Ireland v Wales 24/02/2018 14:15

First topic message reminder :

So, Wales have gone with Dan Biggar, Liam Williams & Leigh Halfpenny for the game against Ireland. George North & Gareth Anscombe drop to the bench, and Rhys Patchell & Josh Adams drop out of the match day squad. Not bad decisions in my opinion, though I think I might have had Patchell on the bench over Anscombe... and possibly switched Halfpenny & Williams- I just think Williams offers more threat from fullback than Halfpenny does.

Wales Team:
Halfpenny (Scarlets); L Williams (Saracens), S Williams (Scarlets), Parkes (Scarlets), S Evans (Scarlets); Biggar (Ospreys), G Davies (Scarlets); R Evans (Scarlets), Owens (Scarlets), Lee (Scarlets), Hill (Dragons), AW Jones (Ospreys capt), Shingler (Scarlets), Navidi (Cardiff Blues), Moriarty (Gloucester).

Replacements:
Dee (Dragons), W Jones (Scarlets), Francis (Exeter Chiefs), B Davies (Ospreys), Tipuric (Ospreys), A Davies (Scarlets), Anscombe (Blues), North (Northampton).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43127349

Ireland Team:
Kearney; Earls, Farrell, Aki, Stockdale; Sexton, Murray; Healy, Best (capt), Porter; James Ryan, Toner; O'Mahony, Leavy, Stander.

Replacements: Cronin, McGrath, John Ryan, Roux, Conan, Marmion, Carbery, McFadden.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43152956

carpet baboon wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

Are we not allowed to discuss stuff like this?  

Nope.

That entire wordpress article isn't a discussion. It's a the ref didn't let us compete so that's why we lost cry baby tantrum.
It's worded ever so politely, but his final line gives it away for what it is.

Hmmm.

I always thought it was something along the lines of Gwent Lad

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

Are we not allowed to discuss stuff like this?  

Nope.

You're obviously the 606 exception as you seldom discuss anything else.

A discussion requires 2 parties.

So it is allowed after all.

There you go.  Glad we cleared up that little misconception

I think this thread is evidence to the contrary.

The Oracle wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Can any decent Welsh man please explain to me GWLAD????

This GWLAD bit.  I haven't got a clue what the hell it's all about but it seems even amongst Welsh posters here, there is a knowledge that the name/entity/organisation/place name/mafia outfit............. whatever the hell it is........... has a bit of a notorious reputation even in Wales.

I've heard some Welsh posters grumble about this word/thing/place/person called GWLAD.

So simple question - what is it all about?  Anyone?  Is it the nerve centre of the Rebellion?

It means 'country' in Welsh.  So it depends what context you mean it in.  It's probably the most recognizable part of our anthem.  It is the name for a poster on here.  It is the name for a chat forum, much like 606v2.  It's also the name for this blog that's been linked (Gwladrugby).  I think I have a coffee mug with Gwlad on it somewhere!  It's a word.  It's welsh.  It's used a lot!

Well I gathered that really. But there is a version that seems a little................... well Munsterfans-ish?
Like I said I think I can make out the different reactions to the word. But I've heard Welsh posters in here refer to it probably disparagingly. I take it that's either the chat forum or the Gwladrugby blog? One of those must be the 'always angry' boys? And I don't mean to make this another Wales v Ireland thing. I assume there are enough differences of opinions within domestic Welsh rugby itself for an 'always angry' brigade to flourish.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

Are we not allowed to discuss stuff like this?  

Nope.

You're obviously the 606 exception as you seldom discuss anything else.

A discussion requires 2 parties.

So it is allowed after all.

There you go.  Glad we cleared up that little misconception

I think this thread is evidence to the contrary.

No handcuffs or strait jackets in sight.  You go for it.  Jackson and the things he might do to help Ireland win.   Go for it.

ps. but be careful because what you say is likely to kill off any 'neutral ref' solution you might be thinking of with regards to Pro14. Kills the 'neutral' ref argument stone dead in my eyes.

SecretFly wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Can any decent Welsh man please explain to me GWLAD????

This GWLAD bit.  I haven't got a clue what the hell it's all about but it seems even amongst Welsh posters here, there is a knowledge that the name/entity/organisation/place name/mafia outfit............. whatever the hell it is........... has a bit of a notorious reputation even in Wales.

