Ireland v England - 19 August 2023

[Bada-Bing!]

And who taught him to tackle that way?

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

And who taught him to tackle that way?

A whole succession of ex RL coaches.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

My rugby club won an Andy Farrell training session years ago (when he coached with England) and he tried to teach our whole club to tackle high and lead with the shoulder.

It will 100% be in built in OFs dna to tackle like that but as he’s a professional I’d have expected him to learn the correct technique a long time ago.

 

[MarkyH]

Added this to follow the thread.

I quite like this line up. As already mentioned by others I'd have Earl at 8 and Willis in. Flexible when Curry returns and fighting Lawes for 6 or for Earl/Willis at 7. Still like our 6/7 options.

I really rate Marchant and have for years, a real smart player, solid all round game in the air and in defence but has a step, bit of pace and runs great lines (if he gets the ball). His game smarts are good too. This would be my 12/13 partnership.

Farrell chat has been done to death, I'm just glad he's not playing so I can try and enjoy the game tomorrow and not get frustrated when the ball ends up in the 10s hands....

 

[ncurd]

Added this to follow the thread.

You can click 'watch thread' to do the same. I regularly do it.

I think if they'd won the 6N and were looking good for the WC, people would be calling the red card an injustice.

I really don't think they would Farrell has had multiple incidents both domestically and internationally. Just about every incident has led to massive criticism of Owen from English fans, look up the SA incident in a mostly firing England side. Most England fans said he should of gone off in that game and we only won by 1 point. Specifically on this forum there tends to close to zero tolerance from England fans of any kind of head shot. due to understanding of concussion implications

Anyone critiquing his Dad is a ******* idiot though. There's a reason I don't want him as head coach while Owen is still available. Once Owen retires I want to poach him from Ireland as quickly as possible.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Anyone critiquing his Dad is a ******* idiot though. There's a reason I don't want him as head coach while Owen is still available. Once Owen retires I want to poach him from Ireland as quickly as possible.

Totally.

He can bring Catt with him, stop off in Munster for Wig and pinch Edwards from France while he’s about it.

 

[ncurd]

Totally.

He can bring Catt with him, stop off in Munster for Wig and pinch Edwards from France while he’s about it.

I'd take Edwards as instead head coach TBF

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I'd take Edwards as instead head coach TBF

Sure? He’s one of the few that didn’t think Farrell should have seen red.

 

[ncurd]

Sure? He’s one of the few that didn’t think Farrell should have seen red.

I struggle to take anyone with skin in the game seriously in their opinion on such matters.

 

[Which Tyler]

I think criticising Farrell for the panel's decision is ridiculous because obviously he had very little to do with it. The three Australians and possibly the RFU's lawyer are to blame for finding a technicality that undermines the whole process.

Farrell does deserve criticism for continuing to tackle in such a stupid, ******* way. He's got a history of red and yellow cards for these tackles (should probably have more reds) and yet he continues to do it. If he learned the tackle properly none of this would be happening.

It's kinda what we do, and reminiscent of the Burgess 2015 fiasco.

It was Burgess "fault" that he didn't know where to stand in defence and didn't know how to jackal.
It was Burt's fault for taking him to the RWC, and was Burth who deserved to be dragged across the coals for that.

Most informed observers (eg. regulars on rugby forae) separated the two, the less informed (social media keyboard warriors), and the press, hounded the guy (apparently, I had no social media at the time).

Now, it's Farrel's fault that he put in that tackle, and it's Farrel's fault that he a long track record of putting in those tackles.
But it's the committee's fault that they let him off, and it's the committee that deserves to be dragged across the coals.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Seen lots of people say it’s deliberate which I can’t get on board with. OF is one of those players who you hate (in a sporting sense) when he’s playing against you and he has one of those faces but he seems like a pretty good bloke and he’s not a cheap shot coward type of player he’s just over zealous, highly competitive and cant tackle properly. He does need to sort it out, though.

 

[TopTen2003]

What do people make of Ribbans in the second row guys- a genuine audition for a starting spot at RWC now? Chessum obviously in the wings on the bench with fitness to prove but with Ribbans in ahead of Martin in Dublin and Lawes seemingly booked in for a role at 6 suggests Ribbans and Chessum in a straight shoot out to partner Itoje?

Can he step up and be the second row we need do you think or is the jury out for you?

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Now, it's Farrel's fault that he put in that tackle, and it's Farrel's fault that he a long track record of putting in those tackles.
But it's the committee's fault that they let him off, and it's the committee that deserves to be dragged across the coals.

Agreed.

My only reservation is that the panel was chaired by a barrister with some rugby grounding - ex Counsel for the ARU and Judicial Officer for the 2015 RWC. You would expect someone of that stature to ensure that the detail was properly examined and laws applied in a correct and emotion free way.

Farrell was armed with a high powered KC who’s been involved with England and the Lions for years. Stellar reputation but he can only get his client off if there’s something to work with.

Did they see angles we didn’t etc? Have the process / laws been interpreted in a different way to how most of us think they should be?

Unfortunately we won’t ever see the ruling. Wonder if the panel was unanimous or split.

 

[big ginger 8]

Agreed.

My only reservation is that the panel was chaired by a barrister with some rugby grounding - ex Counsel for the ARU and Judicial Officer for the 2015 RWC. You would expect someone of that stature to ensure that the detail was properly examined and laws applied in a correct and emotion free way.

Farrell was armed with a high powered KC who’s been involved with England and the Lions for years. Stellar reputation but he can only get his client off if there’s something to work with.

Did they see angles we didn’t etc? Have the process / laws been interpreted in a different way to how most of us think they should be?

Unfortunately we won’t ever see the ruling. Wonder if the panel was unanimous or split.

The ruling is available here: https://resources.worldrugby-rims.p...l-Judicial-Hearing-Decision-16.8.23-final.pdf

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

What do people make of Ribbans in the second row guys- a genuine audition for a starting spot at RWC now? Chessum obviously in the wings on the bench with fitness to prove but with Ribbans in ahead of Martin in Dublin and Lawes seemingly booked in for a role at 6 suggests Ribbans and Chessum in a straight shoot out to partner Itoje?

Can he step up and be the second row we need do you think or is the jury out for you?

Chessum’s got the highest ceiling but with him currently being an unknown quantity this can’t be other than a genuine audition.

I don’t mind Ribbans. He could do a solid enough job, but he’s unlikely to be picking up MoTM champagne too often.

Martin did OK but I did notice him walking around a fair bit, especially last week. This is a step up that takes some getting used to, but also made me wonder if he’s a bit too heavy now. His time will come, but probably bit part only this time.

 

[Reiser99]

Chessum’s got the highest ceiling but with him currently being an unknown quantity this can’t be other than a genuine audition.

I don’t mind Ribbans. He could do a solid enough job, but he’s unlikely to be picking up MoTM champagne too often.

Martin did OK but I did notice him walking around a fair bit, especially last week. This is a step up that takes some getting used to, but also made me wonder if he’s a bit too heavy now. His time will come, but probably bit part only this time.

Wasn't Martin not 100% fit last week?

 

[ncurd]

Unfortunately we won’t ever see the ruling. Wonder if the panel was unanimous or split.

You'd be wrong

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://resources.worldrugby-rims.pulselive.com/worldrugby/document/2023/08/17/a68f357b-5d86-4d42-9e7c-a81538af2218/SNS-23-Owen-Farrell-Judicial-Hearing-Decision-16.8.23-final.pdf

But the madness lies in they believe the sudden changes in dynamics meant Farrell would of completed a legal tackle otherwise. Which is untrue and I don't think even if it passed that barrier the mitigation is enough either.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I don’t mind Ribbans. He could do a solid enough job, but he’s unlikely to be picking up MoTM champagne too often.

Yeah that's my take on it too,
Got decent hands/turn of pace for a tighthead lock as well, not that we're likely to see much of either
Decent player to step in now, but as I mentioned in another thread I'm not too cut up about him moving to France next season as there are better options to invest time in/build around going forwards

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

You'd be wrong

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://resources.worldrugby-rims.pulselive.com/worldrugby/document/2023/08/17/a68f357b-5d86-4d42-9e7c-a81538af2218/SNS-23-Owen-Farrell-Judicial-Hearing-Decision-16.8.23-final.pdf

But the madness lies in they believe the sudden changes in dynamics meant Farrell would of completed a legal tackle otherwise. Which is untrue and I don't think even if it passed that barrier the mitigation is enough either.

Generally am. BG8 beat you to it, I didn’t think it was going to be published but glad it has.

On quick first reading I doubt it will change many minds.

 

[Reiser99]

Generally am. BG8 beat you to it, I didn’t think it was going to be published but glad it has.

On quick first reading I doubt it will change many minds.

The main part I object to is the phrase 'sudden and significant change of direction'. I've seen far more sudden and significant changes in direction stay at red and I didn't think Basham moved that far. On top as others have said, even if George hadn't been there would it have been a legal tackle anyway?