Time to be realistic and adult about things...

After what seems to have been a difficult weekend for both Welsh fans and mods, I thought i'd start a thread to get everyone back on track to the reason we are all here, talking rugby!

I recognise Englands improved performance against Wales (it could hardly get worse after last year) is just what a lot of us needed, and the changing room needed it too, but lets be realistic about a few things...

The Welsh front row have not become bad players over night, it's clear we have reffing concistency issues, as we had last year. But with the new engagement laws added to a lot of analysis work they were never going to be as dominant as they had been forever, thats not to say the wheels have fallen off, just hit a bump and look shaky.

If we're being realistic Wales probably could've and should've scored at least 2 tries, pressure was the force behind some pretty glaring errors.

England were very hungry for this, and needed it way more than Wales did, going into 2015 RWC on the back of 4/5 losses on the bounce to Wales, and last 2 HQ losses too? We just had the hunger to win the game, whereas I think Wales were trying not to make mistakes first up!

If I'm being honest there were 3 key areas as to why England won;

1, the yellow card. I felt a bit for Jenkins originally, but he was warned and penalised, even after that he didn't recognise he was being watched and engaged the exact same way he had been, so he lost my sympathy.

2. Welsh half backs. Webb and Preistland just looked out of their depth, simple passes were executed poorly, timings between the backline and these 2 were way off, Webb was beating to a different drum to everyone else, and the forwards looked like they had no idea what he was doing, both kicked to a plan but did so sloppily!

3, absolutely no cahones whatsoever!!! At 72nd minute, we kicked long to half penny, outside of his 22, Wales were down by 11 points and needed something drastic, what was that something? A boot long downfield for territory with a splintered chase. How were Wales ever going to win this game if they didn't at least try? Why did no player grab the others and say 'Stuff this, we are on the verge of losing, lets try a trick play/counter attack/something different' Theres no way halfpenny gets dropped for running back a ball with both wings outside him, 11 points down with 8 minutes to go!! Even if Gatlands plan A is that rigid there has to be room for an attempt at getting something out of the game?!

I think momentum is key, but it always stops, England now have some, although we don't look like a team to worry NZ or SA yet, but at least we look like the makings of a team who potentially could next year. Wales have been stuttering, but with such a huge Lions contingent, who for a lot of guys have not played too much rugby since, their execution of the plan is the issue, players have been battered by the lions tour, then injured to return in time for international rugby, look at the players who are currently out for other nations...

Parling, Youngs, Youngs, Cole, Corbisiero, Vunipola all injured partially due to a tough lions summer, SOB, murray, Bowe, Hogg, Grant all had long spells on the sidelines too, it's not surprising that Wales forwards especially are struggling a touch, I think if someone recorded injury rates this season of the lions squad we'd all be more sympathetic to the players, even the 11 players above, who were considered 6N best are either not playing, or not playing that well at present.

In summation, France are the only team to take an actual backward step in recent years, Wales, Ireland England have little between them except circumstance, and Italy and Scotland are yet to take that next step to challenge for silverware of late.

Congrats to all winners this weekend, and to the losing teams, there is always next weekend...

I think Ban Ki-moon has some competition!
Nice post.

If I'm being honest there were 3 key areas as to why England won;

1, the yellow card. I felt a bit for Jenkins originally, but he was warned and penalised, even after that he didn't recognise he was being watched and engaged the exact same way he had been, so he lost my sympathy.

I think the yellow had little impact on the game actually. Wales actually seemed to step it up a bit and I don't think we done much damage on the score board with Jenkins off.

6-3 while Jenkins was off.

my point was previously to the card Wales had a bit of pressure, were recycling ball and breaking the line, the Roberts kick was, although poor, a result of a broken line, quick recycle and a random huge miss pass to a deep roberts lining up a crash.

The yellow card stopped all Wales attacking threat and stemmed their momentum.

is this a wind-up? without 4 completely unforced england penalties the score would have been 29-6. how does that compute in your new realism?

wales front row is broken. as is their front 5 effectiveness. yes now is the time to ask tough questions. because without go-forward ball and kickable pens from scrums wales lose every match. FACT.

The yellow card broke our backs, England scored 2 opportunist tries and didn't look like scoring ball in hand because our defense was solid, wales didn't look like scoring at all and failed to maintain any possession and any pressure.
Wales 9/10 axis was a big mistake.

