From harpinonrugby
Before you start, this isn't another article about the blame game that is ongoing in European rugby circles. There will be no mention of splits in revenues, qualifying by merits, governance or power grabbing.
When the competition gets going, in it's current format it's close to perfect. Close to, because really with all the outside fuss about it, it can't really be called perfect can it? I believe that reducing the number of teams from 24 to 20 will compromise the excitement of the pool stages.
What other sporting competition creates the excitement that the Heineken Cup raises with each gameday? What other sporting competition in the world keeps every fan of every team on the lookout for every result, while attempting to calculate every permutation?
Two things give the Heineken Cup as it is this selling point. Firstly, the fact that not every 2nd place team qualifies for the quarter finals. This gives every team the emphasis to keep pushing and ensure they secure first place in their pool, while at the same time giving second place teams the incentive to try and get as many points as possible to be one of the lucky two. In no other competition are bonus points as treasured as in the Heineken Cup, and it really works.
Even for first placed teams, the quarter final draws gives further incentives to collect as many points as possible to ensure a home draw, and an "easy" as possible draw. I say "easy" because with all 6 countries participating, there are no "easy" games in Europe anymore.
There is no resting of players like in soccer's equivalent the Champions League once you are qualified after Round 4. Every fan looks at every game, in every round, and every bonus point.
Already in round 4, I'm mentally ruing bonus points that got away, or delighted that bonus points for other teams never arrived. I know that this mental calculations will be ongoing until the final whistle of the last game in Round 6. It's only then that everything is known.
Why lose this excitement?
Tuesday, 17 December 2013
Saturday, 14 December 2013
Two birds, One Stone
Published for wordinsport
Two seemingly unconnected stories passed by the rugby world this week.
The first was Munster's capture of Robin Copeland. Wexford born Copeland has been outstanding for Cardiff this season, winning 2 Man of the Match awards in 4 Heineken Cup games, as well as several in the Pro 12. At times, he's been the shining light in some rudderless displays from the Blues. There have been calls for Copeland to be called into the Irish set up, and the general consensus is that Munster have signed a very good Irish player.
But his capture has sparked a small bit of unrest. Munster weren't exactly in need of another backrow player, specifically one that plays either blindside or No.8. A combination of Peter O'Mahony and James Coughlan is keeping the wonderful CJ Stander out of the side, with the young, but bright talent of Paddy Butler also pushing hard for selection when he's not injured. Add in Copeland, and it's a case of 5 into 2 doesn't go.
Most of this frustration was because there are places where Munster could do with strengthening. An extra body covering Conor Murray and Cathal Sheridan would be useful, or even backing up Ian Keatley and JJ Hanrahan. As seen with Murray's lay off, one injury here stretches Munster's resources a bit too much. The same can be said in the centres, where behind Downey and Laulala, there isn't a whole lot of cover. Ivan Dineen is making the step up, and both Hanrahan and Earls can cover, but are needed elsewhere. Both Downey and Laulala are out of contract at the end of the season, which makes the need for a centre all the more pressing.
The second news story was that of Richie Vernon. For those who haven't seen it, Richie Vernon, the 20 time capped Scottish backrower is moving to outside centre for what appears to be the rest of his career. He's been unable to regain his place in the Glasgow team in the back row, and with his pace and power, Gregor Townsend has seen his potential in the centres to revitalise his career.
Why could these stories be connected? Simple; CJ Stander is the answer to Munster's centre needs. This would help ease the selection dilemmas in Munster's back row, and could finally get Stander onto the Munster first XV. There's no doubting the pace and power that Stander possesses, and he certainly doesn't have a passing game that is worse than James Downey's. It would be the only area of his game that would need work, but it's not a huge improvement needed.
It seems a crazy idea, but Vernon's isn't the first case of this, with Leinster's Jordan Coughlan another promising backrower that was moved to 12 a year ago. Joe Schmidt foresaw the overload of backrow talent coming through at Leinster with Ruddock, Ryan, Jordi Murphy, Dan Leavy and Jack Conan, and decided that Coughlan had the skills to move to 12 and provide some needed cover.
