2nd TEST - AUS vs BRITISH & IRISH LIONS - 29th June - (KO-11:05 GMT)

First topic message reminder :

2nd Test build-up thread
 
Can the Lions finish the job?
Will Aus bounch back (like we know they can)?
Will the Ref know the rules?
 
Aus have called up George Smith, Jesse Mogg and centre Ben Tapuai but still No Cooper?
(talk about shooting yourself in the foot!)
 
15. Halfpenny,
14. Bowe,
13. BOD,
12. Davies,
11.North,
10. Sexton,
9. Youngs;

1. Vunipola
2. Youngs,
3. Jones,
4. AWJ,
5. Parling,
6. Lydiate,
7. Warburton,
8. Heaslip

Replacements:
16 Hibbard, 17 Grant, 18 Cole, 19 Croft, 20 O'Brien, 21 Murray, 22 Farrell, 23 Cuthbert


Australia
15 Kurtley Beale (Melbourne Rebels)
14 Israel Folau (NSW)
13 Adam Ashley-Cooper (NSW)
12 Christian Leali'ifano (ACT Brumbies)
11 Joe Tomane (Brumbies)
10 James O'Connor (Melbourne Rebels)
9 Will Genia (Reds)
8 Wycliff Palu (NSW)
7 Michael Hooper (NSW)
6 Ben Mowen (ACT)
5 Kane Douglas (NSW)
4 James Horwill (Reds - Cap)
3 Ben Alexander (ACT)
2 Stephen Moore (ACT)
1 Benn Robinson (NSW)

16 Saia Fainga'a (Reds)
17 James Slipper (Reds)
18 Sekope Kepu (NSW)
19 Rob Simmons (Reds)
20 Liam Gill (Reds)
21 Nick Phipps (Rebels)
22 Rob Horne (NSW)
23 Jesse Mogg (Brumbies)

 
For those wanting to see it again and again and again etc.....http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=GEORGE+NORTHS+LIONS+TRY&view=detail&mid=64E92B2D2B1B4128364264E92B2D2B1B41283642&first=0&FORM=NVPFVR&qpvt=GEORGE+NORTHS+LIONS+TRY

Wow. This is some serious Inception Poopie. Bending reality to suit yourself. Please teach me, sensei.

 

I'm finding it very entertaining to be honest HoT, am trying to work out which smells more horsehhit or bullshhit???  

This is just about spot on in my opinion...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2013/jun/29/lions-tactics-board-gatland-vunipola

RubyGuby wrote:I don't think Davies or Bod could have stopped Ashley-Cooper - The try was created a few moves before that and A-C had a lot of room to run into as the phases had stretched the defence and Aus had a lot of options out wide, Bod and Davies were left to try and plug too many holes. Aus were going forward in wave after wave and recycling and getting over the gain line. It was good play from them and the gaps were there because of the earlier phase work. Last week someone said 1/2 p was at fault for not tackling Folau as he went over the line; Folau was in full flow and 1/2p was flying across a couple of yards from the line - He never stood a chance. Trys are created a long way before the touch down and people need to look back a bit before blaming players who are trying to defend the impossible on occasion.

The most sensible post for about the last 5 pages of this thread

You heard the man Ruby. You're not welcome on this thread. Get out!  

 

I'm gone

 

flyhalffactory wrote:

I have never heard such nonsense in my entire life, and I have met some serious Bullsh***ers in my time but you kinda take the biscuit.

LOOK AT THE UTUBE CLIP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQuD6wOePeM
Pause it around 3.06 mins it will show Davies looking at BOD (yet again) "hey Brian mate ahem, hello!! there are THREE AUSSIES and TWO LIONS with 5 metres to stop them...... carry it on and you will see one of Davies' "missed" tackles as he was left yet again in no mans land while waiting for BOD to pick up his man, which he didn't (BOD miss-tackle espn?......... no of course no because he didn't even get to O'Connor before he offloaded it, so his perfect tackle count remains intact whilst the stats reveal that Foxy missed the tackle TRIPE).

If you want me to send you the other clips which will show you other "miss tackles" by Davies and where the defensive line was breached then I can.