Halfpenny was awesome.

Watching the game I never really felt Wales offered much threat. Every time they got themselves into a decent position they kicked the ball. Badly. It was like they were under instruction from the coaches and couldn't play what was in front of them.

Scratch wrote:The yellow card broke our backs, England scored 2 opportunist tries and didn't look like scoring ball in hand because our defense was solid, wales didn't look like scoring at all and failed to maintain any possession and any pressure.
Wales 9/10 axis was a big mistake.

Halfpenny was awesome.

Care's try was opportunistic (unbelievably naïve from the Welsh), Burrell's was very well worked and planned and the one that got away resembled something I would have expected from a rampant Welsh side allowed to pass the ball.

care s try was a typical 9s try . seen           Howley and Philips do the same . Wales switched off and care seen the opportunity. hense  oppositunies try . the other was well worked try . they scored too tries   we scored none . time to change tactics kicking down the field hoping the opposition make a mistake or hold on to the ball after being tackled is old hat and not working anymore with the better teams . England kicked to touch knowing our lineout is rubbish and they scored the second try from it .

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Scratch wrote:The yellow card broke our backs, England scored 2 opportunist tries and didn't look like scoring ball in hand because our defense was solid, wales didn't look like scoring at all and failed to maintain any possession and any pressure.
Wales 9/10 axis was a big mistake.

Halfpenny was awesome.

Care's try was opportunistic (unbelievably naïve from the Welsh),  Burrell's was very well worked and planned and the one that got away resembled something I would have expected from a rampant Welsh side allowed to pass the ball.

Both tries were off the back off pressure in the Welsh 22, that's not opportunist (another interesting comment from Scratch).

England should of scored more tries but we messed up overlaps on a number of occasions.

The score line doesn't really tell the story of the game, England should have won by more.

As the Spanish representative I feel compelled to point out there is no word in Spanish cahones. The letter h is never pronounced in Spanish. Cojones means balls or huevos (which also means eggs). Cajones means drawers. The h may be how many people see the pronunciation of the word but it has feelings just like any other word in any language.   

As for the spirit of the OP, you say that it's time to be realistic and so I might disagree with the contention that 'France are the only team to take an actual backward step in recent years, Wales, Ireland England have little between them except circumstance, and Italy and Scotland are yet to take that next step to challenge for silverware of late.'

If we're talking about recent years in terms of results then on average it's difficult to compare those three sides. Ireland had a horror year last year and Wales have had two consecutive championships. But from what I see in the evolution of the teams' performances, Ireland and England have stepped up a level and Wales have taken a step back. There's certainly no need to panic but I would hope that Gatland is sat down at the end of this tournament and told to assess his performance and how he can tweak a few things to improve on this year's performance because it has been much like last week's game a little underwhelming. Harsh you might say but that's based on the high standards Wales set in the last two tournaments. It isn't beyond this team to keep demanding those levels of performances and when it doesn't happen, there shouldn't be talk of we're more or less in the same position as we were before. It should be how can we get back to where we were before because we're clearly not there at the moment. Talk of not conceding real tries or hypothetically scoring tries is just a smokescreen. You have to be calm but more critical than that.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Scratch wrote:The yellow card broke our backs, England scored 2 opportunist tries and didn't look like scoring ball in hand because our defense was solid, wales didn't look like scoring at all and failed to maintain any possession and any pressure.
Wales 9/10 axis was a big mistake.

Halfpenny was awesome.

Care's try was opportunistic (unbelievably naïve from the Welsh),  Burrell's was very well worked and planned and the one that got away resembled something I would have expected from a rampant Welsh side allowed to pass the ball.

Both tries were off the back off pressure in the Welsh 22, that's not opportunist (another interesting comment from Scratch).

England should of scored more tries but we messed up overlaps on a number of occasions.  

The score line doesn't really tell the story of the game, England should have won by more.

neither of england's tries were as a result of breaking our defense ball in hand

Care's was opportunist and as a result of poor discipline at a pen

Burrell's a grubber

Point is England did not break our defensive line ball in hand to score

And the score line does tell the 'story of the game', perfectly in fact, because that is what the score was.

