Ireland v England - Six Nations Round 4, 9 March 2024

First topic message reminder :

Ireland supremely confident of having any answers to questions that England will pose, according to Bernard Jackman.

Stephen Jones wants lots of bish and bosh and no training.  Stuart Barnes wants Ben Earl in midfield.  Dallaglio wants them to get in some players faces and annoy them a lot.

Farrell doesn't know yet if he'll have Ringrose and Keenan back to consider for squad selection and thus the make up of his bench for 6-2 or 5-3.

Borthwick has two players back for his half-back partnership and the opportunity to continue with Furbank at 15.

No real shots have been fired yet but it's only Monday.

Teams

England
Furbank, Feyi-Waboso, Slade, Lawrence, Freeman, Ford, Mitchell
Genge, George, Cole, Itoje, Martin, Chessum, Underhill, Earl
Dan, Marler, Stuart, Cunningham-South, Dombrandt, Care, Smith, Daly

Ireland
Keenan, Nash, Henshaw, Aki, Lowe, Crowley, Gibson-Park
Porter, Sheehan, Furlong, Beirne, McCarthy, O'Mahony, vd Flier, Doris
Kelleher, Healy, Bealham, Henderson, Conan, Baird, Murray, Frawley

Geordie wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Martin was brilliant as was Chessum. Not often you see Itoje quiet in comparison. May still be a horses for courses selection.

I think it might be a selection for now and not necessarily forever. Tom Curry is to come back from injury, CCS is developing, Tom Pearson is a developing talent, Barbeary, Fisilau etc etc.

The current selection does give us a nice balance though and helps the lineout. Something to evolve as opposed to needing to fix.

Sam where would Curry fit in here now....if he makes it back to his best.

Impact player from the bench, if earl drops off bring on an inform curry? Long term earl at 7 curry at 6 and either CCS or barbery at 8? Will be interesting to see the back row in 2026 going into world cup prep.

Yoda wrote:

Geordie wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Martin was brilliant as was Chessum. Not often you see Itoje quiet in comparison. May still be a horses for courses selection.

I think it might be a selection for now and not necessarily forever. Tom Curry is to come back from injury, CCS is developing, Tom Pearson is a developing talent, Barbeary, Fisilau etc etc.

The current selection does give us a nice balance though and helps the lineout. Something to evolve as opposed to needing to fix.

Sam where would Curry fit in here now....if he makes it back to his best.

Impact player from the bench, if earl drops off bring on an inform curry? Long term earl at 7 curry at 6 and either CCS or barbery at 8? Will be interesting to see the back row in 2026 going into world cup prep.

Agree. I think the only thing we know is we don't really know how the back row (or the team) will look in just one year, let alone two.

Well done England - that's a huge result. I did think the media and pundits were being way OTT all week painting them as complete no hopers, but I didn't see a win coming tbh.

Will this be the result that helps propel England to the next level?

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mountain man wrote:I haven't looked at all possible permutations but what is worst England can finish now? I don't think it's that important as how they play and progress is but was wondering.
Anyway, after today I'm happy whatever. England have definitely showed they are improving.

5th.

If France murder Wales tomorrow then England lose to France with no points whilst Italy and Scotland get two points from their games next weekend.

Scotland backlash next weekend and we beat France and suddenly it becomes very interesting at the top.

Ideally Italy and France beat Wales because Gatland deserves a Wooden Spoon.

This is why I think we should have gone for the bonus point try and tried to play a few phases instead of the drop goal when we had a fresh penalty advantage in front of the sticks on Irelands line. The game was won once we got the new penalty, worse case scenario the ref calls it back and we take the 3. We should have stuck the knife in and put a little bit more pressure on the Irish for next week, that’s what the top teams do in a similar situation.

king_carlos wrote:At Curry's peak, he'd come in for Underhill here. As strong in the tackle but better over the ball and much stronger in the carry. It's a major hip operation he's undergone though. It's just a case of waiting and seeing there.

I think CCS will be starting 8 sometime next year. His conditioning clearly needs to improve when you look at his average minutes played in pro rugby. He's a rare talent when it comes to his strength in contact combined with being quick for his size though.

Then it'd likely be a case of Earl at 7, picking the blindside depending on tactics. Underhill or Curry if you want the work rate, play all three locks if you want bulk and the lineout option.

I agree...he looks a quality 8 in the making and a lineout option. Hopefully he's not badly injured.

Earl at 7 then gives you options at 6 depending on opposition...

RDW wrote:Well done England - that's a huge result. I did think the media and pundits were being way OTT all week painting them as complete no hopers, but I didn't see a win coming tbh.

Will this be the result that helps propel England to the next level?

England have to get past Scotland first. Until then, this is just a (really cool) one-off aberration.

Northgrill wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mountain man wrote:I haven't looked at all possible permutations but what is worst England can finish now? I don't think it's that important as how they play and progress is but was wondering.
Anyway, after today I'm happy whatever. England have definitely showed they are improving.

5th.

If France murder Wales tomorrow then England lose to France with no points whilst Italy and Scotland get two points from their games next weekend.

Scotland backlash next weekend and we beat France and suddenly it becomes very interesting at the top.

Ideally Italy and France beat Wales because Gatland deserves a Wooden Spoon.

This is why I think we should have gone for the bonus point try and tried to play a few phases instead of the drop goal when we had a fresh penalty advantage in front of the sticks on Irelands line. The game was won once we got the new penalty, worse case scenario the ref calls it back and we take the 3. We should have stuck the knife in and put a little bit more pressure on the Irish for next week, that’s what the top teams do in a similar situation.

Doubt England would have been thinking of the permutations like that. They just wanted to get the win.

doctor_grey wrote:

RDW wrote:Well done England - that's a huge result. I did think the media and pundits were being way OTT all week painting them as complete no hopers, but I didn't see a win coming tbh.

Will this be the result that helps propel England to the next level?

England have to get past Scotland first.

France, Scotland was last time out.

On all seriousness we should have moved on significantly by the next time we meet Scotland. Borthwick is evolving the side and it's starting to come good.

Duty281 wrote:

Northgrill wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mountain man wrote:I haven't looked at all possible permutations but what is worst England can finish now? I don't think it's that important as how they play and progress is but was wondering.
Anyway, after today I'm happy whatever. England have definitely showed they are improving.

5th.

If France murder Wales tomorrow then England lose to France with no points whilst Italy and Scotland get two points from their games next weekend.

Scotland backlash next weekend and we beat France and suddenly it becomes very interesting at the top.

Ideally Italy and France beat Wales because Gatland deserves a Wooden Spoon.

This is why I think we should have gone for the bonus point try and tried to play a few phases instead of the drop goal when we had a fresh penalty advantage in front of the sticks on Irelands line. The game was won once we got the new penalty, worse case scenario the ref calls it back and we take the 3. We should have stuck the knife in and put a little bit more pressure on the Irish for next week, that’s what the top teams do in a similar situation.

Doubt England would have been thinking of the permutations like that. They just wanted to get the win.

They should have been thinking like that but given the circumstances it was understandable that they weren't. If Marcus Smith wants to be a top 3 international flyhalf it's the sort of change he needs to make. To keep an ice cold head as everyone around him is getting caught up with the moment. The second penalty is a gimme. A crossfield kick or some sort of all or nothing play was the way to go. Don't give the ref chance to forget the advantage.

He slotted the drop goal well though and a win is more than everyone thought we'd get out of this. The general consensus was that a LBP would be a good result.

Watched it again, we were yards away from getting over the line, the Irish player (Beirne?) was told several times by the referee to release the ball but didn’t at the last breakdown. Possibly looking at the bigger picture and hoping to give England the 3 (we were always going to take the points) rather than risk us getting over the line for the TBP. Think if we had gone another phase or two we would have scored. Who knows, may be the winning of the championship next weekend for them although I think expect them to bounce back against Scotland next week.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

RDW wrote:Well done England - that's a huge result. I did think the media and pundits were being way OTT all week painting them as complete no hopers, but I didn't see a win coming tbh.

Will this be the result that helps propel England to the next level?

England have to get past Scotland first.

France, Scotland was last time out.

On all seriousness we should have moved on significantly by the next time we meet Scotland. Borthwick is evolving the side and it's starting to come good.

My comment about getting past Scotland was to say England need to beat them next opportunity to break that duck which has continued too long. Then England can really say they have improved.  

On the moving forward point, I'm sure you are right.  Certainly hoping England have advanced in a year from now!  Frankly, regardless whether England played well today or not I would hope England will have pushed the needle by then.  And right now, despite how great it was to see England play with real attacking intent, a performance like that is still a one-off.  Need this same group to go out and explain the facts of life to France, then we will see where we are.  

Alex Corbisiero, anchoring the US coverage, said that he has not seen an England match which got him as excited as he was today since that 2019 RWC semi-final.

I thought Murray could have passed the ball and Ireland protect it. Run the clock down, so close to the end, instead of kicking it and essentially giving England possession.

westisbest wrote:I thought Murray could have passed the ball and Ireland protect it. Run the clock down, so close to the end, instead of kicking it and essentially giving England possession.

Refs are extremely quick to penalise sealing when teams try to run the clock down now. Rightly so IMO. It became far too common a few years back. Teams were doing it with 2-3 minutes left at one point. When sides try to go through more than a few phases where they clearly aren't trying to achieve anything but running the clock down, they'll generally get penalised for something now.

NZ and SA both took the same option as Murray in their respective QFs in similar scenarios. I don't think the option was wrong. Rather the execution. It was an uncharacteristically poor kick from Murray. He didn't even really set to kick long whilst making touch either. No time was taken. He just sort of poked it out in a hurried fashion. The kick should've been up around halfway, not the 10m. I'd back Ireland's defence not to concede from there more often than not.

I had a similar poor execution vs poor tactic thought process with Care's absurdly long box kick late in the second half. Due to the execution it looks like an awful option. I actually liked the option when he indicated it though. He looked back at his fly-half and potential chasers, nodded and pointed up. Ireland's wingers had come up high to defend. England were set perfectly to chase. A contestable box kick would've been just on the 22m where calling the mark is so difficult. Care just kicked it about twice as far as the intended landing spot. Really poor stuff.

Northgrill wrote:Watched it again, we were yards away from getting over the line, the Irish player (Beirne?) was told several times by the referee to release the ball but didn’t at the last breakdown. Possibly looking at the bigger picture and hoping to give England the 3 (we were always going to take the points) rather than risk us getting over the line for the TBP. Think if we had gone another phase or two we would have scored. Who knows, may be the winning of the championship next weekend for them although I think expect them to bounce back against Scotland next week.

My first thought when the second, closer, penalty came, was that we had a free shot to score a try and bonus point. It's clear the team and coaches were delighted to get the win, so it does seem as if the extra point wasn't really seen as a missed opportunity by anyone at the time.

There's also the possibility that Marcus Smith had Garbisi's penalty woes against France at the back of his mind, as well as Ford's missed kicks. He might have decided on two goes at the extra three points, rather than just one pressure penalty. Smith has made clutch kicks in the past, but has also missed a couple of easier ones, like a late conversion against Montpellier, which meant Quins were knocked out of the 2022 European Cup (around the 7:05 mark in the video below).

England simply went to secure the win. And in that moment Marcus Smith did exactly what I was hoping he would do.

king_carlos wrote:

westisbest wrote:I thought Murray could have passed the ball and Ireland protect it. Run the clock down, so close to the end, instead of kicking it and essentially giving England possession.

Refs are extremely quick to penalise sealing when teams try to run the clock down now. Rightly so IMO. It became far too common a few years back. Teams were doing it with 2-3 minutes left at one point. When sides try to go through more than a few phases where they clearly aren't trying to achieve anything but running the clock down, they'll generally get penalised for something now.

NZ and SA both took the same option as Murray in their respective QFs in similar scenarios. I don't think the option was wrong. Rather the execution. It was an uncharacteristically poor kick from Murray. He didn't even really set to kick long whilst making touch either. No time was taken. He just sort of poked it out in a hurried fashion. The kick should've been up around halfway, not the 10m. I'd back Ireland's defence not to concede from there more often than not.

I had a similar poor execution

I suspect Murray was worried about being charged down what with it being late in the game so just made sure he got it off the park with a bit of distance.

RDW wrote:Well done England - that's a huge result. I did think the media and pundits were being way OTT all week painting them as complete no hopers, but I didn't see a win coming tbh.

Will this be the result that helps propel England to the next level?

I thought the same. Was a good win and good match. No complaints.

doctor_grey wrote:England simply went to secure the win.  And in that moment Marcus Smith did exactly what I was hoping he would do.  

