All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test
-
@No-Quarter i get the argument but i dont think this is a great example, LF is meters away from BA, take out those two guys and he still isn't making that tackle, if that actually physically block him or BA is right on their shoulder then sure....shepard
-
@Kiwiwomble I don't agree at all, if those two players aren't there, LF has a clear sight of Aki and at least attempts the tackle.
-
@No-Quarter but that's part of what they did, create confusion and doubt with LF.
They do alot of this, most is right on the line, that one i think is fine...that said, LF was caught going in when there were numbers on his outside, he was sucked into thier trap, he needed to make an effort the get to Aki, which he didn't, just accepted it, slowly turned and chased.
-
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@No-Quarter but that's part of what they did, create confusion and doubt with LF.
They do alot of this, most is right on the line, that one i think is fine...that said, LF was caught going in when there were numbers on his outside, he was sucked into thier trap, he needed to make an effort the get to Aki, which he didn't, just accepted it, slowly turned and chased.
then their option of hitting those flat guys if you shift out pays huge dividends.
-
@mariner4life also they had 3 players in a 2m circle of LF, and still had better numbers than us...LF should have been on the outside guy of the 2 screener, pull a Hollywood
-
@taniwharugby yeah, LF definitely makes the wrong decision, if he had tried to take Aki he would have run into the second Irish dummy runner and it would have been a pretty clear penalty. He made a mess of that, though in fairness he had three players in front of him, any one of which could have taken the ball.
-
@No-Quarter ha I just mentioned LF had 3 attackers in his vision above...simple but effective from Ireland.
-
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble I don't agree at all, if those two players aren't there, LF has a clear sight of Aki and at least attempts the tackle.
i really feel we're dangerously close to just being whingers...if that bad man hadn't tackled me i would have run all the way and scored....he's allowed to tackle you....well he shouldn't be!
if other teams are doing things withing the rules and we're not...thats on us
-
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@No-Quarter but that's part of what they did, create confusion and doubt with LF.
They do alot of this, most is right on the line, that one i think is fine...that said, LF was caught going in when there were numbers on his outside, he was sucked into thier trap, he needed to make an effort the get to Aki, which he didn't, just accepted it, slowly turned and chased.
then their option of hitting those flat guys if you shift out pays huge dividends.
I look at .044 and I can't see how Leicester gets to make a good decision. He has two players in his line of vision and Aki directly behind them about to get the ball. They are just blocking him (especially the outside player as it means he can't drift)..
-
@gt12 see i dont think theyre stopping him making the right decision....theyre just presenting several options and that confuses LF...which is on him
-
@Kiwiwomble said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble I don't agree at all, if those two players aren't there, LF has a clear sight of Aki and at least attempts the tackle.
i really feel we're dangerously close to just being whingers...if that bad man hadn't tackled me i would have run all the way and scored....he's allowed to tackle you....well he shouldn't be!
if other teams are doing things withing the rules and we're not...thats on us
As mentioned in the state of the game thread, the way screening forward runners are being used is creating danger. I'm not complaining about Ireland they are playing within law interpretations, However it IS causing defenders to be unsighted and make poor decisions.
Whether a dummy runner has an impact shouldn't just be a physical impact thing, it should also take into account taking up space and blocking visibility.
Rugby will always have players in front of the ball but until Rod McQueen started Brumbie-ball it was rare to see numbers of players run as 'blockers' ahead of the ball.
Perhaps some law interpretation changes in that area would make a cleaner game? -
@Kiwiwomble said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@gt12 see i dont think theyre stopping him making the right decision....theyre just presenting several options and that confuses LF...which is on him
I think the second runner is directly blocking his ability to be able to make a tackle. That's not a decision, that's an impact.
-
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble I don't agree at all, if those two players aren't there, LF has a clear sight of Aki and at least attempts the tackle.
i really feel we're dangerously close to just being whingers...if that bad man hadn't tackled me i would have run all the way and scored....he's allowed to tackle you....well he shouldn't be!
if other teams are doing things withing the rules and we're not...thats on us
Whether a dummy runner has an impact shouldn't just be a physical impact thing, it should also take into account taking up space and blocking visibility.
really?...so no plays allowed behind the scrum? how about the halfback behind a lineout when they pass it back to the wing to connect with the hooker? those are all about not exactly seeing whats going on
-
@gt12 said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@gt12 see i dont think theyre stopping him making the right decision....theyre just presenting several options and that confuses LF...which is on him
I think the second runner is directly blocking his ability to be able to make a tackle. That's not a decision, that's an impact.
I'll add to this by saying that we should hire the very best league attack coach there is and give them free rein to use blocking runners until we get pulled up for it. The only way to get this changed is for us to take it to the nth degree. That's on our coaching team and is a big clap to the NH coaches(who are pushing it as far as they can and good on them).
-
@gt12 said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@gt12 said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@gt12 see i dont think theyre stopping him making the right decision....theyre just presenting several options and that confuses LF...which is on him
I think the second runner is directly blocking his ability to be able to make a tackle. That's not a decision, that's an impact.
I'll add to this by saying that we should hire the very best league attack coach there is and give them free rein to use blocking runners until we get pulled up for it. The only way to get this changed is for us to take it to the nth degree. That's on our coaching team and is a big clap to the NH coaches.
ah, do you watch NRL? all Leicester has to do there is run in to the lead guy and that is getting called back for obstruction. Often league goes too far in rubbing tries out.
-
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@gt12 said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@gt12 said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@gt12 see i dont think theyre stopping him making the right decision....theyre just presenting several options and that confuses LF...which is on him
I think the second runner is directly blocking his ability to be able to make a tackle. That's not a decision, that's an impact.
I'll add to this by saying that we should hire the very best league attack coach there is and give them free rein to use blocking runners until we get pulled up for it. The only way to get this changed is for us to take it to the nth degree. That's on our coaching team and is a big clap to the NH coaches.
ah, do you watch NRL? all Leicester has to do there is run in to the lead guy and that is getting called back for obstruction. Often league goes too far in rubbing tries out.
it's funny you say that as I can't see why he didn't do exactly that - so it is fucking Stormey!
-
I definitely want to make it clear that my post wasn't about bitching about the "cheating Irish" or anything like that, this is a really clear example of Foster and co being out coached again. Poor defensive structure and our players making bad decisions when faced with a pretty standard play, albeit pushed to the limit with the ball carrier taking the pass just outside the shoulder of the second dummy runner. If that's legal, common and effective, why are we not doing it? We instead just fire the ball to a forward 10m from the ruck 5m behind the advantage line and hope for the best.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
@Kiwiwomble I don't agree at all, if those two players aren't there, LF has a clear sight of Aki and at least attempts the tackle.
i really feel we're dangerously close to just being whingers...if that bad man hadn't tackled me i would have run all the way and scored....he's allowed to tackle you....well he shouldn't be!
if other teams are doing things withing the rules and we're not...thats on us
Whether a dummy runner has an impact shouldn't just be a physical impact thing, it should also take into account taking up space and blocking visibility.
really?...so no plays allowed behind the scrum? how about the halfback behind a lineout when they pass it back to the wing to connect with the hooker? those are all about not exactly seeing whats going on
Did you not read the very next words "Rugby will always have players in front of the ball"?
If you take what is happening to extremes a team could run 4 players ahead of the ball who link together and form a semi circle around a defender effectively taking them out of the game. It would look extremely silly but wouldn't be a hell of a lot different to what is currently allowed. The laws however and being judged as written.
**A player is offside in open play if that player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball or who last played it. An offside player must not interfere with play. This includes:
Playing the ball.
Tackling the ball-carrier.Preventing the opposition from playing as they wish
IMO if a player cannot run the line they would prefer to because an attacker without the ball is blocking that line then that is obstruction.
NB: this doesn't apply to LF. he's ball watching and should be better.
-
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Ireland - 2nd Test:
I definitely want to make it clear that my post wasn't about bitching about the "cheating Irish" or anything like that, this is a really clear example of Foster and co being out coached again. Poor defensive structure and our players making bad decisions when faced with a pretty standard play, albeit pushed to the limit with the ball carrier taking the pass just outside the shoulder of the second dummy runner. If that's legal, common and effective, why are we not doing it? We instead just fire the ball to a forward 10m from the ruck 5m behind the advantage line and hope for the best.
what should really piss you off is Ireland have attacked like this for a while now...
