TrentVilla Posted February 24, 2013 Moderator Share Posted February 24, 2013 I don't think so, I mean it is possible but I don't think that is the issue. For a start it isn't in large enough numbers and hasn't been happening for long enough to have the same sort of impact that we see in our football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 24, 2013 Moderator Share Posted February 24, 2013 Insult a referee and you're banned for the rest of the tournament. Deliberately try to snap another players ankle and you sit two games out. I'm not sure that's quie right. Both are 2 match bans In Rugby the ref keeping discipline is vital, so anything aimed at him has to be clamped down on for the safety of all players 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted February 24, 2013 Moderator Share Posted February 24, 2013 Insult a referee and you're banned for the rest of the tournament. Deliberately try to snap another players ankle and you sit two games out. I'm not sure that's quie right. Both are 2 match bans In Rugby the ref keeping discipline is vital, so anything aimed at him has to be clamped down on for the safety of all players Spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 France have plenty of good players, but their coach is a bit clueless. I mean, Parra was undoubtedly the best player for France (Fofana's try was wonderful, though) and they took him off when they needed his leadership most. This is a guy who was instrumental to getting France within a few points of winning the World Cup, and he's only 24, he didn't need to be subbed and shouldn't have been subbed. The pre-planned substitutions thing rarely works and it is a habit the game needs to get rid of. Less said about Michalak the better. Anyway, Ireland are going through a bit of a transition, so I won't get too pissed off as patience is needed, but the right man needs to be in place to get them playing running rugby and stop relying on O'Gara to get them out of trouble. He's past it, and Madigan from Leinster would've been a better option off the bench but he is not conservative enough for Kidney. England v Wales should be a good one. I think England will still win the tournament if they lose. A shock could be on the cards as Wales are a good team when the have some confidence. They just need to replace Phillips at scrum-half so they can get quick ball. But England are grinding out results well enough, and are very good at punishing mistakes like a good team should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted February 24, 2013 Moderator Share Posted February 24, 2013 The removal of Parra was a mistake, I thought so at the time but I can kind of see his thinking as they were getting good positions and not taking them and I guess he thought Michalak was more likely to take them. Only problem is that the removal of Parra disrupted their game and so the the chances stopped coming. I think it was more than just the substitution of Parra tough, we had more depth on the bench we introduced better players than they could and we were fitter than them and those things combined to change the game. Add to that the removal of Parra and they were out the game but even had he stayed on I think France would still have been over run in that last 20 minutes. As for Ireland I'm not sure I'd call it transition, more decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 The France team could be very talented if coached and utilised correctly.. Pikamol (not spelt right, but said that way sorry), parra, fofana are all potential world class players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Ireland are similar to the English football team. Win 1 game and the media builds them up as world beaters and then they believe the hype they sink into a series of turgid boring displays that frustrate fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 As for Ireland I'm not sure I'd call it transition, more decline.Agree with this. As England rugby fans we know the passing of a golden generation requires a rebuilding project that takes a long time, and it takes a coach with guts to drop the big names and bring in youth - especially knowing that they'll get smacked everywhere for the first few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Insult a referee and you're banned for the rest of the tournament. Deliberately try to snap another players ankle and you sit two games out. I'm not sure that's quie right. Both are 2 match bans In Rugby the ref keeping discipline is vital, so anything aimed at him has to be clamped down on for the safety of all players Parisse missed the match on Saturday and will likely miss the final game which makes that a 3 match ban. I know the key to Rugby is respecting the referee (though Alain Rolland doesn't deserve any!) but my arguement is more that Healey's ban should be longer than a ban for insulting a referee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted February 25, 2013 Moderator Share Posted February 25, 2013 Yes but don't forget the bans weren't imposed by the same people so while there may seem to be or perhaps even be a disparity in the two punishments there isn't a lack of consistency or a contradiction because they aren't imposed by the same people plus the reality of the punishments is very different to the headlines. Parisse was banned by the French rugby officials following a red card playing for his club, international Rugby Board rules state clearly that abusing refs carries the sanction of anything between a 6 to 52 week ban. Parisse got 40 days, 10 days suspended. On the other hand Healy was cited for an offence which wasn't punished by the match referee but was later punished by the citing panel and got a three week ban. So in actual fact Parisse got a longer ban than Healy which is justified given the nature of the two offences. However the superficial headlines talk about one player having a 2 match ban and the other having a 3 match ban. The reality is neither got that punishment that is just how their bans relate to the remaining 6 nations fixtures due to the start dates of their two punishments. I blame some of the shite tabloid reporting and the use of football terminology in a far more intelligent sport for peoples misunderstanding.