England v Ireland; Six Nations Round 3

First topic message reminder :

              

ENGLAND vs  IRELAND

Date: Saturday 27th February 2016
Venue: Twickenham
Kick Off: 16:50 (GMT)
Referee: Romain Poite (FFR)
Asst Refs: Nigel Owens (WRU), Alexandre Ruiz (FFR)
TMO: Shaun Veldsman (SARU)
TV Coverage: Live on ITV, RTE, FR2


Head to Head

Played - 119
Wins - 65/47
Draws - 7
Points - 1443/1037


Current Form

England:
W 40-9 v Italy
W 15-9 v Scotland
W 60-3 v Uruguay

Ireland:
L 9-10 v France
D 16-16 v wales
L 20-43 v Argentina


Recent Meetings

05/09/15 England 21 Ireland 13
01/03015 Ireland 19 England 9
22/02/14 England 13 Ireland 10
10/02/13 Ireland 6 England 12
17/03/12 England 30 Ireland 9



Teams

England


1 Joe Marler (Harlequins, 39 caps)
2 Dylan Hartley (captain, Northampton Saints, 68 caps)
3 Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers, 58 caps)
4 Maro Itoje (Saracens, 1 cap)
5 George Kruis (Saracens, 12 caps)
6 Chris Robshaw (Harlequins, 45 caps)
7 James Haskell (Wasps, 64 caps)
8 Billy Vunipola (vice captain, Saracens, 23 caps)
9 Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 54 caps)
10 George Ford (Bath Rugby, 19 caps)
11 Jack Nowell (Exeter Chiefs, 12 caps)
12 Owen Farrell (vice captain, Saracens, 37 caps)
13 Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 18 caps)
14 Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 17 caps)
15 Mike Brown (vice captain, Harlequins, 45 caps)
Replacements
16 Jamie George (Saracens, 5 caps)
17 Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 30 caps)
18 Paul Hill (Northampton Saints, 1 cap)
19 Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 44 caps)
20 Jack Clifford (Harlequins, 2 caps)
21 Danny Care (Harlequins, 56 caps)
22 Elliot Daly (Wasps, uncapped)
23 Alex Goode (Saracens, 20 caps)


Ireland


15. Rob Kearney (UCD/Leinster) 68
14. Andrew Trimble (Ballymena/Ulster) 60
13. Robbie Henshaw (Buccaneers/Connacht) 17
12. Stuart McCloskey (Ballynahinch/Ulster)*
11. Keith Earls (Young Munster/Munster) 47
10. Jonathan Sexton (St Mary's College/Leinster) 58
9. Conor Murray (Garryowen/Munster) 44
1. Jack McGrath (St. Mary's College/Leinster) 27
2. Rory Best (Banbridge/Ulster) Captain 91
3. Mike Ross (Clontarf/Leinster) 56
4. Donnacha Ryan (Shannon/Munster) 36
5. Devin Toner (Lansdowne/Leinster) 33
6. CJ Stander (Munster) 2
7. Josh van der Flier (UCD/Leinster)*
8. Jamie Heaslip (Dublin University/Leinster) Vice Captain 82

Replacements
16. Richard Strauss (Old Wesley/Leinster) 14
17. Cian Healy (Clontarf/Leinster) 56
18. Nathan White (Connacht) 10
19. Ultane Dillane (Corinthians/Connacht)*
20. Rhys Ruddock (St Mary's College/Leinster) 7
21. Eoin Reddan (Old Crescent/Leinster) 68
22. Ian Madigan (Blackrock College/Leinster) 27
23. Simon Zebo (Cork Con/Munster) 22

It looked to me like Brown caught Murray when he was being pushed back in the ruck and trying to find his footing, rather than as a "backswing" from his kick. Regardless, I don't think its unfair to suggest that going for a kick that close to a guy's head is reckless. There have been precedents either way for how that's treated though.

On a more general note, I though Brown had a poor game in some respects. He was very solid, but looked for contact far too much. I do wonder how long he'll stay in the team with the other back three options available. Perhaps, though, Jones will see other changes as a greater priority, with Brown providing experience and continuity.

Poite made some very interesting calls during the match and I was left struggling to understand many of them. I honestly feel he got the England try wrong as I don't feel it was a double movement. I can understand why JvdF's try was ruled out but do believe that could have been given as well.

I am simply mad at Irelands consistent use of the passive defence, it continually allowed England's players to build momentum and cross the gain line with ease.