Exactly. Some saying why not go for BP seeing as had penalty advantage but imagine if they had, played multiple phases which is quite possible then ref says advantage over. Game lost.

Smith did right thing. Get win.

The bonus points were there to be worried about before yesterday.

Reckon Genge may have a visit from the citing commissioner this week?

https://twitter.com/aj_d___/status/1766514145334100073?t=rR2VRyKdCnbUa9DA93NCSw&s=19

Not bothered about BPs to be honest. Certainly not after yesterday.
If a team now finishes ahead of England purely as a result of BP I can live with that. I'm happy England won and in the manner they did.
Confounded all critics, pundits and yes us fans.

Ireland may win 6N but I'd say this morning I reckon England are happier side. Plenty still to work on but they are heading in right direction for sure.

No 7&1/2 wrote:The bonus points were there to be worried about before yesterday.

Reckon Genge may have a visit from the citing commissioner this week?

https://twitter.com/aj_d___/status/1766514145334100073?t=rR2VRyKdCnbUa9DA93NCSw&s=19

You'll need a better camera angle to see where Genge makes contact. Looks like he wraps but there's a lot of force involved. The TMO was unmoved at the time just as he was for the tackle on Genge that the prop was infuriated by.

The team are only bothered about winning though of course so a bonus point against Italy which is normally routine may well have been important. Doubt it will matter though tbf.

No 7&1/2 wrote:The bonus points were there to be worried about before yesterday.

Reckon Genge may have a visit from the citing commissioner this week?

https://twitter.com/aj_d___/status/1766514145334100073?t=rR2VRyKdCnbUa9DA93NCSw&s=19

Is Furlong after an Oscar? I mean seriously. That was surely reviewed by TMO anyway.

Not sure I heard a review. But arm tucked coming in from a long way. Looks like head contact. Roll a dice to decide of course which set of applications refs are following this week but it looks red ish from that angle.

Ben Earl has been the standout forward of this tournament for me.

George Carlin wrote:Ben Earl has been the standout forward of this tournament for me.

He's really grown into the 8 role for England. With some more heft at blindside and the attack actually starting to function properly he's getting the ball and not being asked to run into a brick wall. Makes him far more effective.

And to think some on here say as soon as Curry fit Earl bench at best.

mountain man wrote:And to think some on here say as soon as Curry fit Earl bench at best.

Aboutely. Curry is a miles better 7. When you have 8s like Barbeary and C-S who you could also play 6 (the latter) then I think Earl offers a really good bench forward option.

You still think Martin isn't good enough mountain?

I didn't say Martin wasn't good enough? But please copy and paste up where I said that if I did.

I'll also say it comes as no surprise you have admitted that you wanted England to lose yesterday as part of your ongoing campaign against Borthwick!

I mean really? You're not happy England won?

I'm not king, I'm not just making things up. You don't remember saying that in the wc.

Yeah I was pretty clear that for the better outcome further down the line not having Borthwick as head coach really benefits us.

Well find post where I wrote it. I know I was critical of a game(think before RWC?) where Martin was on as sub and did very little.
However, I certainly have not said he isn't a good enough player for Int rugby.

But again, search out post, I'm more than happy to be corrected.

Funny how the Irish complaints focus on Murray and not the remarkably dumb POM yellow

mountain man wrote:Well find post where I wrote it. I know I was critical of a game(think before RWC?) where Martin was on as sub and did very little.
However, I certainly have not said he isn't a good enough player for Int rugby.

But again, search out post, I'm more than happy to be corrected.

Sorry ain't got time to be sea lioning this morning. About to set off up north. Maybe later but you did say it I see no point in lying.

I'm not accussing you of lying. Seriously you come over as a sore loser even though England won. Maybe I did say something critical about Martin but I'm pretty sure I haven't said he wasn't good enough.

What's sea lioning?

mountain man wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:England simply went to secure the win.  And in that moment Marcus Smith did exactly what I was hoping he would do.  

Exactly. Some saying why not go for BP seeing as had penalty advantage but imagine if they had, played multiple phases which is quite possible then ref says advantage over. Game lost.

Smith did right thing. Get win.

