25 thoughts on “Best Of The Weekend: Scots Step Up while England struggles”

1. I actually thought for yesterday, Italy made it quite an interesting game. However, clearly no one wants to watch rugby long term if you can’t pass the ball from 9 to 10. However I don’t actually think a rule change is needed. If England just picked and went from 10 minutes in, Italy would have either continually lost 2 or 3 years or eventually have to engage in a ruck to slow the ball down, therefore putting half their team offside. If we’d done that early, they probably would have stopped with the tactic.

   Slightly against the grain, I thought the ref did a poor job yesterday. The England players asked several times if they could grab an Italian shirt at the tackle, and therefore “engage” them and creating a ruck. Quite a good article here on how Pocock did that when the Chiefs tried it – http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-no-ruck-blues-backfired-2715116-Apr2016/

   That’s all Haskell was asking when he got, what I thought, was quite a petulant reply from Poite.

   1. There are further examples of Poite not getting it right here in the second video on the BBC analysis (not that they seemed to pick up on it) http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/39096603. Given that “a ruck is a phase of play where on or more players from each team, who are on their feet, in physical contact…”, which would therefore mean open play has ended and an offside line ensues. There are two instances of it at 1:25 and 1:41 where physical contact can be clearly seen (nothing in laws about nature of contact) and thus Poite should have ruled that the ruck had been established.

      1. The pundits talked over those two rucks specifically as examples of no contact – I suspect that Poite let play go on because it was clear that the Italian players weren’t intending to compete, and with what they had discussed with him on Saturday firmly in his mind as to their intentions, so it was let off for the sake of fluidity of play (rather ironically!), much as refs so with the horrendously skewed scrum feeds that are shown a blind eye.

         1. And that is one of the key things that I thought that Poite got wrong, the law only requires contact, and if you make contact with the forming ruck to me that is enough. You could happily argue that in each occasion the italian player went towards the ruck and then after making contact backed out as outnumbered and retreated to make a defensive line, doesn’t mean that ruck wasnt formed (if only briefly) and that an offside line had been established. Frequently you end up with rucks that effectively have no opposition players as the guards are set and defensive players extract themselves to form the defensive line, doesn’t mean that the ruck is no longer a ruck and offside lines disappear. That kind of fluidity between ruck/no ruck would create chaos and would be practically impossible to referee consistently or fairly.

         2. VJ
            If what you say is true, it smacks slightly of a sort of pre-match cosy fix on O’Shea’s part with the ref where because of due deference given by Poite to O’Shea’s stated game plan
            ‘overly generous’ consideration (preferential treatment even) was given at 1:25 and 1:41!
            Bearing we are talking a French ref (some say not a very good one – not my words) and an irishman some might smell something fishy!
            Perhaps in future any conflabs with the ref should have the attendance of both team coaches!

            1. Muppet

            2. Have you finished your homework ?
               Past your bedtime Alex

   2. Good article. Again this is fine if officiated properly but, as per the second instance in the article, it must have been frustrating when a ruck has been formed but no offside is called. The ref can agree to the Chiefs/Italy playing this way but they need to ensure offside is called when it occurs.

      Lovely intuition from Pocock.

2. – Was the problem Italy’s, England’s or the referee’s on Sunday, regarding the offside rule that caused England problems?
   Definitely England’s, partly the referee’s for inconsistencies in what constituted a ruck
   – Where do Wales go from here?
   In short probably nowhere
   – What do Scotland need to do to win at Twickenham?
   Keep doing what their doing
   – France have shown promise, but ultimately look like failing. What needs to change for them to be contenders once more?
   Confidence and killer instinct. They just seem to be forcing it at the moment
   – Do Ireland go into the final two weekends as favourites?
   Not sure anyone out of England, Scotland or Ireland can win it from here
   – What can we expect from the upcoming Super Rugby season?
   Tries

3. I think this article is being very generous to Italy. Yes very clever tactics well executed, but essentially Italy waved the white flag and admitted that we cannot compete in the 6nations in the normal terms of engagement. How this one off tactic develops their game is anyone’s guess. Where is the Italy of a few years ago that sought to improve their ball retention, play more expensively and score tries? They picked up key wins over Wales, Scotland, France and Ireland, and showed some cause for optimism.