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Scratch wrote:The yellow card broke our backs, England scored 2 opportunist tries and didn't look like scoring ball in hand because our defense was solid, wales didn't look like scoring at all and failed to maintain any possession and any pressure.
Wales 9/10 axis was a big mistake.

Halfpenny was awesome.

Care's try was opportunistic (unbelievably naïve from the Welsh),  Burrell's was very well worked and planned and the one that got away resembled something I would have expected from a rampant Welsh side allowed to pass the ball.

Both tries were off the back off pressure in the Welsh 22, that's not opportunist (another interesting comment from Scratch).

England should of scored more tries but we messed up overlaps on a number of occasions.  

The score line doesn't really tell the story of the game, England should have won by more.

neither of england's tries were as a result of breaking our defense ball in hand

Care's was opportunist and as a result of poor discipline at a pen

Burrell's a grubber

Point is England did not break our defensive line ball in hand to score

And the score line does tell the 'story of the game', perfectly in fact, because that is what the score was.

Its a given that Care's try was opportunistic - but then it leads to a gap on the scoreboard with all the additional pressures that implies.

As for the Burrell try, it seems like you are implying that it would have more value had he been passed the ball and run through to score.

I think it was a delightful piece of skill and says a lot about the 36/Burrell combination.

George Carlin wrote:Quins - if you re-read the general tenet of the threads above, I hope you agree that your tone is  probably unnecessarily aggressive. It's a good OP and is genuinely meant.

To be fair to Quin, i read this as a wind up aswell. Very much a Wales played badly nothing to do with England playing well....

Oh and to the OP..

think momentum is key, but it always stops, England now have some, although we don't look like a team to worry NZ or SA yet, but at least we look like the makings of a team who potentially could next year.

Erm...  ...really? England beat them in the AI's in 2012, then nearly beat them in the AI's in 2013 having given away a stupid amount of points in the first 20 mins....? How does that calculate as not having a team to worry the AB's???

Reffing consistency issues?

Am I missing something?

When have you ever been allowed to bore in at 90 degrees? The fact you're finally picked up on it is not a refereeing issue.

The most obvious inconsistency in that game was to penalise Hartley for taking Faletau in the air (irrespective of 'jumping into the tackle' arguments) but letting North off for doing the same on Nowell.

That's inconsistency. Correctly calling a break of the laws of the game is not.

And I don't think the card made much difference anyway, score barely changed.

Agree with Quins (harshly reported and reprimanded, especially given what Scratch appears to get away with) and Geordie - basically writing off the England win by saying it was only because England got lucky with an unfair card and Wales unlucky to have missed to 'certain' tries, is akin to wummery.

Hmmm butterfingers, only 1/2p's boot kept the score from being embarrassing - I fear a bit for your welsh side with his unfortunate injury. Jenkins' YC was a bit of a welsh godsend as it got an under-performing prop replaced with someone better (on the day at least). That game England were just better right across the park - quicker, more determined, better execution of moves, more confident.

Why has my post been reported and buy who??

I know I'm only new to these rugby boards but this is ridiculous.

It does seem a bit of an over reaction by somebody TopHat... I can't see anything offensive that you have written there.

Mind you, looking at it, there's a lot of reporting going on. I guess people have different levels of tolerance when it comes to getting offended.

the answer as to "why" is contained in the answer to "who"

whoever they may be they are clearly, angry, petty, bitter and have been told to muzzle it so are resorting to annoying the mods in more subtle ways that wont result in a ban!

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Scratch wrote:The yellow card broke our backs, England scored 2 opportunist tries and didn't look like scoring ball in hand because our defense was solid, wales didn't look like scoring at all and failed to maintain any possession and any pressure.
Wales 9/10 axis was a big mistake.

Halfpenny was awesome.

Care's try was opportunistic (unbelievably naïve from the Welsh),  Burrell's was very well worked and planned and the one that got away resembled something I would have expected from a rampant Welsh side allowed to pass the ball.

Both tries were off the back off pressure in the Welsh 22, that's not opportunist (another interesting comment from Scratch).

England should of scored more tries but we messed up overlaps on a number of occasions.  

The score line doesn't really tell the story of the game, England should have won by more.

neither of england's tries were as a result of breaking our defense ball in hand

Care's was opportunist and as a result of poor discipline at a pen

Burrell's a grubber

Point is England did not break our defensive line ball in hand to score

And the score line does tell the 'story of the game', perfectly in fact, because that is what the score was.

