Six Nations 2017
-
@Frye said in Six Nations 2017:
That article is something else.
Spiro has well and truly lost it.
This is not a recent thing " it" disappeared over the horizon quite a while ago and search efforts were in vain . Aussie Spiro really isn't a whole lot better than the manatee
-
Just on the style of play thing, it was quite apparent that Ireland on the weekend didn't really know what to do with all that ball. They played a lot of slow ball, one-off runners, but there didn't seem to be a purpose to it. And by purposely initiating contact, they slowed their own ball down, and required a number of their own players to make sure they kept it, meaning they weren't generating much out of it other than tired defenders, and good stats. Their two best attacks came from the one loop play that actually worked; and Payne being the recipient of a nice bit of lenient reffing with respect to the "held in the tackle" law.
They weren't creating space, they weren't sucking in defenders, and if they did go quick to the backs, the midfielders hit it up anyway. At one point Sexton resorted to a bomb for a winger that didn't even know it was coming.
England looked the "better" side throughout, but their error rate was appalling, and their energy rate was low. But, they looked dangerous with the ball (for the little they had it) and their defense re-organised really well. Ireland had the ball and the field position, but didn't know what to do with it.
-
Just on the style of play thing, it was quite apparent that Ireland on the weekend didn't really know what to do with all that ball. They played a lot of slow ball, one-off runners, but there didn't seem to be a purpose to it. And by purposely initiating contact, they slowed their own ball down, and required a number of their own players to make sure they kept it, meaning they weren't generating much out of it other than tired defenders, and good stats. Their two best attacks came from the one loop play that actually worked; and Payne being the recipient of a nice bit of lenient reffing with respect to the "held in the tackle" law.
They weren't creating space, they weren't sucking in defenders, and if they did go quick to the backs, the midfielders hit it up anyway. At one point Sexton resorted to a bomb for a winger that didn't even know it was coming.
England looked the "better" side throughout, but their error rate was appalling, and their energy rate was low. But, they looked dangerous with the ball (for the little they had it) and their defense re-organised really well. Ireland had the ball and the field position, but didn't know what to do with it.
@mariner4life said in Six Nations 2017:
Just on the style of play thing, it was quite apparent that Ireland on the weekend didn't really know what to do with all that ball. They played a lot of slow ball, one-off runners, but there didn't seem to be a purpose to it. And by purposely initiating contact, they slowed their own ball down, and required a number of their own players to make sure they kept it, meaning they weren't generating much out of it other than tired defenders, and good stats. Their two best attacks came from the one loop play that actually worked; and Payne being the recipient of a nice bit of lenient reffing with respect to the "held in the tackle" law.
They weren't creating space, they weren't sucking in defenders, and if they did go quick to the backs, the midfielders hit it up anyway. At one point Sexton resorted to a bomb for a winger that didn't even know it was coming.
England looked the "better" side throughout, but their error rate was appalling, and their energy rate was low. But, they looked dangerous with the ball (for the little they had it) and their defense re-organised really well. Ireland had the ball and the field position, but didn't know what to do with it.
I thought it was a quite deliberate rope a dope by Ireland/Schmidt. England didn't know quite what to do with so little possession and were hammered at the breakdown. As a couple of them said afterwards, they were stunned by Ireland's ferocity over the ball. An echo of what Ireland did to NZ in 2013 in the first half of that match that I never discuss.
They deliberately stayed away from lineouts and decided to go up through the middle a lot of the time. I would have moved Farrell to 10 a lot sooner as he would have controlled the game a lot better than Ford when England did get the ball.
-
Appears to be at least four Kiwis in the management team. I'd imagine they might have an influence about how a team is drilled.
@Frye said in Six Nations 2017:
Appears to be at least four Kiwis in the management team. I'd imagine they might have an influence about how a team is drilled.
Absolutely - big influence. And why they sought out another Kiwi to replace Lam.
-
@mariner4life said in Six Nations 2017:
Just on the style of play thing, it was quite apparent that Ireland on the weekend didn't really know what to do with all that ball. They played a lot of slow ball, one-off runners, but there didn't seem to be a purpose to it. And by purposely initiating contact, they slowed their own ball down, and required a number of their own players to make sure they kept it, meaning they weren't generating much out of it other than tired defenders, and good stats. Their two best attacks came from the one loop play that actually worked; and Payne being the recipient of a nice bit of lenient reffing with respect to the "held in the tackle" law.
They weren't creating space, they weren't sucking in defenders, and if they did go quick to the backs, the midfielders hit it up anyway. At one point Sexton resorted to a bomb for a winger that didn't even know it was coming.
England looked the "better" side throughout, but their error rate was appalling, and their energy rate was low. But, they looked dangerous with the ball (for the little they had it) and their defense re-organised really well. Ireland had the ball and the field position, but didn't know what to do with it.
I thought it was a quite deliberate rope a dope by Ireland/Schmidt. England didn't know quite what to do with so little possession and were hammered at the breakdown. As a couple of them said afterwards, they were stunned by Ireland's ferocity over the ball. An echo of what Ireland did to NZ in 2013 in the first half of that match that I never discuss.
They deliberately stayed away from lineouts and decided to go up through the middle a lot of the time. I would have moved Farrell to 10 a lot sooner as he would have controlled the game a lot better than Ford when England did get the ball.
@Pot-Hale that could be a fair assessment, but it very nearly came unstuck because Ireland weren't generating points. In the end, that lineout steal by O'Mahoney was huge, because if that turns in to another English maul, it was probably going to be another English penalty. The entire momentum of the game swung on that, England never got another sniff.
The breakdowns were a ferocious shitfight, green jerseys were diving at everything at terrific speeds.
Your final point its probably the biggest stick to beat the English with over the course of the whole tournament, they are slow to adjust on the track. The weekend's game, and the Italy game required changes in thinking and execution, but they couldn't do anything. Italy lacked the quality to do anything about it, Ireland just kept at them the whole game.
-
@Pot-Hale that could be a fair assessment, but it very nearly came unstuck because Ireland weren't generating points. In the end, that lineout steal by O'Mahoney was huge, because if that turns in to another English maul, it was probably going to be another English penalty. The entire momentum of the game swung on that, England never got another sniff.
The breakdowns were a ferocious shitfight, green jerseys were diving at everything at terrific speeds.
Your final point its probably the biggest stick to beat the English with over the course of the whole tournament, they are slow to adjust on the track. The weekend's game, and the Italy game required changes in thinking and execution, but they couldn't do anything. Italy lacked the quality to do anything about it, Ireland just kept at them the whole game.
@mariner4life said in Six Nations 2017:
@Pot-Hale that could be a fair assessment, but it very nearly came unstuck because Ireland weren't generating points. In the end, that lineout steal by O'Mahoney was huge, because if that turns in to another English maul, it was probably going to be another English penalty. The entire momentum of the game swung on that, England never got another sniff.
The breakdowns were a ferocious shitfight, green jerseys were diving at everything at terrific speeds.
Your final point its probably the biggest stick to beat the English with over the course of the whole tournament, they are slow to adjust on the track. The weekend's game, and the Italy game required changes in thinking and execution, but they couldn't do anything. Italy lacked the quality to do anything about it, Ireland just kept at them the whole game.
A lot of that must surely come down to captaincy. Hartley appears as thick as pig shit and needs a week of dwelling on something to work it out. Farrell may look the part as a captain but doesn't seem to be a great analyst of the overall game situation and what should be done.
-
-
@Tim Although I share his frustration with Barnes, governing bodies need to be strict about players criticising officials. Players and coaches need to follow internal processes and leave the public excoriation to commentators and fans.
@antipodean His comments were very over the top, and rather unpleasantly anti-English, so I agree that he deserved the fine.
There's a nasty, and frankly pathetic, anti-anglo sentiment in much of French society, so fuck that guy.
-
I didn't agree with Maestri's Anglo-Saxon comment, but the French had every right to be frustrated about the officiating. It just wasn't very smart from Maestri to express his frustration the way he did. But IMO it's the fine that is very over the top, especially if you consider that the comment was made right after the game before the dust had settled.
What fine does Barnes have to pay for an absolutely woeful performance? Oh wait ...
-
I didn't agree with Maestri's Anglo-Saxon comment, but the French had every right to be frustrated about the officiating. It just wasn't very smart from Maestri to express his frustration the way he did. But IMO it's the fine that is very over the top, especially if you consider that the comment was made right after the game before the dust had settled.
What fine does Barnes have to pay for an absolutely woeful performance? Oh wait ...
@Stargazer said in Six Nations 2017:
What fine does Barnes have to pay for an absolutely woeful performance? Oh wait ...
-
$45k!?
I've been following Liam Messam's attempts to raise $50k for a little girl with cancer. The Chiefs team have been shaving their heads today and it's painful how slowly the total ticks up. It's a lot of money.
-
@Milk , @Stargazer Yeah the fine seems excessive but put in context perhaps not quite so bad. For a start 50% of that fine is suspended. Maestri not only criticised the official (let's get over the fact it was Barnes) but also made blatantly racist comments.
Compare this to Marler's comments to Samson Lee (in the heat of the match) where he called him Gypsy Boy (factually correct, albeit inflammatory). Marler got a £20K fine (around NZ$35K and a two match ban.
IMO both are excessive but in context Maestri got away with it a bit.
Oh and I'm sure that all the Taffs on here will be delighted to hear they are part of the great Anglo Saxon conspiracy.