I've heard some Welsh posters grumble about this word/thing/place/person called GWLAD.

So simple question - what is it all about?  Anyone?  Is it the nerve centre of the Rebellion?

It means 'country' in Welsh.  So it depends what context you mean it in.  It's probably the most recognizable part of our anthem.  It is the name for a poster on here.  It is the name for a chat forum, much like 606v2.  It's also the name for this blog that's been linked (Gwladrugby).  I think I have a coffee mug with Gwlad on it somewhere!  It's a word.  It's welsh.  It's used a lot!

Well I gathered that really.  But there is a version that seems a little................... well Munsterfans-ish?  
Like I said I think I can make out the different reactions to the word.  But I've heard Welsh posters in here refer to it probably disparagingly.  I take it that's either the chat forum or the Gwladrugby blog?  One of those must be the 'always angry' boys?  And I don't mean to make this another Wales v Ireland thing.  I assume there are enough differences of opinions within domestic Welsh rugby itself for an 'always angry' brigade to flourish.

I think you're talking about Gwlad the rugby forum. Gwladrubgy blogspot is a different thing. Just an individual's thoughts, I believe, rather than a collective discussion site. Like that blog that Red Stag used to have.

The Oracle wrote:

I think you're talking about Gwlad the rugby forum.  Gwladrubgy blogspot is a different thing.  Just an individual's thoughts, I believe, rather than a collective discussion site.  Like that blog that Red Stag used to have.

Well thanks for filling me in on it, Oracle. I've always wondered about the mixed messages on here about that word Gwlad.
You see, I don't really do any other blogs, Munsterfans/Gwlad stuff, twitter or facebook stuff. So I'm mouthy here but quite a silent, aloof, non existent figure in more general and common electronic social media terms

SecretFly wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

I think you're talking about Gwlad the rugby forum.  Gwladrubgy blogspot is a different thing.  Just an individual's thoughts, I believe, rather than a collective discussion site.  Like that blog that Red Stag used to have.

Well thanks for filling me in on it, Oracle.  I've always wondered about the mixed messages on here about that word Gwlad.  
You see, I don't really do any other blogs, Munsterfans/Gwlad stuff, twitter or facebook stuff.  So I'm mouthy here    but quite a silent, aloof, non existent figure in more general and common electronic social media terms

Same here. You need to register for Gwlad to see the posts anyway. And I hear there may be a paywall in place too. So no thanks!

I heard Wales are going to play SA in Washington in Nov. Is that true?

Collapse2005 wrote:I heard Wales are going to play SA in Washington in Nov. Is that true?

Yes.

Cool

The Oracle wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

I think you're talking about Gwlad the rugby forum.  Gwladrubgy blogspot is a different thing.  Just an individual's thoughts, I believe, rather than a collective discussion site.  Like that blog that Red Stag used to have.

Well thanks for filling me in on it, Oracle.  I've always wondered about the mixed messages on here about that word Gwlad.  
You see, I don't really do any other blogs, Munsterfans/Gwlad stuff, twitter or facebook stuff.  So I'm mouthy here    but quite a silent, aloof, non existent figure in more general and common electronic social media terms

Same here.  You need to register for Gwlad to see the posts anyway.  And I hear there may be a paywall in place too.  So no thanks!

I'm a guest member and never paid a penny. Not a bad bunch of lads but they can't take a beating. It's either the refs fault or the "cheating Irish". More anti-Irish xenophobes than you will find anywhere else, but most are decent enough lads....even if some can't take a beating.

Jesus, Munch...the little dove amongst the wolves!

Courageous! Or do you go in in disguise as a boyo who can't take his beating?

MUNCH wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

I think you're talking about Gwlad the rugby forum.  Gwladrubgy blogspot is a different thing.  Just an individual's thoughts, I believe, rather than a collective discussion site.  Like that blog that Red Stag used to have.

Well thanks for filling me in on it, Oracle.  I've always wondered about the mixed messages on here about that word Gwlad.  
You see, I don't really do any other blogs, Munsterfans/Gwlad stuff, twitter or facebook stuff.  So I'm mouthy here    but quite a silent, aloof, non existent figure in more general and common electronic social media terms

Same here.  You need to register for Gwlad to see the posts anyway.  And I hear there may be a paywall in place too.  So no thanks!

