Guinness SIX Nations 2021

ForestFire

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Explain to me how this is not down:

[/quote]

Because at this point there is an arm or two, from both white and/or blue under the ball. (that's why white continues to wiggle around after this to get the ball past these arms)

It's not clear if the arms are preventing the ball making contact or not, but it's also not clear if the ball is touching the ground (or grass)

Therefore on field decision stands...

And I'd agree with other posters, if on field decision was a try no one would probable question this.

Curse These Metal Hands

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Except the blue and red lines are on the ball. The shoulder of the England Jersey is plain white.

The French arms are around the ball in his stomach area.. Bizarre that you think that's a rugby ball tbh, clearly the shoulder. The TMO didn't even point to that as evidence.

c.p.w.g.w

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

It needs to be conclusive, that certainly is far from conclusive enough, by the rugby rules standards[/quote]

Anyone who thinks that ball was not grounded by Itoje is in cloud cuckoo land.

I accept the ref did not see a grounding.

The replay is conclusive that a try was scored, in my opinion.

Edit : this is not CSI:Twickenham. Anyone who follows the game knows well that he scored a try, ie some part of that ball touched some part of the grass.

Ginger83

ecoli3136 wrote: »

It needs to be conclusive, that certainly is far from conclusive enough, by the rugby rules standards

Anyone who thinks that ball was not grounded by Itoje is in cloud cuckoo land.

I accept the ref did not see a grounding.

The replay is conclusive that a try was scored, in my opinion.

Edit : this is not CSI:Twickenham. Anyone who follows the game knows well that he scored a try, ie some part of that ball touched some part of the grass.[/QUOTE]

I follow the game and I wouldn't agree.
Maybe we will see some sort of try line technology in the future.

Strumms

There is ‘thinking’ the ball is grounded and then conclusively knowing by way of the technology providing evidence that it has been... I didn’t see any replay showing 100% that the ball had in fact been grounded.. close to being grounded for sure... 100% grounded, no

Curse These Metal Hands

Strumms wrote: »

There is ‘thinking’ the ball is grounded and then conclusively knowing by way of the technology providing evidence that it has been... I didn’t see any replay showing 100% that the ball had in fact been grounded.. close to being grounded for sure... 100% grounded, no

The issue has been made worse by a surprisingly large amount of people mistaking his shoulder as the ball and sharing that image as proof of grounding. Anyone saying they saw the ball touching the grass is wrong, I haven't seen a single image that supports that.

Deusexmachina

What a great match. Two fantastic teams.
England’s power, accuracy and rush defense versus Frances’s intuitive skill and ambition.
I’m afraid Ireland look plodding and guileless in comparison.

Strumms

On seeing the first replay I just said.. “ ok, that won’t be awarded, can’t be and there isn’t enough to overturn “... but the more replays Joy was watching including going back to re-reviewing the first angles...after an age.. if it wasn’t conclusive enough the first time, rewatching isn’t going to help... it was like she was dying to scratch together a case to award it... no way is there any conclusive evidence to overturn the on field decision... conclusive evidence the ball touched the grass.. sorry, no.

Deusexmachina

Strumms wrote: »

On seeing the first replay I just said.. “ ok, that won’t be awarded, can’t be and there isn’t enough to overturn “... but the more replays Joy was watching including going back to re-reviewing the first angles...after an age.. if it wasn’t conclusive enough the first time, rewatching isn’t going to help... it was like she was dying to scratch together a case to award it... no way is there any conclusive evidence to overturn the on field decision... conclusive evidence the ball touched the grass.. sorry, no.

Yeah maybe. Doesn’t really matter. It’s a match to decide who is the better team on the day. England were.

The fact that a French player might have managed to get his hand between the ball and the ground doesn’t change that fact.

Furgetaboutit.

Dickie10

Dickie10 wrote: »

I fancy a reaction from England this weekend . think they might sneak this . prediction England 23 France 20

Awful pity i didnt have money on this , whats kind of odd do you get for predicting a correct rugby scoreline?
Had a feeling england would be hngrier and more street smart when they needed to be but made hard work of it. the descsion by farrell to corner with 5 mins left was match winning i was willing him to go for corner found it strange alan quinlan thought a shot at goal was a decent choice 4 points down. wasnt even clear cut 3 points very 60-40 kick. also quinlan was not very neutral during the tmo try decsion he was almost willing it not to be given. the ball definitley rubs grass on intial surge which is well over the white line, thats a try all day long.

Wales deserve the slam if they go and win in paris thats an unreal achievement and probably one of their best grand slams the last 20 years. there very street smart and intelligent team full of leaders who dont mess about all seem to do the right things at the right time, just such good footballing ability, passion and rugby know how, some unreal players too, even there bench is looking good now.

Strumms

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Yeah maybe. Doesn’t really matter. It’s a match to decide who is the better team on the day. England were.

The fact that a French player might have managed to get his hand between the ball and the ground doesn’t change that fact.

Furgetaboutit.

It actually matters, very much...It’s a match that gets decided by who scores the most points.. who was ‘better’ is subjective and not what determines a result.... when points are awarded to a team by a TMO who overturns a decision of ‘no try’ by viewing multiple replays that to most of us watching are inconclusive at ‘best’.. the ball is millimeters from being grounded but zero factual evidence to confirm that it actually was...she looks at the initial replays numerous times, looks for others, goes back to the first angles again says it’s a try.... there is just no clear evidence to show that the ball has been 100% grounded...

Weepsie

ForestFire wrote: »

]

Because at this point there is an arm or two, from both white and/or blue under the ball. (that's why white continues to wiggle around after this to get the ball past these arms)

It's not clear if the arms are preventing the ball making contact or not, but it's also not clear if the ball is touching the ground (or grass)

Therefore on field decision stands...

And I'd agree with other posters, if on field decision was a try no one would probable question this.

I thought the ball was down before this. 14 didn't get under til after the grounding

FileNotFound

Weepsie wrote: »

I thought the ball was down before this. 14 didn't get under til after the grounding

Once ROG said it was down I said fair enough haha. Few men hate the Brits more.

Quantum Baloney

Strumms wrote: »

It actually matters, very much...It’s a match that gets decided by who scores the most points.. who was ‘better’ is subjective and not what determines a result.... when points are awarded to a team by a TMO who overturns a decision of ‘no try’ by viewing multiple replays that to most of us watching are inconclusive at ‘best’.. the ball is millimeters from being grounded but zero factual evidence to confirm that it actually was...she looks at the initial replays numerous times, looks for others, goes back to the first angles again says it’s a try.... there is just no clear evidence to show that the ball has been 100% grounded...

You are babbling.

The ref didn't see the grounding but the TMO was able to clarify what happened on field by reference to images very similar to the one posted above.

It was a try every day of the week. There is no evidence of it being held up in that initial grounding.

Strumms

Quantum Baloney wrote: »

You are babbling.

The ref didn't see the grounding but the TMO was able to clarify what happened on field by reference to images very similar to the one posted above.

It was a try every day of the week. There is no evidence of it being held up in that initial grounding.

The referee didn’t see a grounding so he didn’t award a try. That’s not babbling, that’s fact.

Going to the TMO and the numerous replays we as well as she saw...there was no conclusive evidence that the ball was grounded, absolutely none. She watches the same replays over and over, asks for other angles which give even less of an indication but goes back and looks at the first angles and says a try has been scored...

None of the angles showed that the ball had been grounded...yet a try is awarded. Not good enough.

AdamD

The replay from the other side clearly shows the ball was grounded. As for calling out the TMO - I don't think I've ever seen the TMO's actual name mentioned as much on a forum before, which says a whole lot..

Strumms

AdamD wrote: »

The replay from the other side clearly shows the ball was grounded. As for calling out the TMO - I don't think I've ever seen the TMO's actual name mentioned as much on a forum before, which says a whole lot..

I don’t think a lot of people care who the TMO was...

The ball was not shown to be ‘clearly’ grounded.

On the other hand, fans of honest endeavor, sport and sporting outcomes are questioning why a try was awarded and the outcome and result determined by what seems like an error of judgment on Neville’s behalf... that’s a fair discussion, regardless of what side of the fence you sit...simply she was involved, so she is being mentioned in that context..

If a person enters into an endeavor in the public eye, they open themselves to scrutiny, criticism, praise, the whole works...

Dave_The_Sheep

Ah, that's ok then.

fonecrusher1

fullstop wrote: »

Italy bring absolutely nothing to this tournament.

