ground). However the laws as they are gave the ref little option. I do feel that WR have the best motives in trying to protect players (which is why I believe Parkes should have also seen red) and as someone who had several vertebra broken by a high challenge am never a "game has gone soft" apologist - but I do feel that in a high collision impact sport that there will be injuries from non-illegal acts (accepting the view that Manu's challeng may have been illegal irrespective of the small contact with the head.)

Worse thing for me, parochially, is that Manu will now miss our Challenge Cup 1/4 Final

[No 7&1/2]

I've already posted the rules on it on this thread guestalt. As I've said have a read of it and then come back. Pointless going on hearsay.

[No 7&1/2]

It's a shame re the commentators as there are some excellent ones around but the big names seem guaranteed to get the beeb and itv spots over guys much better but not the household names.

[TightHEAD]

Marler Cited, no surprise!

Also Courtney Lawes!!!! no mention Parks or Owens! unbelievable, the 17th man (citing officer) having their say now!

[Guest]

It's a conspiracy!

[mikey_dragon]

I usually welcome coaches commenting on ref's only because the standard has been below par for a while. Jones' jibe however "it was 13 against 16" is bringing the game into disrepute, surely. That needs to be punished.

[king_carlos]

I have no quibbles about the validity of the red card - just feel the laws are wrong and contact with the head should not be relevant when that low (I have never been part of the "head is red" crowd who have stated any contact with the head should be red no matter how far the head is from the ground). However the laws as they are gave the ref little option. I do feel that WR have the best motives in trying to protect players (which is why I believe Parkes should have also seen red) and as someone who had several vertebra broken by a high challenge am never a "game has gone soft" apologist - but I do feel that in a high collision impact sport that there will be injuries from non-illegal acts (accepting the view that Manu's challeng may have been illegal irrespective of the small contact with the head.)

Worse thing for me, parochially, is that Manu will now miss our Challenge Cup 1/4 Final

The tackle area around the tryline has been a disaster for a long time now. With the tackle rules being tightened up the way players tackle around the line frequently gets overlooked until it's slowed down and replayed.

Around the fringes less dangerous examples happen constantly. A forward picks and go's with a latch bound on him, driving with their head only 2 feet from the ground so that the can get straight to the deck and recycle if stopped. Defending forwards start with their hand on the deck and basically dive shoulder first, arm tucked as low as they can. If we slowed down tackles around the fringes when teams go through 10+ pick and go's in sequence then there will be constant contact made with the head.

Consistency as always is the issue. Parkes got nothing but Manu saw red. In large part due only to where the tackles happened on the field.

[Geordie]

I usually welcome coaches commenting on ref's only because the standard has been below par for a while. Jones' jibe however "it was 13 against 16" is bringing the game into disrepute, surely. That needs to be punished.

Hang the dastardly cad !!!!!

[mikey_dragon]

Well usually it's just a fine.

[Gooseberry]

Well usually it's just a fine.

Well if it's fine what's the problem?

[TightHEAD]

I want to hear what Eddie thinks of the citing officer not citing Parkes.

[dummy_half]

The tackle area around the tryline has been a disaster for a long time now. With the tackle rules being tightened up the way players tackle around the line frequently gets overlooked until it's slowed down and replayed.
...

This is the issue of consistency - I reckon there is a tackle similar to Manu's happens every couple of games, with a covering player throwing themselves desperately across or into a winger with no serious attempt to wrap the arms and at least a recklessness as to where contact is made. This tends to be ignored, especially if it's an unsuccessful tackle attempt and the try is scored. If this sets the precedent for how future instances are dealt with then no problem

I think Manu was a bit unlucky in that had Slade's tackle not brought North down, he'd have made a reasonably sensible cover tackle around the chest, but because North was well on the way down and his forward motion slowed down, the contact was (at least mainly) with his head, and Manu dropped his right arm as he went into the contact probably in an attempt not to be wrapping round North's head/neck, putting him in the position where it was always going to be a no arms tackle. I certainly don't think there was an intention to hit North in the head, just that the sequence of events put the pair of them in an unfortunate position. I can accept the reckless part, and certainly think a red card can be justified (i.e. I don't necessarily think it was the right decision in the particular context, but it wasn't blatantly unreasonable given the current laws and their interpretation)

[No 7&1/2]

Without slades intervention you'd be looking at a penalty try and yellow card.

[dummy_half]

Without slades intervention you'd be looking at a penalty try and yellow card.

Without Slade's intervention, Manu goes into the tackle differently (wouldn't have dropped his right arm / shoulder, which he only does just before contact), so you can't tell the outcome clearly. May well have been a legal (attempt at a) tackle. Of course the ref and TMO can only really judge on what did happen, not on what might have happened in different circumstances.

[TightHEAD]

At least there is plenty of time to make the England 2020 6 nations champions Ads & t-shirts this year and not rush it out too early.

[Guest]

I've already posted the rules on it on this thread guestalt. As I've said have a read of it and then come back. Pointless going on hearsay.

I'm not sure what you're saying is wrong though? Are you a ref yourself?

[Guest]

Without slades intervention you'd be looking at a penalty try and yellow card.

Red card. A shoulder charge to the head is a red card. Is that what you think is wrong?

[mikey_dragon]

Well usually it's just a fine.

Well if it's fine what's the problem?

Sh|t joke pal.

[Guest]

I want to hear what Eddie thinks of the citing officer not citing Parkes.

He’ll probably say it was fine, just to p*ss you off!

[No 7&1/2]

Your first response guestalt I dont understand. Have you read the rules on the implementation of sanctions?

A response to your second point and I suppose for dummy half also is that without slades intervention a lot changes. Dummy half you could be right in that he could go in differently and wrap arms etc but my supposition would be that he still doesnt wrap but north isnt falling. No arms tackle but not high.

[Yoda]

I usually welcome coaches commenting on ref's only because the standard has been below par for a while. Jones' jibe however "it was 13 against 16" is bringing the game into disrepute, surely. That needs to be punished.

Perhaps he could join privac on the naughty step along with the Welsh Prop who basically called the French cheats. Didn't privac say the ref was wrong etc. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Personally I think you are right but if Jones gets done so should privac and the Prop.

[Sponsored content]