You have a misunderstanding of how penalty advantage works then! Knock on advantage can be called once the ball is kicked away or once you gain clean possession but penalty advantage is not called over after a few phases or if you don’t get any significant advantage from a kick (in this case the only significant advantage from a few metres out would have been a try).

mountain man wrote:I'm not accussing you of lying. Seriously you come over as a sore loser even though England won. Maybe I did say something critical about Martin but I'm pretty sure I haven't said he wasn't good enough.

I don't recall you saying Martin wasn't good enough. You have said that about Jonny Hill, so maybe there's some confusion?

I do recall you saying a few weeks ago that you wouldn't start Martin, but maybe would have him on the bench.

mountain man wrote:Martin? I see a lot saying he should be back in team but as lock or backrow? Itoje going to be there so it's only Chessum to replace/move. I'm happy for Chessum to stay as is. Backrow again is fine although I would put C-CS 8 Earl 7 and then it's who's 6. I think Roots done enough to merit keeping shirt. Not sure Underhill has. Martin on bench in place of Coles maybe.

https://www.606v2.com/t71396-england-the-next-episode#4125705

That's seems about right. I definitely DON'T rate Hill!

Yeah so Martin on bench was my view. I think this was after Italy game where Roots looked very good. Martin had a good impact against Scotland and yesterday he was excellent and seeing as it's France next with a huge pack he should be in starting 15.

Think that's a pretty fair assessment.

Northgrill wrote:

mountain man wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:England simply went to secure the win.  And in that moment Marcus Smith did exactly what I was hoping he would do.  

Exactly. Some saying why not go for BP seeing as had penalty advantage but imagine if they had, played multiple phases which is quite possible then ref says advantage over. Game lost.

Smith did right thing. Get win.

You have a misunderstanding of how penalty advantage works then! Knock on advantage can be called once the ball is kicked away or once you gain clean possession but penalty advantage is not called over after a few phases or if you don’t get any significant advantage from a kick (in this case the only significant advantage from a few metres out would have been a try).

No I don't and I agree it's unlikely ref would call it over so near to try line but it is a possibility. Also if an England player did something stupid then pen could be reversed.
Smith did right thing taking 3 points and winning match.

mountain man wrote:

Northgrill wrote:

mountain man wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:England simply went to secure the win.  And in that moment Marcus Smith did exactly what I was hoping he would do.  

Exactly. Some saying why not go for BP seeing as had penalty advantage but imagine if they had, played multiple phases which is quite possible then ref says advantage over. Game lost.

Smith did right thing. Get win.

You have a misunderstanding of how penalty advantage works then! Knock on advantage can be called once the ball is kicked away or once you gain clean possession but penalty advantage is not called over after a few phases or if you don’t get any significant advantage from a kick (in this case the only significant advantage from a few metres out would have been a try).

No I don't and I agree it's unlikely ref would call it over so near to try line but it is a possibility. Also if an England player did something stupid then pen could be reversed.
Smith did right thing taking 3 points and winning match.

You'd need some foul play to turn it over but a dodgy ruck clearout or taking the man in the air from a crossfield kick would certainly do it.

That's what I meant, an act of foul play in heat of moment and it was such a moment could have seen pen reversed.
Anyway, moot point now.

Main point I think is I don't care about BP, getting such a massive result is what matters.

Looked. You merely said Martin was unimpressive here sp must have been on the bbc and there's little in the way of ability to search for those comments. It was after the Wales game pre wc.

mountain man wrote:That's what I meant, an act of foul play in heat of moment and it was such a moment could have seen pen reversed.
Anyway, moot point now.

Main point I think is I don't care about BP, getting such a massive result is what matters.

BP should have been in the Italy and Wales games. Should the bizarre happen twice and we beat France that could be costly albeit our points difference is bad.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mountain man wrote:That's what I meant, an act of foul play in heat of moment and it was such a moment could have seen pen reversed.
Anyway, moot point now.

Main point I think is I don't care about BP, getting such a massive result is what matters.

BP should have been in the Italy and Wales games. Should the bizarre happen twice and we beat France that could be costly albeit our points difference is bad.

I feel confident going over to France. This is a French team in crisis. They look like Ireland in 2019 or ourselves in 2021-2. They should be 0 from 3 and hopefully Borthwick keeps the same 15 and allows us to build on the momentum.

