The Six Nations, now with added bonus points!

[dropkick]

Bonus points and points difference come into play also. England will win but hopefully by not much

[dropkick]

The maul is killing italy

[Fan with smartphone]

[quote="suisse"]The conversations between the referee and Hartley/Haskell are really interesting but Hugh Cahill keeps talking over them making sh!t jokes as he flirts with Lenihan's moustache.[/

Hartley had a point about if you are within 2 metres you are part of the ruck. He has a bit of a point. Poite corrected and said it was one metre. To be fair there are times Italy are certainly within that. England have continued going up the guts with a few extra offloads to stop rucks. They got their 2 tries but it's fool's gold really. Maybe it doesn't matter - England making a big statement by taking the kick at goals there. It's all about the win and the slam for them. But Vern Cotter has 2 weeks to get his gameplan organised and there's a fair chance uncontested rucks will be a part of it.

[Ruckedtobits]

As a matter of interest, what were the odds of Italy being ahead at half-time?

[jezzer]

Should this unbeaten England team be called "The Unconvincibles"?

[kermischocolate]

The conversations between the referee and Hartley/Haskell are really interesting but Hugh Cahill keeps talking over them making sh!t jokes as he flirts with Lenihan's moustache.[/

Hartley had a point about if you are within 2 metres you are part of the ruck. He has a bit of a point. Poite corrected and said it was one metre. To be fair there are times Italy are certainly within that. England have continued going up the guts with a few extra offloads to stop rucks. They got their 2 tries but it's fool's gold really. Maybe it doesn't matter - England making a big statement by taking the kick at goals there. It's all about the win and the slam for them. But Vern Cotter has 2 weeks to get his gameplan organised and there's a fair chance uncontested rucks will be a part of it.

Is the point not that it is a tackle as opposed to a ruck so there is no offside line?

[simonokeeffe]

if England dont BP Scotland then 2 wins of any description is enough for us (no realistic way England can beat Scotland by 30 points without a BP with Farrell's kicking) well we'd need 3 match points more than England in that final game

[Fan with smartphone]

The conversations between the referee and Hartley/Haskell are really interesting but Hugh Cahill keeps talking over them making sh!t jokes as he flirts with Lenihan's moustache.[/

Hartley had a point about if you are within 2 metres you are part of the ruck. He has a bit of a point. Poite corrected and said it was one metre. To be fair there are times Italy are certainly within that. England have continued going up the guts with a few extra offloads to stop rucks. They got their 2 tries but it's fool's gold really. Maybe it doesn't matter - England making a big statement by taking the kick at goals there. It's all about the win and the slam for them. But Vern Cotter has 2 weeks to get his gameplan organised and there's a fair chance uncontested rucks will be a part of it.

Is the point not that it is a tackle as opposed to a ruck so there is no offside line?

My understanding and the way I've seen it refereed before kermischocolate, is that if you approach close to the tackle (I thought poite said 1metre?) then you are considered to be part of a ruck, so the offside line applies. I've seen players in the attacking guard/pillar position reaching out to grab defenders (like haskell suggested) to make them clearly part of a ruck, but that shouldn't even matter if they are already close to the ruck. Does that make sense? Please correct me if I'm wrong here folks! Refereeing it like that helps the referee to be a bit clearer in their own head than Poite today. There were times defenders had a go at a poach, then backed off and Poite then allowed lads to get into offside positions. I think he was allowing too much encroachment and then it was impossible for him to watch everything. Fair play to Italy for taking advantage of that, but I do think Hartley kind of had a point. He wasn't very sure of himself either though, which surprised me.

It's certainly a useful tactic for Italy to force teams into an arm wrestle, but also a useful tactic against England who do like their boshing. They have to stop to think and it killed their momentum a lot. Scotland have shown an aptitude for trying different stuff - like the lineout trick play - and the uncontested ruck is something they could use now and again.

Not to slate Poite, but he missed a blatant failure to release by Hughes just after half time. England went the length and hit the first of two quick tries. It could easily have been an 8 pt Italy lead instead, which would've been very interesting indeed.

[kermischocolate]

Is the point not that it is a tackle as opposed to a ruck so there is no offside line?

My understanding and the way I've seen it refereed before kermischocolate, is that if you approach close to the tackle (I thought poite said 1metre?) then you are considered to be part of a ruck, so the offside line applies. I've seen players in the attacking guard/pillar position reaching out to grab defenders (like haskell suggested) to make them clearly part of a ruck, but that shouldn't even matter if they are already close to the ruck. Does that make sense? Please correct me if I'm wrong here folks! Refereeing it like that helps the referee to be a bit clearer in their own head than Poite today. There were times defenders had a go at a poach, then backed off and Poite then allowed lads to get into offside positions. I think he was allowing too much encroachment and then it was impossible for him to watch everything. Fair play to Italy for taking advantage of that, but I do think Hartley kind of had a point. He wasn't very sure of himself either though, which surprised me.

It's certainly a useful tactic for Italy to force teams into an arm wrestle, but also a useful tactic against England who do like their boshing. They have to stop to think and it killed their momentum a lot. Scotland have shown an aptitude for trying different stuff - like the lineout trick play - and the uncontested ruck is something they could use now and again.

