Talking points from England v Wales V2

[didds]

so after a FK for early push in the second minute, an early push in the 78th minute should be a PK you mean?

didds

 

[TheBFG]

play wasn't over, we had the lineout.

My bad! THE BALL WAS DEAD (happy :wink: )

 

[Camquin]

Didds

Depends how many scrums were in between. Should, praise the lord, we have a game with only two scrums then yes - but warn them before they packed down.

If they have behaved themselves for a number of scrums then no.

Camquin

 

[Pegleg]

I've heard several people say our second FK for early engagement at the scrum should've been a PK, and one person (when pressed) say there's a directive out that every repeat FK infringement should be escalated to a PK.

Have any of you heard of that being the case?

Ask him to show you the directive.

 

[TheBFG]

gouge...... 8 weeks, just makes it look even more stupid on the part of TMO on Saturday!

 

[DocY]

gouge...... 8 weeks, just makes it look even more stupid on the part of TMO on Saturday!

To be fair, this has been the standard this season: no/minimal action taken on the field followed by a ban.

At least it's consistent, even if the quality of the consistency is debatable!

 

[L'irlandais]

Just for notes at the moment, will try and find video clips tomorrow

1) Joe Marler elbow
...

jM cited for striking an opponent, to appear before an independent disciplinary committee later this week.

 

[Dan_A]

I have a question on the whole gouging incident that I don't think has been raised yet.

The sequence of events went like this:-
1) Dan Cole get's yellow carded.
2) From the subsequent penalty Wales opt for the scrum.
3) This forces England to sacrifice Robshaw for Brookes so that England has a full front row for that scrum.
4) The gouge incident then comes to the attention of the officials and the penalty is overturned so the scrum never happens.

My question is could England have asked to have the Brookes for Robshaw enforced substitution annulled (or postponed until the next scrum)?

If not, is that fair?

 

[crossref]

I have a question on the whole gouging incident that I don't think has been raised yet.

The sequence of events went like this:-
1) Dan Cole get's yellow carded.
2) From the subsequent penalty Wales opt for the scrum.
3) This forces England to sacrifice Robshaw for Brookes so that England has a full front row for that scrum.
4) The gouge incident then comes to the attention of the officials and the penalty is overturned so the scrum never happens.

My question is could England have asked to have the Brookes for Robshaw enforced substitution annulled (or postponed until the next scrum)?

If not, is that fair?

that's a great question, and well spotted.
PLUS I wonder if England thought to double-check that the substition still counted as a YC-renforced, and therefore reversible substituion.

 

[paul mc]

I have a question on the whole gouging incident that I don't think has been raised yet.

The sequence of events went like this:-
1) Dan Cole get's yellow carded.
2) From the subsequent penalty Wales opt for the scrum.
3) This forces England to sacrifice Robshaw for Brookes so that England has a full front row for that scrum.
4) The gouge incident then comes to the attention of the officials and the penalty is overturned so the scrum never happens.

My question is could England have asked to have the Brookes for Robshaw enforced substitution annulled (or postponed until the next scrum)?

If not, is that fair?

Really good question

P

 

[FlipFlop]

The yc sub is at the next scrum. Ref asked for replacement. Ref should have reversed replacement. But understandable that this was forgotten by him. But 4th official should have been on it.

 

[RobLev]

gouge...... 8 weeks, just makes it look even more stupid on the part of TMO on Saturday!

Did you see Rob Howley's excuse in the BBC story:

Wales assistant coach Rob Howley says Francis was unaware of what he was doing in the incident that led to him being disciplined.

"When you look at it, his [Francis'] eyes are closed and I don't think he knows what he's doing," said Howley.

"He went to clear someone out."

Exactly how do you "clear someone out" by flopping on top of them?

 

[RobLev]

Re: Talking points from England v Wales

Wynne-Jones's apparent attempted stamp on Haskell's head (57:32 on game clock)?

Obstruction releasing Faletau for the third try?

Anyone want to bite on these?

 

[Ian_Cook]

gouge...... 8 weeks, just makes it look even more stupid on the part of TMO on Saturday!

To be fair, the TMO is under pressure to make a decision quickly. He may have 20+ angles to choose from, but he has to make a choice as to which ones to look at. He can't go through all of them (time constraints) and he may not necessarily pick the best angle

The Judiciary, on the other hand, can sit and watch all the angles as many times as they like, at their leisure.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Re: Talking points from England v Wales

Anyone want to bite on these?

"Wynne-Jones's apparent attempted stamp on Haskell's head (57:32 on game clock)?"

Haven't seen it

"Obstruction releasing Faletau for the third try?"

Not C&O IMO

 

[dave_clark]

To be fair, the TMO is under pressure to make a decision quickly. He may have 20+ angles to choose from, but he has to make a choice as to which ones to look at. He can't go through all of them (time constraints) and he may not necessarily pick the best angle

The Judiciary, on the other hand, can sit and watch all the angles as many times as they like, at their leisure.

isn't the important thing to get the decision right, regardless of how long it takes?

 

[crossref]

isn't the important thing to get the decision right, regardless of how long it takes?

but the current decision is simply whether to cite him or not. Can't understand why that hs taken so long.

once cited -- yes I think the hearing has quite a lot to think about to get to the right sanction.

 

[bcm666]

RE angles and TMO - this stuff about needing more than one angle is bollocks. If you can clearly see what happened from one angle - why do you need another angle?

The citing officer and panel that banned Francis for 8 weeks had no other views because there weren't any - and I know this because after the game I went to the BBC truck to ask if there were any more angles that showed it and they confirmed this. They used the very same shot we all saw, which showed all you needed to see. Furthermore, I've never heard a RU official say to a player that he might have subsequent action taken against him. This is what happens in RL when players are put on report.

This was a cop out - pure and simple and not calling it so is ludicrous.

 

[winchesterref]

I've also never heard a ref give a penalty for "contact with the eyes" and then decline to issue a card. Was a very strange one for me.

 

[winchesterref]

Not to resurrect the discussion as I note the posts were removed, so this is just for interest, however Gats has weighed in:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/3http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/358161785816178