Wales vs England

sydthebeat

England their own worst enemies.

While the refs have been brutal, I'm glad to see them actually calling out the ****housery

prawnsambo

Wales kick the ball to England, England promptly give them a penalty.

lawred2

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

Need more than a kick through to make the lions.

Doing well off the tee too

razorblunt

Gauzere has a thing for Farrell I’d say. Williams went off feet right through him and Gauzere dismissed it.

theVersatile

prawnsambo wrote: »

You're missing the bit where it's not a knock on until it hits the ground or another player. So the interpretation that the ball last touched his leg before the ground/other player and went backwards from his leg, fits that scenario.

Alright, once more from the top.

Possession: An individual or team in control of the ball or who are attempting to
bring it under control.

Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when
a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or
arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the
original player can catch it.

So LRZ loses possession of the ball. Note the definition of possession and the wording of the knock on definition which requires a loss of possession. He plays it with his hand and loses control - and the ball goes forward. That much is clear.

LRZ never regains possession (as defined) or catches the ball after this moment. The ball hitting his leg is irrelevant, because after the ball comes forward off his hand, he has lost control (per the possession definition). The ball then hits the ground. The knock on isn't purely determined by the last direction the ball went (which was backwards off of his arse). Intrinsic in the knock on definition is this idea of control and possession. Therefore, despite the ball last travelling backwards off of the back of LRZ's leg; it doesn't matter.

This is because from the moment LRZ loses possession/control of the ball forward, the ball is never brought back into possession or caught. The test for a knock on isn't a strict "which direction did it last go in off the ball carrier". If it was, then sure its backwards. But LRZ has lost control forward and does not regain control of the ball prior to the ball hitting the ground. The backwards movement of the ball off his leg is inconsequential. Outcome: knock on

razorblunt

Genge penalised.
An Itoje yellow would see this right off really well.

lawred2

Same penalties over and over

Dopey

dublinman1990

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

England are going to be level, despite the first half's refereeing? Back into the game?

Yeah. I should have said it is quite a see saw of a game.

I just realized that England is one try behind Wales when they were on level points. I would have thought England would have taken slow & steady progress to get ahead of Wales. But this game appears to be in Wales favour for now.

If England get a try & conversion with 10 minutes left; they will beat Wales by 1 point. That would be a result for them with all of the sh1t that happened before it.

almostover

razorblunt wrote: »

Genge penalised.
An Itoje yellow would see this right off really well.

It'll never happen, he has the Pfizer vaccine against yellow cards

gally74

Class act

OldRio

England are just a penalty machine.

UAEguy2020

Wish we got this England for a change...

thomond2006

A scandal of a first half but England have been the architects of their own misfortune in the second.

Movementarian

Really torn watching this game, on the one hand don't want England to win because...well..its England.

But also don't want Wales to win because the narrative will be all how great they are despite people writing them off etc. Even though they have jammied their way through 3 games with red cards and now 2 tries that shouldn't have been given.

Draw please!

A2LUE42

prawnsambo wrote: »

You made that bit up because 'laws' didn't you?

It was what several coaches used to preach. Usually around discussions on what you could and couldn't get away with. Anytime a player moaned about someone not following the 'rules'.

prawnsambo

theVersatile wrote: »

Alright, once more from the top.

Possession: An individual or team in control of the ball or who are attempting to
bring it under control.

Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when
a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or
arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the
original player can catch it.

So LRZ loses possession of the ball. Note the definition of possession and the wording of the knock on definition which requires a loss of possession. He plays it with his hand and loses control - and the ball goes forward. That much is clear.

LRZ never regains possession (as defined) or catches the ball after this moment. The ball hitting his leg is irrelevant, because after the ball comes forward off his hand, he has lost control (per the possession definition). The ball then hits the ground. The knock on isn't purely determined by the last direction the ball went (which was backwards off of his arse). Intrinsic in the knock on definition is this idea of control and possession. Therefore, despite the ball last travelling backwards off of the back of LRZ's leg; it doesn't matter.

This is because from the moment LRZ loses possession/control of the ball forward, the ball is never brought back into possession or caught. The test for a knock on isn't a strict "which direction did it last go in off the ball carrier". If it was, then sure its backwards. But LRZ has lost control forward and does not regain control of the ball prior to the ball hitting the ground. The backwards movement of the ball off his leg is inconsequential. Outcome: knock on

He actually never had possession of the ball in the strict sense of the word. And your bold bit is actually the test for a knock on/forward pass. We just saw a detailed examination of this with Casey's pass to Lowe. So yes, its backwards if that's the test.

You're kind of tying yourself in knots with the 'possession' stuff. Loads of knock ons are called when a player never actually has possession. So where does your interpretation work there.

statesaver

Just could not get he's hands on it

DellyBelly

Think this Welsh side is very very good. I can't see France stopping them for the Grand Slam.

dublinman1990

Omg. That was close for Wales there.

UAEguy2020

The one thing Wales hadn’t had go for them was an intercept so there it is.

Dave_The_Sheep

OldRio wrote: »

England are just a penalty machine.

They won't be against us. Guaranteed.

Local_Chap

Who's the co commentator on Virgin for this match?

almostover

DellyBelly wrote: »

Think this Welsh side is very very good. I can't see France stopping them for the Grand Slam.

The effect of COVID on the France squad could be tough for them, Wales have to be heavy favourites for the GS now

gally74

Wales are improving every game,

statesaver

Do people still put value in winning a triple crown ?

dublinman1990

Wales try.

gally74

almostover wrote: »

The effect of COVID on the France squad could be tough for them, Wales have to be heavy favourites for the GS now

Reckon their going to withdraw!

Shelby Foote

Local_Chap wrote: »

Who's the co commentator on Virgin for this match?

Darren Cave

A-Train

Wales try.

They really are blessed

prawnsambo

Wales really working that "you need a bit of luck to win the 6N" thing to the limit.

Whatever about the ref, you don't beat England by that margin with a BP by accident.

HBC08

You'd have got decent odds on Wales winning the triple crown and potentially the GS a few weeks ago.

tabby aspreme

Local_Chap wrote: »

Who's the co commentator on Virgin for this match?

Darren Cave

gally74

A-Train wrote: »

Wales try.

They really are blessed

Their pretty good too

UAEguy2020

You can bet your life on it that we won’t be seeing this England team in Dublin...


This Welsh team is the most poxy team I’ve ever seen. You knew how it would go when that 2nd try was given.

almostover

George Ford is scutter. Why England don't pick Farrell at 10 is beyond me

The DayDream

Well no one can say Wales didn't deserve this one. Even without the controversial try they were the better team.

The England manager hasn't looked to have any answers for their sluggish tournament and it also hasn't looked like he cares much, which seems to have carried over to the team.

UAEguy2020

Jensen Victorious Bulb wrote: »

Whatever about the ref, you don't beat England by that margin with a BP by accident.

Usually.

tanko

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

They won't be against us. Guaranteed.

They will if the referee does his job properly.

Eddie Jones interview should be good after this.

PTH2009

For an average team Wales are going pretty well, the grand slam is in sight for them. Lucky baxtards over there having something to celebrate

Bluwave

That’s a very average and lucky Welsh team.

Simple tactics. Don’t put anyone into the Rucks and wait for England to make mistake after mistake and give away penalty after penalty.

This could be the end of the Eddie Jones era.

prawnsambo

almostover wrote: »

The effect of COVID on the France squad could be tough for them, Wales have to be heavy favourites for the GS now

The French Women's sevens team is now out with covid as well.

tabby aspreme

When did a team last, put 40 points on England

awec

Cannot believe wales put 40 on them.

sydthebeat

Jones out

ElisaAtWar

That was the most extraordinary game I have ever watched. Frank Murphy has more to learn it would seem

theVersatile

prawnsambo wrote: »

He actually never had possession of the ball in the strict sense of the word. And your bold bit is actually the test for a knock on/forward pass. We just saw a detailed examination of this with Casey's pass to Lowe. So yes, its backwards if that's the test.



You're kind of tying yourself in knots with the 'possession' stuff. Loads of knock ons are called when a player never actually has possession. So where does your interpretation work there.

Yes he did have possession at first because by playing the ball with his hand he was "attempting to regain control of the ball" per the possession definition.

The test for a knock on is literally the definition I provided that's in the law book, not "which direction the ball last went". Yes, if it is the test, then it is backwards. But it isn't, so it's not.

The forward pass (or "throw forward" as it is in the laws) is completely different to a knock on; and as such has its own definition:

Throw forward: When a player throws or passes the ball forward i.e. if the arms of
the player passing the ball move forward. In that case, yes the direction is the sole test. But a knock on, as evidence by the definition, is different.

Possession is literally mentioned in the wording of the definition of a knock on. It's not tying into knots - it's literally the way the rules work. You also seem to be missing the fact that the "in possession" definition includes "attempting to control the ball", which as you note is when a large amount of knock ons occur.

Dave_The_Sheep

tanko wrote: »

They will if the referee does his job properly

How's that working out so far?

super_furry

tanko wrote: »

They will if the referee does his job properly.

Eddie Jones interview should be good after this.

He'll deflect and hammer the referee but Jesus they were atrocious, especially after forcing their way back into the game. At 24-24 they handed Wales nine points with a bow on them.

Paul Smeenus

theVersatile wrote: »

Yes he did have possession at first because by playing the ball with his hand he was "attempting to regain control of the ball" per the possession definition.

The test for a knock on is literally the definition I provided that's in the law book, not "which direction the ball last went". Yes, if it is the test, then it is backwards. But it isn't, so it's not.

The forward pass (or "throw forward" as it is in the laws) is completely different to a knock on; and as such has its own definition:

Throw forward: When a player throws or passes the ball forward i.e. if the arms of
the player passing the ball move forward. In that case, yes the direction is the sole test. But a knock on, as evidence by the definition, is different.

Possession is literally mentioned in the wording of the definition of a knock on. It's not tying into knots - it's literally the way the rules work. You also seem to be missing the fact that the "in possession" definition includes "attempting to control the ball", which as you note is when a large amount of knock ons occur.

Can he regain control when he was never in possession?