Ireland v Australia

[vidiot]

There is no obligation for players to release anyone after a collaspsed maul. The obligation to release is after tackles and in rucks.

In the example given, if it is the one I'm thinking of, the defending side failed to create a maul (the ball carrier was on his knees) and it was ruled a tackle. The wallabies were given the scrum feed, but it seemed like a garden variety penalty for me against the tacklers lying all over and the wrong side.

 

[qwerty51]

The irish have a strategy of trying to hold the ball carrier up to create a maul. When this fails, you often have bodies all around the ball.

My view is that refs - when the defensive maul attempt fails - should take a hardline on players around the ball. On saturday the ref awarded a scrum to us on our ball because the ball was unplayable - the reason it was unplayable was that they had 3 or 4 players trying to keep our player off the ground, and when he went to ground there was no way for the ball to come out.

Should've been a penalty to us. Jackson refereed the last 10 mins very poorly.

 

[Biffo]

The irish have a strategy of trying to hold the ball carrier up to create a maul. When this fails, you often have bodies all around the ball.

My view is that refs - when the defensive maul attempt fails - should take a hardline on players around the ball. On saturday the ref awarded a scrum to us on our ball because the ball was unplayable - the reason it was unplayable was that they had 3 or 4 players trying to keep our player off the ground, and when he went to ground there was no way for the ball to come out.

the Minister for Defence is very smart, isn't he?
the Irish culture suits him perfectly
a flow resource barrel of tricks with one jumping out every few minutes.

 

[Lorenzo]

There is no obligation for players to release anyone after a collaspsed maul. The obligation to release is after tackles and in rucks.

when the defensive maul attempt fails

 

[It is what it is]

when the defensive maul attempt fails

Are you deaf QH, he seems to be yelling at you?

 

[Brumby Runner]

They are both are parts of a whole.

We need more backs and forwards in motion, making themselves available, the forward pass from To'omua was one of the those where I thought he was the dummy line to open the hole

Didn't work did it? If he had been the dummy runner presumably he would have attracted defenders but as he ran into a hole the defense wasn't sucked in.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Agree with all of these assessments.
I thought the comments on Foley were particularly appropriate.

Nah - way off the mark saying Foley's defense is better than Quades.

 

[Quick Hands]

Are you deaf QH, he seems to be yelling at you?

I think he just likes large bold letters. Note his avatar

 

[Biffo]

Nah - way off the mark saying Foley's defense is better than Quades.

Ronnie Raygun: there you go again

 

[Brumby Runner]

Ronnie Raygun: there you go again

Biffo, I really have no idea what many of your posts are about, but please don't try to elucidate, I don't really want to know. And the others that I do understand, I just don't agree with you.

 

[cyclopath]

Nah - way off the mark saying Foley's defense is better than Quades.

Nah, not. I could not honestly say either was better, based on what I have seen of both this year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[boyo]

Lets not be precious. Mr Doug has addressed this when a breast feeding mother took him to task.
My take on it is that he was being slightly tounge in cheek due to the excitement of an upcoming game.
Also, he's old enough that he probably doesn't realise that his VCR will record the game so that he can keep a copy and play it back over and over to his grandkids when they come and visit.

I'm not being precious - are you?

Lately some of Mr Doug's posts have suffered from foot-in-mouth syndrome. For his sake I hope that this isn't the start of a habit.

 

[KevinO]

But they're all related BH. If Australia defeated France and Ireland, it could very well be Australia 3rd and Ireland ranked 5th today. Before the weekend based on the fact it's about a 1.5pt swing for a close loss.

They've briefly taken 3rd when other teams have suffered poor losses. If they maintain leading into the World Cup then that's a more fair indication of their quality.

I'm sorry, Ireland has taken 3rd by winning 12 out of 13 test matches in 2014, say what you want about last year but we did not lose a game in Dublin this year, beat France in Paris, and the Pumas twice away.

Both things the Wallabies failed to do, so we briefly taken 3rd by hard work and grinding wins where needed, not by other teams suffering poor losses.

 

[Biffo]

Biffo, I really have no idea what many of your posts are about, but please don't try to elucidate, I don't really want to know. And the others that I do understand, I just don't agree with you.