* * That and people not checking the facts 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Yes but don't forget the bans weren't imposed by the same people so while there may seem to be or perhaps even be a disparity in the two punishments there isn't a lack of consistency or a contradiction because they aren't imposed by the same people plus the reality of the punishments is very different to the headlines. Parisse was banned by the French rugby officials following a red card playing for his club, international Rugby Board rules state clearly that abusing refs carries the sanction of anything between a 6 to 52 week ban. Parisse got 40 days, 10 days suspended. On the other hand Healy was cited for an offence which wasn't punished by the match referee but was later punished by the citing panel and got a three week ban. So in actual fact Parisse got a longer ban than Healy which is justified given the nature of the two offences. However the superficial headlines talk about one player having a 2 match ban and the other having a 3 match ban. The reality is neither got that punishment that is just how their bans relate to the remaining 6 nations fixtures due to the start dates of their two punishments. I blame some of the shite tabloid reporting and the use of football terminology in a far more intelligent sport for peoples misunderstanding.* * That and people not checking the facts But how many games do the players miss in this torunament? Smart bottom. Healey has just has his ban reduced so he is able to play in the last two games (utter joke) while Parisse misses them, that is my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 You've done a grand job of explaining the laws of the game there Trent but you've also highlighted the inadequacies of those very laws if you ask me. In essence the retrospective ban for Healy simply wasn't enough, regardless of Parisse's ban. The fact that you say both ban's are justified given the relative offences is where your argument loses weight. Anyway, Grand Slam on it's way home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted February 27, 2013 Moderator Share Posted February 27, 2013 Yes but don't forget the bans weren't imposed by the same people so while there may seem to be or perhaps even be a disparity in the two punishments there isn't a lack of consistency or a contradiction because they aren't imposed by the same people plus the reality of the punishments is very different to the headlines. Parisse was banned by the French rugby officials following a red card playing for his club, international Rugby Board rules state clearly that abusing refs carries the sanction of anything between a 6 to 52 week ban. Parisse got 40 days, 10 days suspended. On the other hand Healy was cited for an offence which wasn't punished by the match referee but was later punished by the citing panel and got a three week ban. So in actual fact Parisse got a longer ban than Healy which is justified given the nature of the two offences. However the superficial headlines talk about one player having a 2 match ban and the other having a 3 match ban. The reality is neither got that punishment that is just how their bans relate to the remaining 6 nations fixtures due to the start dates of their two punishments. I blame some of the shite tabloid reporting and the use of football terminology in a far more intelligent sport for peoples misunderstanding.* * That and people not checking the facts But how many games do the players miss in this torunament? Smart bottom. Healey has just has his ban reduced so he is able to play in the last two games (utter joke) while Parisse misses them, that is my point. Er I already answered that In terms of Healy I personally think the ban was too short and think it a disgrace that it has been reduced however I think there was a popular misconception that the punishments were handed out by the same body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Aye, Healy went too far. I'd have been fine with him punching the bloke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) Scrums are a huge problem. I watched Saracen's last game at their new stadium with an artificial pitch and the scrum was less of a problem, albeit the officiating remains a nonsense and doesn't help anyone. More guesswork than anything. I wouldn't mind if the future of the game was on those pitches, though, if scrums are to remain as they currently are. They certainly allow for more running rugby. Anyway, the weather has been dire for this tournament and it's been a gruelling watch at times. Definitely a tournament defined by defence. Ireland were shattered after the first half. Played well, then inexplicably took off Murray when he was having a great game. Final twenty minutes resembled a battlefield, with players in heaps across the pitch and coming off. Moment of the game was O'Driscoll coming back on despite being completely banjaxed when the replacement's replacement got injured. Measure of the man. What a legend. A period of tough calls and frustration now for Ireland as the team gets rebuilt. Hopefully with a new manager. Wales have certainly got their act together and next week should be a colossal battle. Wales may just edge it thanks to their frightening back row, especially if both Warburton and Tuperic start. England are very clinical though. If Wales give away as many penalties as they did yesterday it will be a relatively easy win for Engerland who make sod all mistakes. Edited March 10, 2013 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Silly game, kick and clap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted March 10, 2013 Moderator Share Posted March 10, 2013 Next to no chance of an upset here, England average something like 58 points at home to Italy and I can't see today being anything other than a step towards a possible slam decider in Cardiff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted March 10, 2013 Moderator Share Posted March 10, 2013 Silly game, kick and clap. A view commonly held by those who don't understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted March 10, 2013 Moderator Share Posted March 10, 2013 I see Parisse has had his ban for abusing a ref rescinded on the condition that he undertakes a referring course. I love that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Very very poonperformance poor performance today by England.. And the bbc commentary and pundits were appalling.. Saying at half time that the game was won Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts