England XV vs New Zealand First Test

by robshaw4england Thu 22 May 2014, 8:09 pm

First topic message reminder :

1. Joe Marler (Harlequins)
2. *Rob Webber(Bath) Dave Ward (Harlequins)
3. Dave Wilson (Bath)
4. Joe Launchberry (Wasps)
5. Dave Attwood (Bath)
6. Tom Johnson (Exeter)
7. Chris Robshaw (Harlequins)
8. Ben Morgan (Gloucester)

9. Danny Care (Harlequins)
10. Danny Cipriani (Sale)
11. Jonny May (Gloucester)
12. *Billy Twelvetrees (Gloucester) Kyle Eastmond (Bath)
13. Manu Tuilagi (Leicester)
14. Marland Yard (Harlequins)
15. Mike Brown (Harlequins)

16. Dave Ward (Harlequins) Joe Gray (Harlequins)
17. Matt Mullan (Wasps)
18. Henry Thomas (Bath)
19. Ed Slater (Leicester)
20. James Haskell (Wasps)
21. Ben Youngs (Leicester)
22. Freddie Burns (Leicester)
23. Kyle Eastmond (Bath) Henry Trinder (Gloucester)

*Injury concern...

Thoughts?

by **Rugby Fan** Sat 07 Jun 2014, 4:49 pm

TJ wrote:I think when yo see it again in the cold light of day you might see it differently.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu0ZjPUdKdc

Passage of play from 126 mins onwards (68:30 on the game clock). Not a penalty try.

Pullback on Haskell is at 5:20 or around 40 seconds on the game clock. He wasn't clear away either but it could easily have been yellow.

by Exiledinborders Sat 07 Jun 2014, 4:49 pm

TJ wrote:I think when yo see it again in the cold light of day you might see it differently.

I have just watched the game again and it is clear:

Yarde was a yellow but not remotely a penalty try
The penalty against NZ just before the Yarde incident was also a clear yellow but again not a penalty try
the pull back at the start of the game by Nonu was again a clear yellow and the nearest thing to a penalty try in the game but again on balance not a penalty try
Owens seems to have invented a new knock back offence!

by Heaf Sat 07 Jun 2014, 4:51 pm

spot on Exiled ...

by **Rugby Fan** Sat 07 Jun 2014, 4:55 pm

Exiledinborders wrote:Owens seems to have invented a new knock back offence!

In the first 30 seconds, he was OK with the concept of a knock back. Wilson fumbled backwards and he said "play on".

by doctor_grey Sat 07 Jun 2014, 4:56 pm

I am still in a bit of a quandry how people felt England played well. England did not and neither did the ABs. Both squads appeared rusty and out of sync with each other. The game was clearly there for the taking and England didn't. Too many times England got to the 22 and went into a freeze. No creativity, no imagination except kick the occasional grubber. Nothing. I have to put this down to the 9-10 combo. Also a pretty good defence by the ABs (which I don't want to understate, but this is about England). Most of the line breaks were individual effort, not good linkage from player to player. So, this was a pretty mediocre effort by two teams which I believe are much better than this.

Very simply, it came down to the ABs and their damned ability to pull wins out of their arse, bless 'em.

by Heaf Sat 07 Jun 2014, 4:57 pm

Rugby Fan wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:Owens seems to have invented a new knock back offence!
In the first 30 seconds, he was OK with the concept of a knock back. Wilson fumbled backwards and he said "play on".

Yes - don't know what happened after that - he seemed to lose the plot.

by Exiledinborders Sat 07 Jun 2014, 5:16 pm

Rugby Fan wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:Owens seems to have invented a new knock back offence!
In the first 30 seconds, he was OK with the concept of a knock back. Wilson fumbled backwards and he said "play on".

It is not that he made a mistake and thought it was knocked on. He knew it went backwards. He said to Robshaw that it does not matter if it went backwards! With the earlier similar incident he said it was a knock on because he knocked it back with one hand.

Has there been a rule change?

by Heaf Sat 07 Jun 2014, 5:20 pm

Only in Owens head

by bedfordwelsh Sat 07 Jun 2014, 6:04 pm

So question for the English posters, would you make changes automatically and if so who?

I have always liked Parling and thought he had a great game today does Lawes come straight back in and who for?

Morgan was a beast at times from base of scrum and always makes huge yardage gain does Billy V come straight back in.

What about Wood over Haskell, have never been a fan of Haskell and always thought he bit to much in it for his own glory, look at me type of thing but again the back row were outstanding today.

Farrell over Burns? Surely Freddie deserves another shot.

Prior to the game and if no injuries/club commitments I am guessing Lawes, BV, Wood and Farrell would have all started but would any of them affected the result in the end today?

by emack2 Sat 07 Jun 2014, 6:41 pm

Dr.Grey when talking about the timing from a SH sense of view I mean`t risk of injuries being
incurred.In these tests effecting the Super Rugby play off positions which are very close this year.
Sharks should have home S/F and F games and probably the title.
England should keep those who played well starting the 2 nd test and replace non performers
with new boys[regulars]
England were close but not very creative really it was one of those games for both teams.
Can`t wait for next week maybe the REAL AB`s will turn up then

by Big Sat 07 Jun 2014, 6:55 pm

bedfordwelsh wrote:
Prior to the game and if no injuries/club commitments I am guessing Lawes, BV, Wood and Farrell would have all started but would any of them affected the result in the end today?

I'm not convinced that the big difference will come from who starts, but from who does (or at least can) come off the bench. I'd probably not make more than 4/5 changes to the starting XV myself (Hartley, Wood, Burrell and Care to come in), but you could really beef up the bench - and that could make a difference. Bringing on fresh Vunipolas, Tuilagi, Haskell, etc against hopefully tiring opposition can make the difference in a tight game. My fear of course is that it won't be a tight game...

by thomh Sat 07 Jun 2014, 7:01 pm

Lawes absolutely has to start. On club and International form this season there isn't a better second row in world rugby. Haskell/Wood, Eastmond/Twelvetrees, Webber/Hartley etc will be much tighter calls. Agree with people saying that the main difference will be on the bench.

After Marler's scrummaging this season we can also stop pining for Corbisiero.

by Rory_Gallagher Sat 07 Jun 2014, 7:11 pm

England are growing to be one of the premier contenders to win the World Cup, this generation of players look to be very good and there is a scary amount of depth there with many different combinations. The hardest task for Lancaster will be picking a team rather than individuals.

I see England dominating NH rugby for a long time, and pushing into the top 3 in the world rankings.

by yappysnap Sat 07 Jun 2014, 7:28 pm

Gutted

by yappysnap Sat 07 Jun 2014, 7:40 pm

For next week the only change i'd make would be Lawes coming in. The rest i'd bench and see how the team go again, we've all agreed that a weak bench has been a real problem so far, so with the experienced guys coming back on to it that gives us more of a comfort blanket while letting the newer players get a second chance.

As to today's game, stunned by the reffing, impressed by England's resolve and NZ's composure, you just always knew that try was coming (sadly).

I remember a while back Biltong (I think) put up some stats about just how few yellow cards NZ receive per game compared to others. It is really odd how a yellow card decision for any other team becomes just a pen and another chat with the ref for NZ.

by TJ Sat 07 Jun 2014, 7:41 pm

England are clearly getting there a s a real quality team. Strength in depth is there as is organisation, team spirit and tactics. They remain IMO favourites for the WC.

On the three "yellow cards" ( had a look at the replay thanks to the poster above)

Pull back on Haskell - clear pen, yellow possible but not cast iron. NZ could not have any complaints had it been yellow

NZ not releasing on the line - deffo pen - no yellow as they were attempting to hold him up and create a maul - yellow would have been harsh

Yarde - not as close to the line as I thought - so the possible pen try I said is nonsense other defenders were there shortly after wards but as cast iron a yellow as I have seen. He knew exactly what he was doing and it was very cynical. Prevented a try scoring opportunity so the yellow is right.

This is simply my opinion. - revised from earlier thanks to seeing the replay when I was a little more awake

by disneychilly Sat 07 Jun 2014, 7:43 pm

Was annoyed with Wilson's patronising comment at the end of his interview with Robshaw. "Congratulations-you just pushed the All Blacks all the way" is a pretty dumb thing to say to the skip of the team that shellacked NZ two years before. Robshaw should've given him a mouthful IMO-he has class though.

If Kaino hadn't been there England would have dominated physically. Guy did so well. Messam was anonymous and could cede his place if Read is fit next week. Conrad Smith was brilliant at cleaning up so much rubbish and Aaron Smith worked hard all day trying to spark the backs. It was the worst passing and catching display I've seen from NZ since 09-let's hope that was a one off. Dagg was average but so was Cruden and maybe Barrett should have gone on at 10. Smith's try masks the blatant idiocy of that tap. 15 all 4 mins to go in a test you take the kick. Hansen and McCaw said the right things but I imagine Cruden getting a gobful in the shed.

NZ were really average but weren't allowed to get beyond that by England-thought t was pretty even stevens with regard to creating opportunities. Well done to the English boys-they'll have more players available but NZ will have more cohesion. Interesting.

Hey could anyone PM me a link for the Ireland Argentina game please? Struggling for them here.

by yappysnap Sat 07 Jun 2014, 7:59 pm

What was wrong with Read, Disney? England will be under a huge amount of pressure if he does come back in.

I'd be interested to know what the NZ fans thought of Haskells game today?

I thought he went really well, looked good carrying and worked hard at the breakdown. Wood will probably come straight back in but I'd stick with the Hask.

by Poorfour Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:17 pm

yappysnap wrote:For next week the only change i'd make would be Lawes coming in. The rest i'd bench and see how the team go again, we've all agreed that a weak bench has been a real problem so far, so with the experienced guys coming back on to it that gives us more of a comfort blanket while letting the newer players get a second chance.

As to today's game, stunned by the reffing, impressed by England's resolve and NZ's composure, you just always knew that try was coming (sadly).

I remember a while back Biltong (I think) put up some stats about just how few yellow cards NZ receive per game compared to others. It is really odd how a yellow card decision for any other team becomes just a pen and another chat with the ref for NZ.

Not Care, yappy? If Care is fit, he has to start as far as I am concerned, and that's even without my quartered specs on. England will need every ounce of creativity, and most of it is in Care's haircut.

by aucklandlaurie Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:25 pm

Rory_Gallagher wrote:England are growing to be one of the premier contenders to win the World Cup, this generation of players look to be very good and there is a scary amount of depth there with many different combinations. The hardest task for Lancaster will be picking a team rather than individuals.

I see England dominating NH rugby for a long time, and pushing into the top 3 in the world rankings.

But that will not happen if they get Steve Walsh or Nigel Owens as referees.

by mystiroakey Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:26 pm

back at home at twickers it will be very different. who ever refs.

The homes side do normally get the breaks and they can be influenced by the home crowd

by kiakahaaotearoa Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:29 pm

Read has concussion issues yappy and is likely to miss the entire series along with Savea.

Dc I'd be tempted to chuck in Vito at 8 and move Kaino to 6. He had another MIA day today. Cruden needs time to get properly fit and so I'd be tempted to throw in Barrett. I don't see Hansen doing it though but I think a message needs to be sent that winning ugly is not good enough. It's becoming too much of a habit!

by bedfordwelsh Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:31 pm

Like most said I guess the changes or potential changes will affect the bench as well, as in if the likes of BV and Burrell start then Morgan and Tuilagi can come off the bench.

Who would Lawes come in for Launchbury or Parling? After the Lions tour I am a big fan of Parling but reading posts on here by you guys he is looked upon as behind Lawes and Launchbury, is it the case that those two make the better pairing/unit?

by aucklandlaurie Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:32 pm

yappysnap wrote:What was wrong with Read, Disney? England will be under a huge amount of pressure if he does come back in.

I'd be interested to know what the NZ fans thought of Haskells game today?

I thought he went really well, looked good carrying and worked hard at the breakdown. Wood will probably come straight back in but I'd stick with the Hask.

Read is suffering from a head knock, on your other question Re Haskell, looking at your two flankers Haskell to me doesnt look all that flash when compared to the volume of work that Robshaw gets through, in fact he made McCaw and Messam look not very productive either.

by Hood83 Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:37 pm

yappysnap wrote:What was wrong with Read, Disney? England will be under a huge amount of pressure if he does come back in.

I'd be interested to know what the NZ fans thought of Haskells game today?

I thought he went really well, looked good carrying and worked hard at the breakdown. Wood will probably come straight back in but I'd stick with the Hask.

Aside from Wood's work-rate, I do think Haskell is actually better in most areas of the game. I was baffled when he was benched in the WC by Johnson and remained perplexed how he seemed to have slipped so far down the pecking order. He did go off the boil a little but his form at the end of the season has been excellent. I think against a team like SA, I also think we need a back-row with the power to stop them dead. He is still the only flanker I believe can do this.

Anyway, I'm delighted he's gone well.

by nathan Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:50 pm

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Rory_Gallagher wrote:England are growing to be one of the premier contenders to win the World Cup, this generation of players look to be very good and there is a scary amount of depth there with many different combinations. The hardest task for Lancaster will be picking a team rather than individuals.

I see England dominating NH rugby for a long time, and pushing into the top 3 in the world rankings.

But that will not happen if they get Steve Walsh or Nigel Owens as referees.

give it a rest will you, your getting pretty boring

by Sgt_Pooly Sat 07 Jun 2014, 8:58 pm

Owens is normally excellent but had a bit of stinker today. Would we have won without his blunders? Maybe...but we'll never know.

Roll on test 2, let's hope it's equally entertaining!

by Scrumpy Sat 07 Jun 2014, 9:05 pm

Owens cost us a win today, he was very very average at best, it was almost like he didn't want england to win!

by aucklandlaurie Sat 07 Jun 2014, 9:05 pm

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Owens is normally excellent but had a bit of stinker today. Would we have won without his blunders? Maybe...but we'll never know.

Roll on test 2, let's hope it's equally entertaining!

Most of the tests played in Dunedin under the roof, turn into real crackers.

by Heaf Sat 07 Jun 2014, 9:10 pm

Scrumpy wrote:Owens cost us a win today, he was very very average at best, it was almost like he didn't want england to win!

And he invented a new infringement - the backwards knock-on ...

by aucklandlaurie Sat 07 Jun 2014, 9:21 pm

Heaf wrote:
Scrumpy wrote:Owens cost us a win today, he was very very average at best, it was almost like he didn't want england to win!

And he invented a new infringement - the backwards knock-on ...

Have you ever considered it from the angle, had your Winger caught those balls properly, he wouldnt have run the risk of having a call made against him that he didnt like?

by Heaf Sat 07 Jun 2014, 9:26 pm

no - because the players shouldn't have to compensate for shocking refereeing and if you take the Burns one for example only a complete incompetent could even remotely call that as a knock on when the ball travelled at least two feet backwards from his hand to the ground … I really have no idea what Owens was thinking then especially as you could hear him say "it hit his hand so the fact that it went backwards is irrelevant" - under which law is that then?

by Poorfour Sat 07 Jun 2014, 9:30 pm

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Heaf wrote:
Scrumpy wrote:Owens cost us a win today, he was very very average at best, it was almost like he didn't want england to win!

And he invented a new infringement - the backwards knock-on ...

Have you ever considered it from the angle, had your Winger caught those balls properly, he wouldnt have run the risk of having a call made against him that he didnt like?

To be honest, I haven't and won't. A player should reasonably be able to expect the referee not to invent new interpretations of the law. Adapting to the ref in the breakdown or scrum is one thing, adapting to a ref who makes things up in open play is quite another.

Besides, are you honestly trying to tell me that you wouldn't feel aggrieved if, say, Dagg had fumbled the ball backwards and been told it was a knock on?

by aucklandlaurie Sat 07 Jun 2014, 9:46 pm

Heaf/Poorfour

It happens all the time, and it has probably happened to Dagg in the past I just cant recall a specific incident.

Hence you must take the initiative to reduce the chances of having a knock on ruled against you when you are "innocent", the problem was:

1. The balls should have been caught securely, and the ball not be left to drop to the ground.

2. If an attempt is not going to be made to catch the ball, then turn side on to the flight of the ball, this makes it very hard to be interpreted as forward.

3. If you are going to block the ball with your hand, slap it back, dont just block it front on as it doesnt give the impression of going backwards.

by WELL-PAST-IT Sat 07 Jun 2014, 9:53 pm

Big thank you to Rugby Fan for the link, first chance I have had to watch the game.