No defence was stopping Billy V though who had an absolutely crushing game. He really has matured into one hell of a player and Wales will have their work cut out defending him should he play as he did against Ireland.

Again, congrats to England on an excellent win but your indiscipline will have to be looked at. A lot of points were missed by England due to their indiscipline and they cannot afford to do that against Wales.

Poite knew he had to send somebody off, but he was so confused, he picked the player least offending in the incident .... Care. 

I agree that cards should have gone to Murray, followed by Brown, penalty reversed in favour of Ireland for Care's dodgy rucking.

eirebilly wrote:Poite made some very interesting calls during the match and I was left struggling to understand many of them. I honestly feel he got the England try wrong as I don't feel it was a double movement. I can understand why JvdF's try was ruled out but do believe that could have been given as well.

I am simply mad at Irelands consistent use of the passive defence, it continually allowed England's players to build momentum and cross the gain line with ease.

No defence was stopping Billy V though who had an absolutely crushing game. He really has matured into one hell of a player and Wales will have their work cut out defending him should he play as he did against Ireland.

Again, congrats to England on an excellent win but your indiscipline will have to be looked at. A lot of points were missed by England due to their indiscipline and they cannot afford to do that against Wales.

A serious question. Is this "passive defence" a predetermined tactic or just what happens when one team can't stop a more powerful one? I heard the term in commentary but I don't understand why a team would adopt it.

I think it has more to do with the fact that passive defence is less difficult organise and run than that of the Blitz defence and whilst Ireland have no defence coach, it seems to be the only option they are looking at. When done well, it can be solid (as Ireland have shown in many matches previously) but is also incredibly energy sapping for the players as it invites teams to simply run at the defence.

eirebilly wrote:I think it has more to do with the fact that passive defence is less difficult organise and run than that of the Blitz defence and whilst Ireland have no defence coach, it seems to be the only option they are looking at. When done well, it can be solid (as Ireland have shown in many matches previously) but is also incredibly energy sapping for the players as it invites teams to simply run at the defence.

I think I unerstand now - you are equating 'passive' defence with 'drift' defence right?

I dont think Brown was malicious just reckless - if Murray should have been there or not there is still a duty of care owed by all players - and there have been plenty of citings and bans based on reckless play.

offload wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I think it has more to do with the fact that passive defence is less difficult organise and run than that of the Blitz defence and whilst Ireland have no defence coach, it seems to be the only option they are looking at. When done well, it can be solid (as Ireland have shown in many matches previously) but is also incredibly energy sapping for the players as it invites teams to simply run at the defence.

I think I unerstand now - you are equating 'passive' defence with 'drift' defence right?

In a manner of speaking, yes I am and it is a predefined tactic.

Think Care was a bit unlucky as personally I think Poite did see Brown's actions as a yellow but was painted into the corner by the TMO by his verdict and didn't want to go against it. It was only then he asked for Cares number and looking at it he falls on top of Murray but isn't impeding the ball.

Added to that did anyone else get the feeling the ref and TMO just weren't sure whether they could give the Hartley 'try'. I think say Hartley made a double movement was both silly and a get out clause. Never seen someone pushed over after being stationary, presumably it coulnd't have been Hartleys try as he should have released, so for me it's either Youngs try or a knock on as the ball was pushed, or carried forward by someone who shouldn't have been holding it. Anyone know what should have been?

Ben Youngs dabbed the ball down. It shoudl have been a try to him (IMO). The one thing it wasn't was a double movement, but hey ho thems the game.

It was a promising win for England but still some problems that Eddie Jones hasn't addressed yet - still playing people out of position, still very poor discipline - Haskell,Brown,Care and Farrell all were sub par in that area though Care is perhaps the most unlucky.

Another problem is a reliance on Billy. I feel that England still need to give heavy duty carrying to more than one player.

Billy had a strong game but again it felt like he shouldered the burden mostly alone.


Though I guess it's unrealistic to expect Eddie Jones to fix everything in 3 games.

3 wins is good, I hope it continues.

Nice debut from Itoje too, he wasn't perfect, missed a couple of tackles at least for example but promising. Top English tackler. Good disruption work and a lovely turnover stopping a promising Irish attack. Strong carries too, I am surprised England didn't give him the ball more in attack.

Ireland shouldn't be too downhearted as you weren't full strength, still lacking a defence coach and still had your opportunities.

LondonTiger wrote:Ben Youngs dabbed the ball down. It shoudl have been a try to him (IMO). The one thing it wasn't was a double movement, but hey ho thems the game.