So a try doesn't really count unless it's "ball in hand"..........that's sinking to new lows even for you.

Unfortuantly if you manage to kick the ball past the defensive line and re-gather it, that is breaking the line. I know it's a little hard to understand how England could possibly get two tries but it happened, just move on.

I'm really unfussed by the win now, it's been and gone. What interests me is how you (and a few others) are trying to claim some sort of moral victory from a game England dominated.

Can we please just move on?

Thank god for that. It means we actually draw with Wales in 2012 rather than them winning the slam with Williams' kick and lucky bounce.

back to the OP, the reason i thought it was a wind-up, and still do in fact, is that it is wrong on a few levels IMO.

1) jenkins yellow card was awarded when the game had already gotten away from Wales. England were already playing tactically and territorially at that point given their 11-point cushion, and the "possession" that Wales were enjoying was in parts of the pitch that were not at all threatening to England

2) yes the welsh half backs were poor, but guess what, this has always always been a weakness for wales. Philips is a flanker, so when the forwards are going forward he is great, but Wales have not had a world class 10 in recent memory, and their 9s are all untried at international level. nothing new here.

3) cojones doesnt come into it. sticking to a rigid gamplan does. Wales could not get front foot ball against a far more dynamic england front 5. All of Wales problems stem from being outplayed in the front 5 at set piece and in open play, get exacerbated by a poor 9/10 and consigned to the dustbin by a kicking game that was too long with no chase. Wales clearly wanted to win, but they have forgotten how to create.

The scoreline was rather flattering to Wales. 4 of the penalties 1/2P kicked were self-inflicted by England when they were under zero pressure (1st scrum, faletau jump, hartley accidental offside after may fell over roberts, lawes not realising webb still had downward pressure).

england also eased up attacking-wise in the last 20 minutes and happily gave Wales the ball in their 22 knowing the limited threat this posed. As SCW (yes i know he's annoying) said at half time, it really was men against boys (responding to Gatland's midweek jibe), and england were only really operating at 75% effort.

i saw some comments regarding breaking the line somewhere on this thread. England broke the Welsh line frequently, Lawes, Launchbury, Burrell, Nowell, Wilson, 36 all made significant breaks. Whether they resulted in tries from the specific line break is completely irrelevant. The line breaks are what caused the pressure that caused Hibbard to knock the ball away from an offside position (1yd from welsh line) that conceded the pen that Care scored. For example.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Scratch wrote:The yellow card broke our backs, England scored 2 opportunist tries and didn't look like scoring ball in hand because our defense was solid, wales didn't look like scoring at all and failed to maintain any possession and any pressure.
Wales 9/10 axis was a big mistake.

Halfpenny was awesome.

Care's try was opportunistic (unbelievably naïve from the Welsh),  Burrell's was very well worked and planned and the one that got away resembled something I would have expected from a rampant Welsh side allowed to pass the ball.

Both tries were off the back off pressure in the Welsh 22, that's not opportunist (another interesting comment from Scratch).

England should of scored more tries but we messed up overlaps on a number of occasions.  

The score line doesn't really tell the story of the game, England should have won by more.

neither of england's tries were as a result of breaking our defense ball in hand

Care's was opportunist and as a result of poor discipline at a pen

Burrell's a grubber

Point is England did not break our defensive line ball in hand to score

And the score line does tell the 'story of the game', perfectly in fact, because that is what the score was.

So a try doesn't really count unless it's "ball in hand"..........that's sinking to new lows even for you.

Unfortuantly if you manage to kick the ball past the defensive line and re-gather it, that is breaking the line. I know it's a little hard to understand how England could possibly get two tries but it happened, just move on.

I'm really unfussed by the win now, it's been and gone. What interests me is how you (and a few others) are trying to claim some sort of moral victory from a game England dominated.

Can we please just move on?

Oh dear, it seems it is you who is unable to move on as you keep laboring the same tired point.

Enlgand won , what ore do you want.

It doesn't matter about the manner of their victory. The yellow card changed the game and England didn't break our defensive line ball in hand. Wales had a shocker and England benefited, these things happen to Wales fans but we consistently get back the following season.

