[June Tests 2018: 1st Test] Australia vs. Ireland (09/06/2018)

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Well it is like an elderly person to cling to the glories of their youth.

Elderly people are also far wiser. That's how they know that winning a grandslam doesn't mean that ur the dogs ********, only way from here is down

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Cooney's form has been well ahead of Murray's since the 6N (behind a worse pack as well). He deserves a start and probably the 21 shirt for the next while. Goalkicking is probably better than Carbery's as well. Losing this wasn't a disaster by any means. Beirne is perfect to combat the Australians and should start the other tests.

I'd also like to see Conan at 8 (Stander was anonymous except for his break where he botched anyway by not passing) and Larmour or Conway at 15. Kearney was very poor yesterday, making all the mistakes that other people making put him in the team. Leavy would help a lot assuming his injury won't keep him out any longer.

James Ryan is the only player who's played every game going back to the Heineken Cup final so he could do with a rest. He was great yesterday but went in and out of the game at times and a rest would do him good. We don't need him knackered by the third test especially given how good the other locks in the squad are. (Amazing how it's gone from one of our weakest positions to one of the best in a year.)

Finally and most importantly, we desperately need Ringrose. He's so much better than Henshaw as a 13 it isn't even funny. The only battle for places there should be in the centres is Aki v Henshaw at 12. Picking both of them together has definitively been proven not to work at international level. Neither of them were good at all yesterday and between this and the France game we can't break down opposing defences with them. (That SA team we played against doesn't count based on how bad they were.

The only forward I'd retain in the starting XV is POM next week, I'd reunite Cooney and Sexbaby and bring Ringrose in. I don't really know what to do with the back three, Sexy Rob needs a break, he was wrecked after 25 last week and Stockdale has to play all three tests just to make sure we have a back three player over 6ft. I'd like to see Conway in with Carbery at 15 to keep a bit of height as well as having the strongest fielder but I can't see that happening.

Elderly people are also far wiser. That's how they know that winning a grandslam doesn't mean that ur the dogs ********, only way from here is down

We actually closed our borders, Eddie Jones Syndrome hasn't spread here!

 

[TRF_Olyy]

We actually closed our borders, Eddie Jones Syndrome hasn't spread here!

Yet left open the secret passage under the whomping willow that leads directly from our Carrington training centre to the IRFUs treasury

 

[profitius]

Unsurprisingly, all NH teams supporters are moaning about the ref.

Sure, all the refs made mistakes, but it was that you were outplayed - that was the reason for your loss.

Thats your imagination. I don't see all NH fans blaming the ref. In fact in my post you quoted I didn't mention the ref once.

 

[smartcooky]

On the disallowed try. It was a 100% clear penalty. Was arguably 1 of the easiest decisions to make all day and well if anything a high level of stupidity from Coleman. And was referred after play had stopped. It was excellent procedures for that call

This is 100% correct IMO.

In rugby league they'd have applied common sense and understood it had zero impact on the try.

Yes, it did have impact on the try; it would not have been scored at all IF the referee had seen the dangerous tackle at the time it happened. The play would have been stopped and Coleman would have been penalised right there, just as he was.

And for the removal of doubt, tackling a player without the ball is foul play

Law 9: FOUL PLAY

Dangerous Play
13. A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously.

14. A player must not tackle an opponent who is not in possession of the ball.

Also, there is no such thing as a technicality when dealing with foul play... it always trumps materiality. If Coleman had punched the Green player instead of tackling him without the ball, who here thinks that play would have been allowed to continue and the try scored?

 

[smartcooky]

As was pointed out already - the call was from several minutes earlier before we even had the call and it was a contentious call at best given it was a decoy runner.

By the logic of that time frame you might as well have the refs go over the game after it's finished and adjust the score after forensically checking to ensure every single decision is precisely correct.

No, the TMO protocols don't work like that

For Foul Play, the Referee, ARs and TMO can go back as far as the last time the ball was dead (e.g. in touch or the game was stopped for some other reason), but no further.

For other types of non foul play infringements such as a knock-ons, forward passes, offside, hands in the ruck, not rolling away, side entry, not releasing etc, they can only go back two phases (being the current phase at the time the call is made, back to the second most recent ruck, maul. In the examples below, they can only go back as far as the red ruck

ruck : open play (knock on) : ruck : open play (try scored)
- Try disallowed for the knock on

However..

ruck : open play (knock on) : ruck : open play : ruck : open play (try scored)
- Try stands

Also, of course, you cannot adjust the score without affecting the play. If you retrospectively disallow a try, this would have resulted in the game restarting in a different place (penaty, 22 droput, lineout instead of a halfway restart). This means you cannot predict how that change will affect the rest of the game.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Well if we won three games in Australia, it would make a 5 game losing streak two years later look even more embarrassing, so I'd be happy with two wins.

4 Games, The Scotland game, wasn't really classed as a proper test game IMO.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

4 Games, The Scotland game, wasn't really classed as a proper test game IMO.

Cause they're not a real country?

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Cause they're not a real country?

Yep, and also Ireland is two countries therefore shouldn't count.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Yep, and also Ireland is two countries therefore shouldn't count.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Yep, and also Ireland is two countries therefore shouldn't count.

Babas isnt a test match, France are actually **** and we were giving them a confidence boost, and the SA game was cause of the ref, so our last legit game was against Wales.
Last loss was in 2015 as a result

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Babas isnt a test match, France are actually **** and we were giving them a confidence boost, and the SA game was cause of the ref, so our last legit game was against Wales.
Last loss was in 2015 as a result

None of these countries count because they've never had an empire.
Get back to me when we lose to Mongolia or Rome(/Italy) or Russia or China, someone who actually matters.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

None of these countries count because they've never had an empire.
Get back to me when we lose to Mongolia or Rome(/Italy) or Russia or China, someone who actually matters.

France?

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

None of these countries count because they've never had an empire.
Get back to me when we lose to Mongolia or Rome(/Italy) or Russia or China, someone who actually matters.

Also games against Aus, NZ, Ireland, Scotland and Wales (or any other ex English country) are basically just intra squad friendlies anyway

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

France?

Never heard of them having an empire?

 

[Groundhog]

What's the difference between a prostitute and the 2015 English team?
1. A prostitute wouldn't drool when she chokes
2. A prostitute usually knows better than to get ridden in her own home.

Never heard of them having an empire?

Sure wee Napoleon was an emperor, was he not?

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Never heard of them having an empire?

The Colonial Empires counts surely. North Africa (19th century), North America (16th century) and South East Asia (Both) were all largely French.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

France?

I had to scroll down the list of Largest empires to find France that my finger got cramp.


(They're sixth, get at me when they're in the top 5).

 

[Groundhog]

There's a lot to be said for the Mongol empire, as although they probably would have killed millions of your ancestors if given the chance, you also wouldn't be alive, and thus would never have read a single Tigs Man post.

 

[munstermuffin]

What the F is this? A history lesson,
Emporors,
Colonies,
England winning SH tours

Come back to the present lads