Rob Penney, you can take this idea. You're welcome.
Two seemingly unconnected stories passed by the rugby world this week.
The first was Munster's capture of Robin Copeland. Wexford born Copeland has been outstanding for Cardiff this season, winning 2 Man of the Match awards in 4 Heineken Cup games, as well as several in the Pro 12. At times, he's been the shining light in some rudderless displays from the Blues. There have been calls for Copeland to be called into the Irish set up, and the general consensus is that Munster have signed a very good Irish player.
But his capture has sparked a small bit of unrest. Munster weren't exactly in need of another backrow player, specifically one that plays either blindside or No.8. A combination of Peter O'Mahony and James Coughlan is keeping the wonderful CJ Stander out of the side, with the young, but bright talent of Paddy Butler also pushing hard for selection when he's not injured. Add in Copeland, and it's a case of 5 into 2 doesn't go.
Most of this frustration was because there are places where Munster could do with strengthening. An extra body covering Conor Murray and Cathal Sheridan would be useful, or even backing up Ian Keatley and JJ Hanrahan. As seen with Murray's lay off, one injury here stretches Munster's resources a bit too much. The same can be said in the centres, where behind Downey and Laulala, there isn't a whole lot of cover. Ivan Dineen is making the step up, and both Hanrahan and Earls can cover, but are needed elsewhere. Both Downey and Laulala are out of contract at the end of the season, which makes the need for a centre all the more pressing.
The second news story was that of Richie Vernon. For those who haven't seen it, Richie Vernon, the 20 time capped Scottish backrower is moving to outside centre for what appears to be the rest of his career. He's been unable to regain his place in the Glasgow team in the back row, and with his pace and power, Gregor Townsend has seen his potential in the centres to revitalise his career.
Why could these stories be connected? Simple; CJ Stander is the answer to Munster's centre needs. This would help ease the selection dilemmas in Munster's back row, and could finally get Stander onto the Munster first XV. There's no doubting the pace and power that Stander possesses, and he certainly doesn't have a passing game that is worse than James Downey's. It would be the only area of his game that would need work, but it's not a huge improvement needed.
Rob Penney, you can take this idea. You're welcome.
Saturday, 7 December 2013
Educational win for Connacht Eagles
Connacht Eagles 17- 8 Bedford Blues.
Rugby fans have been treated to some fantastic spectacles in the last few weeks, with South Africa - New Zealand, Wales - Australia and even Cardiff - Glasgow thoroughly entertaining those that watched. Unfortunately the action at the Sportsground was not to join those in the pantheon of great games to watch. The weather had a part to play, but overall the Eagles will be satisfied with the scrappy win that flattered them on the scoreboard.
A better team than Bedford would have been out of sight given all the linebreaks they had, but Connacht's defense held firm all but once, to ensure critical penalties were won in the dangerzone.
Connacht's forwards shone throughout, and gave them a platform from the off with some strong scrummaging from Finlay Belham especially. The back row of Masterson, Browne and O'Brien in particular were everywhere, getting through mountains of work, joining the second rows in the engine room. Despite this, Bedford had the best of the first half playing into the wind, eventually their best player on the day, Brendan Burke went over after a break from the hooker, Charlie Clare. Mike Le Bourgois was unable to add the extras.
Carty, who managed the game nicely, especially in the second half, got Connacht onto the scoreboard just before halftime, with Sean O'Brien's sinbinning the only other point of note in the first 40. Indeed, Connacht's discipline was poor, and this young side need to learn to adapt to the referee's interpretation much faster after they were penalised time and again.
The second half started just as the first left off, and Bedford were able to add to their lead with a penalty after Eoin Masterson was sinbinned for another penalty at the breakdown. This seemed to spark Connacht into life, and they will be enthused with their reaction. A good break from Carty led to a period of pressure on the Bedford line, with substitute hooker Dave Heffernan going over. Carty added the extras as Connacht took the lead for the first time.
