6N 2016: England v Wales, 12 March

First topic message reminder :

  
ENGLAND v WALES
12 March 2016
KO: 16:00 GMT
Twickenham, London

Live on ITV, RTE, SC4, FR2, DMAX / BBC (H)

Referee: Craig Joubert (South Africa)
Touch judges: [tbc]
Television match official: [tbc]

A. Head to Head

119 Played 119
53 Won 54
12 Drawn 12
54 Lost 53
1,428 Points 1,371

B. Recent Form

26 September 2015: Twickenham, London
25 – 28 to Wales
2015 Rugby World Cup Pool A

6 February 2015: Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
16 – 21 to England
2015 Six Nations

9 March 2014: Twickenham Stadium, London
29 – 18 to England
2014 Six Nations

16 March 2013: Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
30 – 3 to Wales
2013 Six Nations

25 February 2012: Twickenham Stadium, London
12 – 19 to Wales
2012 Six Nations

13 August 2011: Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
19 – 9 to Wales
2011 Rugby World Cup warm up test

6 August 2011: Twickenham, London
23 – 19 to England
2011 Rugby World Cup warm up test

C. Teams

ENGLAND

[tbc]

WALES

[tbc]

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

Of course it is. Taking a player out of the game is rattling him to such an extent that he plays like a drain. Outside halves are always targeted like that. Some are easier to get at than others.

True but thats not what Tighthead meant.

I thought Taking a Player out was popping up the club for a few pints or maybe to Swansea on the lash!!!

Down Wind Street?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

Of course it is. Taking a player out of the game is rattling him to such an extent that he plays like a drain. Outside halves are always targeted like that. Some are easier to get at than others.

It could be countering their strengths (Worsley man marking Roberts in 2010 [which worked great until it didn't and they scored a try], or targeting Warburton at the ruck [legally rucking] to stop him stealing the ball).

HammerofThunor wrote:Down Wind Street?

Yeah or the Mumbles Mile to Cinderellas

HammerofThunor wrote:Down Wind Street?

the horror, the horror

HammerofThunor wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

Of course it is. Taking a player out of the game is rattling him to such an extent that he plays like a drain. Outside halves are always targeted like that. Some are easier to get at than others.

It could be countering their strengths (Worsley man marking Roberts in 2010 [which worked great until it didn't and they scored a try], or targeting Warburton at the ruck [legally rucking] to stop him stealing the ball).

Or Burgess negating Roberts ability to carry in RWC 2015 before strangely being taken off having been so effective.

Gwlad wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

Of course it is. Taking a player out of the game is rattling him to such an extent that he plays like a drain. Outside halves are always targeted like that. Some are easier to get at than others.

It could be countering their strengths (Worsley man marking Roberts in 2010 [which worked great until it didn't and they scored a try], or targeting Warburton at the ruck [legally rucking] to stop him stealing the ball).

Or Burgess negating Roberts ability to carry in RWC 2015 before strangely being taken off having been so effective.

Oh, so now you agree that taking a player out of the game and taking a player out are two different things.

RubyGuby wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Down Wind Street?

Yeah or the Mumbles Mile to Cinderellas

Cinderellas is long gone and some of the pubs too. You'd still regularly see people wandering along in, err, 'fancy dress' but there wasn't much to do apart from sit in a pub and get pi$$ed

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

Of course it is. Taking a player out of the game is rattling him to such an extent that he plays like a drain. Outside halves are always targeted like that. Some are easier to get at than others.

It could be countering their strengths (Worsley man marking Roberts in 2010 [which worked great until it didn't and they scored a try], or targeting Warburton at the ruck [legally rucking] to stop him stealing the ball).

Or Burgess negating Roberts ability to carry in RWC 2015 before strangely being taken off having been so effective.

Oh, so now you agree that taking a player out of the game and taking a player out are two different things.

It's not me that has to clarify that but TH.

Can we please make an effort NOT to take George Ford out of the game

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

Of course it is. Taking a player out of the game is rattling him to such an extent that he plays like a drain. Outside halves are always targeted like that. Some are easier to get at than others.

It could be countering their strengths (Worsley man marking Roberts in 2010 [which worked great until it didn't and they scored a try], or targeting Warburton at the ruck [legally rucking] to stop him stealing the ball).

Or Burgess negating Roberts ability to carry in RWC 2015 before strangely being taken off having been so effective.

Oh, so now you agree that taking a player out of the game and taking a player out are two different things.

It's not me that has to clarify that but TH.

Read what you've written above, Gwlad. You didn't think there was a difference between the two, but now, apparently, you do.

TightHEAD wrote:

GavCanDance wrote:@ bedfordwelsh.  It's not unheard of for Biggar to play the full 80, for example.    

Not with what Eddies got planned for him he won't.

this is what he said, we all know what he meant. There was some attempt to say he meant taking the man out of the game, this was pants. He mean't take him out full stop and ruin his dancing skills. In that context there was no difference between the two options despite lame attempts to say there were hence my assertion that there was no difference.

Back to reality now?

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

Make up your mind. Is there a difference between the two, or isn't there?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

That's what you said, Gwlad. Now you're admitting that there is a difference.

No it isn't in the context that was being discussed.

Go read the posts. I know you live in Newport but you can't be that obtuse?

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Taking a player out of the game - which is what he said - it very different from taking a player out.

No, it isn't.

That's what you said, Gwlad. Now you're admitting that there is a difference.

No it isn't in the context that was being discussed.

Go read the posts. I know you live in Newport but you can't be that obtuse?

I'm quoting you, Gwlad. I'm not putting words in your mouth.

IN THE CONTEXT POSITED BY TH THERE WAS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TAKING THE MAN OUT AND TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME. FACT.

THE INFERENCE WAS CLEAR, TH ADVOCATED TAKING BIGGAR OUT, THEN OTHERS CHIMED IN WHEN I CALLED IT, SAYING TH WAS ADVOCATING TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME, WHEN CLEARLY HE WAS NOT HENCE WHY HE JUMPED ON MP'S COMMENTS.

IN THAT CONTEXT AND FOR THE LAST TIME FOR THE HARD OF HEARING AND THOSE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHO LIVE IN NEWPORT, THERE IS AND WAS NO DIFFERENCE IN TH'S INTENTION DESPITE THE Poopie ATTEMPT TO CHARACTERISE TH'S SUGGESTION FOR BIGGAR I.E. TAKING HIM OUT, AS TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME

THAT IS WHY I SAID THERE WAS NO DIIFFERENCE, IN THAT CONTEXT AND RELATING TO THAT EXCHANGE.

Got it now or are you just unable to understand plain English?

I already know the answer to that.

lostinwales wrote:All I saw was a few random comments about language which everyone seem to have got over. After which there was some actual discussions about Rugby That was until Gwlad turned up.

And all i see is you come on here and try and point the finger to derail the thread and attempt to blame me for it and making no other contribution whatsoever after receiving a lesson in the significance of crossing the gainline on another thread

I'd call that taking you out of the game

Gwlad wrote:IN THE CONTEXT POSITED BY TH THERE WAS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TAKING THE MAN OUT AND TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME. FACT.

THE INFERENCE WAS CLEAR, TH ADVOCATED TAKING BIGGAR OUT, THEN OTHERS CHIMED IN WHEN I CALLED IT, SAYING TH WAS ADVOCATING TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME, WHEN CLEARLY HE WAS NOT HENCE WHY HE JUMPED ON MP'S COMMENTS.

IN THAT CONTEXT AND FOR THE LAST TIME FOR THE HARD OF HEARING AND THOSE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHO LIVE IN NEWPORT, THERE IS AND WAS NO DIFFERENCE IN TH'S INTENTION DESPITE THE Poopie ATTEMPT TO CHARACTERISE TH'S SUGGESTION FOR BIGGAR I.E. TAKING HIM OUT, AS TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME

THAT IS WHY I SAID THERE WAS NO DIIFFERENCE, IN THAT CONTEXT AND RELATING TO THAT EXCHANGE.

Got it now or are you just unable to understand plain English?

I already know the answer to that.

So when I said 'taking a player out of the game is very different from taking a player out', and you said 'no it isn't', you didn't actually mean it.

Do you often say things you don't mean?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Gwlad wrote:IN THE CONTEXT POSITED BY TH THERE WAS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TAKING THE MAN OUT AND TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME. FACT.

THE INFERENCE WAS CLEAR, TH ADVOCATED TAKING BIGGAR OUT, THEN OTHERS CHIMED IN WHEN I CALLED IT, SAYING TH WAS ADVOCATING TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME, WHEN CLEARLY HE WAS NOT HENCE WHY HE JUMPED ON MP'S COMMENTS.

IN THAT CONTEXT AND FOR THE LAST TIME FOR THE HARD OF HEARING AND THOSE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHO LIVE IN NEWPORT, THERE IS AND WAS NO DIFFERENCE IN TH'S INTENTION DESPITE THE Poopie ATTEMPT TO CHARACTERISE TH'S SUGGESTION FOR BIGGAR I.E. TAKING HIM OUT, AS TAKING HIM OUT OF THE GAME

THAT IS WHY I SAID THERE WAS NO DIIFFERENCE, IN THAT CONTEXT AND RELATING TO THAT EXCHANGE.

Got it now or are you just unable to understand plain English?

I already know the answer to that.

So when I said 'taking a player out of the game is very different from taking a player out', and you said 'no it isn't', you didn't actually mean it.

Do you often say things you don't mean?

Yes constantly. For example, you are an idiot.

On the prediction thread there are 18 predicting an English win to 7 predicting a win for the Welsh so far. I would have expected a more even split tbh although many of the margins are very close. Both camps trying to influence the refereeing of the scrum - I wonder how influential Joubert will have been by the end of the match on Saturday?

I expect Joubert will be pretty conservative after the Scottish Australia balls up. Much will depend on Lee and Marler because Evans is much more solid than Gethin and it is there that England have gained advantage over Wales previously. IMO Joubert will act fast to stamp out any issues early doors and ensure that the scrum isn't as big a deal as jones would like it to be. We will be hoping to get parity and I expect we can, but we also have Faletau who is excellent at recovering ball from a scrum going backwards.

Oh dear. I've been away for several hours only to come back and see GLad is in another fight again. Will he ever learn?

It will be a very good thing if Joubert is more conservative and that we're not talking about him to any great extent after the match. There's sure to be plenty of excitement without a starring role for the ref.

I do hope that joubert referrees the game/scum fairly and does keep his eye on the scrum from both sides. But penalises the side that is infringeing and not make a lottery out of it. ( penalising one side at one scrum ) and penalising the other next time for the same offence.

Lets hope for a great game and the scrums get sorted out asap and not allowed to ruin a good game.

McBryde tries to get the ref to penalise England at scrum time. Obviously Wales have identified that they are weak in that department. Eddie responds to try to equalize the ref. Game on. Wales are a good defensive side that find scoring tries difficult. They have a world class Macarena and their kicks are good too. England set piece and try scoring ability should win the day. Only stupid penalties will get in their way. England are world class at stupid penalties.

Just one more thing whatever happens, which ever side wins, lets not go balming the refferree shell we?

majesticimperialman wrote:Just one more thing whatever happens, which ever side wins, lets not go balming the refferree shell we?

Why not? It's his fault...............

i would expect not blaming the ref will depend on which side of the fence you are.

Hard to promise to not blame the ref this side of the match. Just remember Laidlaw's face last time we saw Joubert officiate!

Frankly its impossible to not blame the ref for some people. But what they blame him for is not buying their version of how the scrum should have been reefed. I am pretty sure there is a positive correlation between blaming of the ref, number of penalties incurred and losing the game.

I'm sure that there's lots of truth in that Gwlad but some of my favourite memories of victories are when I've felt my team have beaten the other team AND the ref. They're the sweetest ones by far.

I blame Steve Walsh - all the way back to 2005 and that Henson kick......

Recwatcher16 wrote:I blame Steve Walsh - all the way back to 2005 and that Henson kick......

I miss that lovely man. As do the Principality Stadium screens. Great hair too.

To be fair his hair was flawless unlike his officiating!

I don't think England ever won a game against Wales with Walsh in the middle......

A kiwi looking after another kiwi. Walsh's abrupt retirement never did quite make sense......

I have gone for England to edge this one only due to playing at home.

England for the Slam.

eirebilly wrote:I have gone for England to edge this one only due to playing at home.

England for the Slam.

I certainly hope so.

eirebilly wrote:I have gone for England to edge this one only due to playing at home.

England for the Slam.

Hope so Billy. Mind you don't get called for arrogance of though, as that recently happened to another Irish poster offering a similar prediction.

Scrummaging...mind games.
Both sides are at it now, accusing the other of illegal scrummaging.
I guess trying to get into the minds of props and of Joubert.
He ran away after the Scotland exit in the RWC.
Anyone any thoughts on Joubert and scrum management ?

gregortree wrote:Scrummaging...mind games.
Both sides are at it now, accusing the other of illegal scrummaging.
I guess trying to get into the minds of props and of Joubert.
He ran away after the Scotland exit in the RWC.
Anyone any thoughts on Joubert and scrum management ?

It's all gone a bit soccer now hasn't it. That's professionalism for you I suppose. Kinda sucks though. I thought rugby might get away with bringing it's traditional values across from the amateur era into the pro era. Seemed to for a while. But now it's all money, blame, accusations, media circuses, players diving, players arrested, scandal, bloodgate, breaking salary caps, poaching players, etc., etc. It's on a downward spiral I think...

Can someone put a poll on whether Joubert will last the 80 mins - or will he disapper down the tunnel before the end

Lets be honest you could pick apart every scrum that has ever taken place and find fault, but I feel this game will be decided on the Ref and touch judges views at scrum time.

could go either way I guess as both do things wrong by the letter of the law.

And now Adam Jones decides to add his opinion, stating Wales should cheat to try and gain an advantage and that his team mate Marler never scrummages not straight. ! oh well it must by the camera angles then, an honest prop eh, that's a novelty.
Sour grapes still after losing his place to Samson it seems.

Can't believe so many people are second guessing what I meant by taking a player out of the game, it really does happen in every game legally, if a team does their homework first or you know a rival team has that one star player that hurts you every time you meet (there is always one!) then you come up with a plan to take them out of the game, that doesn't mean purposely going out there to stamp on his head ffs (calm down Mr Brown!), but if you get the chance to smash him/rough him up/wind him up or get into his head then you do it.

Its part of the game we all love and played, or is it?

Finally. You could have just said that straight away.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Finally. You could have just said that straight away.

and miss out on all the fun that followed!

Yeah nice one. Think LT missed you out of the wum thread.