Deleted User wrote: »

At what point will Italy's spot in the 6 Nations really be ad risk? It's like watching a fish out of water documentary at times.

Scratchly wrote: »

Thats a ridiculous thing to say. They're the biggest supplier of bonus points in the competition!

Bridge93 wrote: »

This Italy is the worst team to ever play in the tournament. They’re young but have no answers and no discipline

Eod100 wrote: »

Would a relegation promotion play off ever be on the cards? Or no guarantee that even if say Georgia beat Italy in a one off game they would be much better? Saw Bernard Jackman was on about it on twitter there

sydthebeat wrote: »

Easily the worst Italian team I've ever seen in the competition

DJIMI TRARORE wrote: »

Unfortunately Italy r slightly better than the next best, be it Georgia, Russia, Spain, Germany. Maybe someone like Kenya would be a better alternative

StevenToast wrote: »

You could leave Italy play the others in the off week....

Take them out of the championship...they have no business being on that table....

This is as close to a friendly as you will get....training sessions are harder than italy...

magic17 wrote: »

Another hammering for Italy. From a competitive point of view, what exactly is the point of them? Surely it would be better to go back to 5 teams and let Italy go face the likes of Georgia in the second tier competition.

They've not improved at all in 20 years despite being given plenty of chances, their teams entered into the Pro 14 etc. They're as bad now as they ever were.

Lads, lads lads careful with that sort of talk. Nothing to see here. Everything is fine. Give them a chance for gods sake. Lets give them another 20 years.

:pac:

Curse These Metal Hands

Would love to see footage of the ball being clearly and undeniably grounded. So far no one has produced any.

Curse These Metal Hands

AdamD wrote: »

The replay from the other side clearly shows the ball was grounded. As for calling out the TMO - I don't think I've ever seen the TMO's actual name mentioned as much on a forum before, which says a whole lot..

Yeah. Very unusual for officials to be criticised after a rugby game...

Dubinusa

I thought it was a try. England were fitter and better in the end, imo. Looks grim for us on a 6 day turnaround. A pasting next week and Farrell is in trouble.

FileNotFound

FileNotFound wrote: »

Once ROG said it was down I said fair enough haha. Few men hate the Brits more.

I actually always find ROG the fairest in his analysis of England, Williams is by far and away the worst!!

Bluwave

Dubinusa wrote: »

I thought it was a try. England were fitter and better in the end, imo. Looks grim for us on a 6 day turnaround. A pasting next week and Farrell is in trouble.

It’s looked like this from a long way out, since after the Scotland game at least. The sarries players are using the 6N to regain their fitness.

While this isn’t ideal for England 2021 it could well be a massive benefit for England 2023 when the core of their team have had a 12-18 month mini sabbatical as the other nations core players play 24 months rugby with minimal time off.

.ak

Ah it was a try. Looked fairly clear on TV, TMO would've had much better high def footage to review..

AdamD

Curse These Metal Hands wrote: »

Yeah. Very unusual for officials to be criticised after a rugby game...

You missed my point. Officials get criticised all of the time, however I've never seen a slew of posts calling out a TMO by their name (sure a ref by their name, but never the TMO), until games where its been a female official.

pickarooney

AdamD wrote: »

You missed my point. Officials get criticised all of the time, however I've never seen a slew of posts calling out a TMO by their name (sure a ref by their name, but never the TMO), until games where its been a female official.

I think you're just reaching here. Go back to the Wales v England thread and count how many times Poite is mentioned. Or go back to the world cup and see if any official is mentioned half as much as Ben Skeen.

hahashake

Right now all teams are on a positive points difference except Italy, who is at -142.

Strumms

Dubinusa wrote: »

I thought it was a try. England were fitter and better in the end, imo. Looks grim for us on a 6 day turnaround. A pasting next week and Farrell is in trouble.

the last 10 minutes France looked seriously leggy, basically out on their feet... the English were full of energy, speed and endeavor...France were just hanging on in there... in professional sport it’s very unusual to see what appeared to be a tangible gulf in fitness between two sides..

hahashake

Strumms wrote: »

the last 10 minutes France looked seriously leggy, basically out on their feet... the English were full of energy, speed and endeavor...France were just hanging on in there... in professional sport it’s very unusual to see what appeared to be a tangible gulf in fitness between two sides..

I'd imagine the COVID situation played a part, even if that's just lack of match fitness from quarantining.