Ronald Reagan was a quite famous president of the USA.
he served two terms as president (1980-88) and usually tops public opinion polls in the USA when the question is: who was the greatest (or best) president?
prior to entering politics (first, as governor of California), he was a movie actor, most of the knowledgeable claiming he was a "B grade" actor.

when Reagan made his run for president in 1980, his opponent was the incumbent (i.e. bloke in the job) Jimmy Carter.
Carter ranks among the least popular president in USA's history.
Carter, previously a peanut farmer, had limited media skills.

when the two engaged in three televised debates in the 1980 campaign, Reagan used his acting and media skills brilliantly.
his greatest tactic was to say, very effusively and with a big smile, "there you go again" whenever Jimmy made a statement that was attackable in the GOP context.
it became the signature of Reagan's campaigning, both out of and in office.

Reagan used the expression to lambast Carter, usually without having to have an opinion.

subsequently, "there you go again" became a very popular expression around the world, but its use became twofold:

1. the lambast, which i prefer not to use and which is not allowed by GAGR rules.
2. as an affectionate expression that you have said something a few (or many times) previously and that i understand your point. so, i was merely pointing out that i have read your point a few times and that i empathise, although not perhaps agreeing - hence the smiley.

i am very surprised that you, living in one of the world's great centres of government and politics are not familiar with the term.

as for your disagreeing with me, wouldn't it be a very dull world if we all agreed on everything?

without offending you, may i take your disagreeing with me much (most?, all?) of the time as a badge of honour?
i do.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I'm sorry, Ireland has taken 3rd by winning 12 out of 13 test matches in 2014, say what you want about last year but we did not lose a game in Dublin this year, beat France in Paris, and the Pumas twice away.

Both things the Wallabies failed to do, so we briefly taken 3rd by hard work and grinding wins where needed, not by other teams suffering poor losses.

It was more of a reflection that a win seems to alter the rankings by 1.5 points and prior to the game there was less than a point between England and Australia meaning a single game would have changed the rankings.

 

[Train Without a Station]

But I stand by my point that being third by less than a ranking point when the other two right behind you have had disappointing losses that would impact this, is not necessarily a true reflection. Maintaining that position will be.

 

[KOB1987]

I'm sorry, Ireland has taken 3rd by winning 12 out of 13 test matches in 2014, say what you want about last year but we did not lose a game in Dublin this year, beat France in Paris, and the Pumas twice away.

Both things the Wallabies failed to do, so we briefly taken 3rd by hard work and grinding wins where needed, not by other teams suffering poor losses.

I personally think that given the exceptional year you Paddies have have had and our lacklustre year you fully deserve to be ranked ahead of us...

however, I do query the IRB (sorry, World Rugby) ranking methodology when it allowed Argentina to slip to 12th (behind Japan & Fiji amongst others) and Ireland to accumulate points for beating Georgia..

 

[KevinO]

I personally think that given the exceptional year you Paddies have have had and our lacklustre year you fully deserve to be ranked ahead of us.

however, I do query the IRB (sorry, World Rugby) ranking methodology when it allowed Argentina to slip to 12th (behind Japan & Fiji amongst others) and Ireland to accumulate points for beating Georgia..

For the record we didn't accumulate any points against Georgia, nor did England against Samoa.

Points stayed the same, just the loses meant that teams dropped. To play a low ranked team is a risk, you can't gain any ranking points but even a draw means losing a full point off your ranking.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-AK (Andrew Kellaway)-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/10354941_10152875295652174_8740787771124288699_n.png?oh=816f6e1a335a1f629867051db993f97d&oe=550BEC76&__gda__=1427120659_7426810f1fb228ac14a9c502ea1d7728
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-AK (Andrew Kellaway)-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10385505_10152859868122174_7898377098673431833_n.png?oh=a77321dfb7aba70d6ccc65cd1d1e367c&oe=551587D8&__gda__=1426903502_82958c283eb9d3f81e139add46b175a9

 

[KOB1987]

OK you are correct

 

[Biffo]

But I stand by my point that being third by less than a ranking point when the other two right behind you have had disappointing losses that would impact this, is not necessarily a true reflection. Maintaining that position will be.

somewhere, someone produced a clever graph of the rankings of the top 10 or 12 teams over three years.
that was interesting - that is what rankings are about.

it was interesting to look at short and long bursts of form by teams in the context of the three-year graph.

perhaps the graph is on the World Rugby website.