Not to slate Poite, but he missed a blatant failure to release by Hughes just after half time. England went the length and hit the first of two quick tries. It could easily have been an 8 pt Italy lead instead, which would've been very interesting indeed.

But isn't it technically illegal to pull players into the ruck? (I know every team does it)
Technically you should join a ruck bound to someone else (I know no one ever does this) by going through the gate formed by players of your own team.

This article was good...
http://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/ ... fell-apart

[Dave Cahill]

But isn't it technically illegal to pull players into the ruck? (I know every team does it)
Technically you should join a ruck bound to someone else (I know no one ever does this) by going through the gate formed by players of your own team.

This article was good...
http://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/ ... fell-apart

Pulling a player into a ruck (or maul) is indeed illegal

[desperado]

Fan with Smartphone/Kermis: as you've said; this tactic has been used in Super Rugby was first (afaik) used by the Chiefs many years ago particularly on restarts (a Rennie tactic). In fact; if I recall there was discussion on here about it at the time. Where the risk of penalty is if you approach the tackle (note: it's not a ruck) too close you must be seen to be coming through the gate (1 m). Since it's nothing new I'm not sure how EJ was a. not prepared b. 'going on about it'. It's within the rules, nothing new, and as a supposed professional coach he should get on with it. Matt Dawson's tweets are also small minded plain ignorance.

[fourthirtythree]

Here's a Murray Kinsella article that we all talked about here from 2 years ago with video analysis.
http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-sup ... 7-Mar2015/

Frankly it was worth it for the look of sheer concentrated stupid on Dylan Hartley's face when he was talking to Poite.

Eddie Jones is the Jose Mourinho of rugby. Some people like that kind of thing. I don't. But it was funny when he was whining that following the law of rugby union isn't rugby.

[jimbobjoe]

Jeez those English are a bunch of sore winners. The whining from Jones/Dawson and the toilet that is twitter was embarrassing.

[kermischocolate]

Here's a Murray Kinsella article that we all talked about here from 2 years ago with video analysis.
http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-sup ... 7-Mar2015/

Frankly it was worth it for the look of sheer concentrated stupid on Dylan Hartley's face when he was talking to Poite.

Eddie Jones is the Jose Mourinho of rugby. Some people like that kind of thing. I don't. But it was funny when he was whining that following the law of rugby union isn't rugby.

Absolutely this.

We're only talking about it because it took England so long to work out what was going on.
Credit where it's due to Italy.

[Ruckedtobits]

Should this unbeaten England team be called "The Unconvincibles"?

Absolutely, but only after the Calcutta Cup game or, better still, on March 18th.

The England players response to a, little-used but not unique, tactic was incredible and suggested that their fundamental rugby knowlege is limited. Poite adapted well to what was presented and it will be a travesty if World Rugby do anything in response to England's claims about demeaning the game.

For Scotland and Ireland it was a huge encouragement to play England a little 'off-piste' and wait for bedlam to surface. Enjoyed it immensly and only sorry that Italy didn't have the second chapter as well prepared as the first.

[suisse]

Jeez those English are a bunch of sore winners. The whining from Jones/Dawson and the toilet that is twitter was embarrassing.

Indeed. But I agree with what ROG said. Unless there is some sort of rule change fans might stop turning up. It weird seeing a game where 15 of the 30 players, at the highest level, don't know what is happening. Plus the 85,000 booing in the stands. I know you could say all they have to do is learn the rules a but more but even the Italians were confused at times. They didn't know if it was a ruck or not. Italy levelled the playing field and did nothing illegal. There are more than one way to win a test match (or at least be competitive). So good for them. But personally I wouldn't wanna see that too often.

Did anyone else listen to Dylan Hartley say that in Italy's previous 2 games, the opposition only won the game in the final 10-15 mins? Were't Ireland out of sight by half time? The RTE lads listened to that interview and didn't pick up on it.

[suisse]

For Scotland and Ireland it was a huge encouragement to play England a little 'off-piste' and wait for bedlam to surface. Enjoyed it immensly and only sorry that Italy didn't have the second chapter as well prepared as the first.

I'm just worried that England will have received 3 kicks in the arse by now and by the time they play us, they could have worked out a few issues. They have two weeks to prepare for Scotland. Also, we're unlikely to see Farrell ever leaving so many points behind again. As great as it sounds having them here on the last weekend, last weekend would have been the perfect time, so far, to have played them.

[FLIP]

Indeed. But I agree with what ROG said. Unless there is some sort of rule change fans might stop turning up.

Ireland fans didn't stop turning up after getting boned by terrible refereeing mistakes so I don't see this happening.

On the BBC highlights show last night with POC, Guscott and Jonathan Davies, the point made was if Italy had tried that against New Zealand, NZ would have adapted to it in an instance and blown Italy off the park. It's not Italys fault, or the fault of the laws, if Englands players on the pitch are too pig ignorant to work out how to combat the tactic (pick and drive) and the coaches are too stubborn to get an instruction on the park to work against it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/39098514 if you can see it.

[offshorerules]

I thought the reaction from Eddie Jones was bizarre.

[OTT]

Hartley's post match interview would have me believe that up to that point he still had no breeze what was going on. There is ill-informed which can happen but ffs the concept should have been easy enough to comprehend at half time when he had someone else other then The Brand (™) to explain it to him.