The exact same thing happened a few times in superrugby last season and the try was given to the player dotting the ball down (Youngs here).

I also seem to remember NZ doing this in an international and getting a try.

It was never a double movement, that was a truly bizarre call. 5m scrum would have been understandable, or if they deemed the ruck formed before the try line (so no 5m scrum) it should have been a penalty to England and a yellow card to any one of the many Irish players holding onto the ball and killing it (hence why Hartley couldn't place it).

To balance that slightly you could have been putting Itoje in that first bracket of players for pens as well, that turnover was a touch fortunate not to be pinged! Good full debut though against a tough irish side. Haskell must be walking the tightrope with itoje and Clifford starting to push, though Jones clearly likes what he sees from The Brand.

It was a strange decision from Hartley, several things could have happened and I would have understood, but never a double movement.

beshocked wrote:It was a promising win for England but still some problems that Eddie Jones hasn't addressed yet - still playing people out of position, still very poor discipline - Haskell,Brown,Care and Farrell all were sub par in that area though Care is perhaps the most unlucky.

Another problem is a reliance on Billy. I feel that England still need to give heavy duty carrying to more than one player.

Billy had a strong game but again it felt like he shouldered the burden mostly alone.


Though I guess it's unrealistic to expect Eddie Jones to fix everything in 3 games.

3 wins is good, I hope it continues.

Nice debut from Itoje too, he wasn't perfect, missed a couple of tackles at least for example but promising. Top English tackler. Good disruption work and a lovely turnover stopping a promising Irish attack. Strong carries too, I am surprised England didn't give him the ball more in attack.

Ireland shouldn't be too downhearted as you weren't full strength, still lacking a defence coach and still had your opportunities.

It was promising to see Kruis, Itoje and Haskell all carry a lot more and with more impact. Itoje in particular made some very good runs.

Billy gets the ball more as he takes a lot of high balls and works in tandem with the flankers to get the ball in pop passes at pace.

What are people's thoughts on Robshaw?

Has to stay for me, just makes good decisions.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Think Care was a bit unlucky as personally I think Poite did see Brown's actions as a yellow but was painted into the corner by the TMO by his verdict and didn't want to go against it. It was only then he asked for Cares number and looking at it he falls on top of Murray but isn't impeding the ball.

Added to that did anyone else get the feeling the ref and TMO just weren't sure whether they could give the Hartley 'try'. I think say Hartley made a double movement was both silly and a get out clause. Never seen someone pushed over after being stationary, presumably it coulnd't have been Hartleys try as he should have released, so for me it's either Youngs try or a knock on as the ball was pushed, or carried forward by someone who shouldn't have been holding it. Anyone know what should have been?

Agree 7.5

Hartley didn't double move, momentum from the ruck pushed him over. Sure it wasn't a try but if a player is dragged over in a mass of bodies its difficult to say he penalised. If that's the case though it should have been an England scrum 5 I assume.  Too much emphasis on slow-mos for me.

Same for Care, slow mo 3 seconds look like an age. Brown should have gone though... saying he didn't know the guys head was there was ridiculous.

I don't think Brown could have been surprised but as long as players are allowed to compete for the ball with their feet there is a risk of this. You don't normally see it as the clearout was too poor! Your thoughts on B Vunipola altering yet?

beshocked wrote:It was a promising win for England but still some problems that Eddie Jones hasn't addressed yet - still playing people out of position, still very poor discipline - Haskell,Brown,Care and Farrell all were sub par in that area though Care is perhaps the most unlucky.

Another problem is a reliance on Billy. I feel that England still need to give heavy duty carrying to more than one player.

Billy had a strong game but again it felt like he shouldered the burden mostly alone.


Though I guess it's unrealistic to expect Eddie Jones to fix everything in 3 games.

3 wins is good, I hope it continues.

Nice debut from Itoje too, he wasn't perfect, missed a couple of tackles at least for example but promising. Top English tackler. Good disruption work and a lovely turnover stopping a promising Irish attack. Strong carries too, I am surprised England didn't give him the ball more in attack.

Ireland shouldn't be too downhearted as you weren't full strength, still lacking a defence coach and still had your opportunities.

I agree the over-reliance on Billy V. is a problem.  It is clear that opposing teams will increase their defensive focus on him.  Having at least one more power runner amongst the forwards will actually create more space for Billy and make him even more effective.  Is Hughes the answer?  Time will tell.  Maybe Clifford will show something in a longer cameo, though I don't think he is a dynamic runner.  As the tournament goes on, it is more and more clear the degree to which this team is a work in progress.

