2017 Six Nations
Discussion
ninja-lewis said:
In fairness, there were two occasions when Haskell was asking about it (one near the touch line and the other with Hartley mid-field) and I think one one of them the questions asked was "how can we get them to form a ruck" which could sound like a request for tactical advice to non-English ears rather than clarification of referee's interpretation.
Have any of the current England squad played in France? Could a lack of French speakers place the side at a disadvantage in France/Italy games with continental referees whose English may let them down at times. Also in monitoring what an opposition captain is saying to the referee in French even if the referee is replying in English.
I have been thinking this for a long time now. I am a reasonable French speaker(15 years living in France) and the standard of French refs English is just not good enough when under pressure .Have any of the current England squad played in France? Could a lack of French speakers place the side at a disadvantage in France/Italy games with continental referees whose English may let them down at times. Also in monitoring what an opposition captain is saying to the referee in French even if the referee is replying in English.
I can put myself in thier place the other way round though.
I played a bit of football here in France when I was younger and in split second communication it's very difficult .
Yesterday the ref was substituting his verbal replies ,as the proper replies couldn't form in his mind quick enough to get them out in my opinion.
Like I said I have seen this often now .
Couldn't really tell what was going on from the stand. Need to watch it again on catch-up, I think.
We assumed rucks were being formed and the ref was willfully ignoring the Italians being offside.
Sounds like that really wasn't the case! We had some shock at half time!
England should have adapted earlier and got the job done with a little less pain, methinks.
The kicking was atrocious and we didn't think the wind was bad (lower tier, between halfway and 22) where we were sitting, at least in the first half.
Hey; at least we won, a good scare will likely make us stronger and the winning streak continues. Definitely not the weekend of rugby I expected!
I must admit; the Scotland game feels like it could be a touch one. They'll be well up for it (as always) and we've shown some weaknesses.
We assumed rucks were being formed and the ref was willfully ignoring the Italians being offside.
Sounds like that really wasn't the case! We had some shock at half time!
England should have adapted earlier and got the job done with a little less pain, methinks.
The kicking was atrocious and we didn't think the wind was bad (lower tier, between halfway and 22) where we were sitting, at least in the first half.
Hey; at least we won, a good scare will likely make us stronger and the winning streak continues. Definitely not the weekend of rugby I expected!
I must admit; the Scotland game feels like it could be a touch one. They'll be well up for it (as always) and we've shown some weaknesses.
TheExcession said:
ut side of the scrummage and line out, the adult rules seem to work quite well for minis. 
What I really find myself doing these days is trying to copy the likes of Nigel Owens, with his constant commentary of the match play.
Just explaining what he sees in the game and how he expects players to play the game of rugby.
I thought the French Ref today was poor in his attitude regarding the questions that the England players asked. That line from him 'I'm a ref not a coach' was very disappointing. England were only asking for clarification of how he was going to ref the match.
I've been pulled on points in mini refffing like that, and the best I could do to for the lads playing was to explain what I wanted to see in terms of a game of rugby.
The worst part is when you get a whole heap of your own team's supporters screaming at you because you made a wrong call.
Personally, I reckon everyone should be made to ref at least one game (even if it is only U9s) before they criticise a referee elsewhere! What I really find myself doing these days is trying to copy the likes of Nigel Owens, with his constant commentary of the match play.
Just explaining what he sees in the game and how he expects players to play the game of rugby.
I thought the French Ref today was poor in his attitude regarding the questions that the England players asked. That line from him 'I'm a ref not a coach' was very disappointing. England were only asking for clarification of how he was going to ref the match.
I've been pulled on points in mini refffing like that, and the best I could do to for the lads playing was to explain what I wanted to see in terms of a game of rugby.
The worst part is when you get a whole heap of your own team's supporters screaming at you because you made a wrong call.
Whilst most of the adult laws do translate well enough, I have on a couple of occasions had to point out to other refs at tournaments - in the politest possible manner, of course - that the kids from both sides on the floor in tears are probably the reason why we're not actually allowed rolling mauls at this level!
dom9 said:
Couldn't really tell what was going on from the stand. Need to watch it again on catch-up, I think.
We assumed rucks were being formed and the ref was willfully ignoring the Italians being offside.
We assumed rucks were being formed and the ref was willfully ignoring the Italians being offside.
that must have been baffling/annoying for the crowd if they thought that, as the "offsides" were so blatantto be fair, I am glad I had the commentary explaining what the ref was saying, I am sure I would have been as baffled if I was in the crowd
still shocked the seasoned international players didn't twig instantly
Edited by Adam B on Monday 27th February 13:30
A win's a win. But this England side have yet to click together IMO. We have some very good players but it all feels a bit raw and untapped still.