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Scratch wrote:The yellow card broke our backs, England scored 2 opportunist tries and didn't look like scoring ball in hand because our defense was solid, wales didn't look like scoring at all and failed to maintain any possession and any pressure.
Wales 9/10 axis was a big mistake.

Halfpenny was awesome.

Care's try was opportunistic (unbelievably naïve from the Welsh),  Burrell's was very well worked and planned and the one that got away resembled something I would have expected from a rampant Welsh side allowed to pass the ball.

Both tries were off the back off pressure in the Welsh 22, that's not opportunist (another interesting comment from Scratch).

England should of scored more tries but we messed up overlaps on a number of occasions.  

The score line doesn't really tell the story of the game, England should have won by more.

neither of england's tries were as a result of breaking our defense ball in hand

Care's was opportunist and as a result of poor discipline at a pen

Burrell's a grubber

Point is England did not break our defensive line ball in hand to score

And the score line does tell the 'story of the game', perfectly in fact, because that is what the score was.

So a try doesn't really count unless it's "ball in hand"..........that's sinking to new lows even for you.

Unfortuantly if you manage to kick the ball past the defensive line and re-gather it, that is breaking the line. I know it's a little hard to understand how England could possibly get two tries but it happened, just move on.

I'm really unfussed by the win now, it's been and gone. What interests me is how you (and a few others) are trying to claim some sort of moral victory from a game England dominated.

Can we please just move on?

Oh dear, it seems it is you who is unable to move on as you keep laboring the same tired point.

Enlgand won , what ore do you want.

It doesn't matter about the manner of their victory. The yellow card changed the game and England didn't break our defensive line ball in hand. Wales had a shocker and England benefited, these things happen to Wales fans but we consistently get back the following season.

What did David Wilson do early doors? Hint: a few moments later Care was dashing over the line (ball in hand).

I would like to make a point in regards to penalties and tries.

Penalties conceded in itself does not suggest whether a team would or should have won by more or less points.

It is the manner in which the penalties were conceded that tells you much about the pressure or percieved pressure a team was under.

Take scrum penalties (of which Wales conceded a lot of this weekend)

Boring in
Dropping bind
Collapsing
Popping up.

Breakdowns.

Did you concede a penalty whilst on attack?
Did you concede a penalty in defence?
Were you in your redzone under pressure or was it way down field?

Offsides

Offside because you were in front of the kick?
Were you offside because your defence was under pressure in your red zone or was it mistimed to rush defence or charging down a kick?

If a team contiuously conceded penalties in cynical play you can suggest they should have conceded more tries, but if it was for "unforced errors" such as poor discipline then that is altogether another issue.

As far as tries are concerned, it really doesn't matter how a try is scored.

We may think a quick tap is opportunist, but that is a misnomer, it is exploiting unorganised defence, a chip kick or grubber, is again exploiting defence, this time a rush defence and there is no sweeper.

Scoring a try from counter is once again taking advantage of unorganised defence.

Set piece tries again is using either the position in a line out (the back) for quick ball, or at a scrum, by swinging the scrum to either the blind side or open side, depending where you have stacked the numbers.

Statistics won't tell you how defences were broken, they simply say so many defenders were beaten, or so many line breaks were taken.

But it doesn't tell you whether it was due to a counter attack or set phase.

You can further look at missed tackles, which again is not entirely correct. You may want to say my team caused 30 missed tackles against your team.

The reality is missed tackles is one aspect of a statistic, but what about ineffective tackles?

What about the desperate tackle from a forward on a back that is at full throttle and chances of making the tackle is slim to none anyway.

So to decide whether one team would have won by 30 due to this or taht statistic does not tell the whole story.

Sorry for the long rant.

One of the reasons the Welsh defence wasn't often breached with ball in hand was because they had 14 players in the defensive line. Halfpenny was left back on his own, which is why the English kicks often found touch deep in the Welsh half. If you keep players back you're more likely to be able to run the ball back with support but the defensive line is more likely to be breached. Not exactly complicated stuff.

Perhaps the way forwards is to have 15 man defensive lines with no-one committing to the rucks and then discounting any scores from territorial kicks.

This

"The yellow card changed the game and England didn't break our defensive line ball in hand. Wales had a shocker and England benefited, these things happen to Wales fans but we consistently get back the following season."