I don't think its quite right to say we are relying on Billy so much as to say that his current form is so much better than any other carrier we have (and probably any other heavy carrier in the 6N)

lostinwales wrote:I don't think its quite right to say we are relying on Billy so much as to say that his current form is so much better than any other carrier we have (and probably any other heavy carrier in the 6N)

I agree his current form is terrific. But he made 17 or 18 runs.  That's a lot!  Surly not relying on him that much by design, but it seemed every time England went forwards, there he was. If England had another power runner, Bully would have more room to move. That is an exciting prospect.

yappysnap agree, I didn't think it was double movement, I couldn't hear the commentary due to watching it in a pub of course,thought it should have a 5m scrum to England.

As for Robshaw, the same pros and cons, good hard worker but not a strong ball carrier.


no 7 & 1/2 I balanced it out by saying his defence could have been better.

How many penalties did Itoje give away? There was one I thought he was unlucky to be pinged.

lostinwales my point is that without him where would England look to get go forward?

doctor grey Hughes could well be the answer in the future but as for now...

Clifford to me seems like a very intelligent player. Want to see him involved more sooner rather and later.

eirebilly wrote:I think it has more to do with the fact that passive defence is less difficult organise and run than that of the Blitz defence and whilst Ireland have no defence coach, it seems to be the only option they are looking at. When done well, it can be solid (as Ireland have shown in many matches previously) but is also incredibly energy sapping for the players as it invites teams to simply run at the defence.

It's a tactic that works for the likes of New Zealand but we are a long way off being the ABs. To allow a team like England to run at you is inviting disaster. The fact that England didn't get more points on the board was extremely surprising and we were lucky to be in the game for so long. That being said it almost worked and if we'd have taken our scoring chances it would have been a different story. Henshaw and VDF came agonizingly close and we did create those chances so it's not all so gloomy.

Now to really open up against Scotland and Italy and show what we actually can do. 2 wins to finish the tournament would leave a better taste in the mouth.

I don't think anyone's mentioned just how good our lineout was as well. Kruis rose to the challenge and did his homework. Especially with all the talk being about Toner before the game but the guy was anonymous. Itoje seemed to help at lineout time too.

Pete330v2 wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I think it has more to do with the fact that passive defence is less difficult organise and run than that of the Blitz defence and whilst Ireland have no defence coach, it seems to be the only option they are looking at. When done well, it can be solid (as Ireland have shown in many matches previously) but is also incredibly energy sapping for the players as it invites teams to simply run at the defence.

It's a tactic that works for the likes of New Zealand but we are a long way off being the ABs. To allow a team like England to run at you is inviting disaster. The fact that England didn't get more points on the board was extremely surprising and we were lucky to be in the game for so long. That being said it almost worked and if we'd have taken our scoring chances it would have been a different story. Henshaw and VDF came agonizingly close and we did create those chances so it's not all so gloomy.

Now to really open up against Scotland and Italy and show what we actually can do. 2 wins to finish the tournament would leave a better taste in the mouth.

Agree.  In hindsight, this was kind of a weird match.  both sides created more chances and managed to just not get them converted.  This, I think, is what separates ourselves from the other big boys in International Rugby.  Ireland, with a lot of newer faces, acquitted themselves very well.  With some of the new blood gaining more experience, Ireland does not look to be in bad shape for the future.  Just a bit of a rocky road for 2016.

Itoje was very good, just thought I'd throw that turnover/pen in. Wasn't a stupid one but should have gone to Ireland. Poite was a touch erratic in some of his decisions though.

Jones is looking to 6 for another big carrier if his choice of Ewers is anything to go by. If back row is going to change this 6 nations it's going be Clifford or Itoje and the latter is going to be a lock in the longer term.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I don't think Brown could have been surprised but as long as players are allowed to compete for the ball with their feet there is a risk of this. You don't normally see it as the clearout was too poor! Your thoughts on B Vunipola altering yet?

Yes and no.

He's playing well at the moment but for me he's still playing school boy rugby. He's ridiculously strong but I think vs. a tough defensive and large team like Wales/SA/NZ he'll have his work cut out. Half the time he starts his runs from a standing start, makes the gainline sure but that won't cut it against the best. Why few outside of England are yet to herald him yet. I still think hes 10kg from greatness.
In SA people for instance don't rate any player until he's done it over the boks. For instance, Tom Croft has a very good reputation in SA because of the 09 lions tour. People still talk about him whereas from what I hear people in England see him as a past player right.