Owens, for such a competent ref, did have an absolute stinker. It seems the Eden Park atmosphere got to him, all the wrong decisions went the way of NZ.

Positives, we have strength in depth, this is now proven.

Marler has turned into a world class LH, I would say probably as good as Corbs, and I am a Saints fan.
Hooker, we have three good international class players at least.
TH great scrummager, bars of soap for hands.
Locks, international class locks seem in endless supply.
Backrow, perm any three form at least five, Johnson excluded.
SH, three excellent players
FH, Farrell, Burns, Myler, Cips, better options than most.
Centres, Burrell, Manu, Eastmond, 36, other than the AB, who else has such depth
Wings; May, Ashton, Yarde, Foden
FB; Brown Foden, Pennel and quite a few others.

Roll on next week, Lawes, Wood and Care have to come back.
Burrell, Farrell, Hartley and BV have to be in the 23.

The futures bright, the futures WHITE

by bedfordwelsh Sat 07 Jun 2014, 10:04 pm

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Big thank you to Rugby Fan for the link, first chance I have had to watch the game.

Owens, for such a competent ref, did have an absolute stinker. It seems the Eden Park atmosphere got to him, all the wrong decisions went the way of NZ.

Positives, we have strength in depth, this is now proven.

Marler has turned into a world class LH, I would say probably as good as Corbs, and I am a Saints fan.
Hooker, we have three good international class players at least.
TH great scrummager, bars of soap for hands (Inded but am a big fan of props being able to do their main job first anything else a bonus and he can scrummage)
Locks, international class locks seem in endless supply.
Backrow, perm any three form at least five, Johnson excluded.
SH, three excellent players
FH, Farrell, Burns, Myler, Cips, better options than most.
Centres, Burrell, Manu, Eastmond, 36, other than the AB, who else has such depth (Davies, JD, Sc Williams Cory Allen Hook )
Wings; May, Ashton, Yarde, Foden (Really think May is your weak link)
FB; Brown Foden, Pennel and quite a few others.

Roll on next week, Lawes, Wood and Care have to come back.
Burrell, Farrell, Hartley and BV have to be in the 23.

The futures bright, the futures WHITE

by Heaf Sat 07 Jun 2014, 10:55 pm

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Heaf/Poorfour

It happens all the time, and it has probably happened to Dagg in the past I just cant recall a specific incident.

Hence you must take the initiative to reduce the chances of having a knock on ruled against you when you are "innocent", the problem was:

1. The balls should have been caught securely, and the ball not be left to drop to the ground.

2. If an attempt is not going to be made to catch the ball, then turn side on to the flight of the ball, this makes it very hard to be interpreted as forward.

3. If you are going to block the ball with your hand, slap it back, dont just block it front on as it doesnt give the impression of going backwards.

laurie, in general I understand what you are getting at when attempting to catch a high ball - but these two cases were not like that (especially the Burns one) and were so obviously not knock-ons the ref has to take the blame for his incompetence and it shouldn't be seen as the players' fault - especially as mentioned for one he even acknowledged it had gone backwards and said it was irrelevant … that certainly does not happen all the time - I've never heard such a thing ..

I don't get your point 3 either - if you are trying to stop the ball, slapping it back would have the opposite effect surely?

by aucklandlaurie Sat 07 Jun 2014, 11:15 pm

Fair enough heaf, I'll rephrase No.3 as follows:

Do not block the ball with your hand, slap it back, by blocking the ball with your hand front on (to the ball) you run the risk of it giving the illusion that its not travelling backwards.

I never criticise referees for wrongly calling knock ons or non knock ons.

I

by Poorfour Sun 08 Jun 2014, 12:26 am

Laurie, in May's case, Owens even said that the knock on was given because it hit May's left hand before going on to hit his right (from which everyone appears to agree it went backwards). Since May was standing side-on to the touchline with his left hand towards the NZ tryline and his right the other side of his body, the only way the ball could have hit both hands was by going backwards off the left.

As a decision, it was beyond odd (and comparable to the ref who waved play on against Quins a few weeks back when Care was tackled without the ball, stating "the ball was out of the ruck")

by Taylorman Sun 08 Jun 2014, 12:32 am

doctor_grey wrote:
emack2 wrote:In the squad first choice probably,Carter,Romano,Brother Grimm,Piatau,Read,Savae,Cruden
not match fit.
Hey Mysti play it for me,THAT result was exactly what I expected a close game a rusty side
versus one with nothing to lose.
Most June AI`s NZ are vulnerable,you think you`re hard done by.I don`t expect the SH
Super franchises are to chuffed with possible injuries to players at business end of there
season.
So, you are saying the problems for the Super XV teams are now just starting somewhat to equalise those of the Premiership clubs?
Can't speak for every club, but Saints play 39 matches this season.

theres only 52 weeks in a year Doc. 39 for one team in any season is ridiculous. Over how many comps is that? I suppose an Aucklander playing sxv and the ITM cup might play 28 or so but even then not many play both tournaments. just sounds like theyre squeezing every cent out of the public.

by Taylorman Sun 08 Jun 2014, 12:38 am

yappysnap wrote:For next week the only change i'd make would be Lawes coming in. The rest i'd bench and see how the team go again, we've all agreed that a weak bench has been a real problem so far, so with the experienced guys coming back on to it that gives us more of a comfort blanket while letting the newer players get a second chance.

As to today's game, stunned by the reffing, impressed by England's resolve and NZ's composure, you just always knew that try was coming (sadly).

I remember a while back Biltong (I think) put up some stats about just how few yellow cards NZ receive per game compared to others. It is really odd how a yellow card decision for any other team becomes just a pen and another chat with the ref for NZ.

We also score more tries than most sides- should that also be looked into perhaps?

by Taylorman Sun 08 Jun 2014, 12:39 am

emack2 wrote:Dr.Grey when talking about the timing from a SH sense of view I mean`t risk of injuries being
incurred.In these tests effecting the Super Rugby play off positions which are very close this year.
Sharks should have home S/F and F games and probably the title.
England should keep those who played well starting the 2 nd test and replace non performers
with new boys[regulars]
England were close but not very creative really it was one of those games for both teams.
Can`t wait for next week maybe the REAL AB`s will turn up then

Unfortunately Alan the real ABs did turn up...next week we just need some better ones...

by aucklandlaurie Sun 08 Jun 2014, 12:41 am

Poorfour wrote:Laurie, in May's case, Owens even said that the knock on was given because it hit May's left hand before going on to hit his right (from which everyone appears to agree it went backwards). Since May was standing side-on to the touchline with his left hand towards the NZ tryline and his right the other side of his body, the only way the ball could have hit both hands was by going backwards off the left.

As a decision, it was beyond odd (and comparable to the ref who waved play on against Quins a few weeks back when Care was tackled without the ball, stating "the ball was out of the ruck")

And didnt the knock on occur off the right hand? its so long ago I cant recall exactly.

by Heaf Sun 08 Jun 2014, 1:10 am

laurie have you actually seen the Burns 'knock on'?

The ball is bouncing along the pitch in the direction of the England try line when Burns running back in the same direction reaches out for it and makes slight contact and the ball carries on in the same direction landing a good 2 feet in the direction of the England try line on from where Burns touched it - never in a million years was it a knock on and nobody except Owens thought it was - it was one of the most bizarre calls I've seen for a long time.

by aucklandlaurie Sun 08 Jun 2014, 1:25 am

Heaf, maybe I havent seen it as many times as you, I only saw it as and when it happened and have not seen it since thats nearly 17 hours ago, at the time I felt the player left himself open for a unfriendly decision via his technique.

As I said earlier I never criticise referees when they call/dont call a knock on.

by king_carlos Sun 08 Jun 2014, 1:35 am

Taylorman wrote:
doctor_grey wrote:
emack2 wrote:In the squad first choice probably,Carter,Romano,Brother Grimm,Piatau,Read,Savae,Cruden
not match fit.
Hey Mysti play it for me,THAT result was exactly what I expected a close game a rusty side
versus one with nothing to lose.
Most June AI`s NZ are vulnerable,you think you`re hard done by.I don`t expect the SH
Super franchises are to chuffed with possible injuries to players at business end of there
season.
So, you are saying the problems for the Super XV teams are now just starting somewhat to equalise those of the Premiership clubs?
Can't speak for every club, but Saints play 39 matches this season.

theres only 52 weeks in a year Doc. 39 for one team in any season is ridiculous. Over how many comps is that? I suppose an Aucklander playing sxv and the ITM cup might play 28 or so but even then not many play both tournaments. just sounds like theyre squeezing every cent out of the public.

Over the course of 4 tournaments T-Man. Technically you could argue 3 as Saints played the pool stages of the Heineken Cup (European 1st tier) but only qualified for the knockout stages of the Amlin challenge cup (European 2nd tier) rather than Heineken Cup quarter finals.

This is close to a max due to Northampton being involved in play-offs and finals etc but for Saints thier season was made up of:

Aviva Premiership (English Clubs) - 22 games in regular season + semi final and final (Saints won) - 24 games in total

Heineken Cup (European 1st tier) - 6 pool games (qualified for Amlin challenge quarter finals) - 6 games total

Amlin Challenge Cup (European 2nd tier) - quarter final, semi final and final (Saints won) - 3 games total

LV Cup (Anglo-Welsh Cup) - 4 group games, Semi-final and final (Saints were runners up) - 6 games total

The above is Saints 2013/14 season which adds up to 39 games.

I can excuse anyone for questioning the total though given that the number of games European clubs play is insane for a contact sport. In my opinion it's the main contributor to the sheer number of injuries which are blighting NH rugby at the moment.

by doctor_grey Sun 08 Jun 2014, 1:38 am

Taylorman wrote:
emack2 wrote:Dr.Grey when talking about the timing from a SH sense of view I mean`t risk of injuries being
incurred.In these tests effecting the Super Rugby play off positions which are very close this year.
Sharks should have home S/F and F games and probably the title.
England should keep those who played well starting the 2 nd test and replace non performers
with new boys[regulars]
England were close but not very creative really it was one of those games for both teams.
Can`t wait for next week maybe the REAL AB`s will turn up then

Unfortunately Alan the real ABs did turn up...next week we just need some better ones...

But this was not a great or even a good match, to be fair, by either side. Hopefully better sides turn up next week. For a match that kicked off at 3:30am for me, I need a bit for juice than the humdrum nonsense played on Saturday. Glad a try was finally scored, albeit by the team in black instead of the team in white. It meant I could go to bed.

by Heaf Sun 08 Jun 2014, 1:39 am

Laurie, I don't normally either but then I've never seen such a bizarre knock on call and heard such a bizarre statement from the ref about it going backwards being irrelevant - and I wouldn't call it poor technique from the player as he wasn't trying to catch a high ball, he was reaching for a bouncing ball that had been kicked past him.

I've watched it over as I frankly couldn't believe it, so was trying to see if I'd missed something. I'm not the only one either - I've looked on various different message boards and the word bizarre comes up frequently in relation to his knock on calls.

Maybe you should take another look as I think it's a little unfair to criticise the player whilst letting Owens off for what was a very poor performance?

by **Rugby Fan** Sun 08 Jun 2014, 1:47 am

TJ wrote:...This is simply my opinion. - revised from earlier thanks to seeing the replay when I was a little more awake

I don't think your view is unreasonable but I think you were unfair to suggest the only people who would disagree are one-eyed Englishman. The New Zealand commentators explicitly said they thought the All Blacks were lucky not to see yellow, while they also thought Owens got the knock-on decisions wrong. Meanwhile, on Twitter, Craig Chalmers was one high profile non-English player to make the same observation. Ian McGeechan in the Telegraph says New Zealand should have seen yellow twice.

by aucklandlaurie Sun 08 Jun 2014, 2:00 am

Heaf, Coupla things:

Thanks for the invitation to view the incident again but I will decline, but I will explain why.

To now watch replays does not replicate the position that Nigel Owens was in during the hurly burly of the game, it only shows what a television camera saw, and probably one in an elevated position to boot. Owens is at ground level running around with possibly many players run across his line of sight. he can only see, interpret, apply and explain what he sees in the split second.

We dont want to see the game the game stopped so that every posible knock on is reviewed from the angle,height of a camera which is 99% percent of the time different to that of the man with the whistle.

I have been on this forum (606v2) for a number of years now and in all those years will not find me criticising a referee for calling or not calling a knock on.

by Sponsored content