1) yellow card happened too late to have any bearing on the final outcome. welsh not winning penalties at the scrum was a far bigger problem for their normal gameplan than a yellow card during which england scored 6 points and wales 3.

2) regarding line breaks. that actual FACTS are thusly:
England 596 metres gained, 26 defenders beaten, 6 clean breaks (by 6 different players)
Wales 430m gained, 24 defenders beaten, 6 clean breaks (3 by North)

3) "Wales had a shocker." This statement is what particularly gets people's goat. Wales did not have a shocker. They played about as well as they were allowed to, given the opposition, and the abilities of their players, and their rigid gameplan. England, just like Ireland, were more responsible for the outcomes than Wales.

Had Wale spicked Philips and Biggar it would have been the usual story.

Our biggest error was picking Webb on the back of France and Priestalnd who doe snot have the psychological make up for an international 10.

Wales occasionally have bad days, this one was awful and a lack of concentration at the pen and a lost line out let England in

Well done to them for exploiting those errors.

It should also be noted that most of England's Lions are out injured and yet Wales fielded 12….there is a well documented post Lions hangover and when you make up the majority of the side then that hangover will be intense

Normal service will resume next year at Millie   

Scratch, you don't have to bleat out excuses every post.

Wales got beat, it's over.

Just suck it up and move on, it really doesn't matter.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Scratch, you don't have to bleat out excuses every post.

Wales got beat, it's over.

Just suck it up and move on, it really doesn't matter.

not making excuses whatsoever, just explaining how we lost the game. I said well done, what more do you want Pooly, if nothing why don't you move on. good lad.  

 Scratch....

Dont worry im sure your rugby bosses will be arranging some fixtures for your team , against teams you might actually beat...of course they've already ruled out Japan and Fiji...

I don't think the scrum had much of a baring on the game

Lawes was the main difference. He stopped RP in his tracks and cut the welsh backline out of the game.

Already looking toward to the MS next year - gethin will have a point to prove

England were better , Wales were pants.

I think Scratch should be allowed to make some points about rugby on a rugby forum.

GeordieFalcon wrote: Scratch....

Dont worry im sure your rugby bosses will be arranging some fixtures for your team , against teams you might actually beat...of course they've already ruled out Japan and Fiji...

agreed, we will have to play teams we have 75% win ratios over since the last RWC... :head scratch: let me think...

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Scratch, you don't have to bleat out excuses every post.

Wales got beat, it's over.

Just suck it up and move on, it really doesn't matter.

not making excuses whatsoever, just explaining how we lost the game. I said well done, what more do you want Pooly, if nothing why don't you move on. good lad.  

You constantly revert to your normal self though.

If there wasn't a yellow, our line wasnt broken for tries(makes no sense), if Bigger and Phillips had of started we'd have won, bla bla bla bla.....

You're such a poor loser it's unreal.

Most posters are not digging at Wales after the defeat, they're just responding to your insane ramblings.

It's coming across as sad and desperate, the game is in the past, move on.

Sgt.Pooly, we have an agreement in place not to attack the poster.

Please stick to the topic, every poster including Scratch has a right to provide an opinion, even if you don't agree with it.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Scratch wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Scratch, you don't have to bleat out excuses every post.

Wales got beat, it's over.

Just suck it up and move on, it really doesn't matter.

not making excuses whatsoever, just explaining how we lost the game. I said well done, what more do you want Pooly, if nothing why don't you move on. good lad.  

You constantly revert to your normal self though.

If there wasn't a yellow, our line was broken for tries(makes no sense), if Bigger and Phillips had of started we'd have won, bla bla bla bla.....

You're such a poor loser it's unreal.

Most posters are not digging at Wales after the defeat, they're just responding to your insane ramblings.

It's coming across as sad and desperate, the game is in the past, move on.

yet you always have to bite and therefore refuse to move on yourself

while you make personal attacks and call me insane - i will report it - i just have an opinion and am expressing it while not attacking you or your opinion

that is a forum'

it seems you prefer everyone just accede to your opinion and version of events

i think that reflects on your personality

and pooly, i am not interested in what you think at all, but fyi i am not a poor loser, i congratulated england but i won't sit back and watch you wallow in it, you and several other posters on here have absolutely no humility and there is nothing worse win my book than a poor winner, smacks of insecurity.

I'm not attacking him, I'm giving an opinion about his posts.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I'm not attacking him, I'm giving an opinion about his posts.

suggesting i am insane because i have a contrary opinion is nothing but an attack poly

The next time the two of you have anything to say to one another that is not topic related or personal in any way I will immediately send you to the sinbin for 7 days.

Yu have had your warnings, I am now done debating with the two of you.

Scratch, not sure who you have a 75% win record over since the last world cup. Certainly not England.

From the top of my head it's

England: 67%
Samoa: 0%
Argentina: 50%
New Zealand: 0%
France: 100%
Ireland: 33%
Australia: 0%
South Africa: 0%
Italy: 100%
Scotland: 100%
EDIT:    Japan: 50%

Not sure who else you've played.

EDIT 2: Just to be fair, here's England's

Wales: 33%
Fiji: 100%
Argentina: 100%
New Zealand: 50%
France: 67%
Ireland: 100%
Australia: 50%
South Africa: 0%
Italy: 100%
Scotland: 100%

uncontested scrums anyone?

Quite a few 0% in there!

quinsforever wrote:back to the OP, the reason i thought it was a wind-up, and still do in fact, is that it is wrong on a few levels IMO.

1) jenkins yellow card was awarded when the game had already gotten away from Wales. England were already playing tactically and territorially at that point given their 11-point cushion, and the "possession" that Wales were enjoying was in parts of the pitch that were not at all threatening to England

2) yes the welsh half backs were poor, but guess what, this has always always been a weakness for wales. Philips is a flanker, so when the forwards are going forward he is great, but Wales have not had a world class 10 in recent memory, and their 9s are all untried at international level. nothing new here.

3) cojones doesnt come into it. sticking to a rigid gamplan does. Wales could not get front foot ball against a far more dynamic england front 5. All of Wales problems stem from being outplayed in the front 5 at set piece and in open play, get exacerbated by a poor 9/10 and consigned to the dustbin by a kicking game that was too long with no chase. Wales clearly wanted to win, but they have forgotten how to create.

The scoreline was rather flattering to Wales. 4 of the penalties 1/2P kicked were self-inflicted by England when they were under zero pressure (1st scrum, faletau jump, hartley accidental offside after may fell over roberts, lawes not realising webb still had downward pressure).

england also eased up attacking-wise in the last 20 minutes and happily gave Wales the ball in their 22 knowing the limited threat this posed. As SCW (yes i know he's annoying) said at half time, it really was men against boys (responding to Gatland's midweek jibe), and england were only really operating at 75% effort.

i saw some comments regarding breaking the line somewhere on this thread. England broke the Welsh line frequently, Lawes, Launchbury, Burrell, Nowell, Wilson, 36 all made significant breaks. Whether they resulted in tries from the specific line break is completely irrelevant. The line breaks are what caused the pressure that caused Hibbard to knock the ball away from an offside position (1yd from welsh line) that conceded the pen that Care scored. For example.

Completely agree with this, bar England operating at 75%. Otherwise I would say spot on. I too read the OP as a bit of a tongue-in-cheek number, nicely summarised by the 'don't have a team to worry NZ or SA' line.

HammerofThunor wrote:Scratch, not sure who you have a 75% win record over since the last world cup. Certainly not England.

From the top of my head it's

England: 67%
Samoa: 0%
Argentina: 50%
New Zealand: 0%
France: 100%
Ireland: 33%
Australia: 0%
South Africa: 0%
Italy: 100%
Scotland: 100%
EDIT:    Japan: 50%

Not sure who else you've played.

EDIT 2: Just to be fair, here's England's

Wales: 33%
Fiji: 100%
Argentina: 100%
New Zealand: 50%
France: 67%
Ireland: 100%
Australia: 50%
South Africa: 0%
Italy: 100%
Scotland: 100%

Like i said we must play more games against teams we beat easily.   

Bilts you know fine well Scratch is just another WUM.

If he put in genuine rugby discussions there would be no issues...and the Sarge wouldnt have to put him in his place...

Biltong wrote:Sgt.Pooly, we have an agreement in place not to attack the poster.

Please stick to the topic, every poster including Scratch has a right to provide an opinion, even if you don't agree with it.

So basically the wums win?