Championship is definitely to play for, just feel an extra BP yesterday from a great position would have put the pressure on the Irish a bit more. They’ll be disappointed to lose it at the death but in the cold light of day they were second best all afternoon and will probably be relieved they kept England out for the extra BP when a try looked inevitable.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mountain man wrote:That's what I meant, an act of foul play in heat of moment and it was such a moment could have seen pen reversed.
Anyway, moot point now.

Main point I think is I don't care about BP, getting such a massive result is what matters.

BP should have been in the Italy and Wales games. Should the bizarre happen twice and we beat France that could be costly albeit our points difference is bad.

But getting a higher position on table by means of a BP isn't what matters, it's winning games and how they are won. By that mark England getting 3rd in RWC is good but that was because of draw. So gaining say 3rd instead of 4th purely on bonus points in same category for me.
I'd rather England did have try bonus points but only because they'd have scored at 4 tries which means attack must have been good. Purely as a means of gaining a place higher on table doesnt matter to me.

Anyway, what's sea lioning?

Northgrill wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mountain man wrote:That's what I meant, an act of foul play in heat of moment and it was such a moment could have seen pen reversed.
Anyway, moot point now.

Main point I think is I don't care about BP, getting such a massive result is what matters.

BP should have been in the Italy and Wales games. Should the bizarre happen twice and we beat France that could be costly albeit our points difference is bad.

I feel confident going over to France. This is a French team in crisis. They look like Ireland in 2019 or ourselves in 2021-2. They should be 0 from 3 and hopefully Borthwick keeps the same 15 and allows us to build on the momentum.

Championship is definitely to play for, just feel an extra BP yesterday from a great position would have put the pressure on the Irish a bit more. They’ll be disappointed to lose it at the death but in the cold light of day they were second best all afternoon and will probably be relieved they kept England out for the extra BP when a try looked inevitable.

I don't the championship will be to play for by the time we play.

Brilliant game by both teams. England deserved winners - congrats to them.

mountain man wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

mountain man wrote:That's what I meant, an act of foul play in heat of moment and it was such a moment could have seen pen reversed.
Anyway, moot point now.

Main point I think is I don't care about BP, getting such a massive result is what matters.

BP should have been in the Italy and Wales games. Should the bizarre happen twice and we beat France that could be costly albeit our points difference is bad.

But getting a higher position on table by means of a BP isn't what matters, it's winning games and how they are won. By that mark England getting 3rd in RWC is good but that was because of draw. So gaining say 3rd instead of 4th purely on bonus points in same category for me.
I'd rather England did have try bonus points but only because they'd have scored at 4 tries which means attack must have been good. Purely as a means of gaining a place higher on table doesnt matter to me.

Anyway, what's sea lioning?

Winning the tournament is made harder by not picking up bonus points you should. Think it was over decadence something since englnad last failed to get one in an Italy game. Now come the final weekend if we fluke a win in France it's likely not to matter.

Sea lioning is a term where mainly online someone asks for proof of something they could look for themselves.

Its kind of incredible that England are 2nd with a negative points difference. The championship could conceivably end with only one team with a positive points difference.

Sea lioning is a term where mainly online someone asks for proof of something they could look for themselves.

But you were the one making accussation so I think onus is on you. I'm sure I haven't said Martin isn't good enough for England. I have said he wasn't very good in game when he was on albeit briefly as a sub which is justified in opinion.

Fluke a win against France? What like how they fluked a win yesterday?

Honestly, I really don't know why you bother watching England if it pains you so much.

Northgrill wrote:

mountain man wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:England simply went to secure the win.  And in that moment Marcus Smith did exactly what I was hoping he would do.  

Exactly. Some saying why not go for BP seeing as had penalty advantage but imagine if they had, played multiple phases which is quite possible then ref says advantage over. Game lost.

Smith did right thing. Get win.

You have a misunderstanding of how penalty advantage works then! Knock on advantage can be called once the ball is kicked away or once you gain clean possession but penalty advantage is not called over after a few phases or if you don’t get any significant advantage from a kick (in this case the only significant advantage from a few metres out would have been a try).

In that case some refs also have that misunderstanding. It was in a very similar situation, and in the same place on the pitch, in 2012 that the ref awarded advantage for a collapsed maul, and then decided that advantage was over when England kicked for a wing to score but failed to collect it.

That one was an unusually short advantage, but advantage is over when the ref thinks it is, and sometimes that is sooner than expected.

Under the circumstances, taking the win was the right decision.