As for Billy its fine putting in good performances against lesser sides but what is required is a big dominating performance against what many believe is a superior backrow (on paper) is when people can start saying... ok, kid isn't that bad afterall. He was pretty much neutralised during the WC by Wales and AUS from memory.

fa0019 Neutralised by Wales and Australia - comedy gold......

Didn't start vs Australia because of his injury vs Wales and was causing a lot of problems for Wales before his injury, I still think his injury was a big blow to England's hopes of beating Wales.

Was very strong when he came off the bench vs Fiji too.

You don't help yourself with factual inaccuracies like that.

I understand that some people don't judge a player as good until they've done it against the team they support, but I think it's a little short sighted. If you start to watch England more closely Billy has been ona rich vein of form and as per your thoughts the Wales WC game turned on him and Youngs picking up injuries. He was very good in that match, stand out player for me.

beshocked wrote: fa0019 Neutralised by Wales and Australia - comedy gold......

Didn't start vs Australia because of his injury vs Wales and was causing a lot of problems for Wales before his injury, I still think his injury was a big blow to England's hopes of beating Wales.

Was very strong when he came off the bench vs Fiji too.

You don't help yourself with factual inaccuracies like that.

Wales' backrow was on top for the whole match even when behind. It was pretty stark. My mistake on AUS I thought he had.

As I said before, Wales will be an acid test for him as these guys on paper are seen as better players, better professionals. If he wants to joint he elite he needs to do it against the best.

it does highlight perhaps not too much attention was paid. Him and Hughes in the same backrow, if we think one can play 6 (Hughes for me) makes me a bit giddy.

You're not thinking of the right match if you thought Wales backrow was on top fa. Despite the fears about Englands pack we were on top and controlling for 60 odd minutes. Billy's injury tipped the balance, along with b Youngs.

Do not faint B, but I am about to agree with you.

Billy was excellent against Wales in RWC and his injury, along with the stamping injury suffered by ben youngs, was perhaps a key reason that england faltered in that game.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You're not thinking of the right match if you thought Wales backrow was on top fa. Despite the fears about Englands pack we were on top and controlling for 60 odd minutes. Billy's injury tipped the balance, along with b Youngs.

Youngs I agree (probably because Wigglesworth was so bad) but always thought Wales looked comfortable in the backrow. He's improving but I wonder how Jones will combat the welsh backrow with his current combo.

No 7&1/2 wrote:it does highlight perhaps not too much attention was paid. Him and Hughes in the same backrow, if we think one can play 6 (Hughes for me) makes me a bit giddy.

billy has better workrate and tackling, Hughes is better picking the ball from the back of the scrum - so other way round for me.

Itoje, Hartley, kruis, Haskell all made powerful strong carries particularly in the second half. Billy was just a bit more difficult to stop. So pretty good really in that department. Robshaw is the only one looking a bit lightweight (and slow) in the pack.

Vunipola was the best forward on the pitch, certainly not neutralised, very prominent. Against Aus I'd agree with your assessment though, virtually anonymous.

Whichever way, not a fun prospect for the opposition!

Agree 71/2, we have to get Hughes & Billy on the same pitch.

Our breakdown would improved no end if we can field Hughes, Clifford, Itoje and Cole together.

And Launchbury.

Jones described Robshaw's as a glue player, so England might be stuck with him for a while.

offload wrote:Jones described Robshaw's as a glue player, so England might be stuck with him for a while.  

Maybe because he looks like he's running in it......he's that slow.

Double movement isn't in the laws is it? It's just a term that relates to a specific type of 'holding on' that applies for the try line. If Hartley was still holding the ball as he was driven over the try line it was 'holding on'. If everyone (including the ball) got pushed over without Hartley himself specifically holding it, then it was fine. Couldn't tell who was holding to ball to be honest, or if it was grounded, so it probably should have been a scrum to England.

The Irish disallowed try, well it was clearly held up when the ref got there so he couldn't see the grounding. Unless it can be specifically seen on the camera it would never be given. Even in the old days I'm not sure it would have been given because, as I said, by the time the ref got there it was clearly held up. There is no benefit of the doubt to the attack in Union, like there is in League (I think).

