• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

USA v England - 19/07/25

The Rugby Forum - Global Rugby Union News, Six Nations & RWC Discussion

Help Support The Rugby Forum:

ChicagoKid said:
If MLR paid Top 14 money, you would see a massive influx of talented athletes.

Anything less than $100,000 is poverty wages.
Click to expand...
If the premiership paid even league one football wages you'd see a massive influx of athletes too - but they don't so the point is moot
 
TRF_Olyy said:
If the premiership paid even league one football wages you'd see a massive influx of athletes too - but they don't so the point is moot
Click to expand...
The difference in wealth between our two nations is vast.

We are paying high schoolers $6 million. There is money available if we can breakthrough.
 
TRF_Olyy said:
So?
Football pays astronomically more than rugby here, that's all I'm saying and all you were saying about other sports attracting American athletes
You're the one moving the goalposts
Click to expand...
Make It Rain Money GIF
 
I went to bed at the second delay, but it's too hot and I can't sleep, so watching now.

Just want to say - I love these commentators, they sound as if watching rugby is actually an enjoyable thing.
They're also happy to acknowledge that the ref has a microphone, and it's good to hear what he's saying - as opposed to our usual lot who are busy wondering why the ref made the call, whilst the ref is trying to tell everyone why the made the call, and refusing to either listen, or let the rest of us hear it.
They even... And I can't believe I'm going to say this about a modern commentator... They even have the ability to not say anything when they've nothing to say!

Oh, and as that's where I'm up to - beautiful hands from MOjo for Northmore's try, but how the hell did we butcher the try after IFW chase down and the knock on by Blue12?
 
Ok,they're off for lightning, just after a denied try for Dombrandt.
Can one of the bug boys explain what happened there? He's talking about binding onto a ripper, and therefore it's obstruction, but... What does that even mean?

is it that he split out from the maul, but didn't get away from it enough? Which doesn't look right to me - but I fully acknowledge my ignorance of what the big buggers do, though I've generally learned a lot from my decades on forae.
 
Which Tyler said:
Ok,they're off for lightning, just after a denied try for Dombrandt.
Can one of the bug boys explain what happened there? He's talking about binding onto a ripper, and therefore it's obstruction, but... What does that even mean?

is it that he split out from the maul, but didn't get away from it enough? Which doesn't look right to me - but I fully acknowledge my ignorance of what the big buggers do, though I've generally learned a lot from my decades on forae.
Click to expand...
This won't help but I was perplexed as well, as I've never heard the term 'ripper' outside the context of Nightmare on Elm Street, 18th century Britain, or a violent farting session
 
TRF_Olyy said:
Ted Hill watch (stats from RugbyPass):

Carries: 0
Tackles: 0 (1 missed)
Lineouts: 0
Turnovers: 0


Edit: Stats updated, now 1 tackle (0 missed), so crisis averted
Click to expand...

Hill's 100% tackle success rate means he should have been picked dover Tom Curry for the Lions test.
 
Geordie said:
I think the back row has to change for the AIs

Tom Willis has to start at 8..which then changes what we've had with Earl at 8 previously.

That's a headache for the coaches with the current flanker options
Click to expand...
I read the original question as 'who has played themselves in?'. That implies people who were previously outside of the 23. Willis was already the man in possession at the end of the 6N.

The clear winners for me are the centres. Atkinson was the pick of the bunch but Northmore was good in both of his games and Ojomoh looked classy in attack and very aggressive in defence. Obviously, the standard of last night’s opposition needs to be taken into account, but the three of them have surely cemented their place in the squad.
Protalus rampart said:
I know it's an inexperienced team and the weather isn't great but the attack has been miles off the last couple weeks. I assume the kicking is SB instructed but against the US it'd be nice to see some flashes of creativity
Click to expand...
Disagree on the bolded. It's fair to say that we lacked ambition and creativity against the USA but against Argentina, the attack was pretty good. On the handful of occasions we did attack 'ball-in-hand', I thought the decision-making and execution was decent - Northmore and Ojomoh in particular.
 
Ddanno said:
Glad that's over.

Centres - good, we might be getting somewhere

Langdon + Ohgre - encouraging

Ford - should be in Aus and told not to ******* kick

Locks - fine

CCS - more of that please

The rest, ehhhh. Gameplan was shunt but who cares against oppo like that.
Click to expand...
From an overall tour perspective, I’d also add the props. Baxter and Heyes were excellent throughout and AOF had some good moments. Rodd was a bit underwhelming but possibly more from the PoV that I’ve definitely seen him play better.
 
higgik said:
Maybe because CCS is on it today, so less for him to do????
Click to expand...
I was underwhelmed by Pepper. After a couple of good cameos, I thought he was going to rip it up, but he was pretty anonymous. In fairness, it can be harder to shine as a flanker in these sort of games, but he definitely suffered in comparison to CCS who was very busy a prominent on both sides of the ball.
 
TBF, that wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to make big carries. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.
 
BPM said:
TBF, that wasn't what stood out to me about CCS. I expect him to make big carries. What impressed me more was his work rate and being a real nuisance in mauls and around the ruck. In essence, lots of small but effective interventions. I thought that was more what I'd see from Pepper, but didn't.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine. I just hoped to see a bit more from him. Perhaps we'd have seen more link play if we'd held on to the ball a bit more.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's what I got from his performance aswell. Far more effective and influential rather than just trying to be over physical.

It's a good sign, but we need to see him repeat that against the bigger sides.
 
TRF_Olyy said:
His first game in a while in the backrow and not at lock, his first game in a while looking like the player he can be

Hmmmmm
Click to expand...

I mean it’s also v USA

I don’t think anyone could fault his physicality but the issue especially as a 6 was his positioning and stamina in defence which he struggled with against higher level opposition
 
Ddanno said:
This won't help but I was perplexed as well, as I've never heard the term 'ripper' outside the context of Nightmare on Elm Street, 18th century Britain, or a violent farting session
Click to expand...
Did you see Puja's answer?

I think the problem was that we caught the ball, players came in to form the maul and the catcher gave the ball over the top of them to Dombrandt, who then bound on. There was an IRB law clarification a while back on that - the ball can be transferred within a maul by ripping it backwards, but you can't pass it over the top of already bound people (cause teams were doing that and making nigh-undefendable mauls).
Click to expand...
The reason they clarified it as still being offside with a handover is that it removed any competition - if the ball doesn't have to be transferred to somone binding onto the first man, then a lock could jump in the lineout, have two players bound onto his midriff in perfect driving position (with no need to pay any attention to the ball) as soon as he landed, and then use long arms to just hand it back to someone at the back who could then plonk themselves at the back of a wedge. Better to rule that the ball can only be transferred to someone directly bound onto you, otherwise it stops being a maul.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ddanno said:
Yeah, makes a lot more sense now.

Still don't know what a ripper is.
Click to expand...
We're not alone - when ref was explaining his decision (to Ford and Dombrandt?) one of them actively asked him what a ripper was.

Sounds like a very technical offence that only back-5 players would even know about. But still - it's always good to learn, and that whole offence is new to me.
 
TommiG88 said:
I think the ball was given over the top, as the US pack had started to push before he landed. It frustrates me that it went to TMO to stop the try, but didn't check how it came about
Click to expand...
TBF to the ref - wasn't there a technical problem and couldn't get the replay in the stadium?
Seemed like the TMO saw something, told the ref, faffed about with tech, gave up and gave the ref a script to tell the skippers
 

Similar threads

BPM
England 24/25 Depth Chart
2 3
Replies
60
Views
8K
AngloScotsHybrid
A
Quel Carreleur
Club representation in the 6Nations
Replies
2
Views
336
TRF_Olyy
TRF_Olyy

Latest posts

Back
Top