We were also confused about why the kicking was so bad. Sat high up and didn't notice anything odd except for a couple of times when the post top flags were blowing in odd directions.
We can't switch off for 40mins in the next two games. Both of which should be belters.
We were also confused about why the kicking was so bad. Sat high up and didn't notice anything odd except for a couple of times when the post top flags were blowing in odd directions.
We can't switch off for 40mins in the next two games. Both of which should be belters.
Exactly that!
It shows you how much harder it is to see the big picture from the stands, without the benefit of replays, commentary etc on TV.
All seems so obvious now but, at the time, I couldn't believe that the Italian scrum half seemed to be allowed to stand in our line whenever he liked.
Your eye isn't drawn to the (non-existent) ruck, you're focusing on the Italian player in front of it and you can't then go back and see why that happened.
I guess it's similar to the issue the players had with it, on field. You expect a ruck to be formed and can't see the wood for the trees when the ref appears to let the opposition do what they want.
I'd have hoped a better rugby brain on the field would have spotted it earlier. I can't see the same tactic working against the '03 squad for nearly as long, if at all.
It shows you how much harder it is to see the big picture from the stands, without the benefit of replays, commentary etc on TV.
All seems so obvious now but, at the time, I couldn't believe that the Italian scrum half seemed to be allowed to stand in our line whenever he liked.
Your eye isn't drawn to the (non-existent) ruck, you're focusing on the Italian player in front of it and you can't then go back and see why that happened.
I guess it's similar to the issue the players had with it, on field. You expect a ruck to be formed and can't see the wood for the trees when the ref appears to let the opposition do what they want.
I'd have hoped a better rugby brain on the field would have spotted it earlier. I can't see the same tactic working against the '03 squad for nearly as long, if at all.
I was sitting in the East Middle not far from half way and got into an amusing but heated chat re the Italian tactics. One 'rugby fan' (Think old school Twickenham style regular) insisted that the 'offside player' was not penalised as he wasn't interfering with play!!! FFS.... isn't that Footie?
When I suggested that there was no offside line (at the second occasion) and that's why there was no offside nor penalty, he 'corrected me' and suggested that I brush up on my knowledge of the Laws of the game. (No ref links nearby)
I suggested that Care should simply pass into the 'offending/offside' player then as he would automatically be interfering with the play? Much like the chippy little bu66ers do at every occasion in my experience to 'win' a penalty. His reply was even more baffling - 'well then he would be interfering wouldn't he and we would get the penalty; it's not rocket science mate'.....
Maybe he should be the new tactician and coach the squad?
If rugby fans at Twickenham were baffled, then what hope for the occasional watcher - who at least had commentary to help out!
Several around me did start watching the lack of offside line and joined in, much to the annoyance of the 'know all' behind. The prat from Wigan in front wasn't much better. Never mind; a great day out at Twickenham as ever!
And a win to lead the table. But that makes it three sub par performances with three wins? We wont always get away with it.
When I suggested that there was no offside line (at the second occasion) and that's why there was no offside nor penalty, he 'corrected me' and suggested that I brush up on my knowledge of the Laws of the game. (No ref links nearby)
I suggested that Care should simply pass into the 'offending/offside' player then as he would automatically be interfering with the play? Much like the chippy little bu66ers do at every occasion in my experience to 'win' a penalty. His reply was even more baffling - 'well then he would be interfering wouldn't he and we would get the penalty; it's not rocket science mate'.....
Maybe he should be the new tactician and coach the squad?
If rugby fans at Twickenham were baffled, then what hope for the occasional watcher - who at least had commentary to help out!
Several around me did start watching the lack of offside line and joined in, much to the annoyance of the 'know all' behind. The prat from Wigan in front wasn't much better. Never mind; a great day out at Twickenham as ever!
And a win to lead the table. But that makes it three sub par performances with three wins? We wont always get away with it.
Ok, so the rule, or perhaps this gap between the rules, has been explained and whether we like it or not it is there. My next question is, despite being briefed by the Italy staff they were going to exploit/play it, how well do people think the referee judged it?
Looking back at a few of the occasions it was used there did seem to be occasions when a ruck was briefly formed but then dissolved and because the ref didn't call 'ruck' quickly enough he then had to call 'tackle only'.
There were also one or two occasions, on both sides, when opposition players were held in to try and form a ruck but the ref still called 'tackle only', and other almost identical occasions when he called 'ruck'.
I think the referee was starting to get confused over how the players could play themselves out of the non-contested ruck situation culminating in the second half instance where Dan Cole just wandered through when England were not contesting the ruck and then just fell on the ball to take possession.
Because of the very high numbers of occasions this tactic was used in one Test level match did we reach a point in the match whereby the referee was confused as to what the players were allowed or permitted to do to resolve the no-contest ruck?
If so, is this this something the referees can flag to Worldrugby to request them to look at how the rules, or perhaps this gap in the rules, is correctly administered to prevent the game becoming the near-farce it seemed to be at one point yesterday?
Looking back at a few of the occasions it was used there did seem to be occasions when a ruck was briefly formed but then dissolved and because the ref didn't call 'ruck' quickly enough he then had to call 'tackle only'.
There were also one or two occasions, on both sides, when opposition players were held in to try and form a ruck but the ref still called 'tackle only', and other almost identical occasions when he called 'ruck'.
I think the referee was starting to get confused over how the players could play themselves out of the non-contested ruck situation culminating in the second half instance where Dan Cole just wandered through when England were not contesting the ruck and then just fell on the ball to take possession.
Because of the very high numbers of occasions this tactic was used in one Test level match did we reach a point in the match whereby the referee was confused as to what the players were allowed or permitted to do to resolve the no-contest ruck?
If so, is this this something the referees can flag to Worldrugby to request them to look at how the rules, or perhaps this gap in the rules, is correctly administered to prevent the game becoming the near-farce it seemed to be at one point yesterday?
Poite had a good game, his English is excellent (consider how the French and Italian teams communicate with the ref).
The laws (not rules) are fine, it was England who were too stupid to adapt to it by using the pick and go. The Italian tactic was an attack coach's wet dream. There were gaps everywhere but England were too daft to exploit them until later in the game.
As for the poster who is trying to emulate Nigel Owens. Please don't. He is a terrible ref who loves the sound of his own voice too much and has openly admitted to interpreting the laws as he sees fit. Plus he might well be biased. Copy Graces or Barnes instead.
The laws (not rules) are fine, it was England who were too stupid to adapt to it by using the pick and go. The Italian tactic was an attack coach's wet dream. There were gaps everywhere but England were too daft to exploit them until later in the game.
As for the poster who is trying to emulate Nigel Owens. Please don't. He is a terrible ref who loves the sound of his own voice too much and has openly admitted to interpreting the laws as he sees fit. Plus he might well be biased. Copy Graces or Barnes instead.
phil_cardiff said:
The laws (not rules) are fine, it was England who were too stupid to adapt to it by using the pick and go. The Italian tactic was an attack coach's wet dream. There were gaps everywhere but England were too daft to exploit them until later in the game.
They are rules. Rugby chooses to call them laws, but they aren't. Nobody ever went to prison for a forward pass!I should be careful who you call stupid and daft. Wales didn't exactly cover themselves with glory. "Shall we kick for touch, or kick for goal". "We will kick for goal", and what happened?
phil_cardiff said:
Poite had a good game, his English is excellent (consider how the French and Italian teams communicate with the ref).
The laws (not rules) are fine, it was England who were too stupid to adapt to it by using the pick and go. The Italian tactic was an attack coach's wet dream. There were gaps everywhere but England were too daft to exploit them until later in the game.
As for the poster who is trying to emulate Nigel Owens. Please don't. He is a terrible ref who loves the sound of his own voice too much and has openly admitted to interpreting the laws as he sees fit. Plus he might well be biased. Copy Graces or Barnes instead.
There surely has to be something more to it than that, doesn't there?The laws (not rules) are fine, it was England who were too stupid to adapt to it by using the pick and go. The Italian tactic was an attack coach's wet dream. There were gaps everywhere but England were too daft to exploit them until later in the game.
As for the poster who is trying to emulate Nigel Owens. Please don't. He is a terrible ref who loves the sound of his own voice too much and has openly admitted to interpreting the laws as he sees fit. Plus he might well be biased. Copy Graces or Barnes instead.
OK, this current England team might not be the sharpest minds ever to play the game, but even so, you've got to assume there was something making them think they couldn't just pick up and go, even if it was the assumption that no team would be so daft as to leave the rucks completely uncontested specifically because they knew their competition would just pick up and go and romp up the field every time. If you look at the laws, and look at what happened yesterday, England should've picked and carried every time and won the game with a World record score. It's not difficult to see how that would be confusing.
I really did think Poite did the game a disservice with his one liner about being a ref, not a coach. OK, I only referee nine year olds, not professional players at international level, but to my mind, one of the most important parts of reffing at any level should be to explain and educate. Presumably if Hartley had said "if you've not called ruck, can I just step round the guys on the floor, pick it up and run with it", he would've had to have given him a straight answer?
Kermit power said:
...I really did think Poite did the game a disservice with his one liner about being a ref, not a coach. OK, I only referee nine year olds, not professional players at international level, but to my mind, one of the most important parts of reffing at any level should be to explain and educate. Presumably if Hartley had said "if you've not called ruck, can I just step round the guys on the floor, pick it up and run with it", he would've had to have given him a straight answer?
Firstly I was not a rugby player but a footballer. However, my son played rugby at a decent level (with Haskell from minis up to national U18 level coincidentally) so from when he was 6 to going to University at 18 I watched a lot of rugby. I am always the first to say that the quality and style of refereeing in rugby is a quantum leap better than in football. The main reason for my opinion is that rugby refs explain their decisions whereas football refs tend to be dictatorial. That said, when I was playing if I asked a referee, politely, why he'd made a decision I am sure he have told me. I was surprised at the one liner Poite came out with yesterday and I was annoyed with the way the media grasped onto it to undermine Hartley and Haskell. This, of course, being the same media that argued about the tactic all through the break! I also noticed in the second half that the ref was calling ruck/tackle much more quickly partly to reduce any ambiguity and also, it seemed to me, as though even he was tired of the confusion.
Nothing more to add but I didn't think it was a good example of refereeing, neither did think it made the players look stupid by asking for a clarification, that was the British media doing what they always do - build people up just to knock them down. Yesterday it was the England team but they will do it to everyone and anyone given the chance.
Slaav said:
I was sitting in the East Middle not far from half way and got into an amusing but heated chat re the Italian tactics. One 'rugby fan' (Think old school Twickenham style regular) insisted that the 'offside player' was not penalised as he wasn't interfering with play!!! FFS.... isn't that Footie?
When I suggested that there was no offside line (at the second occasion) and that's why there was no offside nor penalty, he 'corrected me' and suggested that I brush up on my knowledge of the Laws of the game. (No ref links nearby)
I suggested that Care should simply pass into the 'offending/offside' player then as he would automatically be interfering with the play? Much like the chippy little bu66ers do at every occasion in my experience to 'win' a penalty. His reply was even more baffling - 'well then he would be interfering wouldn't he and we would get the penalty; it's not rocket science mate'.....
Maybe he should be the new tactician and coach the squad?
If rugby fans at Twickenham were baffled, then what hope for the occasional watcher - who at least had commentary to help out!
Several around me did start watching the lack of offside line and joined in, much to the annoyance of the 'know all' behind. The prat from Wigan in front wasn't much better. Never mind; a great day out at Twickenham as ever!
And a win to lead the table. But that makes it three sub par performances with three wins? We wont always get away with it.
I was in the South Lower and no one around me had a clue what was going on including me! We were content just to give the ref grief at various points. I didn't realise what was going on until I re-watched it later when I got home. When I suggested that there was no offside line (at the second occasion) and that's why there was no offside nor penalty, he 'corrected me' and suggested that I brush up on my knowledge of the Laws of the game. (No ref links nearby)
I suggested that Care should simply pass into the 'offending/offside' player then as he would automatically be interfering with the play? Much like the chippy little bu66ers do at every occasion in my experience to 'win' a penalty. His reply was even more baffling - 'well then he would be interfering wouldn't he and we would get the penalty; it's not rocket science mate'.....
Maybe he should be the new tactician and coach the squad?
If rugby fans at Twickenham were baffled, then what hope for the occasional watcher - who at least had commentary to help out!
Several around me did start watching the lack of offside line and joined in, much to the annoyance of the 'know all' behind. The prat from Wigan in front wasn't much better. Never mind; a great day out at Twickenham as ever!
And a win to lead the table. But that makes it three sub par performances with three wins? We wont always get away with it.
Amusingly, the Italians around me didn't seem to give a s
t what was going on and were quite content to get as much Guinness down them as humanely possible 
Pugster said:
I was in the South Lower and no one around me had a clue what was going on including me! We were content just to give the ref grief at various points. I didn't realise what was going on until I re-watched it later when I got home.
Amusingly, the Italians around me didn't seem to give a st what was going on and were quite content to get as much Guinness down them as humanely possible
Is it possible to consume Guinness in an inhumane manner? Amusingly, the Italians around me didn't seem to give a s
t what was going on and were quite content to get as much Guinness down them as humanely possible 
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff