RWC: AUS v ENG (Twickenham): POOL A; 6am (AEDT) Sunday 4 October

[mxyzptlk]

Did anyone notice Fardy's clean-out around the 14min mark on the side of the field, now that was a good clean out!

Here you go.

 

[BDA]

I'm really shocked at the way Sam Burgess so become a bit of a scapegoat for the English public. The Bloke is ultra talented and personally I'd love to have him wanting to play for the Wallabies. It's hardly his fault that he has been selected. I actually think he's performed ok given his limited experience, and he certainly wasn't the reason the English lost.

The fact is that he is still at least 12 months away from hitting his straps at test level. It goes to show that Cheika's decision to go for experience over potential in many cases was the right call. People calling for the likes of Kerevi, naiyaravoro, PAE, etc would have made the same mistake as England.

 

[mxyzptlk]

I'm really shocked at the way Sam Burgess so become a bit of a scapegoat for the English public.

How much of a scapegoat is he actually becoming? I'm hearing more invective thrown Lancaster and Andy Farrell's way, and Burgess just seems to be the one caught up in that wake. Like you said, he wasn't involved in selecting himself over Luther Burrell, he didn't leave a distributor out of the match day 23 against Wales, he wasn't the reason England's scrum turned into an accordion, and he didn't leave Steffon Armitage in France. It was also clear he wasn't chosen to play 12 because of his vast skill set; he was chosen to play there strictly for his size, power, and defensive capabilities, and he fulfilled those roles about as well as Brad Barritt did.

But the selection questions, that's on the coaching staff and their judgment, not Burgess.

 

[the plastic paddy]

Yeah, as I said, there will be a few instances people can name, but of all the bad cleanouts that apparently should be red-carded (the threshold for citation remember), not many are.
Problem is, if World Rugby want this type of act out of the game, and they really deem it a red card offence, then officiate it on the field as such consistently, so players know the severe consequence. Then they'll stop. Currently, there is not enough disincentive as they probably won't even get yellow carded, let alone red carded or suspended, in most cases.

I don't want to resurrect the whole thing, but a certain type of tackle has become increasingly rare since someone was red carded during a game rather than afterwards. If they want to stamp it out, someone needs to see red on the field, IMHO.

 

[mxyzptlk]

I don't want to resurrect the whole thing, but a certain type of tackle has become increasingly rare since someone was red carded during a game rather than afterwards. If they want to stamp it out, someone needs to see red on the field, IMHO.

 

[Brumby Runner]

As someone said on the front page, I was worried until the England winger chipped and chased from his own 22, and the kick went out on the full. That was an awful option and showed the fragility in their game/confidence.

As for Phipps, one pass was a shocker but the other required some Aus forwards to weave so the ball would miss them so I only marked him for one dud pass.

I think if you watch Phipps closely in all games, he seems to have an impression of where there are a few gold jumpers and just shoots the ball in that general direction, hoping that one of them will latch onto it. He seems to be much better when there is only one potential receiver. Multiple potential receivers might just confuse him. Or, alternatively, it just might be that he doesn't take a good look first of all to work out who he wants to receive the ball.

 

[galumay]

Bit of a joke really. The cleanout was not deemed worthy of a yellow card (even after the TMO reviewed it) at the time, yet Hooper now has a red card to his name for the same offence JdP was yellow-carded for against Scotland.

Meanwhile, Wood kicks someone unconscious - gets a 'warning', as does Burgess for his tackle.

Mmmm...you are not really on track there, it was always a potential RC offence under the current laws, I guess thats the point of the CO, to pick up the ones missed or incorrectly ruled on field.

Without hearing what the CO had to say about the JdP incident, its impossible to know how it was ruled and perceived.

Burgess tackle was a YC offence under the rules, cited and confirmed as such.

Perhaps the joke is that the Wallabies suffer basically no disadvantage for Hoopers red card foul play, they get to field a full 15 players in the next match. What do you reckon the outcome of the game would have been if Hooper had been red carded at that point?

I think we all have to remember player safety is the highest priority here and believe it or not its not some conspiracy theory to help NH sides win or punish South Pacific nations or whatever the latest theory is!

 

[cyclopath]

I don't want to resurrect the whole thing, but a certain type of tackle has become increasingly rare since someone was red carded during a game rather than afterwards. If they want to stamp it out, someone needs to see red on the field, IMHO.

So, pretty much what I said?

 

[Dave Beat]

Bit of a joke really. The cleanout was not deemed worthy of a yellow card (even after the TMO reviewed it) at the time, yet Hooper now has a red card to his name for the same offence JdP was yellow-carded for against Scotland.

Meanwhile, Wood kicks someone unconscious - gets a 'warning', as does Burgess for his tackle.

Yes odd.
If he wrapped his arms around the player who didn't come through the gate the clear out would have been just as damaging.
Thought Burgess head high was worse.
Great clear out - but wrap your arms.

I've read, thought, and witnessed the Northern Hemishpere teams get the rub of the green at Judicary hearings for some time now - just another example.

 

[Dave Beat]

Burgess tackle was a YC offence under the rules, cited and confirmed as such.

Perhaps the joke is that the Wallabies suffer basically no disadvantage for Hoopers red card foul play, they get to field a full 15 players in the next match. What do you reckon the outcome of the game would have been if Hooper had been red carded at that point?

