Oh look. It's the unedifying spectacle of England getting beaten. You're as bad as Rassie.
Absolutely content that Scotland won as they managed the game better, stretched the defence to get; one good try and force a schoolboy error for a penalty try, competed effectively to get supremacy and took their chances well.
Disappointed that England underperformed, absolutely but also been watching 5 and 6 Nations long enough to know that these things occur in sport, far too regularly given England's player pool and resources but is another discussion.
Disappointed that England management decided to take off the playmaker who had scored all their points, absolutely, but again that is another discussion.
Would it have had a material affect, who knows, I do know that England made enough errors of judgment and skill/execution so as not to be in the ascendency despite having a significant amount of possession and territory and were, therefore, not worthy of a positive result.
But what I cannot get my head around is the inability, or possibly the desire of people on a referees forum, not to assess
the facts or answer the straightforward question.
Did the referee call it as a dummy? - Simple yes or no, not your or mine or my great aunt bessie's opinion, did he or didn't he?
If no then I am imagining things as the video record clearly shows it and St Nigel also comments upon it!
So no bad loser, no perceived English arrogance just a desire for someone else to recognise or consider the significant failure of an international referee to not only know the laws but also to apply them.
Is that too much to ask?