Wales vs England

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?

dublinman1990

Wow. What a result for Wales. Even with the 2 tries to them given against England's favour; Wales were the better team today. They are on fire for the GS & they thoroughly deserve it.

theVersatile

Paul Smeenus wrote: »

Can he regain control when he was never in possession?

The problem here seems to be that ye define "in possession" as having the ball per as its used generally - as opposed to the way its defined in the laws. By playing the ball with his hand, LRZ is attempting to gain control of the ball, therefore he is in possession per the definition. Once he fails to gather the ball, he has then lost possession - and its a knock on.

lawred2

Still it's good to see Martin Johnson pissed off

Paul Smeenus

theVersatile wrote: »

The problem here seems to be that ye define "in possession" as having the ball per as its used generally - as opposed to the way its defined in the laws. By playing the ball with his hand, LRZ is attempting to gain control of the ball, therefore he is in possession per the definition. Once he fails to gather the ball, he has then lost possession - and its a knock on.

So we've gone from regain to gain control?

The Inbetween is mine

My half Welsh heritage is quite happy right now

theVersatile

Paul Smeenus wrote: »

So we've gone from regain to gain control?

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

Apologies - my use of gain and regain seems to have caused confusion. Yes, if the player was simply attempting to bring the ball under control - then he's in possession, regardless of whether or not he had possession before

Boscoirl

BBC played at half time a shot of the first try from begind the Welsh. England had finished their talk and started spreading out. The defenders on the other side managed to get in position but the defenders in the side with the try strolled out with their backs to the ball. It’s not the refs fault IMO.

The 2nd was a knock on though.

Daly turned his back on the ball for the tap n go try. Would have been in a position to tackle if he was switched on.

England are remarkably poor. They look like a dejected group of players.

Boscoirl

The main difference today for England was they were actually reffed

The Inbetween is mine

[Deleted User] wrote: »

England are remarkably poor. They look like a dejected group of players.

Great isn't it?!

Strumms

Farrell coming across as a complete dick as the interviewer asks pretty standard questions. He doesn’t get to decide what he gets asked.

tanko

Who is that interviewer for the BBC, she's some woman for asking dumb questions.

clsmooth

Boscoirl wrote: »

The main difference today for England was they were actually reffed

Correction: The main difference today for England was Maro Itoje were actually reffed. 5 penalties :eek:

OldRio

Farrell did very well in that interview. Wouldn't be drawn into any of the controversy. Fair play.

VANG1

Itoje is a penalty machine. Should be lion’s captain

lawred2

PTH2009 wrote: »

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

Wales have an incredible knack of taking every opportunity that comes their way..

thomond2006

[Deleted User] wrote: »

England are remarkably poor. They look like a dejected group of players.

They got shafted today in fairness.

Brewster

Strumms wrote: »

Farrell coming across as a complete dick as the interviewer asks pretty standard questions. He doesn’t get to decide what he gets asked.

Come on. His team experienced a couple of shockers and he couldn’t afford to talk about the decisions. What do you expect him to do? Go off on a rant about referee? Let’s enjoy game and result, but let’s not criticise a player when it is not warranted!

Podge_irl

Strumms wrote: »

Farrell coming across as a complete dick as the interviewer asks pretty standard questions. He doesn’t get to decide what he gets asked.

Thought he did about as well as possible under the circumstances.

Beechwoodspark

England looked all over the shop as thst half wore on

For all Eddie’s talk of “finishers” and the importance of the last quarter of the match