I agree Davies had a poor game, but to suggest that BOD had a good one, or his tackles were all good effective ones, or it was due Davies being poor that he was worn out at the end is frankly laughable.......... BOD was pretty damn close to Davies inept performance.

Watch the match before making silly comments, and don't rely on espn for back up as quite often they are incorrect (look at Parling's stats its a joke)

Total A Grade Chicken manure now, Fly  You'll have a very profitable crop of Paranoid Delusion by the year's end as you watch the game for the thousandth time to prove Davies was........................................

What's that????  Am I hearing right?????.....................

You've changed your story? - Now, you're accepting that Davies was responsible for his own stats and they show he didn't have a better game than the old fart beside him?  Now you're saying he was 'inept'?  Now he had a 'poor game'?  By the way, I didn't say that about either player..it's people like you who love the player grades and performance reports.  It gives the net warriors a sense of coaching power.  

So my initial contribution to this thread was to respond to reports in 606 which seemed to suggest Davies had a barnstorming session in comparison to the old goat beside him.  I was reading that his performance warrants the 13 slot more than BOD because he was more lively than the old panting coot beside him all the way through the game.  And then BOD even got the balme for the missed tackle that he didn't miss.  

He ran out as fast as he could from a breakdown melee that might have created a try scoring chance in itself.  You've heard of backs like BOD having to hang in there to protect the try line for as long as possible? Right?  That's called offensive tactics, tying in players and then shooting out wide.  Australia are a good side at attack, I'm told.

I never said BOD had a great game.  Never said Davies had a terrible one.  I've blamed Gatland for his defend-the-first-win gameplan.  But yes, I did call a spade a spade when I scented the organic fertiliser whiff that suggested Davies had a much better game than O'Driscoll  - He didn't.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:I don't think Davies or Bod could have stopped Ashley-Cooper - The try was created a few moves before that and A-C had a lot of room to run into as the phases had stretched the defence and Aus had a lot of options out wide, Bod and Davies were left to try and plug too many holes. Aus were going forward in wave after wave and recycling and getting over the gain line. It was good play from them and the gaps were there because of the earlier phase work. Last week someone said 1/2 p was at fault for not tackling Folau as he went over the line; Folau was in full flow and 1/2p was flying across a couple of yards from the line - He never stood a chance. Trys are created a long way before the touch down and people need to look back a bit before blaming players who are trying to defend the impossible on occasion.

The most sensible post for about the last 5 pages of this thread

Like a British MP I refer you to a post I made 1 page ago :

"Let's call it a try designed to be scored.

As I always say, think also about the players trying to score as much as the players trying to defend. They both have a job to do and sometimes it's a score and sometimes it's a try saving tackle.

That's rugby. The Aussies forced the error, or forced the defenders into a two choice predicament - as they train to do."

 BOD and JD are both classy performers. It wasn't the best day at the office for either of them but when they are trying to operate off poor ball and playing on the back foot life is going to be diffficult. The aussies were breaking the gain line time and time again and gaps were appearing everywhere and we were scrambling in defence - We need a PLATFORM if these guys are to be given a chance as without it; life will continue to be very very difficult in the midfield and 10 axis. So much for Youngs and his quick ball eh" but he was living off scraps and the rest is just a domino effect - Time to get serious.

SecretFly wrote:
You've changed your story? - Now, you're accepting that Davies was responsible for his own stats and they show he didn't have a better game than the old fart beside him?  Now you're saying he was 'inept'?  Now he had a 'poor game'?.

I haven't changed my story at all, where have you read that I have stated that Davies is responsible for his own stats, If you want I will show you the 12 tackles BOD made, and the 8 tackles Foxy made, and the 3 miss tackles Foxy made and then we can analyse the reason for their performances. The try is a classic example of espn category definitions:

BOD not missing a tackle - true but only because he didn't even get to O'Connor before he distributed, and
Foxy missing a tackle - true but only because there was a 3 on 2 and he had no chance to cover both.

So quite true the stats highlights Foxy "miss tackle", and BOD still with a 12-0 performance, but the actual passage of play reveals a different story, a clear examples of lies, damn lies and statistics.

