Rugby World Cup

[GG.]

Absolutely not.

Doubling annoying really as we lost the last World Cup in large part because sinkler got knocked out meaning we got monstered by the SA scrum.

[Carlos]

I'm obviously supporting my Patagonian cousins but Ford is grabbing this by the scruff, classy guy

[GG.]

Two stunning drop goals from George ford of all people. Maybe my decision to carry on watching will be vindicated…

And a third. Un be fucking lievable

[McSwede]

Two stunning drop goals from George ford of all people. Maybe my decision to carry on watching will be vindicated…

And a third. Un be fucking lievable

It's great stuff from England. Hopefully a performance that will give them confidence in the tournament

[IanF]

I groaned when Ford kicked the 2nd drop goal.. then shut up as it sailed between the posts. Obviously know very little about the modern game!

[dinny_g]

There is absolutely no justification for a red for anything other than deliberate foul play.

That’s no longer the laws of the game.

This is a hugely impressive performance under the circumstances

[Swervin_Mervin]

This is probably the best I've seen England play in some time. Far more disciplined. Quite the result given the start

[GG.]

There is absolutely no justification for a red for anything other than deliberate foul play.

That’s no longer the laws of the game.

This is a hugely impressive performance under the circumstances

Clearly I’m aware of that. I’m saying the current laws are cretinous.

Anyway - good to see they could persevere but really that was down to the excellence of George Ford and a very poor Argentina. I think the jury is still out on Englands ability to play at the highest level.

[Carlos]

Didn't see the MOM but assume it was Ford, outstanding performance and pretty much gets England through the group stages.

[dinny_g]

There is absolutely no justification for a red for anything other than deliberate foul play.

That’s no longer the laws of the game.

This is a hugely impressive performance under the circumstances

Clearly I’m aware of that. I’m saying the current laws are cretinous.

Anyway - good to see they could persevere but really that was down to the excellence of George Ford and a very poor Argentina. I think the jury is still out on Englands ability to play at the highest level.

I dunno to be honest. I know a few ex internationals and it’s hard to hear them speak sometimes. Not quite a stammer but they’re sort of reaching for words.

If we don’t protect players from concussion type injuries then the game is going to die anyway.

Just my two penneth

[duncs500]

I’m not sure I really even recognise the modern game any more… they way they police yellow / red cards is just mental.

There is absolutely no justification for a red for anything other than deliberate foul play.

I was very very close to turning it off after 12 minutes. I’m continuing to watch mainly just to see if we triumph over adversity but it we go out at the group stage I’m not sure I’ll bother watching any further games.

This summarises precisely how I was feeling at that point.

What I really hate about the modern video review in football and rugby is that they review everything in such slow motion that it always looks bad and never considers the speed at which things happen. Curry had absolutely no chance to go anywhere then. That could have happened to anyone and they wouldn't have been able to avoid it, and when red cards are just a lottery of bad luck then it's going to ruin the game.

I'm all for protecting the players, but there has to be some level of intent and some possibility that the player could have reasonably avoided it.

[duncs500]

As for the performance, well I've been a Ford fan since he appeared in the scene, and often find myself wishing they'd have played him over Farrell more often over the years. So I was really pleased to see him put in such a stellar performance, in general the team looked solid, but as above Argentina flattered them.

[jamcg]

I'm all for protecting the players, but there has to be some level of intent and some possibility that the player could have reasonably avoided it.

This. There was nothing malicious in the manoeuvre, If you’re going to give cards for head on head- if it’s because you were dumb it’s a yellow, if you were dirty it’s a red

What makes it less understandable for me is an Argentinian player goes high and mashes one of ours in the head with his elbow and all we got was a penalty, he didn’t even get a yellow

[mik]

Didn't watch the game, but just searched youtube for that incident. Red card for that seems ridiculous.

[Carlos]

My 2 pence worth with a bit of background if you weren't aware:

There is a class action lawsuit by 300+ ex rugby players against the governing bodies on the basis that they havent done enough to prevent brain injuries. These players have developed epilepsy, dementia or early onset dementia etc at a very young age, i believe some where still in their 20's!

Even at an amateur/semi pro level I know of personally a couple of players who are epileptic in their 30's which is likely to be as a result of head trauma whilst playing.

In Wales the maximum tackling height has been reduced this season to "below the base of the sternum" for the community game to reduce the risk of these injuries.

This^ is not welcome in the Pro game but instead this year the emphasis is on reducing direct head contact at the tackle area which obviously poses the greatest risk of concussion and brain injury by heavily policing the tackle area with the onus on the tackler to reduce their height.

Some players don't bend at the waist and tackle, they dip and brace which typically ends up in a chest or above collision. Farrell is a great example of the type of tackle technique that is trying to be changed.

Curry is not dirty player and a great deal of his game is legally dominating the tackle area and jackling but yesterday he was bolt upright, coming in at speed, eyes closed and tackling a player who had barely hit the floor after catching the ball. Its exactly the type of collision that rugby is trying to banish, it's not an accidental clash of heads, he was never competing for the ball, it's reckless.

It's worth noting that neither player was fit to continue and will likely not play for a while, potentially never which just reinforces that it's the type of contact that should be avoided and was avoidable.

[dinny_g]

Curry is not dirty player and a great deal of his game is legally dominating the tackle area and jackling but yesterday he was bolt upright, coming in at speed, eyes closed and tackling a player who had barely hit the floor after catching the ball. It’s exactly the type of collision that rugby is trying to banish, it's not an accidental clash of heads, he was never competing for the ball, it's reckless.

This…

[duncs500]

I'm sorry, but to say he's bolt upright is quite obviously wrong.



I understand the reasons for the rule changes, but in this case it's a step too far IMO.

[dinny_g]

He has made no attempt to bend at the hip, his chest is upright, the onus is on the tackler to be in the correct position.

There is no mitigation at all IMO and a clear and obvious red

[duncs500]

You do know what upright means right? His chest is not upright, and this is at point of contact when he's probably already more upright than he was aiming to be recoiling from the impending clash.

Anyway, clearly in 10mins people who are very clear on the rules have decided it was a red. I'm not saying it's not a red under the rules, I'm saying if that's a red the rules are shit.

[duncs500]

I also just don't see the rules being applied consistently either, you can watch a game and see all sorts of less than ideal body positions and tackling go unpunished. Indeed, the offensive player's aim to to put the defensive player in a difficult position, even I've played the game enough to know that if you run and hold a line that allows a nice clean waist to leg tackle you're doing it wrong. You want to jink and get the tackler off balance so that you can steamroller him.