Jump to content

Recommended Posts

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fair point, yes. Just not for an ordinary open

> field runner who happens to jump when receiving a

> pass! As Kieran Reid said to the ref yesterday,

> does that mean next time I've got the ball, if I

> jump in the air they can't tackle me?


He had to jump to take the pass as it was head height - if he is then tackled low whilst still in the air he's potentially going to topple over head first.


As the referee explained, that's why it was only a penalty, no card.


I thought it was the right decision. Intentionally jumping before being tackled is another matter - although you do see it sometimes under high kicks where it looked like to catcher jumped just to take advantage of the rules. I don't think that was the case with Sinckler.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rendelharris Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Fair point, yes. Just not for an ordinary open

> > field runner who happens to jump when receiving

> a

> > pass! As Kieran Reid said to the ref

> yesterday,

> > does that mean next time I've got the ball, if

> I

> > jump in the air they can't tackle me?

>

> He had to jump to take the pass as it was head

> height - if he is then tackled low whilst still in

> the air he's potentially going to topple over head

> first.

>

> As the referee explained, that's why it was only a

> penalty, no card.

>

> I thought it was the right decision. Intentionally

> jumping before being tackled is another matter -

> although you do see it sometimes under high kicks

> where it looked like to catcher jumped just to

> take advantage of the rules. I don't think that

> was the case with Sinckler.


No I don't think he did it deliberately (though as you say, it was head height, he could have caught it without jumping), and the interpretation of the rules is correct, just think they need to tweaking to say if the player is so close to the ground that tackling them there isn't dangerous it's not a penalty, maybe reduce to to a scrum at best.

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not much to change really (if he's going to stick

> with the Sexton/Farrell combination, which I still

> don't find convincing - the SBW red possibly saved

> them from too much exposure) - McGrath in for

> Vunipola and Lawes for Wyn Jones, perhaps?


Agreed on the exposure of Sexton Farrell - but I'd possibly limit that to Farrell, its Farrell who is the only out of position player. And he seemed weak in the tackle a couple of times on Saturday. His kicking and interaction with Sexton is worth having, and his fast pass, but it's a bit of a gamble.


Wyn Jones will start I imagine.


The referee will be key. The Dublin game which AM referred to above was thuggish for the first 20mins as ABs laid down a marker after losing in Chicago - the referee allowed it all, high tackles + forearms everywhere. Whether they play within the law on Saturday will depend upon the referee's early calls.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rendelharris Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Not much to change really (if he's going to

> stick

> > with the Sexton/Farrell combination, which I

> still

> > don't find convincing - the SBW red possibly

> saved

> > them from too much exposure) - McGrath in for

> > Vunipola and Lawes for Wyn Jones, perhaps?

>

> Agreed on the exposure of Sexton Farrell - but I'd

> possibly limit that to Farrell, its Farrell who is

> the only out of position player. And he seemed

> weak in the tackle a couple of times on Saturday.

> His kicking and interaction with Sexton is worth

> having, and his fast pass, but it's a bit of a

> gamble.

>

> Wyn Jones will start I imagine.

>

> The referee will be key. The Dublin game which AM

> referred to above was thuggish for the first

> 20mins as ABs laid down a marker after losing in

> Chicago - the referee allowed it all, high tackles

> + forearms everywhere. Whether they play within

> the law on Saturday will depend upon the referee's

> early calls.



AWJ will only play 55 minutes then Lawes - AWJ can be really niggly and frustrate the opposition at his best.


It's Romain Poite as Ref


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11885575

Apparently he is, after some googling:

good at referring the scrum and then supports the dominant srummaging team through the game, so the early scrums are key,

and he tends to favour the defending team at the breakdown, so I'd say there may then be fewer kickable penalties.

I noticed in the commentary on Saturday (it wasn't obvious to me on the screen) that Sean O'Brien was posted out in the backs to help take care of Sonny Bill while he was there. This was presumably because Farrell wouldn't be able to. I still like both he and Sexton playing. There have been quite a few exciting moves in the backs.


I wouldn't call Farrell out of position Mick. He plays there for England.


As for Saturday, I'd expect casualties........

I agree they make for an exciting combination, but given that the ABs are doubtless going to come out all guns blazing (and possibly fists flying) I'd like to see some more beef in the centres - Joseph, probably, with one of the two at 10 - Farrell edging it for superior tackling and goal-kicking ability.

Goal kicking defo - but tackling has been weak so far this tour I thought. I know he has a reputation as a decent tackler, but I'm seeing him being brushed off / dumped on his ass, in Saturdays game


I think the combination is the right thing to do - its inventive and attacking. who dares wins. and as AM says SOB will likely be there extra cover.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Goal kicking defo - but tackling has been weak so

> far this tour I thought. I know he has a

> reputation as a decent tackler, but I'm seeing him

> being brushed off / dumped on his ass, in

> Saturdays game


Shane Williams used to describe himself as a speed bump

- slowing the opposition down before someone else could

pile in.


He needs someone else quite close though.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Goal kicking defo - but tackling has been weak so

> far this tour I thought. I know he has a

> reputation as a decent tackler, but I'm seeing him

> being brushed off / dumped on his ass, in

> Saturdays game


That's the problem I think, he's a good tackling 10 but not necessarily up to a centre's job in the modern game - he was giving away two stone and three inches to SBW, for example - and so gets targeted as the weak spot in the line, which makes him look worse than he is maybe.


It's all a bit academic anyway as I'm sure Gatland will stick with the plan - after all they did win!

Here's the ABs:


Starting XI: J Barrett, I Dagg, A Lienert-Brown, J Laumape, J Savea, B Barrett, A Smith; J Moody, C Taylor, O Franks, B Retallick, S Whitelock, J Kaino, S Cane, K Read (capt).


Replacements: N Harris, W Crockett, C Faumuina, S Barrett, A Savea, TJ Peranara, A Cruden, M Fekitoa.


No surprises. Laumape looks like an awesome force, only 5'9" but sixteen stone plus of muscle, defensive positioning needs work but like a lot of former league players his bulldozing qualities are frightening. Be interesting to see his impact with fifteen men on the field instead of fourteen.

No change for the Lions. Fair enough, though I really feel sorry for Joseph, I think he deserved at least a place on the bench. Guess there'll always be someone who loses out. Roll on Saturday, could be a cracker though I fear the ABs will come out fired up and swinging, and if they play at their best there isn't a team on earth can live with them. Twenty margin, I'd guess, hope I'm wrong. Will be watching with Kiwis so someone'll be happy...

Gatters was a hooker after all :)


Given how much you have talked about discipline this week, did Mako Vunipola?s four penalties and yellow card make you think about a change in that position?


A: No. I didn?t think there was anything wrong with the first one where he has gone to charge down a kick and he has followed through. Codie Taylor does exactly the same thing in exactly the same time frame and it?s not a penalty.


If you put the two of them side by side, they are exactly the same, so Mako was a bit unlucky. The one where the referee has penalised him for going on his knee is absolutely marginal where he is competed on the ball.


He hasn?t collected Barrett?s head (with the clear out yellow card) and then there?s a scrum penalty.



http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/warren-gatland-lions-qa-game-13289208

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • why do we think we have the right for the elected local council to be transparent?
    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...