Six Nations 2017
-
@Pot-Hale said in Six Nations 2017:
Even 36-15 is not a cricket score.
What's more relevant is the question - would Georgia have managed to play a test like that against England since the world and its mother seems to think they should be playing in the 6/7 Nations with/without relegation?
Not sure? Who is their coach at the moment. Conor O'Shea sure had a shit eating grin on his face for picking a tactic that Eddie hadn't thought of.
Maybe it was his inside knowledge that the England players didn't study the laws -
If Italy had managed to keep the scoreline close until half-time, it would have been even more effective if they'd adopted the no-contest ruck tactic only in the second half.
-
@Crucial What ruck, though? My recollection is that the ref had already explicitly stated that there was "tackle only" at that particular breakdown. Not saying it wasn't a penalty, but logically Itoje's can't have been a ruck offence.
-
@Pot-Hale But without using it in first half, I doubt the halftime score would have been close (even with OF's bad kicking day), so it was only going to work for them as a Plan A. I'd guess even with presumed inside knowledge of English player IQs, the Italian coaching team can't have believed how well their tactics worked. Even when it looked like England had worked out how to counter the no-ruck, they didn't do so consistently, which was disappointing.
But, they won, and hopefully will have learned from such a hastening experience. Even Hartley and Haskell (maybe...)
-
@Disgusted-of-TW said in Six Nations 2017:
@Crucial What ruck, though? My recollection is that the ref had already explicitly stated that there was "tackle only" at that particular breakdown. Not saying it wasn't a penalty, but logically Itoje's can't have been a ruck offence.
Didn’t see it but you can't play thecball when off your feet. Ruck or tackle.
-
@booboo said in Six Nations 2017:
@Disgusted-of-TW said in Six Nations 2017:
@Crucial What ruck, though? My recollection is that the ref had already explicitly stated that there was "tackle only" at that particular breakdown. Not saying it wasn't a penalty, but logically Itoje's can't have been a ruck offence.
Didn’t see it but you can't play thecball when off your feet. Ruck or tackle.
Or general play.
-
-
It raises an interesting issue about offside though. How often has a back been called for coming up early when no ruck was technically formed so actually no offside line.
I'll be the first to admit that my default assumption after a tackle is that a ruck was formed if it's on the ground. But as soon as I saw it here. I was like oh yeah no arriving defending player no ruck, no offside. What I didn't understand though was why couldn't that box kick be charged down? -
*Italy played a novel tactic of not committing any men to the breakdown beyond the initial tackler, meaning no ruck was formed and any offside became irrelevant.
Italian defenders could therefore stand between England's half-backs, creating confusion for the men in white.
"How can you have players standing in your attack line? Even when there were rucks, there were people standing in our attack line.
"You look to pass the ball and there's a blue jumper there. You look in front and there's a blue jumper there. There's blue jumpers everywhere.
"He [Poite] had a terrible day. He wasn't refereeing rugby."
Asked if rugby's laws need to change following the game, Jones said: "I don't think anyone wants to see a game like that. No-one likes to see rugby not played in its proper form so World Rugby will have to have a very close look at it.
"I don't think there was anything good in that today. It didn't improve the game."*
Italy match not proper rugby - Jones
*England coach Eddie Jones said an unexpected Italy tactic "wasn't rugby" as they frustrated the Six Nations champions before finally losing 36-15.
Italy led 10-5 at half-time as they chose not to compete at the breakdown, allowing them to step into the England line without going offside.
But the hosts found a way through with five tries in the second period.
"Well done Italy, very smart. We knew they'd come with something," Jones told BBC Radio 5 live.
"But it wasn't rugby. We haven't played a game of rugby yet.
"I'm not critical of Italy, they did what they needed to do to stay in the game."
Italy coach Conor O'Shea defended the tactic, saying: "Everything we did was completely legal; I was incredibly proud of what the players put out there."
At one stage, England captain Dylan Hartley and team-mate James Haskell asked referee Romain Poite to clarify the law, but the Frenchman replied: "I am a referee, not a coach."
Jones added: "Did we react quick enough? It's hard when you don't play rugby, it's like playing a different game out there.
"If your half-back can't pass the ball, the game becomes difficult. It's not the way you want to play the game. We wanted to move the ball and play some good rugby.
"We scored six tries and at the end of three rounds, if we were undefeated and with a bonus points, we'd be doing handstands. So we're doing handstands."
Italy played a novel tactic of not committing any men to the breakdown beyond the initial tackler, meaning no ruck was formed and any offside became irrelevant.
Italian defenders could therefore stand between England's half-backs, creating confusion for the men in white.
"How can you have players standing in your attack line? Even when there were rucks, there were people standing in our attack line.
"You look to pass the ball and there's a blue jumper there. You look in front and there's a blue jumper there. There's blue jumpers everywhere.
"He [Poite] had a terrible day. He wasn't refereeing rugby."
Asked if rugby's laws need to change following the game, Jones said: "I don't think anyone wants to see a game like that. No-one likes to see rugby not played in its proper form so World Rugby will have to have a very close look at it.
"I don't think there was anything good in that today. It didn't improve the game."*
Italy 'ruined the match' - Dawson
*The innovative tactics caused confusion among the spectators as well as those on the field, and former England scrum-half Matt Dawson laid the blame for a disjointed contest firmly with Italy.
The 2003 World Cup winner said on Twitter: "Well done Italy on ruining this international. Now World Rugby have to change the laws because of your inability to compete at this level."
O'Shea was not about to back down when Dawson's comment was put to him, saying: "I'd like him to sit down with World Rugby to look at some of the other games we've played this year, and if he's that good in the rules, actually make a comment after we were impacted as we were in the first game of this championship - but that's not for me to talk about now.
"We came here to have a go. If they want us to lose by 100 points, why should we? Why should we be normal. We should be ourselves. Rather than having a go, have a bit of humility and respect for guys who have very little in comparison to their counter-parts.
"I was expecting this, if I'm honest."*
'I'm sure Trevor Chappell would've been happy today'
*Jones went on to compare the Italian tactic to a famous one-day international cricket match between Australia and New Zealand in 1981.
With one ball remaining, New Zealand needed a six to tie the match.
To ensure this couldn't happen, Australia's captain Greg Chappell ordered his brother Trevor to bowl the last ball underarm, a legal action at the time.
"Well, obviously they've been watching Trevor Chappell with the underarm bowl along the ground to make sure they couldn't hit a six," said Australian Jones.
"I'm sure Trevor Chappell would've been happy today."*
-
I just watched some highlights on stuff. What I don't understand is why weren't italy just attacking the halfback seeing there was no ruck instead they just jumped around behind the tackle area getting in the way. Also wouldn't most captains just say alright halfback fuck off its time to pick and go 80m down field and see if they still don't want to contest.
-
@Magpie_in_aus said in Six Nations 2017:
I just watched some highlights on stuff. What I don't understand is why weren't italy just attacking the halfback seeing there was no ruck instead they just jumped around behind the tackle area getting in the way. Also wouldn't most captains just say alright halfback fuck off its time to pick and go 80m down field and see if they still don't want to contest.
Wasn't that what teams did to the Chiefs sometimes when they used the tactic?
-
Holy shit, a NZ news site posted some actual rugby analysis:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/89831868/how-italys-offside-tackle-tactics-caught-england-off-guard-and-how-to-counter-itSure, it took a game on the other side of the planet to get them to do it but baby steps.
-
-
@Bones said in Six Nations 2017:
For those wondering why they didn't sack the scrum half or can't charge the kick... You still can't join the ruck from the side or encroach within a metre.
Yep, and the WR refs have decided that it is against the spirit of the game to smash the half back after he has removed the ball
-
@Crucial Which is strange because they've been exposed to halfbacks enough to know better.
-
@antipodean said in Six Nations 2017:
@Crucial Which is strange because they've been exposed to halfbacks enough to know better.
But they have an affinity. The are both hated by everyone else on the field.