I'm a guest member and never paid a penny. Not a bad bunch of lads but they can't take a beating. It's either the refs fault or the "cheating Irish". More anti-Irish xenophobes than you will find anywhere else, but most are decent enough lads....even if some can't take a beating.

Oh, OK. Just something I picked up on the Dragons thread (paywall). Obviously not then. I've no intention of registering though. This place is bad enough!

That Gwlad post might be okay, if it was balanced yeah.

There was a neck roll that was missed. Wales did seem to be penalised for holding a lot quicker. But as I said on the day, we got away with a Steff Evans high shot and there are other things I’m sure could be highlighted.

It’s not really worth writing a piece like that. Wales didn’t really deserve to win, I don’t think and it does come across slightly bitter when you’re so one sided.

I can’t remember seeing Gatland say much after the game. Apparently he criticised our scrumhalves’ fitness, but I didn’t see him saying Ireland were done, other than maybe where he said after he match about if it’s a higher ball in play time (above 37 mins or so), Wales would win. If it’s less (and it was apparently 32) Ireland will.

He did say wales were going to win the championship before the tournament though, so he’s not always right.

carpet baboon wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

Are we not allowed to discuss stuff like this?  

Nope.

That entire wordpress article isn't a discussion. It's a the ref didn't let us compete so that's why we lost cry baby tantrum.
It's worded ever so politely, but his final line gives it away for what it is.

I said from the start that Jackson didn't ref Ireland at the breakdown - and thought it was pretty obvious by observing but some stats also back it up. The fact that Shingler and Navidi, the two best flankers in the tournament were rendered obsolete tells its own story... so I'll ask again, is Glen Jackson dating Joe's niece? She's a cute little thing I tell ye.

Another thing, the English are clearly the worst for having a ref didn't let us compete so that's why we lost cry baby tantrum. Too up yourselves to think that teams can compete with England .

mikey_dragon wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

Are we not allowed to discuss stuff like this?  

Nope.

That entire wordpress article isn't a discussion. It's a the ref didn't let us compete so that's why we lost cry baby tantrum.
It's worded ever so politely, but his final line gives it away for what it is.

I said from the start that Jackson didn't ref Ireland at the breakdown - and thought it was pretty obvious by observing but some stats also back it up. The fact that Shingler and Navidi, the two best flankers in the tournament were rendered obsolete tells its own story... so I'll ask again, is Glen Jackson dating Joe's niece? She's a cute little thing I tell ye.

Another thing, the English are clearly the worst for having a ref didn't let us compete so that's why we lost cry baby tantrum. Too up yourselves to think that teams can compete with England .

So Mikey, it was the ref that beat you as he cheated?
And not sure why your bringing the English into this, I'm Irish discussing an Ireland Vs Wales game, and the tiny percentage of "fans" who believe he that the IRFU are head of a giant conspiracy to Always do over the welsh

ooh and your assertion that the Welsh flankers are the best in the tournament is just your opinion. I'm sure an argument could be made for the Scottish lads, or even Dan leavy, who outplayed his Welsh opposite number at the weekend (but I suppose that was only down to the ref?)

As I have said earlier, also during the match, Ireland did live a charmed life at the breakdown and a lot of 50/50 decisions went their way. Nature of the beast when playing at home I guess. Its horrible when they go against you and ok when they go for you. I thought the penalty to take Ireland to a 30-20 lead was very poor and should have been awarded to Wales but there you go. There were a lot of calls in the game that went against both teams so on the whole, I believe that the ref did not cost Wales the win.

Wales will score points given possession (27 with 30% possession) but their ability to retain ball was not good enough.

Ireland played exactly how I hoped and knew they could, it was a great game to watch. Sexton did not have a great game kicking wise but by god he was brilliant with ball in hand.

eirebilly wrote:As I have said earlier, also during the match, Ireland did live a charmed life at the breakdown and a lot of 50/50 decisions went their way. Nature of the beast when playing at home I guess. Its horrible when they go against you and ok when they go for you. I thought the penalty to take Ireland to a 30-20 lead was very poor and should have been awarded to Wales but there you go. There were a lot of calls in the game that went against both teams so on the whole, I believe that the ref did not cost Wales the win.

Wales will score points given possession (27 with 30% possession) but their ability to retain ball was not good enough.

Ireland played exactly how I hoped and knew they could, it was a great game to watch. Sexton did not have a great game kicking wise but by god he was brilliant with ball in hand.

It was a scrum penalty where the scrum collapsed neither team going forward (Ireland maybe slightly). The ref was standing right beside the scrum on the side it collapsed so maybe he saw something you didnt? Why do you think it was a penalty to Wales?

From Wales I thought Steph Evans was very good. He got a very important turn over/rip on Dan Leavy on the 19.04 minute. Ireland were really on the up going through 11 phases from our own 22 to Wales'. Evans' turnover lead to Davis' try and a huge turnaround in momentum. Great play Evans. He also ran for Wales' most meters.

Gareth Davis is also unbelievably good. Where TF are all these scrum halves in Wales coming from?

So - will Farrell be a significant loss - given the form he displayed; and will Ringrose therefore be a weakness - given he's rusty and if picked will be meeting a team in high spirits and playing a rapid fire game?

I know the answer is 'we don't know'.  But what do we think?  Will Ringrose be the right kind of player for this game where an abrasive, physical guy like Farrell just looked the perfect choice?

SecretFly wrote:So - will Farrell be a significant loss - given the form he displayed; and will Ringrose therefore be a weakness - given he's rusty and if picked will be meeting a team in high spirits and playing a rapid fire game?

I know the answer is 'we don't know'.  But what do we think?  Will Ringrose be the right kind of player for this game where an abrasive, physical guy like Farrell just looked the perfect choice?

I actually think he will be a big loss. Best center performance from an Ireland center this year. Farrell did everything well.

Ringrose's defense wasnt great v Scotland last year.

Collapse2005 wrote:From Wales I thought Steph Evans was very good. He got a very important turn over/rip on Dan Leavy on the 19.04 minute. Ireland were really on the up going through 11 phases from our own 22 to Wales'. Evans' turnover lead to Davis' try and a huge turnaround in momentum. Great play Evans.

Gareth Davis is also unbelievably good. Where TF are all these scrum halves in Wales coming from?

The Welsh are HUNGRY for those rips. You can see them tensing to get in the right contact to be able to attempt them over and over. The eyes are on that ball, not the man. This has been a big part of the Welsh game now for a while and yet I always feel other teams aren't as fully aware of it as they should be. They get a lot of 'leverage' from those rips when successful.

SecretFly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:From Wales I thought Steph Evans was very good. He got a very important turn over/rip on Dan Leavy on the 19.04 minute. Ireland were really on the up going through 11 phases from our own 22 to Wales'. Evans' turnover lead to Davis' try and a huge turnaround in momentum. Great play Evans.

Gareth Davis is also unbelievably good. Where TF are all these scrum halves in Wales coming from?

The Welsh are HUNGRY for those rips.  You can see them tensing to get in the right contact to be able to attempt them over and over.  The eyes are on that ball, not the man.  This has been a big part of the Welsh game now for a while and yet I always feel other teams aren't as fully aware of it as they should be.  They get a lot of 'leverage' from those rips when successful.

Look at the 11 phases Ireland went through prior to that rip. Some really really good moves to make it down to the Wales 22. It must have felt like a big blow to concede after that.

Collapse2005 wrote:

It was a scrum penalty where the scrum collapsed neither team going forward (Ireland maybe slightly). The ref was standing right beside the scrum on the side it collapsed so maybe he saw something you didnt? Why do you think it was a penalty to Wales?

In the lead up to that scrum (seconds prior) Wales should have won a penalty when Farrell clearly did not release the tackled player. Did not see what Wales did in the scrum that could have warranted a penalty either, possibly not hooking the ball?

As I have stated many times, Ireland were worthy of the win.

Collapse2005 wrote:From Wales I thought Steph Evans was very good. He got a very important turn over/rip on Dan Leavy on the 19.04 minute. Ireland were really on the up going through 11 phases from our own 22 to Wales'. Evans' turnover lead to Davis' try and a huge turnaround in momentum. Great play Evans. He also ran for Wales' most meters.

Gareth Davis is also unbelievably good. Where TF are all these scrum halves in Wales coming from?

It's actually a bit bare. Gareth Davies and Rhys Webb - that's it - with Web injured and off to play in Europe. So just Davies! The rest behind him are a long way down in terms of quality. Just hope Davies doesn't get injured.

eirebilly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

It was a scrum penalty where the scrum collapsed neither team going forward (Ireland maybe slightly). The ref was standing right beside the scrum on the side it collapsed so maybe he saw something you didnt? Why do you think it was a penalty to Wales?

In the lead up to that scrum (seconds prior) Wales should have won a penalty when Farrell clearly did not release the tackled player. Did not see what Wales did in the scrum that could have warranted a penalty either, possibly not hooking the ball?

As I have stated many times, Ireland were worthy of the win.

It would have been a very harsh penalty, on the replay you can see he does release as he spins around and then attacks the ball again. He tackles Williams around the ankles and then places his hands on the ground gets up and spins around then attacks the ball again. Think it was fair enough and fairly good technique from Farrell.

Ireland will win the Raeburn shield again if they beat current holders Scotland next week.

So many cups and stuff and bonus points and breakdown accuracy to think about for those poor players!

I hope they hold it together and just play their very best game of the year against the Scots.

collapse2005 wrote:Ireland will win the Raeburn shield again if they beat current holders Scotland next week.

I'm a bit disappointed we haven't got the Ireland v Scotland thread going yet.

The Scots are normally so quick of the mark with their thread starting. We barely get an Irish one going 24 hours before kick off!

Does anyone know anything about the Raeburn shield WITHOUT googling it?

rapidsnowman wrote:

collapse2005 wrote:Ireland will win the Raeburn shield again if they beat current holders Scotland next week.

I'm a bit disappointed we haven't got the Ireland v Scotland thread going yet.

The Scots are normally so quick of the mark with their thread starting. We barely get an Irish one going 24 hours before kick off!

Does anyone know anything about the Raeburn shield WITHOUT googling it?

Yes

rapidsnowman wrote:

collapse2005 wrote:Ireland will win the Raeburn shield again if they beat current holders Scotland next week.

I'm a bit disappointed we haven't got the Ireland v Scotland thread going yet.

The Scots are normally so quick of the mark with their thread starting. We barely get an Irish one going 24 hours before kick off!

Does anyone know anything about the Raeburn shield WITHOUT googling it?

Yep, it's the beat the holder trophy.

We won it from...the All Blacks? Right?

Nope, the Aussies beat you to it .. then England beat them

BamBam wrote:Nope, the Aussies beat you to it .. then England beat them

Oh Right.

Well, it won't be on my mind as the Scots zero in from all angles at high speed.

I think Fly Spray might be the best defence..

Funnily enough, I can't quite remember how it got from England to Scotland though. For some reason there's a blank spot in memory ...

SecretFly wrote:Jesus, Munch...the little dove amongst the wolves!

Courageous!  Or do you go in in disguise as a boyo who can't take his beating?

Heh, no I just jump in to comment once in a while, and plant a few seeds.

Without wanting to dredge up the referee issue, I thought Glen Jackson was a key element in Ireland winning the game. I also think the same was true with Scotland and Nigel Owens. Honestly, I always thought Wales looked comfortable, a bit like a boxer on the back foot who's taking plenty of jabs but can produce some classy shots to nullify the opponent. The try before half-time was key and frustrating to concede, but even then, at 27-13, I thought Wales would come back into it, the running threat was always there, but the conceded one try too many through poor defence in the tight and not enough poahing.

But Jackson, as with Nige, was key. I'm not sure either had a particularly 'poor' game, per se, but their respective interpretations massively favoured one team over the other.

For Jackson, I felt he was rewarding the aggressor/team in possession. Perhaps an element of Ireland being at home contributed, but impossible to say. But he was rewarding the team with the ball, and was frustratingly inconsistent in his ruling at the breakdown - at some points allowing a free for all and competition, at others blowing up for something innocuous. That said, Wales would have know his interpretation going in to the game - the lack of poaching threat, in a game where the ref was allowing some fairly loose slowing down of the ball, was a massive loss. On a weekend where Scotland had two poachers in Barclay and Watson, as well as players like McInally etc., having Shingler (who offers little ground threat but is a great defender and nuisance at rucks) and Navidi (who makes some turnovers, but not really proven international class yet) was costly. Flooding the backline kept Ireland quiet in the wide channels, but the fringe defence was simply too weak.

Having got a pretty good track record of predictions on this forum, I'd personally quite like to see Warburton at 6 and one of our fetchers (Tipurics, J Davies, E Jenkins, perhaps Navidi) at 7 come the RWC '19 - my prediction being that I think it could happen. Alternatively, change the shirt number - i.e. Navidi at 6, Warburton 7 - and the same could be true. It's harsh on Shingler, but I wonder if that might be the way they go - at the moment, it seems like Navidi is in the driving seat at openside, ahead of Tipuric, and Gatland does go with what he likes. We've got plenty of quality 7s - throw Thomas Young in there, too - and not too many 6s. Shingler is quality, and if needs be a deserved starter come the RWC, but having him at 6 is a very different dynamic to a 6.5 type player. It's almost as stark as England playing a second-row at 6, and Scotland playing a 7; there are different ways you can cut your cloth, and you accept each option's relative strengths an weaknesses.

Back to the weekend just gone...As with both refs, though, it wasn't merely the decisions they gave, it was the ones they didn't. There was a point in the first half in the Scotland game where they made a break down the right wing. For some reason, I think it went to TMO after several phases, or may have been leading to a penalty...I'm not actually sure how the move ended up, and whether it was beneficial to Scotland, but in that short break there was a marginally forward pass, preceded/followed by a grubber with the chaser being marginally offside.

That is what Nige does - he allows the game to flow. But there was a host of little, arguably minor, indiscretions that he let go that benefited Scotland far more than they did England. The penalty that disallowed Danny Care's breakaway was a mess. It's perhaps the right decision, as slowing the ball down with no recourse happens far too frequently, but that makes it an inconsistent adjudication, and therefore frustrating. If Scotland had gone through a few more phases, or even one, would play have been pulled back as with a penalty advantage? I'd suggest - and this is completely conjecture ofc - probably not.

But I do think Jackson contributed quite significantly to Ireland winning, where Schmidt's death by a thousand cuts/pick-and-goes approach was reliant on sustaining pressure that would have been relieved by a turnover penalty. Also, some very dubious application of carrying as well - supporting man bound to the ball carrier, and often straying offside - was never picked up on. That's starting to become something England do, too, and it's effective - did feel like it was another area Ireland were able to keep momentum around the fringes without ever being in threat of conceding possession due to the referee letting it go.

This might come across as bitter, and biased, but honestly I thought it was quite a close game and Wales could quite easily have won it in the final quarter with North etc. on the field, and long before Anscombe's missed pass at the death. As with the England game, it was a match of fine margins, and I don't think we've been that far away from the Grand Slam this year, losing narrowly away from home whilst playing for the win on 80 minutes. Promising signs with the way Wales have moved the ball and the performances of in-form players. Clearly need to add something in the close exchanges because they were taught a lesson by the masters in that regard on Saturday. Ireland were good though, there's no doubting that, very good. Sexton's goal-kicking probably due to back injury, but played great in the loose. Wonder what you'd do without Murray the RWC? Forwards look like a conveyorbelt of talent though. Two huge games for Ireland, look forward to them both. Don't think the title is decided just yet, and think England are probably still at evens to win it with Ireland.

And miaow all that you have said is fine. If a team is aware of how the ref refs, and they play to that, well that's rugby.
We know how Barnes will control the breakdown but year on year we don't adapt to him and that's on us.
What annoys me is when it is suggested that a ref has intentionally favoured one team rather than the style of play. Basically saying the ref has cheated to ensure his favoured team wins is absolute tosh in my mind.

carpet baboon wrote:And miaow all that you have said is fine. If a team is aware of how the ref refs, and they play to that, well that's rugby.
We know how Barnes will control the breakdown but year on year we don't adapt to him and that's on us.
What annoys me is when it is suggested that a ref has intentionally favoured one team rather than the style of play. Basically saying the ref has cheated to ensure his favoured team wins is absolute tosh in my mind.

Well Barnes grew up on the England Wales border and went to school in Wales so its hardly a stretch to think he might have at least subconscious bias towards Wales.

Collapse2005 wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:And miaow all that you have said is fine. If a team is aware of how the ref refs, and they play to that, well that's rugby.
We know how Barnes will control the breakdown but year on year we don't adapt to him and that's on us.
What annoys me is when it is suggested that a ref has intentionally favoured one team rather than the style of play. Basically saying the ref has cheated to ensure his favoured team wins is absolute tosh in my mind.

Well Barnes grew up on the England Wales border and went to school in Wales so its hardly a stretch to think he might have at least subconscious bias towards Wales.

And you can think that if you want. I just don't see it. He refs our games the same way he does all his others. Very officious. Very strict at the breakdown. We just can't help ourselves

carpet baboon wrote:

And you can think that if you want. I just don't see it. He refs our games the same way he does all his others. Very officious. Very strict at the breakdown. We just can't help ourselves

This times 1000. Barnes is not a bad ref, very pedantic but you have to adjust to it and Ireland rarely do. To say he is biased is very poor.

carpet baboon wrote:And miaow all that you have said is fine. If a team is aware of how the ref refs, and they play to that, well that's rugby.
We know how Barnes will control the breakdown but year on year we don't adapt to him and that's on us.
What annoys me is when it is suggested that a ref has intentionally favoured one team rather than the style of play. Basically saying the ref has cheated to ensure his favoured team wins is absolute tosh in my mind.

Absolutely. Same twisted logic applies to labelling Gatland as anti-X and pro-Welsh when coaching the Lions. The man's a Kiwi, trying to win something exponentially difficult, and clearly has his 'type' of player/style of play/belief in how to win test rugby (see: Scott Williams kept out of the side by Jamie Roberts 2012-16; Tipuric for Lydiate, similar period). Fans can project bias very easily, believing their partisan passion is something shared across the sport. Sadly, it's a business, a job etc. - the romance drains away when a sport goes professional, partly because romance is what use to mythologise something we either don't entirely understand, or to simply to make life a bit more 'interesting'.

The idea that a ref is 'crooked' is ridiculous, but you do get refs who defer to power - Craig Joubert's probably the most obvious one in that regard, for all his qualities. And you also get refs who can be intimidated by a crowd. I felt Nige lost himself to the occasion a bit in the Scotland-England game, which he's prone to once in a while (usually at club level with the Scarlets), and he wasn't reffing in his usual calm and assured way. He looked a bit jumpy - but that's just my opinion.

Don't think the same was true of Jackson. I was repeatedly frustrated throughout the game by him - primarily his non-calls, as well as those he did make - but I was equally frustrated by Wales' lack of contest at the breakdown. There's synchronicity between the two, unfortunately; Wales stopped competing when they were getting pinged, but also Ireland were securing quick ball so well, Wales were struggling to make any headway unless they forced it.

Two very different reffing styles; Nige is centre stage, which is great for TV, as he's commentating on decisions that you might otherwise be berating him for ignoring, and also advising players a lot at ruck time to keep the game alive; Jackson a lot more passive, observing the game and blowing up without giving away what he's thinking.

Haven't rewatched the game, and may get a different perspective on second viewing, but in all honesty felt this was another opportunity missed for Wales. Matched Ireland in the set-piece, which is incredibly rare, particularly at lineout; looked far better with ball in hand playing running rugby; but couldn't get near parity in controlling the game which would have allowed running threat to prosper.

Also, and this is something most Irish fans will not have experienced, the commentator on the British broadcast referred to Jackson at the start of the game, and then once more mid-game, as "one of the best referees in the world". This grated a bit, I won't lie.

But what makes a great one?

Talking about set piece, I have noticed that it's becoming rare that one scrum dominates another, they all seem quite even.
Any big ugly forward want to explain? I'm a handsome back so don't get the dark arts of scrummaging

carpet baboon wrote:Talking about set piece, I have noticed that it's becoming rare that one scrum dominates another, they all seem quite even.
Any big ugly forward want to explain? I'm a handsome back so don't get the dark arts of scrummaging

Referees have been instructed to keep play going. If the ball is available they will tell the 9 to play it, rather than sit around waiting for the penalty lottery.

Bout bloody time too.

mid_gen wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Talking about set piece, I have noticed that it's becoming rare that one scrum dominates another, they all seem quite even.
Any big ugly forward want to explain? I'm a handsome back so don't get the dark arts of scrummaging

Referees have been instructed to keep play going. If the ball is available they will tell the 9 to play it, rather than sit around waiting for the penalty lottery.

Bout bloody time too.

Yes, but I think I know what carpet is talking about. I think he's referring to these ghostly static scrums where 'parity' seems to be miraculously accurate to the extent that not an inch of movement is seen even when these scrums go on for a relatively longish time.
There has been a lot of them in this 6N. But I think it's tactics concerning defensive shape or attacking shape. Scrums are now kinda used as simple platforms to prepare attack or getting ready to fan out rapidly to defend. That's my reading of what I'm seeing anyway.