England vs South Africa - 1st Quilter International

First topic message reminder :

Date: Saturday 3rd November 2018
Time: 15:00
Location: Twickenham Stadium

Referee:       Angus Gardiner (Aus)
Assistant 1: Jerome Garces (France)
Assistant 2: Ben Whitehouse (Wales)
TMO:            Olly Hodges (Ireland)




Teams


England

15 Elliot Daly (Wasps, 21 caps), 14 Jack Nowell (Exeter Chiefs, 26 caps), 13 Henry Slade (Exeter Chiefs, 13 caps), 12 Ben Te’o (Worcester Warriors, 13 caps), 11 Jonny May (Leicester Tigers, 37 caps), 10 Owen Farrell (Saracens, 61 caps) co-captain, 9 Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 77 caps), 1 Alec Hepburn (Exeter Chiefs, 2 caps), 2 Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints, 93 caps) co-captain, 3 Kyle Sinckler (Harlequins, 13 caps), 4 Maro Itoje (Saracens, 22 caps), 5 George Kruis (Saracens, 25 caps), 6 Brad Shields (Wasps, 2 caps), 7 Tom Curry (Sale Sharks, 4 caps), 8 Mark Wilson (Newcastle Falcons, 4 caps).
 
16 Jamie George (Saracens, 28 caps), 17 Ben Moon (Exeter Chiefs, uncapped), 18 Harry Williams (Exeter Chiefs, 11 caps), 19 Charlie Ewels (Bath Rugby, 6 caps) , 20 Zach Mercer (Bath Rugby, uncapped), 21 Danny Care (Harlequins, 81 caps), 22 George Ford (Leicester Tigers, 47 caps), 23 Manu Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers, 26 caps).




South Africa


15 Damian Willemse, 14 S’bu Nkosi, 13 Jesse Kriel, 12 Damian de Allende, 11 Aphiwe Dyantyi, 10 Handre Pollard, 9 Ivan van Zyl, 8 Warren Whiteley, 7 Duane Vermeulen, 6 Siya Kolisi, 5 Pieter-Steph du Toit, 4 Eben Etzebeth, 3 Frans Malherbe, 2 Malcolm Marx, 1 Steven Kitshoff

Substitutes: 16 Bongi Mbonambi, 17 Thomas du Toit, 18 Wilco Louw, 19 RG Snyman, 20 Lood de Jager, 21 Embrose Papier, 22 Elton Jantjies, 23 André Esterhuizen.

SA should've gone for a drop goal too, seriously, what were they thinking ?

TightHEAD wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:Tighthead, run a poll to see if posters in general think it was a penalty, yellow, red or nothing. I'm guessing the majority would go for a penalty at least.

Why?

An attempt was made by the player to wrap their arms and it wasn't high.
Perfect hit in the modern game.

To see what the forum view is. It might be interesting.

I agree it would be interesting, but I feel people biased views would take over.

Because yours are completely unbiased ?

well well well not since Sir Jonny Wilkinson scored against Scotland while his foot was 2 meters in touch have we seen such blatant daylight robbery at Twickenham.

rodders wrote:well well well not since Sir Jonny Wilkinson scored against Scotland while his foot was 2 meters in touch have we seen such blatant daylight robbery at Twickenham.

And that went to TMO as well. Donal Courtney, take a bow!

rodders wrote:well well well not since Sir Jonny Wilkinson scored against Scotland while his foot was 2 meters in touch have we seen such blatant daylight robbery at Twickenham.

Australians will disagree. They weren't happy about last year's Twickenham refereeing decisions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yRM46g0Mp4

Ha I don't remember that one. That's pretty funny.

Collapse2005 wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yRM46g0Mp4

Ha I don't remember that one. That's pretty funny.

It was Lord Jonny's comeback game, though, so had to be given!

Reminds me a bit of Ben Smith's try v Ireland in Chicago. His whole leg was in touch too.

Sir Jonny doesn’t have to adhere to the same laws of physics as mere mortals. The earth clearly moved down a few inches in deference. And why not?

Duty281 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yRM46g0Mp4

Ha I don't remember that one. That's pretty funny.

It was Lord Jonny's comeback game, though, so had to be given!

A Scottish friend had spent the whole week texting me about how Scotland were going to break Jonny all over again. For Jonny to complete the full house of rugby scoring methods was deeply fitting.

Especially as I lucked into a ticket at literally the last minute (I was in Kew Gardens when I got the call and had to hightail it to Twickenham to get in...).

Looks like there's going to be plenty of yellow cards for SA in the next couple of weeks.

Check out @jimhamilton4’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/jimhamilton4/status/1059712752091127808?s=09

Erasmus running through tackling practice. Tongue firmly in cheek. And still ignoring the fact they already got away with it. The perfect response to coaches wanting to whinge and moan while appearing to accept refs decisions in the future!

But what an occasion it was at HQ to see Wilko back in full flow.

The Scot I was with even enjoyed it.

TightHEAD wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:uh?

it was a legal tackle, you see those on a Sunday morning up and down the country at mini/youth level and the Ref has no problem with them.

his arm wrapped. fact, end of debate.

Alas, you need to wrap both arms. Farrell couldn't wrap his right arm because he'd decided to turn his shoulder into Esterhuizen instead.

He could have wrapped both arms, but that would have meant losing 'the collision', which has been allowed to become more important than player safety.

He did attempt to wrap both arms, these guys are hitting big and I suspect it is a lot different to what you played at school!

So do "you see those on a Sunday morning up and down the country at mini/youth level" or is it "a lot different to what you played at school"?

Is leading with the shoulder allowed in mini rugby but then policed in the school game?

Farrell maybe needs to be conscious of his own welfare a bit more, he could be looking at a serious rotator cuff injury if he hits hard bone (like someone's head) with such a 'tackle'.

You'll still the odd occasion where he and plenty of others will take the risk. Sometimes it works. Sometimes you get it wrong and pay. And sometimes you get away with it and mercer will poach the ball away and win you the game.

Tom Shanklin on his podcast: "I'm working next week over Twickenham way. It's in a pub but I don't know if I'll be able to find it. It's called the Farrell Arms."

Rugby Fan wrote:Tom Shanklin on his podcast: "I'm working next week over Twickenham way. It's in a pub but I don't know if I'll be able to find it. It's called the Farrell Arms."

Thats where he left them, makes sense now

I've listened to a lot of this week's rugby podcasts, and it's evident that the rugby world is not on the same page about how tackles shoud be policed.

While I haven't heard any former/current players and officials say they think Farrell should have seen red - which is why there is little surprise over the lack of a citing - opinions are all over the shop about whether it was a legal tackle.

Tom Shanklin says he spoke with a current referee - he didn't say "international", so we can't assume it was Nigel Owens - who said he would have penalised Farrell. Meanwhile, David Flatman spoke with another official who thought that Jerome Kaino's tackle during a European Cup game was all right, and he received a five week ban.

Rob Vickerman said that the video on the World Rugby website indicating which tackles it believes are illegal, shows one which is almost identical to the Farrell tackle (I don't know where that video is on the site). He also suggested the footage has become like the photograph of the dress, which some saw as white/gold and others as blue/black.

It may well be that even elite referees are split on how the tackle should be ruled but I think that just reinforces the need for World Rugby to speak out more clearly on the issue, so even their own officials know where their expectations are.

The evidence around tackling is that the biggest way to reduce the risk of injury to both parties is if the tackler is not upright.

World Rugby has already trialled moving the height of the tackle to below the armpits/nipples at U20, and it’s set to be rolled out more widely.

Too late for this RWC, obviously, but for the next cycle the question may well become moot.

It does also feel frustrating that Farrell and England are the bad guys here, when as has been pointed out SA were guilty of similar earlier in the match.

Ultimately it is the responsibility of the referee and his interpretation. That and the main thing that Farrell's 'target' was not injured in the collision.

Well, you’re just going to have to suck it up. Farrell should have been penalised and SA should have won the game when the easy penalty should have been kicked between the posts.

It's only idiots that are doing that lost. I'm sure there's no one on here that stupid.

England should have lost. But the referee choked. Just another international referee that choked in the big moment. Farrell is a liability and should have cost England that game.

Oh. That's awkward. Guess there are. Ouch.

You know it should have been penalised and a hapless England should have lost. You know deep down, lol. But, but, but....but

I'd have penalised it yes. I've seen a range of sanctions normally ranging from nothing to a yellow. Gardner made a few calls which were consistent but I didn't agree with.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'd have penalised it yes

That doesn’t make you an idiot

No it doesn't. Suggesting rugby games are decided solely on 1 thing would of course.

Thing is, if its a penalty then its a yellow.

ebop wrote:You know it should have been penalised and a hapless England should have lost. You know deep down, lol. But, but, but....but

Strange you thought Farrell's hit was a penalty but not Sam Cane's tackle on Robbie Henshaw. Bit inconsistent no?

Cane drove his shoulder in Henshaw's face. Red card all day every day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQSpT6igORU

munkian wrote:Thing is, if its a penalty then its a yellow.

Why?

LondonTiger wrote:

munkian wrote:Thing is, if its a penalty then its a yellow.

Why?

Because a no arms tackle is a penalty and a yellow.

ebop wrote:Well, you’re just going to have to suck it up. Farrell should have been penalised and SA should have won the game when the easy penalty should have been kicked between the posts.

Easy penalty? Close to the touch line on the wrong side and right on the limit of Pollard's range.

munkian wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

munkian wrote:Thing is, if its a penalty then its a yellow.

Why?

Because a no arms tackle is a penalty and a yellow.

Since when? The law book only states that sanctions range from penalty through YC to RC. Sure they focused on it a few years ago, mainly looking at no arm chop tackles, but in the last season or so only clear shoulder charges have been binned.

ebop wrote:Well, you’re just going to have to suck it up. Farrell should have been penalised and SA should have won the game when the easy penalty should have been kicked between the posts.

Suck it up? We won....

Lovely contact with the eyes here too. The game is a mess.

Who is making g contact with eyes?

LondonTiger wrote:Who is making g contact with eyes?

RG Snyman

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:Who is making g contact with eyes?

RG Snyman

Picture quality not great, but only person who could be making contact with eyes is the guy top right, that does not look like Snyman

There is literally no way of telling whats going on in that photo

LondonTiger wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:Who is making g contact with eyes?

RG Snyman

Picture quality not great, but only person who could be making contact with eyes is the guy top right, that does not look like Snyman

At this point, you're either trolling or are not looking at the correct part of the image.

If we are talking about the man in the middle with his head resting on a teammates shorts, who does look like it may be Snyman, then I am unable to see any English head near his hands. 
His right arm is around his team mates neck, while his left seems to be between his other teammates shorts and wahat looks to be Kruis's knee.

Picture though is too small to make much out.

It like a impressionist painting of a rugby scene. How do you expect anyone to see anything in that photo?

LondonTiger wrote:I am unable to see any English head near his hands. 
.

Really? You can not see a hand on a head / face anywhere in this?

ebop wrote:You know it should have been penalised and a hapless England should have lost. You know deep down, lol. But, but, but....but

I know deep down that SA should have won but did not. I am heartbroken.

BTW I think Ebop is probably the only active poster that I have on my foe list. He really does seem to have some issues

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I am unable to see any English head near his hands. 
.

Really? You can not see a hand on a head / face anywhere in this?

Yep, that's banged to rights that is.

No place for it in today's game. What a coward.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I am unable to see any English head near his hands. 
.

Really? You can not see a hand on a head / face anywhere in this?

Well that's not the image that LT was looking at and describing, is it?

BamBam wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I am unable to see any English head near his hands. 
.

Really? You can not see a hand on a head / face anywhere in this?

Well that's not the image that LT was looking at and describing, is it?

It's the lower left hand quadrant of the exact image.

My guess is he doesn't realise that you can enlarge the image. Even though it says click to enlarge the image.

Now I can see it, but as BamBam says the image I was looking at was different to this moving gif - ie in the image you can see Kruis face with no hand any where near it (yet).

Looks like the Saffa may have gotten away with one.

RugbyFan100 wrote:Lovely contact with the eyes here too. The game is a mess.

RF100 I know how to enlarge the image, though it is still small, but this is what you posted and there is, at this point, no hand in Kruis's face.

Kruis is quite clearly almost sitting up in the still image. How is that in anyway comparable to the very telling GIF that you posted afterwards, which starts with him lying on his side