|
Post by lollygagger on Feb 28, 2017 9:19:31 GMT
I thought it was great. There's not much I enjoy more than watching a team that have been so over trained that they are stumped when something unusual happens. That the England team didn't even know the basic rules of the game they're apparently the cream of just added to the enjoyment for me. The same happens footy - players so under the training cosh, mostly concerned with being picked to play and looking good that they've lost track of what made them good at it in the first place.
It didn't spoil the game for me, I was glued to it, it was fascinating.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2017 9:33:28 GMT
I'm not sure about that.
I think they were concerned about being penalised by the referee, and that's what was causing the confusion.
They did (eventually) sort it out, and scored 6 good tries.
I was also confused, as on occasions there were two italians at the breakdown and yet other Italian players were trying to block passing channels without being penalised.
And I was sat drinking beer, not running around, blood pumping, and trying to work out an answer.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Stumpy on Feb 28, 2017 10:47:21 GMT
In my opinion, Italy can’t compete at this level of rugby, and they resorted to a tactic that was not illegal; but, was against “The Spirit of the Law” of rugby. It’s a bit like a Gentleman’s Agreement…….Don’t get within a metre of the scrum half (#9) at the ruck.
Now that our pizza chomping Mediterranean friends have resulted to tactics that effectively shut down a game of rugby. How many more inadequate teams will rely on this underhand method to disrupt a game, and if they’re so desperate to disrupt it to this level, why bother turn up to play in a competition that’s all about having a “Game of Rugby”.
To put it in Foolsball terms; it’s a bit like placing all 11 divas players in front of their own goal, effectively blocking it for 90 minutes, nothing in the foolsball rule book to say you can't, but what would be the point of that?
Will the rugby laws be rewritten?...... Who knows.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2017 12:26:17 GMT
But the biggest insult is that it didn't work, so what was the point (apart from restricting England to 6 tries).
Rog
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2017 13:03:16 GMT
But the biggest insult is that it didn't work, so what was the point (apart from restricting England to 6 tries). Rog It worked pretty well for the first half. England even used the tactic themselves
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2017 14:20:43 GMT
You have a strange measure of 'worked'.
They lost. Had six tries put by them. Not even a losing bonus point. Have had to endure contempt from a huge number of fans for not 'fronting up' and playing the game.
But if you think it worked, fair do's.
I certainly don't think the laws need changing. One would have to think after this high profile attempt at trickery, teams will be more prepared.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Feb 28, 2017 14:27:36 GMT
It plainly did work for the first half, Italy went in ahead. Where they went wrong was in turn not adapting once England got to grips. It might have foxed England for the entire second half if they'd played properly, slow as England are on the uptake!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2017 19:57:34 GMT
You have a strange measure of 'worked'. They lost. Had six tries put by them. Not even a losing bonus point. Have had to endure contempt from a huge number of fans for not 'fronting up' and playing the game. But if you think it worked, fair do's. I certainly don't think the laws need changing. One would have to think after this high profile attempt at trickery, teams will be more prepared. Rog As I said for the first half, Italy were ahead at the break. They usually chase kicks and it does pay off.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2017 20:56:50 GMT
If you think it worked, fine.
I think it was a bit like shooting themselves in the foot.
Rather than plucky underdogs it changed many's perceptions.
An admission that they're not up to this level of competition maybe?
Bring on Scotland. Now that will be a PROPER game, and may the best team win.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Stumpy on Feb 28, 2017 21:19:28 GMT
You have a strange measure of 'worked'. They lost. Had six tries put by them. Not even a losing bonus point. Have had to endure contempt from a huge number of fans for not 'fronting up' and playing the game. But if you think it worked, fair do's. I certainly don't think the laws need changing. One would have to think after this high profile attempt at trickery, teams will be more prepared. Rog As I said for the first half, Italy were ahead at the break. They usually chase kicks and it does pay off. As Fast Eddie stated in yesterday's Metro. "We saw a Trevor Chappell game of rugby today". Just in case you don't know who Trevor Chappell is: He was an Austrukinfalian cricketist, who famously bowled underarm along the ground to Brian McKechnie to stop him from hitting a six to tie a match.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Feb 28, 2017 21:22:12 GMT
We had a few beers with some Italian fans afterwards. They were a good freindly bunch. Helped that we have an Italian in our team.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2017 21:44:49 GMT
Campagnaro was terrific.
Maclean and Parisse had their usual excellent games.
What did the Italians make of it?
Rog
ETA of course the big difference is that Chappells tactic meant they won the game
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Feb 28, 2017 21:51:04 GMT
Campagnaro was terrific. Maclean and Parisse had their usual excellent games. What did the Italians make of it? Rog ETA of course the big difference is that Chappells tactic meant they won the game They spoke little of it. I gained the impression it was an expected result. I think that's probaly why they started talking about football. They supported the club we brought home off.
|
|
|
Post by Stumpy on Feb 28, 2017 22:07:48 GMT
Campagnaro was terrific. Maclean and Parisse had their usual excellent games. What did the Italians make of it? Rog ETA of course the big difference is that Chappells tactic meant they won the gameSorry, forgot that crucial bit Rog
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 8:36:45 GMT
The game's gone now, so none of it's important, I realise. However there's another little issue that's bugging me relating to the ref Roman Poite.
In the game, much was made out of Hartley and Haskell asking what the laws said, and the comic reply being given "I'm a referee not a coach". Oh how we all laughed!
However I have now read that when OShea discussed the tactic with Poite on Friday, he explained to them in detail a law change that had occured that week, which meant they could not touch the scrum half (their original plan). As a result they changed the plan to blocking the passing lanes.
Seems to me he was happy to provide information and advice to Italy, but not to England.
Anyway, that's off my chest now. Get ready for Scotland. I hope it's not going to be another David Sole moment.
Rog
|
|