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

[notapatrioticboneinme]

...... Just because another case wasn't reported or a player wasn't charged has absolutely nothing to do with the case for a similar incident.

Sully, I wasn't trying to defend Hooper; his clean-out was so quick I can't see what actually happened, timing wise; I'm saying if Farrell's shoulder charge was similar to Hooper's (except much slower) why wouldn't Farrell be cited, or is a yellow equal to a 1 match ban

 

[notapatrioticboneinme]

Is there a replay of Hooper slowed down anywhere?

 

[notapatrioticboneinme]

Seriously, you don't think the game has changed?.......
I'm not saying anything about comparing players in different eras it's merely a different game and the transition from one code to the other is not necessarily obvious: izzie bombed a certain try, burgess doesn't get the fact that you have to think about the next phase too.

IS, technically union has changed but the general play hasn't as much as league IMO. If you were watching union 40 years ago and compared it to nowadays relative to the change in league I perceive a far bigger difference in league.
I'm certainly not saying it's easy for the forwards to change between codes, two completely different skill sets needed; still much easier for the backs.

 

[Viking]

Sully, I wasn't trying to defend Hooper; his clean-out was so quick I can't see what actually happened, timing wise; I'm saying if Farrell's shoulder charge was similar to Hooper's (except much slower) why wouldn't Farrell be cited, or is a yellow equal to a 1 match ban

I think the fact it was a ruck makes a difference. Why? Because players are stationary at the ruck, and Hooper comes flying in with a 10 metre run up at full pace.

Compare this to Farrell who is attacking moving targets, I think its much easier to get it wrong as you have less time to think. You can't argue the same for Hooper, he had plenty of time to make a decision and get his technique right - a whole 10metre run up but still got it wrong.

 

[Cardiffblue]

I think the fact it was a ruck makes a difference. Why? Because players are stationary at the ruck, and Hooper comes flying in with a 10 metre run up at full pace.

Compare this to Farrell who is attacking moving targets, I think its much easier to get it wrong as you have less time to think. You can't argue the same for Hooper, he had plenty of time to make a decision and get his technique right - a whole 10metre run up but still got it wrong.

I loathe Farrell but I think he was confused by the play rather than anything more sinister. Burgess tackle was worse. Hooper was dumb. Hopefully he will drop this brain fart stuff. Other than that he was brilliant

 

[cyclopath]

I agree consistency is woeful.

Cooper gets a yellow for a soft head high, Then Burgess does a similar or worse incident and gets nothing.
Douglas puts a hit on a player off the ball which I think was similar to Farrells but Farrell gets yellow carded.

I think they got it the wrong way around, Farrell should have got a penalty and Burgess should have got a yellow.

Douglas' was more a tackle without the ball - it wasn't really a shoulder charge. I thought penalty was appropriate there. Of course, if his tackle without the ball prevented England scoring for instance, that's foul play and yellow.
The off-field yellow is really a furphy - I mean they can get 3 of them before it goes further, and that resets anyway after QF! Really no sanction at all.

 

[BDA]

Yes also Douglas didn't follow through. You could see on the replay that he starts to pull out of the tackle as soon as he realises the guy wont get the ball

 

[Cardiffblue]

The nadir of Welsh rugby under Gareth Jenkins has become known as the Gyppocaust. What should the current situation with England be called. Suggestions so far:

Rimmering
Orcageiddon
Lancastergate
bombercaust
lancastration

 

[Mr Doug]

First you have to mix a metaphor or two.

Groucho, part of the 'mix' involving Burgess's future would include "dough", would it not?!

 

[Mr Doug]

The nadir of Welsh rugby under Gareth Jenkins has become known as the Gyppocaust. What should the current situation with England be called. Suggestions so far:

Rimmering
Orcageiddon
Lancastergate
bombercaust
lancastration

Cardiffblue, in view of my comment a few days ago, (equating shrinking testicles to Anabolic Steroid use), I prefer "Lancastration"!!

 

[WOOLI]

Cardiffblue, in view of my comment a few days ago, (equating shrinking testicles to Anabolic Steroid use), I prefer "Lancastration"!!

Think positive!

Look to the future!

Eddiegod

 

[Inside Shoulder]

We should encourage the poms to blame burgess: as long as they blame him they wont address the real issues in their game.

 

[fatprop]

The Farrell hate is strong as well

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The Farrell hate is strong as well

ohoh - thats getting a bit closer to the mark: we need to distract them.
Mind you, how can you have a bloke's father (assistant) coaching the national team - even if he's the best bloke for the job? someone has to step aside and parenting being what it is dad goes.
Whats more their attacking structure is utterly confused - blokes crossing one another from one side of the breakdown to the other suggests that they have a plan to retain the ball for 2 phases and no more. They don't even have a default go round the corner (or don't go round the corner) position.

 

[fatprop]

ohoh - thats getting a bit closer to the mark: we need to distract them.
Mind you, how can you have a bloke's father (assistant) coaching the national team - even if he's the best bloke for the job? someone has to step aside and parenting being what it is dad goes.
Whats more their attacking structure is utterly confused - blokes crossing one another from one side of the breakdown to the other suggests that they have a plan to retain the ball for 2 phases and no more. They don't even have a default go round the corner (or don't go round the corner) position.

Yeah, best to keep them away from working out how they want to play and then selecting a side that will play to that pattern - now that would be crazy

 

[Tahtrajic]

ohoh - thats getting a bit closer to the mark: we need to distract them.
Mind you, how can you have a bloke's father (assistant) coaching the national team - even if he's the best bloke for the job? someone has to step aside and parenting being what it is dad goes.
Whats more their attacking structure is utterly confused - blokes crossing one another from one side of the breakdown to the other suggests that they have a plan to retain the ball for 2 phases and no more. They don't even have a default go round the corner (or don't go round the corner) position.

I have to say. She Who Must Be Obayed asked the same thing about how a son can be picked in a team when the father is the coach. She thought that sort of thing stop at school boy level. She also just sent me this photo she found on Facebook

 

[the plastic paddy]

The Farrell hate is strong as well

That is because he is a CU Next Tuesday.

 

[Pfitzy]

Dad or Son?

 

[Braveheart81]

I have to say. She Who Must Be Obayed asked the same thing about how a son can be picked in a team when the father is the coach. She thought that sort of thing stop at school boy level. She also just sent me this photo she found on Facebook

It's a tough one to resolve. Andy Farrell has had the defensive coaching gig with England since before Owen Farrell debuted.

Should Stuart Lancaster have said that his defensive coach (who is probably the best English defensive coach he could employ given England's defence is one of their traditional strengths and he did very well with the Lions) should resign so Lancaster can pick his son?

Or does Lancaster not select someone who he thinks is one of his best fly half options (and certainly his best goalkicker) because his Dad is the defence coach?

 

[I like to watch]

Simple.
Either,or.
Just not both.
Ever.