Six Nations Rugby 2021

Aled

Well-known member
Messages
3,272
Reaction score
522
Location
Dinefwr
Wales have won two 6 Nations matches on the trot and usually i'd have a grin like a Cheshire cat.....not this year. I think the Scotland red card was unlucky as unlike last week, i don't think this week was as clear cut. I think a yellow would of sufficed. Once again had that red card not happened Wales would of lost. There is one silver lining Wales do have a bit of dog, and Rees-Zammit appears the real deal. So commiserations Scotland rather than well done Wales. From the start that Scotland team showed energy and commitment. England had to do a bit of work but got home relatively easily, May should of been a high jumper! Italy did some nice back play, but made some mistakes. Varney, the Welsh Italian seems to be a nice looking player.
Sorry all not feeling my usual enthusiastic self during this 6 Nations, usually i love the craic and companionship, Covid is definitely having an effect, on me, i'm pretty sure i'm not the only one! Right time for a large G&T and a read of the Field magazine.
Cheers
Aled
 

salarchaser

Well-known member
Messages
3,424
Reaction score
2,202
Location
Cheshire
I'm with Aled, marginal red.
Penalty, definitely. Yellow, probably. Red, hmmm.
Nowhere near the certainty of last week. Its the trailing arm that convinces the ref. If his head was up and his arm in a tackling position, he'd have been pinged and stayed on.
Wales played better than last week. Lineout was acceptable.
Scotland more clinical in the first half than against England.
A bit of stardust from Hogg and Rees-Zammit.
15 on 15, Scotland win.
It all stemmed from Scotland crossing on the Welsh line.
Fine margins....
 

sewinfly

Well-known member
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
369
Location
caerphilly
I really thought we were going to be on a hiding from the Scots.
We also missed 8 points to the boot which would of looked better in our favour.

Never been a big Hogg fan but today he looked different and I liked it.

Spencer. ...........
 

mows

Well-known member
Messages
4,322
Reaction score
3,164
Location
edzell
Frustrating as a Scott.
But wales did superb not to give a penalty in the last 5 minutes and may well deserve their victory due to that.
 

pfeul

Well-known member
Messages
868
Reaction score
513
Location
Paris, France
Nice games for the neutral today.

Even if there reminds some questions about the end result in a 15 vs 15 full game, what is striking is the efficiency of the Welsh team as soon as they enter the 22yds zone. It does not occur often but every time it's almost a try. Sale thing last week and today. That should provide shear optimism to the Welsh supporters for the future.
IMHO the defeat does not lie in the fagerson red card although it had some effect indeed.
Twice the Scotts could have scored easy penalties but they have chosen the bad option feeling strong apparently to score a try.
That's a bad game management from the captain which reminds me the not so old horrible French team management during so many games. The worst was at 17-10. That should have been 20-10 but results on the opposite in a 17-15 three minutes later.
Last week it was the same but was hidden by the English weakness and fortunately with no effect at the end. But not today.
Passion heart and soul are great for scoring tries but game management make wins at the end. The Scottish team lacks it.
As for the red card, one can discuss for hours whether there is direct contact with the head or not.
But the point is that Fagerson is very late and engages shoulder first to clean the ruck on Win Jones who is leaning head down. The guy knows that with the current rules, he's close to the limit and that doing so he might be definitely binned
 

Loxie

Well-known member
Messages
11,283
Reaction score
2,057
I really thought we were going to be on a hiding from the Scots.
We also missed 8 points to the boot which would of looked better in our favour.

Never been a big Hogg fan but today he looked different and I liked it.

Spencer. ...........
He's playing for a proper club now...
 

Handel

Well-known member
Messages
2,341
Reaction score
714
Location
London
I'm with Aled, marginal red.
Penalty, definitely. Yellow, probably. Red, hmmm.
Nowhere near the certainty of last week. Its the trailing arm that convinces the ref. If his head was up and his arm in a tackling position, he'd have been pinged and stayed on.
Once you accept it was a penalty I am not sure where you go but red. Fagerson ran in from a distance, he could see what he was doing. The only part of the Welsh player he could make contact with was his head. So that is red unless there is a reason for it not to be. A player joining a ruck has to bind onto a teammate in the ruck when joining. He can't do that if his arms are by his sides. So Fagerson entered the ruck illegally and hit the Welsh player on the head.
I guess there are two other points. First it wasn't as bad as last week, but that was absolutely terrible and that O'Mahony only received a 3 game ban suggests to me that the three members of the disciplinary panel all have concussion themselves. Second you see that sort of thing all the time. That though isn't any mitigation. There is nothing wrong with the laws of the game if only the top referees would enforce them. What you saw yesterday was the referee enforcing the laws of the game.
Rugby is an endangered species for many reasons and injuries, especially head injuries, are one of those reasons. Some doctors are now pushing to ban tackling in schools and youth rugby. Other doctors are pointing out that you wouldn't play a couple of weeks after fracturing your leg so why can you play a couple of weeks after fracturing your brain? And then there are all the risks associated with women's rugby. What we saw yesterday was entirely logical and I just hope we see other referees enforcing the laws properly.
 

SJF

Member
Messages
79
Reaction score
18
Once you accept it was a penalty I am not sure where you go but red. Fagerson ran in from a distance, he could see what he was doing. The only part of the Welsh player he could make contact with was his head. So that is red unless there is a reason for it not to be. A player joining a ruck has to bind onto a teammate in the ruck when joining. He can't do that if his arms are by his sides. So Fagerson entered the ruck illegally and hit the Welsh player on the head.
I guess there are two other points. First it wasn't as bad as last week, but that was absolutely terrible and that O'Mahony only received a 3 game ban suggests to me that the three members of the disciplinary panel all have concussion themselves. Second you see that sort of thing all the time. That though isn't any mitigation. There is nothing wrong with the laws of the game if only the top referees would enforce them. What you saw yesterday was the referee enforcing the laws of the game.
In my opinion it was a clear red for the reasons Handel mentions above. There is no such thing as "clearing out" in the Laws, it is the cause of a lot of head injuries, and knee injuries and should be stamped out ( poor phrase use). Players charging in at the side, hitting prone players ar rarely clearing the ball for the scrum half they are making a "macho" statement. It needs stopping.
I played West Wales Rugby for 15 years on and of in the 80's & 90's so I'm not unused to the dark arts - but we are getting an accumulation of injuries in the modern game that are changing players lives.
 

salarchaser

Well-known member
Messages
3,424
Reaction score
2,202
Location
Cheshire
Once you accept it was a penalty I am not sure where you go but red. Fagerson ran in from a distance, he could see what he was doing. The only part of the Welsh player he could make contact with was his head. So that is red unless there is a reason for it not to be. A player joining a ruck has to bind onto a teammate in the ruck when joining. He can't do that if his arms are by his sides. So Fagerson entered the ruck illegally and hit the Welsh player on the head.
I guess there are two other points. First it wasn't as bad as last week, but that was absolutely terrible and that O'Mahony only received a 3 game ban suggests to me that the three members of the disciplinary panel all have concussion themselves. Second you see that sort of thing all the time. That though isn't any mitigation. There is nothing wrong with the laws of the game if only the top referees would enforce them. What you saw yesterday was the referee enforcing the laws of the game.
Rugby is an endangered species for many reasons and injuries, especially head injuries, are one of those reasons. Some doctors are now pushing to ban tackling in schools and youth rugby. Other doctors are pointing out that you wouldn't play a couple of weeks after fracturing your leg so why can you play a couple of weeks after fracturing your brain? And then there are all the risks associated with women's rugby. What we saw yesterday was entirely logical and I just hope we see other referees enforcing the laws properly.
Entirely logical Handel.

I do wonder though, if O'Mahoney hadnt made that clearout last week and set a precedent, would Fagerson have seen red? Far less clear cut yesterday.

Coaches and players just have to accept the rules are looking to protect player's health and modify technique accordingly. It would be a shame to lose the physicallity out of the game.

Injecting some controversy, it could be that we need to allow rucking back into the game to encourage defenders to stay out of the areas that slow the ball down. That type of clearout may not be 'required'.

Maybe if Fagerson had put 'Farrell' on the back of his shirt he'd have been ok. ;)
 

salarchaser

Well-known member
Messages
3,424
Reaction score
2,202
Location
Cheshire
I played West Wales Rugby for 15 years on and of in the 80's & 90's so I'm not unused to the dark arts - but we are getting an accumulation of injuries in the modern game that are changing players lives.
If you played west Wales rugby in the 80s and 90s, you'll have seen plenty of dark arts.;)

I agree about seriousness of injury. Another for England at a breakdown yesterday
 

peterchilton

Well-known member
Messages
2,294
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Mid Wales
I heard that all England players will have 'Farrell' on their shirts so as to avoid any cards.🤔
I thought you like O'Mahoney because he played on the edge like Farrell :unsure:

Its unusual for a stand off to be as aggressive as Farrell I guess, Biggar is pretty aggressive but only usually with his tongue, he was quiet yesterday and had a poor game ..... maybe the ref had threatened a red card if he didn't shut up.
 

salarchaser

Well-known member
Messages
3,424
Reaction score
2,202
Location
Cheshire
I thought you like O'Mahoney because he played on the edge like Farrell :unsure:

Its unusual for a stand off to be as aggressive as Farrell I guess, Biggar is pretty aggressive but only usually with his tongue, he was quiet yesterday and had a poor game ..... maybe the ref had threatened a red card if he didn't shut up.
You evidently didnt read my reply last time you posted similar.
I stated that Farrell goes way beyond 'the edge'.
Quite a few forwards play on the edge in a controlled way, as do some backs. Farrell is regularly out of control, and late, cheap shots. He could easily have pulled out of yesterdays challenge, or if his arms were in a tackling position it would have cushioned the impact and prevented the head clash. He deliberately goes head hunting.

Biggar can be quite physical and on occasion gets it wrong. He is a milder version of Farrell
 

peterchilton

Well-known member
Messages
2,294
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Mid Wales
You evidently didnt read my reply last time you posted similar.
I stated that Farrell goes way beyond 'the edge'.
Quite a few forwards play on the edge in a controlled way, as do some backs. Farrell is regularly out of control, and late, cheap shots. He could easily have pulled out of yesterdays challenge, or if his arms were in a tackling position it would have cushioned the impact and prevented the head clash. He deliberately goes head hunting.

Biggar can be quite physical and on occasion gets it wrong. He is a milder version of Farrell
in your opinion of course ;) but not the refs?
 

Handel

Well-known member
Messages
2,341
Reaction score
714
Location
London
Entirely logical Handel.

I do wonder though, if O'Mahoney hadnt made that clearout last week and set a precedent, would Fagerson have seen red? Far less clear cut yesterday.

Coaches and players just have to accept the rules are looking to protect player's health and modify technique accordingly. It would be a shame to lose the physicallity out of the game.

Injecting some controversy, it could be that we need to allow rucking back into the game to encourage defenders to stay out of the areas that slow the ball down. That type of clearout may not be 'required'.

Maybe if Fagerson had put 'Farrell' on the back of his shirt he'd have been ok. ;)
I am not sure whether the referee saw the Fagerson incident in real time or had to be alerted to it by the TMO. The TMO was Karl Dickson who is one of these project referees - for many years he was the number two scrum half at Harlequins behind Danny Care so he played a lot of English premiership rugby. Several former professionals have taken up refereeing with a view to being fast tracked to the top. Dickson clearly wasn't so sure about the red card no doubt because he has seen so many similar incidents whilst playing. I think the referee called it right.
Talking of rucking, there is an interview on the BBC Sport website with Sir Gareth and some film of the 1971 Scotland v Wales game (which Wales also won by a point) which includes a couple of rucks. The players are on their feet..................
 

salarchaser

Well-known member
Messages
3,424
Reaction score
2,202
Location
Cheshire
The players are on their feet..................
Though most of the time, the feet are on the players. :ROFLMAO:


More and more, players are arriving unbalanced.
If they miss the target, or the target moves, they end up flat on their faces.
In my opinion, a player should be able to remain upright at all times and not overbalance. That would bring more control to clearouts.
O'Mahoney and Fagerson came in so low and with feet so far back they could never correct their trajectory.
Being a hardened cynic, how long before coaches are getting players to identify 'exocets' and to get in their way, seeking red cards.
A bit like players jumping in the air as a tackler arrives.
The game could be in a downward spiral.
 

salarchaser

Well-known member
Messages
3,424
Reaction score
2,202
Location
Cheshire
Just reading the law regarding arriving at a ruck / maul.
If you take it literally, there would be 30 or 40 penalties a game.
The majority of forwards hit rucks and mauls without binding including the Welsh forwards.
In mauls its usually well below the shoulder.

World Rugby, Law 9: Foul Play​

20. Dangerous play in a ruck or maul.

a. A player must not charge into a ruck or maul. Charging includes any contact made without binding onto another player in the ruck or maul.

b. A player must not make contact with an opponent above the line of the shoulders.
 

Handel

Well-known member
Messages
2,341
Reaction score
714
Location
London
A one-word answer Handel ... forwards
I thought someone would say that Jack but when you have two wingers who can literally create something from nothing you would think they could do a bit better than they are. Their reserve winger Murley is no slouch either.
 
Top