I see Burgess tackle on hooper as far worse than the clear out.
Hooper didn't even have the ball and he almost had his head taken off.
Hooper was clearing out some one who was playing the ball "on the side of a ruck" - next time wrap your arms the clear out would have been possible more effective.

A tackle around the head of a player, is far more dangerous than not wrapping your arms in a tackle / clear out.

 

[KOB1987]

Perhaps the joke is that the Wallabies suffer basically no disadvantage for Hoopers red card foul play, they get to field a full 15 players in the next match.

Except for the bit that we are now without one of our world class players for what has become our most crucial pool match.

 

[Tex]

Fear not, Sean "Terminator" Mahon will fill his boots. If not then we'll get to watch another tussle between Poey and Warburton at openside, which is worth the price of admission alone.

Feels good having depth!

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[KOB1987]

Yeah we can cover it no problems but to say we haven't been disadvantaged is incorrect

 

[kiap]

But the selection questions, that's on the coaching staff and their judgment, not Burgess.

Probably.

There are also murmurings that Burgess's selection was imposed from above within the RFU.

It may be untrue (or I'd like to think so). The coach would resign before accepting that, surely? He probably will now anyway.

 

[Braveheart81]

Mmmm.you are not really on track there, it was always a potential RC offence under the current laws, I guess thats the point of the CO, to pick up the ones missed or incorrectly ruled on field.

Without hearing what the CO had to say about the JdP incident, its impossible to know how it was ruled and perceived.

Burgess tackle was a YC offence under the rules, cited and confirmed as such.

Perhaps the joke is that the Wallabies suffer basically no disadvantage for Hoopers red card foul play, they get to field a full 15 players in the next match. What do you reckon the outcome of the game would have been if Hooper had been red carded at that point?

I think we all have to remember player safety is the highest priority here and believe it or not its not some conspiracy theory to help NH sides win or punish South Pacific nations or whatever the latest theory is!

Please tell us where this is stipulated as being a red card offence under the laws.

The dangerous and foul play laws don't stipulate which offences are red cards or yellow cards. In my opinion, all of them can be depending on the severity of the action. Likewise, all of them can be deemed to be yellow cards only or just a penalty.

I think it is fairly safe to say that Hooper's offence is not a red card offence because we see it happen very frequently and red cards are almost never given. It is probably an even mix between yellow cards and penalties.

Do you think that referees are going to start changing their policy? I don't.

 

[A mutterer]

Please tell us where this is stipulated as being a red card offence under the laws.

The dangerous and foul play laws don't stipulate which offences are red cards or yellow cards. In my opinion, all of them can be depending on the severity of the action. Likewise, all of them can be deemed to be yellow cards only or just a penalty.

I think it is fairly safe to say that Hooper's offence is not a red card offence because we see it happen very frequently and red cards are almost never given. It is probably an even mix between yellow cards and penalties.

Do you think that referees are going to start changing their policy? I don't.

more importantly, it was deemed as a penalty only by 2 officiating refs at the time, after multiple replays and serious discussion prior to making a decision.

to me, this is rather insulting and undermines the authority of the ref and TMO as he has in effect overruled them to pursue a punitive charge.

 

[BDA]

But the selection questions, that's on the coaching staff and their judgment, not Burgess.

Well that's true, but much of the selection criticisms of Lancaster are directed at the selection of Burgess, both in the squad and in the 23. That's essentially the fans saying that his selection cost the team. That wouldn't make feel too great if I was Burgess and that was the general sentiment coming from the public.

It's a real shame too, because in 8 months time, when England tour Australia, Burgess had the potential to be a major impact player for England. Now I doubt he'll stick around.

 

[Joeleee]

I don't want to resurrect the whole thing, but a certain type of tackle has become increasingly rare since someone was red carded during a game rather than afterwards. If they want to stamp it out, someone needs to see red on the field, IMHO.

I agree, judiciaries, whilst necessary, often punish things inefficiently I think. With this example, Hooper and the Wallabies get punished, but England, who were wronged, don't see any benefit. If this really should have been a red card offence, the two referees should be heavily lambasted for not calling it as at least a yellow, and putting England at a heavy comparative disadvantage.

On another note, I feel like Australia are extremely lucky to have TPN as a reserve hooker. If things had gone different injury wise, his career could have gone anywhere, and he is capable of putting some serious hurt on in the last 10-20 minutes. I love that we have reserves like him, Slipper, Beale and Mitchell who could have been in World XV teams at some point in their career. The experience and class we have to choose from is seriously impressive.

 

[Mr Doug]

I think if you watch Phipps closely in all games, he seems to have an impression of where there are a few gold jumpers and just shoots the ball in that general direction, hoping that one of them will latch onto it. He seems to be much better when there is only one potential receiver. Multiple potential receivers might just confuse him. Or, alternatively, it just might be that he doesn't take a good look first of all to work out who he wants to receive the ball.

It's bloody obvious, Brumby Runner, Phipps "should have gone to Specsavers"!!!

 

[Dave Beat]

to me, this is rather insulting and undermines the authority of the ref and TMO as he has in effect overruled them to pursue a punitive charge.

Or the judicary could possibly be very biased and needs to be looked at - sure i've heard that before.

But like some of the world teams that are selected and the number of Northern Hemisphere players getting the start - I read them and think. Well. Much the same as I do with regards to the weekend incidents;
Burgess - takes off a players head who doesn't even have the ball - nothing.
Hooper - clears out a player on the side of a ruck, and despite match officials "reviewing it, and dealing with it" outside sources think lets give time.