I at no point stated that Davies or BOD had a good game, I also have been quite clear in that they were played under GatlandBall orders, and that's the reason for their inept performance i.e. dictated by tactics and not what both players can do if allowed. What I don't subscribe to is a level of poster who cherry picks data to validate a players performance and conversely to run down another.

Re: The try. BOD was in the middle of the breakdown almost on the line when as captain he should have been screaming for the "lurking forwards around the fringes" to defend the line. He most certainly didn't defend cleverly as it was certain as taxes and death that 5 metres out Oz was going to spread it wide, at that position he should have been defending the centre channel not scurrying across the gain line.

Quite agree the try was created well before the final execution, poor tackles about a minute before and a miss-tackle about 30 seconds before put the pressure on us.

flyhalffactory wrote:If you want I will show you the 12 tackles BOD made, and the 8 tackles Foxy made, and the 3 miss tackles Foxy made and then we can analyse the reason for their performances.

Yes please

flyhalffactory wrote:

Re: The try. BOD was in the middle of the breakdown almost on the line when as captain he should have been screaming for the "lurking forwards around the fringes" to defend the line. He most certainly didn't defend cleverly as it was certain as taxes and death that 5 metres out Oz was going to spread it wide, at that position he should have been defending the centre channel not scurrying across the gain line.

Quite agree the try was created well before the final execution, poor tackles about a minute before and a miss-tackle about 30 seconds before put the pressure on us.

So it's back to "Davies was better than BOD" again?  Do make up your mind, fly.  I'm dizzy...and you're wrong.

One game and you guys have boiled it down to one missed tackle or one tackle that should've been made.  Why do I get the feeling if they were from the same nation you wouldn't be having this discussion. You guys crack me up! Keep up the good work.  

kia... try sharing a 'Lions' team with Australia and South Africa and maybe Argentina, then get back to us on the curious 'fun' of thinking our guy performed better than your guy.

Flyhalf is (I think!) a Scot by the way and Davies is Welsh.

Only a few token (but good ones like Genia, Ezbeth and Lobbe) players from those teams would make it so I'd be happy to see them in the squad.  

I'm only having you on mate. But in the context of the game, I think there are more relevant things worth looking at. The flaky lineout throws to the back spring to mind. That said, I dig the passion and the conviction. Can't fault you there.  

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:One game and you guys have boiled it down to one missed tackle or one tackle that should've been made.  Why do I get the feeling if they were from the same nation you wouldn't be having this discussion. You guys crack me up! Keep up the good work.  

Have you not seen some of the Irish threads?

Cyril is right.  It's really a seven Nation entity, the Lions.  England, Wales, Scotland, Leinster, Munster, Ulster and Connacht.

The British and Internecine Tribal Warfare Lions.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:One game and you guys have boiled it down to one missed tackle or one tackle that should've been made.  Why do I get the feeling if they were from the same nation you wouldn't be having this discussion. You guys crack me up! Keep up the good work.  

K
Where the heck do you get that from

There have been a few similar topics and 100s of messages on each, where do you get one missed tackle etc..................

  Fly you left out the Tongans, Samoans, South Africans and New Zealanders etc. I think they will be offended. The British and Irish Multinational Lions (minus the Scots)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SecretFly wrote:Cyril is right.  It's really a seven Nation entity, the Lions.  England, Wales, Scotland, Leinster, Munster, Ulster and Connacht.

The British and Internecine Tribal Warfare Lions.

 
yes that at least made me laugh Secret.
Leics (midlanders) and Sarries (Londoners) aren't the best of mates either.

I don't flyhalffactory or Canterbury as I prefer to call you.  Don't take what I say seriously. I'm just basking in the glory of winning a bet with Bluesmancometh that the Lions would win 3-0. That's why he really left the boards because he didn't want to be called In My Humbler Opinion. (the bet was the other would change their name depending on whether a Lions cleansweep occurred or not).

I only jest and seek to point out that tempers are fraying and there's still a game in hand. Save the recriminations for after you lose this Saturday.  

SecretFly wrote:kia... try sharing a 'Lions' team with Australia and South Africa and maybe Argentina, then get back to us on the curious 'fun' of thinking our guy performed better than your guy.

Flyhalf is (I think!) a Scot by the way and Davies is Welsh.

The funny thing about this I cannae recall one of us stating Hogg, Maitland should be in, we mostly have been ok if Gray had been on the bench, and feel that Grant was the best option taking into account the players injured and sent home.

I have been one of the few Scots (or any other nation) who had advocated Lydiate, I also thought that BOD should have been captain, also thought that Sir Johnny should have toured, also think that Farrell has got better and better and Sexton has got poorer and poorer but still agreed that Sexton should have started........ etc etc

Yes I am Musselburgh/Edinburgh/Scotland/Lions through and through, and had played Blindside at a decent level for the best part of 20 years, happily retired, and a veteran of 4 Lions tours (as a supporter) this 2013 tour been the first I have missed for 20 yrs.

Have a vested interest in the Welsh game as I love flowing rugby and spent a fair few years during the working week down there.

Don't like GatlandBall Lite at all

SecretFly wrote:Cyril is right.  It's really a seven Nation entity, the Lions.  England, Wales, Scotland, Leinster, Munster, Ulster and Connacht.

I think we can probably manage without one of those...

Scotland have barely featured.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I don't flyhalffactory or Canterbury as I prefer to call you.  Don't take what I say seriously. I'm just basking in the glory of winning a bet with Bluesmancometh that the Lions would win 3-0. That's why he really left the boards because he didn't want to be called In My Humbler Opinion. (the bet was the other would change their name depending on whether a Lions cleansweep occurred or not).

I only jest and seek to point out that tempers are fraying and there's still a game in hand. Save the recriminations for after you lose this Saturday.  

Cheers mate  

and of course to FlyTipping sorry FlyFishing  

Lions!! all for one and one for all

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I don't flyhalffactory or Canterbury as I prefer to call you.  Don't take what I say seriously. I'm just basking in the glory of winning a bet with Bluesmancometh that the Lions would win 3-0. That's why he really left the boards because he didn't want to be called In My Humbler Opinion. (the bet was the other would change their name depending on whether a Lions cleansweep occurred or not).

You think the real result is going to stop him?????    That's only an incentive for him.  That's motivation.  That's game on.  He's the most competitive guy I've ever witnessed here.  Every topic is a heavy weight prize fight of stats, training science, tactical awareness and knowledge of the game.  I hear he's gone from here forever but if he returns it'll be to PROVE you completely wrong still, kia.... and PROVE to you that he won the bet, that it was a 3-0 rout by the Lions.

flyhalffactory wrote:


Cheers mate  

and of course to FlyTipping sorry FlyFishing  

Lions!! all for one and one for all

From one fly to another....  

 

Anyone got any Fly Killer

Last time I looked Davies and BOD. But if you read back further there are numerous others.  

SecretFly wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I don't flyhalffactory or Canterbury as I prefer to call you.  Don't take what I say seriously. I'm just basking in the glory of winning a bet with Bluesmancometh that the Lions would win 3-0. That's why he really left the boards because he didn't want to be called In My Humbler Opinion. (the bet was the other would change their name depending on whether a Lions cleansweep occurred or not).

You think the real result is going to stop him?????    That's only an incentive for him.  That's motivation.  That's game on.  He's the most competitive guy I've ever witnessed here.  Every topic is a heavy weight prize fight of stats, training science, tactical awareness and knowledge of the game.  I hear he's gone from here forever but if he returns it'll be to PROVE you completely wrong still, kia.... and PROVE to you that he won the bet, that it was a 3-0 rout by the Lions.

He's got some software you can run limited video fotage through to get a complete run down of the games. No doubt it'll come out as 3-0 to Lions. Not all stats are right, even the scores

 In my not so humble opinion, I think you could be both right.  

flyhalffactory wrote:

SecretFly wrote:
You've changed your story? - Now, you're accepting that Davies was responsible for his own stats and they show he didn't have a better game than the old fart beside him?  Now you're saying he was 'inept'?  Now he had a 'poor game'?.

