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

Poorfour 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).

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.

The length that penalty advantages are being played for has changed hugely since 2012 to be fair Poorfour. They've just got longer and longer. Especially within the opposition 22.

I do think a part of that is due to refs being far more stringent officiating subsequent infringements after an advantage is given though. At one point it was common to see defending teams have impeccable discipline up until the first offence is given. Then once they'd conceded advantage, they'd offside at every ruck, rolling on the wrong side, getting hands on the ball illegally. Anything they could to slow things as generally refs wouldn't bother giving advantage after advantage. Whereas refs always do that now. Which I think is a great shift. It's incredibly hard to defend near the line without going offside. That's the point though!

I just wish they'd also be harsher with cards for those repeat offences within one run of play. If a team gives two penalties near their line, gets a warning, then goes offside once more, it's often a yellow. Yet if a team gives an offside advantage, 3 more offside advantages, then kills an attacking maul, it's a warning. I'd happily see the warning dropped for repeat infringements. They're professional sportsman, you don't need a break in play and a tut from the captain for them to know they shouldn't be offside 4 phases in a row on their line. It's often clearly cynical with those repeat infringements, it should be carded as such just the same as POM cynically killing an attacking ruck yesterday.

mountain man wrote:

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.

Nope.

Watching England has been a drag for a while. Hopefully yesterday is the first step to Borthwick realising he wasn't on the tight track. He seems to suggest last year was last year and he wants to start again. He needs to but it'll take more than 1 game we win again by a couple to convince me he's anything more than miles out of his depth.

Yeah a fluke like yesterday.

So England beat one of the best teams in world against the odds and against all expectations and in doing so Borthwick should be realising he's not on right track?

Enough. Time to watch Wales France.

mountain man wrote:So England beat one of the best teams in world against the odds and against all expectations and in doing so Borthwick should be realising he's not on right track?

Enough. Time to watch Wales France.

He hasn't been up until yesterday. And even then it needs to improve a lot. If he has realised after a year good for him. How it took Jim so long when it was obvious god only knows. But yes i would prefer a better coach. And a different attack and scrum coach.

I'm afraid you clearly don't understand how this works, MM. England are going to come 6th. It was the prediction after Italy won. The predictions are never wrong. Except when they are. But then the prediction was different. As there were 42 predictions. With the ones that were wrong being ignored. Then people who bring the wrong ones up are called liars. This is how reasoned discussion works.

Borthwick is killing rugby. It has been decided. The prophecy has spoken. Nothing shall alter it. All that happens thus is proof of the prophecy. Discussion is meaningless in the face of the prophecy.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yeah a fluke like yesterday.

"Fluke" makes no sense as a description. The team played exactly the way they trained. In post-match interviews, several players were asked a variation on "Did you ever think you could perform like this?", and they all, to a man, said yes, because that's what they see in training. Borthwick's squad selection wasn't forced through injuries, either.

England didn't get any flukey referee decisions, like a red card which gets rescinded after the game. None of the England scores were flukey.

If anything, England looked in danger of not making the most of their possession and field position. We missed kicks, and didn't get a try when we elected to go to touch at 8-3. Ireland were second best in many parts of the game but still could have won. It wouldn't have been a fluke if a quality side like Ireland had managed to snatch victory but nor was it a fluke that England got the win.

I'll say again ...arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a Pidgeon ...

Just put him on block...life is much better on here....

Rugby Fan wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yeah a fluke like yesterday.

"Fluke" makes no sense as a description. The team played exactly the way they trained. In post-match interviews, several players were asked a variation on "Did you ever think you could perform like this?", and they all, to a man, said yes, because that's what they see in training. Borthwick's squad selection wasn't forced through injuries, either.

England didn't get any flukey referee decisions, like a red card which gets rescinded after the game. None of the England scores were flukey.

If anything, England looked in danger of not making the most of their possession and field position. We missed kicks, and didn't get a try when we elected to go to touch at 8-3. Ireland were second best in many parts of the game but still could have won. It wouldn't have been a fluke if a quality side like Ireland had managed to snatch victory but nor was it a fluke that England got the win.

Does it not?bit of luck and against the odds. Fits the description for me.

Geordie wrote:I'll say again ...arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a Pidgeon ...

Just put him on block...life is much better on here....

Second time mods that the lovely fella which is geordie is being personally abusive again. He can't help himself but are we really saying this is OK?I'm happy to alter my style of writing to compensate.

F*** it's funny that the guy who's dogmatic screeching over the last year has driven posters to not bother with the threads he frequents is now calling for mummy because someone's called him an eejit twice.

I'd bet it hasn't crossed his wee mind that even the mods might have reached a stage where they'd be over the moon if he took the crying elsewhere.

king_carlos wrote:F*** it's funny that the guy who's dogmatic screeching over the last year has driven posters to not bother with the threads he frequents is now calling for mummy because someone's called him an eejit twice.

I'd bet it hasn't crossed his wee mind that even the mods might have reached a stage where they'd be over the moon if he took the crying elsewhere.

Whats the rules on thinking coaches are below par vs personal abuse king? Hey if we're loosening the rules and we can all slag people off along with you already openly lying then it signals the end of the board shortly.

I suspect there's a longer line to slag off some posters than others.

Why don't you find a forum where your prophecies are more appreciated?

king_carlos wrote:Why don't you find a forum where your prophecies are more appreciated?

I'm fine here. Why don't you apply to be a mod and change the rules so we can only agree with what you say from now on?

I get on grand with lots of posters who disagree with me. Between the last two rounds I posted a few paragraph response to Doc completely disagreeing that the tactics not suiting the players was to blame for the Scotland loss. I think Doc's one of the best posters on these boards. Duty and I usually go at it about cricketing matters during every Test series. I really enjoy our discussions.

You gave up discussing rugby a long time ago though, 7.5. You're purely here to cry about a single coach and twist whatever occurs to fit what you've already decided is going to happen. It's a forum to discuss sport. You're on the rugby thread. The point is to discuss rugby. You gave up on discussion a long time ago and drifted into preaching your dogmatically conceived prophecies in a seemingly endless spiral towards insanity. It's sad. Lots of posters, including mods, have tried to point out there are more constructive ways to engage. You've refused to listen and have spent the last year derailing threads. Then you wonder where the mods are because someone calls you a name. A long time ago you were an interesting poster to discuss with. I don't think I've ever seen such an embarrassing descent on this forum or the Beeb ones that came before it.

Wow. Given we've seen the descent of mods posting borderline racistly against the Irish and another one for threatening to glass a poster I'm shocked. I would still expect the mods to uphold the rules against people they may even dislike though. Of course I'm not the only poster to put slants on things to suit narrative bit hey ho. As with all the recommendations through the years just block me if you don't want to hear that I think the coaches aren't great.

I'm going to take your advice though. Take a break until the summer tour.

And seemingly another thread has descended into garbage.

OK here's a deal...I'll stop referring to you as a board stomping Pidgeon (sorry thats the 3rd time) and just bickering in general...if you revert back to the old poster who was argumentative but also knowledgeable and accepting rather than this version that just seems to spew negativity and actively look to derail the discussions.

king_carlos wrote:F*** it's funny that the guy who's dogmatic screeching over the last year has driven posters to not bother with the threads he frequents is now calling for mummy because someone's called him an eejit twice.

I'd bet it hasn't crossed his wee mind that even the mods might have reached a stage where they'd be over the moon if he took the crying elsewhere.

I'd say being deliberately disruptive is grounds for a ban myself, not sure anyone would miss him.