Connacht grew into the game from here, with Sean O'Brien to the fore. He was a physical beast, and as he gains experience, he will be able to effect the game more. If he was able to add some handling or offloading skills to his impressive arsenal, O'Brien would be one of the leaders of the Connacht first team.
A long period of pressure on the Bedford line brought another try, this time for Andrew Browne, which put a bit of gloss on the scoreline that perhaps flattered Connacht. They should learn a lot from this, as there were a few times when the wrong decisions were made, but they were able to win a game that it looked like they were going to lose for a very long time. Not a bad habit to get into.
Young players like Conor Finn, Shane Layden, Finlay Bealham and O'Brien had strong games, but my man of the match was Jack Carty.
Connacht Eagles: 15 Shane Layden, 14 David Panter, 13 Conor Finn, 12 Brian Murphy, 11 Steve Macauley, 10 Jack Carty (captain), 9 Paul O’Donohoe; 1 Finlay Bealham, 2 James Rael, 3 JP Cooney, 4 Dave Nolan, 5 Danny Qualter, 6 Andrew Browne, 7 Eoghan Masterson, 8 Sean O’Brien
Replacements: 16 Dave Heffernan, 17 Peter Reilly, 18 Ultane Dillane, 19 Conor Kindregan, 20 Caolin Blade, 21 Tadhg Leader, 22 Marcus Walsh
 |
| Paul O'Donohue clears from the base of a ruck. |
A better team than Bedford would have been out of sight given all the linebreaks they had, but Connacht's defense held firm all but once, to ensure critical penalties were won in the dangerzone.
Connacht's forwards shone throughout, and gave them a platform from the off with some strong scrummaging from Finlay Belham especially. The back row of Masterson, Browne and O'Brien in particular were everywhere, getting through mountains of work, joining the second rows in the engine room. Despite this, Bedford had the best of the first half playing into the wind, eventually their best player on the day, Brendan Burke went over after a break from the hooker, Charlie Clare. Mike Le Bourgois was unable to add the extras.
Carty, who managed the game nicely, especially in the second half, got Connacht onto the scoreboard just before halftime, with Sean O'Brien's sinbinning the only other point of note in the first 40. Indeed, Connacht's discipline was poor, and this young side need to learn to adapt to the referee's interpretation much faster after they were penalised time and again.
The second half started just as the first left off, and Bedford were able to add to their lead with a penalty after Eoin Masterson was sinbinned for another penalty at the breakdown. This seemed to spark Connacht into life, and they will be enthused with their reaction. A good break from Carty led to a period of pressure on the Bedford line, with substitute hooker Dave Heffernan going over. Carty added the extras as Connacht took the lead for the first time.
Connacht grew into the game from here, with Sean O'Brien to the fore. He was a physical beast, and as he gains experience, he will be able to effect the game more. If he was able to add some handling or offloading skills to his impressive arsenal, O'Brien would be one of the leaders of the Connacht first team.
A long period of pressure on the Bedford line brought another try, this time for Andrew Browne, which put a bit of gloss on the scoreline that perhaps flattered Connacht. They should learn a lot from this, as there were a few times when the wrong decisions were made, but they were able to win a game that it looked like they were going to lose for a very long time. Not a bad habit to get into.
Young players like Conor Finn, Shane Layden, Finlay Bealham and O'Brien had strong games, but my man of the match was Jack Carty.
Connacht Eagles: 15 Shane Layden, 14 David Panter, 13 Conor Finn, 12 Brian Murphy, 11 Steve Macauley, 10 Jack Carty (captain), 9 Paul O’Donohoe; 1 Finlay Bealham, 2 James Rael, 3 JP Cooney, 4 Dave Nolan, 5 Danny Qualter, 6 Andrew Browne, 7 Eoghan Masterson, 8 Sean O’Brien
Bedford Blues: 15. Mike Le Bourgeois, 14. Patrick Tapley, 13. Brendan Burke, 12. Ollie Dodge, 11. James Short ,10. Mark Atkinson, 9. Darryl Veenendaal; 1. Darren Fearn, 2. Charlie Clare, 3. Phil Boulton, 4. Mike Howard, 5. Paul Tupai (c), 6. Tom Jubb, 7. Matt Hankin, 8. Nick Fenton-Wells
Replacements: 16. TJ Harris, 17. Nico Steenkamp, 18. Tomas Gilardon Paz, 19. Ben Gulliver, 20. Tom Armes, 21. Ben Calder, 22. Jake Sharp
Replacements: 16. TJ Harris, 17. Nico Steenkamp, 18. Tomas Gilardon Paz, 19. Ben Gulliver, 20. Tom Armes, 21. Ben Calder, 22. Jake Sharp
Thursday, 5 December 2013
Irish rugby is in a precarious position
Understatement of the Year: The situation in Europe is worrying. Extremely worrying if you are an Irish rugby supporter. The uncertainty over the Heineken Cup and what that might entail is not ideal for the teams in the Pro 12.
In a particular bad day, the continuation of the Welsh exodus has led Rhys Priestland and Richard Hibbard to Wasps and Gloucester respectively, while the PRL have decided to reject the terms they demanded at the start of these shenanigans.
This is only bad news for Ireland. Now the English are looking for an alternate competition, and the Welsh are seeking an end to their financial difficulties whilst trying to make playing for the regions a more attractive proposition. A very sensible and realistic solution for both of them is for an expanded Premiership/Championship with the four Welsh regions.
This would be a death knell for the Pro 12. It is nearly impossible for the competition to continue with just the Irish provinces, and the Italian and Scottish teams. The English may ridicule the standard of the Pro 12 now, but the potential "Pro 8" would be a terrible competition. The standard and marketability would be reduced drastically.
Irish players could do what the Welsh are doing now. To get the most out of their careers, they want to be playing in leagues of a high standard. Much like the soccer landscape, the best Irish players would move to English teams, and the quality of Irish rugby would be neglected.
What can Ireland do to stop this and try and keep their top players in Ireland?
There isn't much that can be done, but here are two outlandish possibilities;
1. A New Irish team. With an added team in Ireland, the talent could be spread out better, so that more players are getting game time, and are up against the other quality Irish players week in week out. Players like Rhys Ruddock, Paul Marshall and even CJ Stander could finally get the starts they deserve.
2. If you can't beat them, join them. Which would be more profitable for the English Premiership, a league with the regions, or with the provinces? Although at the same time, I wish I was joking.
In a particular bad day, the continuation of the Welsh exodus has led Rhys Priestland and Richard Hibbard to Wasps and Gloucester respectively, while the PRL have decided to reject the terms they demanded at the start of these shenanigans.
This is only bad news for Ireland. Now the English are looking for an alternate competition, and the Welsh are seeking an end to their financial difficulties whilst trying to make playing for the regions a more attractive proposition. A very sensible and realistic solution for both of them is for an expanded Premiership/Championship with the four Welsh regions.
This would be a death knell for the Pro 12. It is nearly impossible for the competition to continue with just the Irish provinces, and the Italian and Scottish teams. The English may ridicule the standard of the Pro 12 now, but the potential "Pro 8" would be a terrible competition. The standard and marketability would be reduced drastically.
Irish players could do what the Welsh are doing now. To get the most out of their careers, they want to be playing in leagues of a high standard. Much like the soccer landscape, the best Irish players would move to English teams, and the quality of Irish rugby would be neglected.
What can Ireland do to stop this and try and keep their top players in Ireland?
There isn't much that can be done, but here are two outlandish possibilities;
1. A New Irish team. With an added team in Ireland, the talent could be spread out better, so that more players are getting game time, and are up against the other quality Irish players week in week out. Players like Rhys Ruddock, Paul Marshall and even CJ Stander could finally get the starts they deserve.
2. If you can't beat them, join them. Which would be more profitable for the English Premiership, a league with the regions, or with the provinces? Although at the same time, I wish I was joking.
Wednesday, 27 November 2013
What a Global Rugby Season could mean for Ireland
The news today that the IRB is seeking to introduce a global rugby season is a positive one, and one that the IRFU and Ireland should get behind, and push for further syncing of the calendars.
There have been a number of calls for this over the past few months from both northern and southern hemisphere players. While there are a lot of obstacles in the way, specifically the inability to play in the southern hemisphere during their summer, I believe that a resolution, or at the very least, a comprise can be reached.
Their solution consists of moving the summer test window to July, allowing Super Rugby to play through, and for European rugby finals to finish with time to spare for these tests.
One key advantage of the mooted change is that their would be less club v country rows, with the recent example including Northampton's fine by the PRL for allowing George North to play for Wales outside the international window, the lack of the Argentinian players who play for Premiership clubs against Italy INSIDE the window, and the fact that some of the England side will be playing in the final of the Premiership instead of the first test with New Zealand next summer.
I don't think this is enough.
One way to completely synchronise the calendars, and to eradicate any club v country rows is to completely separate the club and country playing times. Each international window would be back to back in each hemisphere, and would overlap. Then each hemisphere is free to do what they want in regards to the club season.
One reason for the Northern Hemisphere teams to do this is to allow their players come together for extended periods of time, similar to what the Southern Hemisphere teams experience now, save for a few weeks back for Super Rugby playoffs after the June internationals. This means that the standard of international rugby should increase, given that teams will be able to spend more time together.
Assuming that no competition wants to be scraped, and none want to shorten or reduce the number of teams it involves (even though this would make things so much easier), the current set up is:
Northern Hemisphere:
Pro 12 and Premiership need 25 weeks to complete, plus another 2 for breaks in between the playoffs.
Top 14 needs 29 weeks.
6 Nations needs 7 weeks including the breaks in between,
Heineken Cup needs 9 weeks.
Add in the summer and winter test windows and that's a total of 49 weeks in a 52 week year. In years with a World Cup, which takes 7 weeks, one of the international windows is closed, which means that rugby takes up 53 weeks in a 52 week year. Clearly a problem here. This is why some of the domestic competitions play during the 6 Nations and Winter internationals.
The main obstacle for an integrated calendar is that by separating internationals with club fixtures, you'd need a lot more weeks in a season. (Hence saying that it would be easier for some competitions to shorten.)
Southern Hemisphere:
Super Rugby 21 weeks as it currently stands
The Rugby Championship 8 weeks
Grand total of 30 weeks, with summer and winter tests gives 36 weeks.
My solution is this:
The international windows would be from March to June. This would include having the northern tours in March, the 6 Nations and Rugby Championship in April and May, while the European teams travel south in June.
The Northern season would end here and start again in late July, while Super Rugby would be moved so that it starts in mid July until late November. Their season would start up again in February with the ITM Cup and Currie Cup a few weeks before the internationals. The difference in the Northern hemisphere season would be that instead of stopping in November and February/March for internationals, they would continue and the finals would be held in February.
So how would this benefit Ireland? You may have noticed in the Southern Hemisphere that I've left out the ITM and Currie Cups in the list of weeks. This is because those competitions are played during the international windows. This means that all of the Super Rugby players are involved, except for a few who play for their international teams. This both strengthens these competitions by still having quality players playing alongside exciting youngsters, but also allows fringe international players stay match fit should the need for them to be called up arises.
Why would that benefit Ireland? Simple, I propose that the UBL is played over the periods when Ireland are on international duty. This both strengthens the club game in Ireland, gives the club players and young academy players vital exposure to those on the fringes of the national side, who are also kept match fit in case of any injuries.
The Junior competitions would be moved to try and maximise their playing potential for senior teams, which means they are kept away from the ITM Cup and UBL, and from the start of the domestic seasons when the international players will still be on holiday / pre-season like they currently do.
In World Cup years, the international tours could be scraped and the international window would be reorganised, minimising disruption elsewhere.
There have been a number of calls for this over the past few months from both northern and southern hemisphere players. While there are a lot of obstacles in the way, specifically the inability to play in the southern hemisphere during their summer, I believe that a resolution, or at the very least, a comprise can be reached.
Their solution consists of moving the summer test window to July, allowing Super Rugby to play through, and for European rugby finals to finish with time to spare for these tests.
One key advantage of the mooted change is that their would be less club v country rows, with the recent example including Northampton's fine by the PRL for allowing George North to play for Wales outside the international window, the lack of the Argentinian players who play for Premiership clubs against Italy INSIDE the window, and the fact that some of the England side will be playing in the final of the Premiership instead of the first test with New Zealand next summer.
I don't think this is enough.
One way to completely synchronise the calendars, and to eradicate any club v country rows is to completely separate the club and country playing times. Each international window would be back to back in each hemisphere, and would overlap. Then each hemisphere is free to do what they want in regards to the club season.
One reason for the Northern Hemisphere teams to do this is to allow their players come together for extended periods of time, similar to what the Southern Hemisphere teams experience now, save for a few weeks back for Super Rugby playoffs after the June internationals. This means that the standard of international rugby should increase, given that teams will be able to spend more time together.
Assuming that no competition wants to be scraped, and none want to shorten or reduce the number of teams it involves (even though this would make things so much easier), the current set up is:
Northern Hemisphere:
Pro 12 and Premiership need 25 weeks to complete, plus another 2 for breaks in between the playoffs.
Top 14 needs 29 weeks.
6 Nations needs 7 weeks including the breaks in between,
Heineken Cup needs 9 weeks.
Add in the summer and winter test windows and that's a total of 49 weeks in a 52 week year. In years with a World Cup, which takes 7 weeks, one of the international windows is closed, which means that rugby takes up 53 weeks in a 52 week year. Clearly a problem here. This is why some of the domestic competitions play during the 6 Nations and Winter internationals.
The main obstacle for an integrated calendar is that by separating internationals with club fixtures, you'd need a lot more weeks in a season. (Hence saying that it would be easier for some competitions to shorten.)
Southern Hemisphere:
Super Rugby 21 weeks as it currently stands
The Rugby Championship 8 weeks
Grand total of 30 weeks, with summer and winter tests gives 36 weeks.
My solution is this:
 |
| For bigger image, click here |
The Northern season would end here and start again in late July, while Super Rugby would be moved so that it starts in mid July until late November. Their season would start up again in February with the ITM Cup and Currie Cup a few weeks before the internationals. The difference in the Northern hemisphere season would be that instead of stopping in November and February/March for internationals, they would continue and the finals would be held in February.
So how would this benefit Ireland? You may have noticed in the Southern Hemisphere that I've left out the ITM and Currie Cups in the list of weeks. This is because those competitions are played during the international windows. This means that all of the Super Rugby players are involved, except for a few who play for their international teams. This both strengthens these competitions by still having quality players playing alongside exciting youngsters, but also allows fringe international players stay match fit should the need for them to be called up arises.
Why would that benefit Ireland? Simple, I propose that the UBL is played over the periods when Ireland are on international duty. This both strengthens the club game in Ireland, gives the club players and young academy players vital exposure to those on the fringes of the national side, who are also kept match fit in case of any injuries.
The Junior competitions would be moved to try and maximise their playing potential for senior teams, which means they are kept away from the ITM Cup and UBL, and from the start of the domestic seasons when the international players will still be on holiday / pre-season like they currently do.
In World Cup years, the international tours could be scraped and the international window would be reorganised, minimising disruption elsewhere.
Tuesday, 26 November 2013
Intensity wins Rugby matches
 |
| Peter O'Mahony displays his passion on his face, while Jamie Heaslip has that "game-face" stare |
Fast forward over two years. Sunday November 24th 2013; Ireland off the back off a humiliating loss to Australia are staring down the barrel of a potential hammering against the world's number 1 team. Instead, Sean O'Brien pushes Aaron Smith for holding onto the ball too long surrounded by Irish players. The message is clear. Ireland are here to compete and scrap for every inch. Minutes later, Conor Murray scores a try that sets the tone for the emotional roller-coaster that is to follow.
It's no coincidence that these incidents started two huge performances against much fancied opposition. The intensity that Ireland showed in both games bridged the gulf in class between the teams. This intensity was visibly lacking two weeks ago when Ireland played Australia. The bookmakers couldn't separate the two sides, and Ireland were legitimately fancied to do well. Instead, they played with no aggression, no urgency in defense, and Australia wanted it far more.
This intensity and shear determination can be the difference between winning and losing, or the difference between a close match and a hammering, which goes both ways - that game last Sunday, or the hammering of England in Croke Park in 2007. It separates champion teams from the pretenders, and the men from the boys. Munster of the naughties found this intensity through so many near misses in the Heineken Cup, and Michael Cheika brought this determination to Leinster as they embarked on their European adventure.
It's nearly impossible to play with the intensity that Ireland played at last Sunday every time they play, but Schmidt needs to create an atmosphere, where Ireland can produce a high level of intensity to start performing at high level more constantly.
Thursday, 21 November 2013
In defense of Alain Rolland
Open response comment to Nick Cain for his article criticising Alain Rolland.
Congratulations, your personal vendetta against Rolland is carefully concealed.
First, very kind of you to remind everyone about a game that Rolland refereed two years ago. Because he's had no other games in the meantime. Also good of you to remind everyone that he made the correct decision in sending Warburton off for a dangerous tackle. The only thing Wales have to blame for their exit is themselves.
You state: "Rolland being unable to detect which props were responsible for the collapsing that blighted the early scrum engagements," I'm going to make an assumption here, but this suggests that you think it was obvious which front rower was at fault?
Let's have a look shall we? At scrum 1, you've mentioned that "Jenkins (was) hinging and then collapsing," Which to me suggests you think Jenkins was at fault for the first scrum (which I think you are wrong, and I'll explain that later). You then fail to look at the rest of the scrums.
Scrum 1. 2 resets before a pen against SA, as you've mentioned. You fail to mention that this was against Tendai Mtwararira on the other side of the scrum, and not Malherbe. There was no TV view of that side of the scrum broadcast, so it's hard to comment.
BUT, I can comment on the Malherbe, Jenkins side, where the problems ended up. You claim that Jenkins was hinging, my viewing is that Malherbe was not driving straight. Imagine, two different interpretations to that same scrum. That must be an anomaly.
Scrum 2. End result: One reset before SA use the ball.
Here, There is no doubt in my mind that a) Jenkins didn't hinge, mostly because the scrums didn't collapse, and b) Malherbe was folding in under pressure when you look at his body position.
Because you haven't gone on with your opnions of the other scrums, but my understanding of what you've said is that you think because Jenkins was "at fault" for the first scrum, you think he must have been at fault for the next scrums? Correct me if I'm wrong. I've had to make assumptions here based on your lack of clarity.
Scrum 3. End result. Pen against Welsh front row for collapsing. i.e. Rolland has agreed with you about Jenkins hinging. I think Malherbe was already on the ground before the scrum collapsed.
How can two different people have two different interpretations of the same scrum when they've had time to review it? And yet, Rolland has had to make a split second decision without the benefit of being able to review it.
Because of half time, and the refusal of the BBC to show replays of scrums, there is only one more scrum that we can see on the Malherbe/ Jenkins side.
Scrum 6. Pen against Malherbe, Hard to tell if it was Malherbe was collapsing or Jenkins was hinging. Even on review.
And yet you find no problem in chastising Rolland for " going for the eeny-meeny-miney-mo option of giving alternate penalties."
Then you further criticise him for showing the willingness to end the collapsing scrums by warning the players, and following through with it.
The play and speed of the game improved no end when the scrums were uncontested.
Your suggestion that Rolland go into the game with pre-conceived research influencing his scrum decisions is ludicrous and against everything that is fair in sport. Not only that, but in this game, the first cap for Frans Malherbe, it was also impossible. How can you research someone who has never played at this level? These are humans, capable of off days, so how can you go into a game with preconceived ideas on who is the dominant scrum? The referee can do nothing else that adjudicate what is in front of him on the day. To suggest anything else is ignorant and stupid.
You then single out Rolland for not calling any crooked feed and early striking? Tell me, has any referee ever called an early strike in the last 10 years?
Your vendetta against Rolland is ridiculous, and your arguments are unfounded.
Congratulations, your personal vendetta against Rolland is carefully concealed.
First, very kind of you to remind everyone about a game that Rolland refereed two years ago. Because he's had no other games in the meantime. Also good of you to remind everyone that he made the correct decision in sending Warburton off for a dangerous tackle. The only thing Wales have to blame for their exit is themselves.
You state: "Rolland being unable to detect which props were responsible for the collapsing that blighted the early scrum engagements," I'm going to make an assumption here, but this suggests that you think it was obvious which front rower was at fault?
Let's have a look shall we? At scrum 1, you've mentioned that "Jenkins (was) hinging and then collapsing," Which to me suggests you think Jenkins was at fault for the first scrum (which I think you are wrong, and I'll explain that later). You then fail to look at the rest of the scrums.
Scrum 1. 2 resets before a pen against SA, as you've mentioned. You fail to mention that this was against Tendai Mtwararira on the other side of the scrum, and not Malherbe. There was no TV view of that side of the scrum broadcast, so it's hard to comment.
BUT, I can comment on the Malherbe, Jenkins side, where the problems ended up. You claim that Jenkins was hinging, my viewing is that Malherbe was not driving straight. Imagine, two different interpretations to that same scrum. That must be an anomaly.
Scrum 2. End result: One reset before SA use the ball.
Here, There is no doubt in my mind that a) Jenkins didn't hinge, mostly because the scrums didn't collapse, and b) Malherbe was folding in under pressure when you look at his body position.
Because you haven't gone on with your opnions of the other scrums, but my understanding of what you've said is that you think because Jenkins was "at fault" for the first scrum, you think he must have been at fault for the next scrums? Correct me if I'm wrong. I've had to make assumptions here based on your lack of clarity.
Scrum 3. End result. Pen against Welsh front row for collapsing. i.e. Rolland has agreed with you about Jenkins hinging. I think Malherbe was already on the ground before the scrum collapsed.
How can two different people have two different interpretations of the same scrum when they've had time to review it? And yet, Rolland has had to make a split second decision without the benefit of being able to review it.
Because of half time, and the refusal of the BBC to show replays of scrums, there is only one more scrum that we can see on the Malherbe/ Jenkins side.
Scrum 6. Pen against Malherbe, Hard to tell if it was Malherbe was collapsing or Jenkins was hinging. Even on review.
And yet you find no problem in chastising Rolland for " going for the eeny-meeny-miney-mo option of giving alternate penalties."
Then you further criticise him for showing the willingness to end the collapsing scrums by warning the players, and following through with it.
The play and speed of the game improved no end when the scrums were uncontested.
Your suggestion that Rolland go into the game with pre-conceived research influencing his scrum decisions is ludicrous and against everything that is fair in sport. Not only that, but in this game, the first cap for Frans Malherbe, it was also impossible. How can you research someone who has never played at this level? These are humans, capable of off days, so how can you go into a game with preconceived ideas on who is the dominant scrum? The referee can do nothing else that adjudicate what is in front of him on the day. To suggest anything else is ignorant and stupid.
You then single out Rolland for not calling any crooked feed and early striking? Tell me, has any referee ever called an early strike in the last 10 years?
Your vendetta against Rolland is ridiculous, and your arguments are unfounded.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)