Unless you’re Mike Phillips
https://youtu.be/4YyXTwe6eSw
+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
I don’t claim to be an expert but happy to offer a couple of observations
If you watch the side that kicked it long the wing is always after it like shot to help prevent a quick throw in. There are fewer opportunities at professional level to take a quick throw in because of the way in which players are coached. The level of detail which the attack and defence coaches put into their respective roles is phenomenal.
Defending ball recovery. Exit strategies from different parts of he pitch. Specific Defensive alignment in broken play and from set pieces.
When a Wales player(s)make a tackle the first option is to attempt a turnover. If the ball is being cycled back to the opposition #9 defensive players disengage and sweep left or right depending on where the defence captain is reading that the next attacking play is coming.
1 Forward will defend either side of the breakdown. Called the gatekeeper. Remaining forwards on their feet deploy in 2/3 man pods.
When attacking Wales often line their forwards 1-1-2-2-2. One particular incident that highlighted this was in the first half when after the ball had passed through several pairs of hands Faletau received the ball in the outside centre position with only Tipuric outside him
Tap penalties are always an option if players in the defence switch off for a moment as on Saturday when Daly turned his back and the Wales #9 saw the gap open up with no full back watching. Coaches will not be happy if you take a quick penalty, run into tacklers and lose the ball or give away a penalty for not releasing. Dwayne Peel used to be very quick with taking quick penalties
I’ll tell you something you rarely or never see these days is a tap penalty where the ball is passed to an oncoming player for him to take the ball into contact. I guess it’s because there is a strong chance that possession will be lost.
I think that refereeing standards vary widely even at international level so refs are very influential especially in closer games.
The tackle/breakdown is poorly ref’d, badly coached and is an example of the shambles which turns off the less studious watcher.
Unless you’re Mike Phillips
https://youtu.be/4YyXTwe6eSw
The complicated nature of the rules in rugby leaves things wide open to interpretation and I agree with later posts that it is this that contributes largely to the game being a turn off.
In the days of boot money where the game was far more open and off the cuff, it was a spectacle. I'd often go and watch Cardiff play on bank holidays etc and when there was City game. It wouldn't enter my mind nowadays.
It can still be enjoyable if you get two sides who are willing to throw the ball about but again, with the money on offer these days this is rarely likely to occur.
Its all about power.
My worry is that football, historically a very simple game in comparison with few rules, is going the same way and becoming a bit of a turn off, especially with the inconsistencies regarding VAR.
In the Pro 14 a few weeks back a player juggled the ball forward with his first touch and in attempting to regather it knocked it backwards over his head and onto the floor.
It was given as a knock on.
Nigel Owens was on Scrum V last night clarifying the rule and he said it was a knock on as per the laws.
Why did he get the first one wrong? "The water carrier...." shouldn't have been on the pitch if the only reason the game had stopped was to give one side the chance to avoid further punishment. Isn't it a similar effect to footballer going down with "cramp" to give their side chance to talk tactics and refresh? I don't think enough time was given and communication could have been improved but how much do teams talk in that scenario and how much extra should they be allowed to say? Something to decide going forward rather than out-of-the-blue on the day.
I'm sure the England camp isn't just discussing those two moments though given their ambitions.
Gauzere not only consulted at length with the TMO - and both watched the 'knock on' incident in slow motion several times - he also checked with his two Irish assistant referees who had also been watching the big screen, and both agreed with his call.
After thousands of pages of reportage, analysis and comment on the two controversial tries, there is still no definitive outcome.
The referee has subsequently agreed that he didn't give England quite enough time to set themselves for the Adams try (they did on one side of the pitch but not the side that mattered) - so fine margins and maybe he called time back on a couple of seconds too soon - and whilst agreeing on further slow motion viewings (per the reported phone call with Joel Jutge) that LRZ did knock the ball forward and didn't have control the main confession was that he should have made an on-field decision himself and not consulted the TMO!
Still, it gives England supporters all they need to claim they were robbed, and to ignore all the other bad refereeing decisions that affected other teams in the competition. If the Adams try hadn't been given Wales would almost certainly have kicked a 3 point penalty. If Maro Itoje had been yellow carded as he should have been, the normal rule of thumb is that a 10 minute sin-binning will cost his side 7 points. So Wales gained 4 points from dubious first half refereeing decisions. OK - a win by 12 points not 16!
Agreed.... worth adding that if the kick to the corner for Adams hadn’t been perfect and had been caught by the England defender who then went the length of the pitch to score, then no one would be clamoring that it was taken too quickly and that Wales should have the ball back for a penalty in front of the posts. Biggar gambled for a try and played it superbly
wow... there are probably about 15 dodgy pens given every week in football and the general reaction is that the ref's a whanker.
In rugby it makes the national press and needs to be dissected. Odd
I also think it was a knock on - but all four officials at the match felt it had been knocked backwards onto the English player.
Two days later after a media storm the referee (allegedly) accepts he got that wrong.
The incident also highlights a few ambiguities in the law book (especially about control of the ball), and the fact that most pundits and fans are experts on custom and practice, but ignorant of what the laws actually say. Jeremy Guscott summarised it well.
If it was totally clear cut there wouldn't be tens of thousands of wannabe referees still arguing the toss on social media! But yes, Wales had some luck with the calls.
Glad you mentioned that England were set up as they needed to be to their left for the first try before the ref said the clock should go back on - as Farrell delivered his talk to the team under the posts, his team were equi distant from each touchline, yet they left the side where any cross kick was going to go wide open.
Nigel Owens said on Scrum Five last night that the second try should not have been allowed because Rees-Zamitt never had the ball under control after it had gone forward, if he had been able to do that then the try would have been a legitimate one.
Having been caught out by the first try, England were then caught napping with the third one with their full back of all people turning his back on the play. England played as if they didn’t have a brain in their head either individually or collectively - the fuss regarding the refereeing is a diversionary tactic to try and make them look less stupid.
Martin Johnson was the perfect example of this on the weekend when he said "by the letter of the law its not a knock on, but 98 times out of 100 its given"
Did Wales get some luck? Certainly, but like you said Itoje should have been carded & wasn't. The fact of the matter is it was even going into the last 20 minutes and Wales won it with ease, you can't give away the number of penalties England did and expect to win the game.