   Whilst Eng were very poor in being so slow to work this out, and were generally very error strewn, once we did adapt we were all over Italy and but for poor handling and kicking would have won even more convincingly. I do not think this score was flattering to England in the slightest, given that one of the Italian’s scores was a freak rebound from a missed penalty.

   1. Agree with this, a lot of praise is being given for effectively causing England an inconvenience.
      I think its pretty sad that O’shea took Italy to Twickenham with the sole goal of not losing by a landslide.

      Italy have shown glimpses but their continued lack of fitness and competitiveness is worrying and surely enhances the calls to introduce relegation/promotion playoffs.

      1. I think there’s a vast difference between going into a match knowing that defeat is a very high possibility, and going into one knowing it is a certainty. If you listen to O’Shea’s post-match interview, he said that Italy came to win – and up until the 70th minute, there was still an incredibly high (relatively) chance that they could pull off the upset, with only 2 points in it.
         Italy know that resource-wise (such as player quality and morale), they are currently minnows compared to England, and needed to try something different. This adroit angle made them competitive enough, and given that we’re only a few months into an entire overhaul of the Italian system, it is still far too early days to judge them on it. Should relegation play-offs be introduced? Yes. But not with the sole reasoning that Italy are a disgrace. They have further to travel than the other sides currently, but they’re still worth their place if they can mix things up like they did on Sunday.

         1. I think youre right but Italy have shown that over the past year that they can compete at this level. Even against Wales in the first game of this years tournament they were in control for the first half, having played good rugby. Yet Sunday seemed like a massive step back, almost like an admission that they didn’t have chance. I appreciate the scoreline was close with 10 mins to go, but this was more from Farrel’s lack of accuracy than an indicator of Italy’s performance.

            You could argue that Italy are “minnows” compared to all of the other 6N teams, yet they didn’t try this previously. They do have further to go, but this has been the case for the past decade or so, and with Georgia seemingly improving year on year it is surely a matter of time before they are factored into the tournament.

            Also didn’t call Italy a disgrace, that would be a bit far.

            1. Don’t worry, ‘disgrace’ wasn’t a direct or even an indirect quote – more summarising the position by the most hard-line Italy critics rather than yourself. I think that Italy’s trying of a new tactic has more to do with the maverick curveballs that Brendan Venter is known to throw out there, rather than a white flag of surrender in being unable to play the ‘traditional’ style. Put it this way; if you went into a match with the feeling that a different tactic would make you more likely to win the game, surely you would take it? Italy did no different – it’s just that their chances of winning went from the Superbru-esque 0.5% to maybe 15%, so it is less visible. As for Farrell’s inaccuracies, it is a fair point, but equally if Allan had been landing more of those penalties then pressure would have been greater on England again. As always, the what-ifs can be speculated for a month of Sundays.
               My stance in defending Italy has more to do with wanting a positive inclusion of Georgia in an opened format of some sort, rather than emphasising the negatives around Italy’s troubles as a tool to achieve the same effect.

               1. Phew, thanks. Was just checking.

                  When you look at it that way I think youre right. From an Italy perspective it was worth a shot. I think the frustration on my part was more from going in thinking it would be a high scoring game where we could finally see a new-look (sort of) backline, and then seeing England struggle through. Italy carried out their gameplan to the letter so cant fault them for that.

            2. I think O’Shea miscalculated: Italy are generally in the game for 50 or so minutes, so he should’ve had them play as they normally do for 50 then stop competing at the ruck. Would’ve perplexed the England players and they wouldn’t have had half-time to regather and be told what to do. That would’ve been worth watching.

      2. You say not losing by a landslide but they were winning in the first half and if they had a reliable kicker would have been way ahead at ht. Italy came to play , Everyone could see that when they had the ball ? And their defensive tactics worked perfectly. I think you are just saying what the english media has been saying and not thinking for yourself. How many times did italy target england out wide ?

         1. Actually if Italy had a reliable kicker they wouldn’t have scored one of their two tries…

4. Do we think Italys complete inability to compete at this level, in comparisons to years past when they could at least pull out a shock or keep the game close is a bigger reflection on a big Italian downfall or larger improvements from the rest of the NH teams??

5. I think we are far enough into the tournament to have a real crack at the first test team for the lions.
   So I woukd pick:
   1- Vunipola, 2- Brown, 3- Furlong, 4- Itoje, 5- J.Gray, 6- Stander, 7- Watson, 8- Vunipola
   9- Murray, 10- Sexton*, 11- Nowell, 12- Farrell, 13- Henshaw, 14- Seymour, 15- Hogg

   16- George, 17- McGrath, 18- Fagerson*, 19- Wyn Jones, 20- O’Brien, 21- Webb, 22- H.Jones*, 23- L.Williams

   Sexton*- Only if fit (sadly unlikely) if not Russell goes to 10.
   Fagerson*- Due to Cole being off form, I think Fagerson would bring good speed at the end of the game and in a stronger pack would struggle less in Scrum.
   Jones*- IMO he is brilliant hasn’t set the 6N on fire due to them being his first games of the season, if he is not in great form for the Stormers I would have Eliiot Daly step in.

   Players close to test squad:
   K.Owens, D.Cole, J.Launchberry, R.Gray, S.Warburton, J.Tipuric, T.Falatau, A.Price (BOLTER), F.Russell, A.Dunbar, J.Joseph, E.Daly, A.Watson

6. In answer to your questions:

   – Was the problem Italy’s, England’s or the referee’s on Sunday, regarding the offside rule that caused England problems?
   England and the referee’s. England should have dealt with it better than they did. The ref was far too inconsistent in his application of the laws

   – Where do Wales go from here?
   Dunno. Wooden spoon?

   – What do Scotland need to do to win at Twickenham?
   Not let Finn Russell have one of his flaky games. Start Hamish Watson. Win upfront. Don’t get beaten at the set piece. If they find themselves in a leading position, don’t do what they do all too often and throw it away in the last 20. All easier said than done

   – France have shown promise, but ultimately look like failing. What needs to change for them to be contenders once more?
   Stop trying to force the off-load. More control from fly-half. Find a decent blind side flanker. Hope Picamoles, Serin and Gourdon stay fit

   – Do Ireland go into the final two weekends as favourites?
   No

   – What can we expect from the upcoming Super Rugby season?
   Dunno. Aggregate scores of 200+? Defenses that leak more than politicians?

7. So after EJ, next angriest man on Ruckgate appears to be Matt Dawson. Seems to me he has a point as a scrum half as this rather depressing tactic seems to be aimed squarely at preventing the 9 from releasing the backs. What I find slightly dubious is the fact the Conor O’Shea has now admitted that they were deliberately targeting Care i.e. his former scrum half at Quins. It’s not illegal but is certainly cynical and for me detracted from what would otherwise have been an improved Italian performance. Surely O’Shea and Venter should be concentrating on developing what is a relatively weak side rather than trying one-match gimmicks. Not a disgrace, just a bit of a shame really.

8. I’m not sure any of the other 6N teams would have shown better decision making TBH. Show me the evidence they would have? It was a sham of a game in retrospect and once the initial intrigue had worn off I found it really hard to watch. Wales the same. The rugby in this years tournament has been very compelling and a good advert though. I still think everyone throws there best at England and that distorts our perception of quality and performance standards – Wales a prime exponent in their varying performances between the rounds. Not sure any meaningful analysis can be taken from this week’s England game really. It may have done England a favour – the lack of physicality meant it was little more than an opposed team run, and they will be fresher going into the Scotland game than normal….

9. That’s a good point Geraint. Whilst the game may have tested Haskell’s brain, it certainly didn’t test any of the England team physically.

   I don’t think there were any injuries. And as you point out it leaves them fresher for the Scotland game.

   Not to mention far less complacent and with a point to prove!

   1. There’s a week break anyway so physical factors are not a major concern other than injuries

Comments are closed.