England vs New Zealand

Moderator: Puja

Post Reply
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by WaspInWales »

Which Tyler wrote:
Mr Mwenda wrote:Harsh call there. Lost it when the lineout disintegrated. Anyone with more technical knowledge see what hge issue was? Just George losing it?
I'm no expert, but they looked like Itoje was high enough, Retallick just kept reading it, and George wasn't getting the ball high enough
Yep, Retallick had a stormer. Immense.
Peat
Posts: 448
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Peat »

Renniks wrote:Can we all, please, take a moment to see that we just held NZ to only 16 points, only 1 try, got Barrett worried to the point he's going for DGs
We also looked a completely different team for 30 minutes of that game to what we have for the past 2 years - even just from an intensity point of view!

Penalty count was a huge improvement too!

The fact we can sit here and whinge about the ref in an NZ game is such a huge turn around from where we were last week!
Less of the optimism you!



I have to say, I thought the Lawes call was correct. I wonder if he'd got away with it if everyone had been a step up though, rather than just Lawes stood a good pace in front of everyone else in a white shirt, begging the question.

Of course, he deffo gets away with it if its not a try, which is almost as irritating as Danny Care's very clumsy attempts to buy a penalty.
francoisfou
Posts: 2513
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:01 pm
Location: Haute-Garonne

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by francoisfou »

Peej wrote:Has to be said, England's leadership went to absolute pot after Hartley went off. No composure, wobbly set piece, poor tactics
Exactly, shame Hartley was replaced by George, who didn't have his best game in an England shirt.
What can one say about Farrell? Curate's egg is probably fair. A captain? No!
WaspInWales
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:46 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by WaspInWales »

Farrell with 10 missed tackles according to ESPN.

Will that get a mention?
Renniks
Posts: 724
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:12 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Renniks »

WaspInWales wrote:Farrell with 10 missed tackles according to ESPN.

Will that get a mention?
If you're playing on the edge all the time, you're going to miss tackles! Cough cough
User avatar
Galfon
Posts: 4292
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:07 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Galfon »

Daws: 'I said it at the time - three points is everything. When you're under the posts you take the points and it's those fine margins that we need to get right..'
It depends who calls the shots...surely EJ has a signalling system to override on-pitch panic ?
User avatar
Which Tyler
Posts: 9179
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:43 pm
Location: Tewkesbury
Contact:

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Which Tyler »

francoisfou wrote:
Peej wrote:Has to be said, England's leadership went to absolute pot after Hartley went off. No composure, wobbly set piece, poor tactics
Exactly, shame Hartley was replaced by George, who didn't have his best game in an England shirt.
What can one say about Farrell? Curate's egg is probably fair. A captain? No!
Faz... 2 good tackles, and directly responsible for a 9 point swing to the ABs.
Jonny May would have been a better captain in that second half.


Oh,I also had a plea to make. For those who think Underhill's try should have stood... For the love of god's, we need to act with more class than the Saffers did about their last minute penalty last week.
Last edited by Which Tyler on Sat Nov 10, 2018 5:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
fivepointer
Posts: 5895
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by fivepointer »

The disallowed try. Lawes was fractionally offside so a penalty was the right call. Shame that every other backfoot offside in the game wasnt called.
England got lucky last week with the TMO. These things do tend to even out over time.
Our line out wasnt great but throwing it to Maro is only going to work some of the time. Kruis was hardly used and Lawes ignored when he came on. Whoever was calling, needs to have a bit of a rethink.
I thought there was much to be pleased about though. We defended well, our workrate was excellent, out fitness stood up, we scrummaged well and we scored 2 very good, albeit contrasting tries. I cannot recall the last time we've driven a maul like that.
fivepointer
Posts: 5895
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by fivepointer »

WaspInWales wrote:Farrell with 10 missed tackles according to ESPN.

Will that get a mention?
Bloody hell. Thats more than i thought. His defence is absolute pish. Of course it wont get a mention, at least not by the fatheads on Sky who seem determined to laud his every good effort and disregard the 50% of his game that is so ordinary.
Peat
Posts: 448
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Peat »

Galfon wrote:Daws: 'I said it at the time - three points is everything. When you're under the posts you take the points and it's those fine margins that we need to get right..'
It depends who calls the shots...surely EJ has a signalling system to override on-pitch panic ?
Court of Human Rights threw out the remote controlled shock collars.
User avatar
Mellsblue
Posts: 14562
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Mellsblue »

Which Tyler wrote:
francoisfou wrote:
Peej wrote:Has to be said, England's leadership went to absolute pot after Hartley went off. No composure, wobbly set piece, poor tactics
Exactly, shame Hartley was replaced by George, who didn't have his best game in an England shirt.
What can one say about Farrell? Curate's egg is probably fair. A captain? No!
Faz... 2 good tackles, and directly responsible for a 9 point swing to the ABs.
Jonny May would have been a better captain in that second half.


Oh,I also had a plea to make. For those who think Underhill's try should have stood... For the love of god's, we need to act with more class than the Saffers did about their last minute penalty last week.
You can’t disagree with a call without lacking class? Watching it in a crowded pub I thought it was ok. I’ll bow to those who had a better view of the telly. I’ll also stick to the fact that 99 times out of 100 the 2 inches (nearly beating NZ hyperbole clause invoked) he is offside isn’t given a seconds thought.
paddy no 11
Posts: 1945
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by paddy no 11 »

Got away with it last week, done out of it this week that's the way it goes

Wouldn't be too buoyant if I was England, Underhill sets the tone for 20 minutes and everyone follows after that there's plenty of issues.
Insouciant
Posts: 319
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:15 am

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Insouciant »

Losing to New Zealand on an offside decision... I didn't even know that rule got used when they played.
Peej
Posts: 1756
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:01 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Peej »

fivepointer wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:Farrell with 10 missed tackles according to ESPN.

Will that get a mention?
Bloody hell. Thats more than i thought. His defence is absolute pish. Of course it wont get a mention, at least not by the fatheads on Sky who seem determined to laud his every good effort and disregard the 50% of his game that is so ordinary.
Wow that really is shockingly high
User avatar
Mellsblue
Posts: 14562
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Mellsblue »

Galfon wrote:Daws: 'I said it at the time - three points is everything. When you're under the posts you take the points and it's those fine margins that we need to get right..'
It depends who calls the shots...surely EJ has a signalling system to override on-pitch panic ?
It’ll be interesting to see how he reacts now he has to make the pressure calls. Past behaviour suggests it won’t be his forte. I’ll never forget his tantrum when Robshaw made the (wrong) call against Wales on the World Cup. As I said to my mate at the time, I’d be disappointed if my eldest behaved like that on the rugby field.
User avatar
Mellsblue
Posts: 14562
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Mellsblue »

Peej wrote:
fivepointer wrote:
WaspInWales wrote:Farrell with 10 missed tackles according to ESPN.

Will that get a mention?
Bloody hell. Thats more than i thought. His defence is absolute pish. Of course it wont get a mention, at least not by the fatheads on Sky who seem determined to laud his every good effort and disregard the 50% of his game that is so ordinary.
Wow that really is shockingly high
If that stat was next to Ford’s name.....
The miss on Bin Smuth was criminal. All we’ll hear about, though, is the tackle on Read (which was bloody good).
The thing that annoys me is that all the things you here about him in commentary, match reports or ratings, of you didn’t know any better, you’d think he was a back row player. Not what I’d want from my 10.
Epaminondas Pules
Posts: 3407
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:19 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Epaminondas Pules »

WaspInWales wrote:
Which Tyler wrote:
Mr Mwenda wrote:Harsh call there. Lost it when the lineout disintegrated. Anyone with more technical knowledge see what hge issue was? Just George losing it?
I'm no expert, but they looked like Itoje was high enough, Retallick just kept reading it, and George wasn't getting the ball high enough
Yep, Retallick had a stormer. Immense.
NZ did what they’ve done all 4Ns which is close the gaps to make the contest more viable. They succeeded and competed well. We should have made a meal of the gap to ensure that we have more advantage as the throwing side but as usual remained mute. Cute from NZ, poor from England.
User avatar
Which Tyler
Posts: 9179
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:43 pm
Location: Tewkesbury
Contact:

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Which Tyler »

Mellsblue wrote:You can’t disagree with a call without lacking class?
Of course you can - last week, the Saffers failed; I really do'nt want us to fail as well.
Mellsblue wrote: Watching it in a crowded pub I thought it was ok. I’ll bow to those who had a better view of the telly. I’ll also stick to the fact that 99 times out of 100 the 2 inches (nearly beating NZ hyperbole clause invoked) he is offside isn’t given a seconds thought.
Agreed entirely - in fact, I think I may have said exactly that already.
User avatar
Oakboy
Posts: 6373
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:42 am

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Oakboy »

Surely, George's place has to be questioned? His lineout throwing cost us the match in the cold light of day. The total yardage lost to his poor throws was the difference between defeat and victory.

Yes, there were loads of other issues but sacrificing field position to that extent just can't be acceptable.
Beasties
Posts: 1309
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:31 am

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Beasties »

To my eyes it looked like Hartley was having his best game for ages (not saying a lot though). It seemed an odd decision to replace him so soon.
16th man
Posts: 1668
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:38 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by 16th man »

Rules lawyers appearing all over the place, putting rulers on Lawes feet, but seemingly ignoring the AB swallow diving into the ruck from the side in the background. If the TMO is going to get involved then surely he should point out the first offence.

Anyway, if you'd offered me 15 v 16 at 2.55 i'd have bitten your hand off.
User avatar
Mellsblue
Posts: 14562
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by Mellsblue »

Which Tyler wrote:
Mellsblue wrote:You can’t disagree with a call without lacking class?
Of course you can - last week, the Saffers failed; I really do'nt want us to fail as well.
Mellsblue wrote: Watching it in a crowded pub I thought it was ok. I’ll bow to those who had a better view of the telly. I’ll also stick to the fact that 99 times out of 100 the 2 inches (nearly beating NZ hyperbole clause invoked) he is offside isn’t given a seconds thought.
Agreed entirely - in fact, I think I may have said exactly that already.
I’m glad someone else also invoked the nearly beating NZ hyperbole clause. I was feeling like I’d made it up.
fivepointer
Posts: 5895
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by fivepointer »

Beasties wrote:To my eyes it looked like Hartley was having his best game for ages (not saying a lot though). It seemed an odd decision to replace him so soon.
I thought he was going pretty well. Surprised he got taken off at h/t.

Losing a l/o isnt always down to the hooker. Sometimes the opposition work things out and get a man up to contest. Our problem was in using Maro almost exclusively. It became quite an easy read, particularly as Maro wasnt taking a step back. I'd put it down to poor calling.

On Lawes, yes it was a tough call. You see dozens of incidents every game of players in front of the back foot and liable to penalty. Except unless its about 10 meters from the goal line it is almost never blown.

Rough with the smooth on these things.....
I R Geech
Posts: 375
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:38 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by I R Geech »

England lost because they aren’t very bright. Poor decisions from Farrell, repeating things that aren’t working in the lineout, and brain farts when in scoring positions - it’s been a trait of this team for a while. No one is thinking, or seems capable of it.

Woodward is a twat, but Thinking Clearly Under Pressure won him a World Cup. This lot clearly couldn’t think their way out of a paper bag.
User avatar
canta_brian
Posts: 1262
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:52 pm

Re: England vs New Zealand

Post by canta_brian »

Mellsblue wrote:
Peej wrote:
fivepointer wrote:
Bloody hell. Thats more than i thought. His defence is absolute pish. Of course it wont get a mention, at least not by the fatheads on Sky who seem determined to laud his every good effort and disregard the 50% of his game that is so ordinary.
Wow that really is shockingly high
If that stat was next to Ford’s name.....
The miss on Bin Smuth was criminal. All we’ll hear about, though, is the tackle on Read (which was bloody good).
The thing that annoys me is that all the things you here about him in commentary, match reports or ratings, of you didn’t know any better, you’d think he was a back row player. Not what I’d want from my 10.
Blimey you’re brave with that last sentence. The Johnny Wilkinson appreciation society may well lynch you for that sort of sentiment.
Post Reply