I haven't changed my story at all, where have you read that I have stated that Davies is responsible for his own stats, If you want I will show you the 12 tackles BOD made, and the 8 tackles Foxy made, and the 3 miss tackles Foxy made and then we can analyse the reason for their performances. The try is a classic example of espn category definitions:

BOD not missing a tackle - true but only because he didn't even get to O'Connor before he distributed, and
Foxy missing a tackle - true but only because there was a 3 on 2 and he had no chance to cover both.

So quite true the stats highlights Foxy "miss tackle", and BOD still with a 12-0 performance, but the actual passage of play reveals a different story, a clear examples of lies, damn lies and statistics.

I at no point stated that Davies or BOD had a good game, I also have been quite clear in that they were played under GatlandBall orders, and that's the reason for their inept performance i.e. dictated by tactics and not what both players can do if allowed. What I don't subscribe to is a level of poster who cherry picks data to validate a players performance and conversely to run down another.

Re: The try. BOD was in the middle of the breakdown almost on the line when as captain he should have been screaming for the "lurking forwards around the fringes" to defend the line. He most certainly didn't defend cleverly as it was certain as taxes and death that 5 metres out Oz was going to spread it wide, at that position he should have been defending the centre channel not scurrying across the gain line.

Quite agree the try was created well before the final execution, poor tackles about a minute before and a miss-tackle about 30 seconds before put the pressure on us.

There was no 3 on 2,it was 3 on 3 how can you miss that there was a winger outside Davies.

So much has been discussed about the tackling that missed the try when the entire bigger picture has been missed. The try would have been scored another way if that one had been stopped. Momentum was with the Ozzies in the last 10 minutes from the second Horwill called the scrum . It wasnt a matter of who or how the try was going to be scored just a matter of when.

The entire side was to blame for not keeping the well built up pressure on the Ozzies for the entire match- NOT the one or two individuals that might have been in the 'envious' position to stop the winning try. They are merely the scapegoats that some just feel they have to have to feel better.

Ridiculous.

The Lions got pinned back into their own 22 for about 10 minutes. When that happens a try is coming unless the team in possession feics it up. O'Driscoll said as much in his post match interview. In fact he even pointed to his own loose kick when he must have been unaware the Lions had advantage. And that wasn't the only moment in which the Lions failed to deal with some unrelenting Aussie pressure. The Lions collectively lost it.

O'Driscoll didn't make Davies miss his tackle. And by the way, O'Driscoll didn't force Halfpenny to take the last kick against his will. Get a grip lads. There's no need to make up ridiculous fairytales to try and pin the blame on anyone who's not from your nation. Getting pinned back for so long and eventually conceding the try was the teams failure. And also credit to the Aussie's for making the killer blow when other teams might have let the heads drop.

 I wouldn't say it was a team failure but having watched it about 389765890 times I can conclude that in all there were 7 players to blame and strangely none of them were welsh  

Taylorman wrote:So much has been discussed about the tackling that missed the try when the entire bigger picture has been missed. The try would have been scored another way if that one had been stopped. Momentum was with the Ozzies in the last 10 minutes from the second Horwill called the scrum . It wasnt a matter of who or how the try was going to be scored just a matter of when.

The entire side was to blame for not keeping the well built up pressure on the Ozzies for the entire match- NOT the one or two individuals that might have been in the 'envious' position to stop the winning try. They are merely the scapegoats that some just feel they have to have to feel better.

Ridiculous.

I think most realize this Taylorman some have just taken exception to a certain poster trying to blame O'Driscoll for the try.

Yep, seems like blaming someone goes part and parcel with a Lions tour...mores the pity because the concept is great. Just shows what these guys are up against (coaches and players) when they not only have to battle with the opposition...

Artful_Dodger wrote:

Taylorman wrote:So much has been discussed about the tackling that missed the try when the entire bigger picture has been missed. The try would have been scored another way if that one had been stopped. Momentum was with the Ozzies in the last 10 minutes from the second Horwill called the scrum . It wasnt a matter of who or how the try was going to be scored just a matter of when.

The entire side was to blame for not keeping the well built up pressure on the Ozzies for the entire match- NOT the one or two individuals that might have been in the 'envious' position to stop the winning try. They are merely the scapegoats that some just feel they have to have to feel better.

Ridiculous.

I think most realize this Taylorman some have just taken exception to a certain poster trying to blame O'Driscoll for the try.

Smoke screens abound.  

Dodgy get the facts correct

Truly amazing how posters cherry pick not only data from stats (poorly collected data at that) sites, but others state something which was not true at all.
I countered the argument that Davies was poor compared to BOD (based on cherry picking the espn stats) and that he (Davies) was also to blame for the try. So this was NOT started by someone blaming BOD but a few posters reacting to others blaming Davies for the try and his poor performance compared to BOD.

flyhalffactory wrote:

Smoke screens abound.

Dodgy get the facts correct

Truly amazing how posters cherry pick not only data from stats (poorly collected data at that) sites, but others state something which was not true at all.
I countered the argument that Davies was poor compared to BOD (based on cherry picking the espn stats) and that he (Davies) was also to blame for the try. So this was NOT started by someone blaming BOD but a few posters reacting to others blaming Davies for the try and his poor performance compared to BOD.

We're not going to start all this again, fly?  I really don't want to but:

Fact is NO, fly, NO this wasn't started by some people reacting to others blaming Davies for the try.  That's a complete untruth.  Some people (moi and others) reacted to Seagultaf blaming BOD for the try.  

Seagultaf started the ball rolling.

Seagultaf wrote: "Clearly the best team won, the Lions forwards were poor in the set piece in particular. Vunipola is not a starting test prop, he got absolutely mullered in the first half!

The biggest problem for the Lions though was the bench, BOD was out on his feet with 10mins to go but with no centre on the bench he stayed on and got caught out of position for the winning try. Also Warburton going off and Croft coming on affected the breakdown."

So yeah, I said he was talking crap.  He was.  Then you decided to tell me how Seagultaf was right - BOD was responsible.  And I said you were talking crap too.  You and Mr Seagultaf were the ones blaming someone for the try

Only one player missed the tackle...it wasn't BOD.  That's the truth and will remain the truth into eternity.  It's for others to decide to blame a player.  I don't blame Davies or BOD.  But people here are terrified of their players being blamed for something so they get their counter-attack in first.  Seagultaf being a case in point.  No stats, written proof above.

flyhalffactory wrote:

Artful_Dodger wrote:

Taylorman wrote:So much has been discussed about the tackling that missed the try when the entire bigger picture has been missed. The try would have been scored another way if that one had been stopped. Momentum was with the Ozzies in the last 10 minutes from the second Horwill called the scrum . It wasnt a matter of who or how the try was going to be scored just a matter of when.

The entire side was to blame for not keeping the well built up pressure on the Ozzies for the entire match- NOT the one or two individuals that might have been in the 'envious' position to stop the winning try. They are merely the scapegoats that some just feel they have to have to feel better.

Ridiculous.

I think most realize this Taylorman some have just taken exception to a certain poster trying to blame O'Driscoll for the try.

Smoke screens abound.  

Dodgy get the facts correct

Truly amazing how posters cherry pick not only data from stats (poorly collected data at that) sites, but others state something which was not true at all.
I countered the argument that Davies was poor compared to BOD (based on cherry picking the espn stats) and that he (Davies) was also to blame for the try. So this was NOT started by someone blaming BOD but a few posters reacting to others blaming Davies for the try and his poor performance compared to BOD.

Wrong.

Think SecretFly has summed it,  Seagultaf was at pains to exonerate Davies by blaming BOD (and you backed him up) for the Wallabies try and many pointed out that actually Davies was the one who missed his man, not that it really matters.

Dodgy

Read the topic and see where this first reared its ugly head. Its quite clear that the stats (espn) were used to promote one player over another.

And I never used the site to blame one player but I (like so many on this topic) pointed out Davies certainly wasn't to blame even though some posters have attempted to use the stats to discredit him. (quite cowardly really)

Just for you as I have done for fly........... this is a utube extract of the try so we can see "who was to blame"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQuD6wOePeM

Pause it at
3.00 mins
look where BOD is!, almost at the rear of  breakdown i.e. not covering the centre channel next to Foxy - at this point there is a 3 on 2 potential overlap. BOD is trying to pull in some exhausted forwards to cover the defensive gaps. Foxy is attempting to get BOD to cover O'Connor. No ones fault as BOD is covering the potential gap at the breakdown while trying to cojole an exhausted Lydiate amongst others.

3.05 mins
Its quite clear that at this point there is a 3 on 2 overlap. BOD realising this attempts to cover the defensive line by running to tackle O'Connor. BOD cant be everywhere but by "encouraging the exhausted forwards to plug the breakdown he has been delinquent in covering the midfield channel. Now what does Foxy do here?, attempt to force O'Connor into a mistake by rush tackling him or does he hope that BOD can tackle him while he covers Ashley-Cooper..... what a dilemma!.

3.07 mins
3 Aussies in full flight are still running full force against 2 Lions (Foxy and Bowe). We are now on the FIVE METRE line and BOD still hasn't nailed O'Connor, Foxy has now a decision to make: go for O'Connor or delay?. He delays...... BOD tackles O'Connor but the ball has already gone

3.08 mins
........the ball has already gone alright to the steaming like a train Ashley-Cooper going through the gap, Foxy attempts to readjust his positioning to stop the Aussie centre alas he has no hope.

Foxys fault?...... don't think so.
BODs fault?...... don't think so.

Where was the Lions FB?.......... are we going to apportion the blame on every individual who in the text book scenario should have been in the correct defensive position. By the way this all happened over EIGHT SECONDS, so makes the blame apportionment even more ridiculous.

If we are hyper-critical the forwards should have been plugging the gaps in the breakdown, allowing the captain (BOD) to concentrate on being in the correct defensive position thus being able to stop O'Connor.

And what do the stats show
Foxy - add yet another missed tackle to his already "dire tackle performance"
BOD - maintains his perfect 12-0 tackle count

Sigh - Well done    

HammerofThunor wrote:Wow. This is some serious Inception Poopie. Bending reality to suit yourself. Please teach me, sensei.

 

Now I know this has been cleaned up but what the hell is inception poopie ?  

Artful_Dodger wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

Artful_Dodger wrote:

Taylorman wrote:So much has been discussed about the tackling that missed the try when the entire bigger picture has been missed. The try would have been scored another way if that one had been stopped. Momentum was with the Ozzies in the last 10 minutes from the second Horwill called the scrum . It wasnt a matter of who or how the try was going to be scored just a matter of when.

The entire side was to blame for not keeping the well built up pressure on the Ozzies for the entire match- NOT the one or two individuals that might have been in the 'envious' position to stop the winning try. They are merely the scapegoats that some just feel they have to have to feel better.

Ridiculous.

I think most realize this Taylorman some have just taken exception to a certain poster trying to blame O'Driscoll for the try.

Smoke screens abound.  

Dodgy get the facts correct

Truly amazing how posters cherry pick not only data from stats (poorly collected data at that) sites, but others state something which was not true at all.
I countered the argument that Davies was poor compared to BOD (based on cherry picking the espn stats) and that he (Davies) was also to blame for the try. So this was NOT started by someone blaming BOD but a few posters reacting to others blaming Davies for the try and his poor performance compared to BOD.

Wrong.

Think SecretFly has summed it,  Seagultaf was at pains to exonerate Davies by blaming BOD (and you backed him up) for the Wallabies try and many pointed out that actually Davies was the one who missed his man, not that it really matters.

Look I don't know who you are or what your agenda is but if you are defending outside someone who looks to be struggling to make his ground and recognise the risk of the attacking player simply gliding though the gap between you and the man failing to make his tackle, then you do get pulled out of position, which is what happened to Davies. You can argue that he should have stayed with AAC but if he had, then O'Connor may well have scored himself with BOD reaching for the tackle with a yard or so to the line. It was a no win situation for Davies, one in which any decision he made Aus were going to score.

I wonder if any of the people spouting off here have ever played the game let alone in the position they choose to wax lyrical Love sacks. Maybe Davies should have stayed with his man (as he was probably taught as a child) and let BOD take the rap when JOC reached through the out pf position BOD to score. But hey he wasn't as concerned with that as you Meat trombone soloist are he just wanted to win

I didn't see the game but I would say it sounds like O'Connor and AAC did a good job.