As for Brown, at every single ruck there is (at least) someone lying on the floor near the ball (often several people). There is always a risk of someone getting kicked in the head. From memory, the Marshall incident was different because he dragged his foot back why coming from an offside position (so illegal) and din't seem to have much chance of actually hitting the ball. Might be wrong with that. Brown would have dislodged the ball if Murray hadn't held on to it (Care had already given away the penalty so that's not an issue). I would have no problem with it being deemed that kicking into a ruck is dangerous and can be considered reckless, but then they should simply allowing the use of the foot in the ruck. Everyone just uses their hands anyway. It would also stop people swinging their foot round the side (clearly offside), which is let go so often as well.

But over, I spent most of the game furious (my wife kept giving me looks of concern). Mostly with England and ref (not that I thought he was skewed, just didn't like his interpretation).

I think England need to move on from Robshaw asap, England have better/in form players waiting to take his space.

Eddie has given him a chance but he looks off the pace with the younger whippersnappers around him.

It'll be interesting to see just how the backrow goes without Robshaw.

Over the summer I'd really like to see 6. Vunipola 7. Kvesic 8. Hughes 20. Clifford but understand Kvesic will probably not get a chance.

Clifford showed a real instinct for being over the ball at the end of the game, can't remember who made the tackle but he was instantly in and very strong

One positive with Robshaw is in general he doesn't give away brainless penalties like another backrower.... His discipline is pretty good.

fa0019 Wales were on top when they were losing? Sorry I don't understand that logic.

I thought Faletau was relatively quiet till Billy went off and Haskell came on.

Wales won because they handled their injuries better than England did. Rugby is a squad game. Can't rely on one or two players. It's why I am worried about England's reliance on Billy. It's fine in the short term but in the long term we need someone else. Hughes as already mentioned is seen as the main rival.

I agree Londontiger. B.Youngs injury was as crucial as Billy's. Both players were playing very well. Wales won fair and square though - Haskell and Wigglesworth weren't good enough, neither was Webber for example.

HammerofThunor wrote:Double movement isn't in the laws is it? It's just a term that relates to a specific type of 'holding on' that applies for the try line.  If Hartley was still holding the ball as he was driven over the try line it was 'holding on'.  If everyone (including the ball) got pushed over without Hartley himself specifically holding it, then it was fine. Couldn't tell who was holding to ball to be honest, or if it was grounded, so it probably should have been a scrum to England.

The Irish disallowed try, well it was clearly held up when the ref got there so he couldn't see the grounding.  Unless it can be specifically seen on the camera it would never be given.  Even in the old days I'm not sure it would have been given because, as I said, by the time the ref got there it was clearly held up.  There is no benefit of the doubt to the attack in Union, like there is in League (I think).

As for Brown, at every single ruck there is (at least) someone lying on the floor near the ball (often several people).  There is always a risk of someone getting kicked in the head.  From memory, the Marshall incident was different because he dragged his foot back why coming from an offside position (so illegal) and din't seem to have much chance of actually hitting the ball. Might be wrong with that. Brown would have dislodged the ball if Murray hadn't held on to it (Care had already given away the penalty so that's not an issue).  I would have no problem with it being deemed that kicking into a ruck is dangerous and can be considered reckless, but then they should simply allowing the use of the foot in the ruck.  Everyone just uses their hands anyway. It would also stop people swinging their foot round the side (clearly offside), which is let go so often as well.

But over, I spent most of the game furious (my wife kept giving me looks of concern). Mostly with England and ref (not that I thought he was skewed, just didn't like his interpretation).

Yes I thought Ireland were allowed to be very cute in the first half in particular, always a few hands on the ball, always a couple of player falling over the top competing, pulling extra attackers into the ruck and just slowing things down. Obviously England could have countered this better and Youngs in particular was at fault a lot in the first half wasting a lot of attacking positions.

Thought Youngs had a poor game, his passing was giving our own players problems.

Probably lucky that Care didn't do much other than get a yellow, or he'd be in danger of dropping to the bench

Given the Irish injury count I thought they did very well to keep in the game with the players they had available. Unusual and wonder if the meaningful game time that is now required in the Pro12 is having an effect on the players injury count.

England still look like their combinations are work in progress but a solid set piece and aggressive defence has seen them through the first three games against limited attacks.
More of the same against Wales whose main tactic is to pressurise mistakes - which doesn't work against SH sides. Definitely could work against England.

Yet another 6N tournament with England's last game away from home with SH ref. Fully expect England to penalised with a succession of soft penalties in a boobie for tat exchange with France in Paris by a ref who bottles it. Should be very interesting to watch how Jones responds both during the game and after with a squad selection for the Oz tour.