England v Ireland Autumn Nations Cup | 21.11.20 KO 15:00 | RTE 1 Read Post #5

Clegg · 23-11-2020 12:22pm

We started the game quite well I think. Put in a few chips and cross field kicks to catch out the defence. Didn't always work, but it gave England something to think about other than rushing up and smothering our carriers.

I don't know why we stopped stopped doing that after 20 minutes. Perhaps it was pre-planned or perhaps England sussed us out, but I'd like to see more tactical kicking in the future. It's worked for Leinster in the league and Ireland have scored trys off the back of it this season too. Get Ringrose back into the side when he's fit and we have another player with a good kicking game who could exploit the gaps left by a rush defence.

Think we could use Lowe's boot more as well. He has some technical issues to iron out, namely the low trajectory of his kicks. But the distance he gets is huge. This for instance was an excellent kick and would have given us prime field position but for even better fielding from Owen Farrell.

https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1330809953825804294?s=09

California Dreamer · 23-11-2020 12:24pm

I am disappointed that Devin Toner is not part of this squad and Andy Farrell doesn't hold him in any high regard.

lawrencesummers · 23-11-2020 12:30pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

we've seen countless great full backs being beating in the air with crossfield kicks like that.... i just find it very distasteful to call it a childish error and to apportion blame for the try onto keenan when the damage was done inside him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOhlT0LdeCA

We have seen countless great fullbacks winning the ball in the air from cross field kicks like that as well.

Sure I think he could have done better, but in reality it’s a mute point because we were hanging on by fingernails at that point and had Keenan caught it then it was back to another scrum or lineout where we were getting hammered anyway.

lawrencesummers · 23-11-2020 12:32pm

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

It also appears Rob Kearney has never made a mistake in his career...

Damm autocorrect changing tackle to mistake.

ironingbored · 23-11-2020 2:57pm

In fairness, if England were playing a WC Final tomorrow that would be their team.

We were missing (either through injury/rotation):
Sexton
Ringrose
Furlong
Leavy
Henshaw
Larmour
Murray
Stockdale
Henderson
Herring
Beirne
Conway

phog · 23-11-2020 3:07pm

ironingbored wrote: »

In fairness, if England were playing a WC Final tomorrow that would be their team.

We were missing (either through injury/rotation):
Sexton
Ringrose
Furlong
Leavy
Henshaw
Larmour
Murray
Stockdale
Henderson
Herring
Beirne
Conway

True but it's also worth pointing out that a lot of the team that started was what pundits wanted to start as they felt some of them were better than who they replaced.

In saying that any Irish team heading to Twickenham without Sexton is a poorer team than one with him.

23-11-2020 3:15pm

Clegg wrote: »

We started the game quite well I think. Put in a few chips and cross field kicks to catch out the defence. Didn't always work, but it gave England something to think about other than rushing up and smothering our carriers.

I don't know why we stopped stopped doing that after 20 minutes. Perhaps it was pre-planned or perhaps England sussed us out, but I'd like to see more tactical kicking in the future. It's worked for Leinster in the league and Ireland have scored trys off the back of it this season too. Get Ringrose back into the side when he's fit and we have another player with a good kicking game who could exploit the gaps left by a rush defence.

Think we could use Lowe's boot more as well. He has some technical issues to iron out, namely the low trajectory of his kicks. But the distance he gets is huge. This for instance was an excellent kick and would have given us prime field position but for even better fielding from Owen Farrell.

https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1330809953825804294?s=09

I thought I was losing my marbles in the European Cup final in Newcastle that day. Leinster running the ball in their own 22m line and not making any headway despite being behind on the scoreboard.

I was screaming at the TV for some grubbers, dinks over the top, even kicks for territory.

Is kicking for territory obsolete nowadays? I wasn't O'Gara's biggest fan but he used to pin teams back in their own half better than any other outhalf in the world I'd wager.

irishbucsfan · 23-11-2020 3:28pm

I’m just not that pushed about this game, aside from our line out really.

That back line can’t be successful. Ross Byrne can’t play in that midfield at the highest level. The only way I could ever see that working would be if Carberry or similar was able to join the line as a 2nd pivot. It doesn’t mean Byrne isn’t a good player, I’m a big fan of his. Just not in this team with that supporting cast.

As soon as you resign yourself to the fact that breaking the line in open play is going to be very difficult, then your only option is really to dominate territory. Unfortunately our set piece made that impossible. If our line out had been 100% then I reckon we could still have won that game, especially when you consider one of their line outs was off a throw deep in their 22, so potentially a 10-14 point swing.

The set piece is far more concerning to me. We need to get ahead of that problem. The scrum wasn’t a disaster but I don’t see where points are going to come from if we can’t reliably win line outs in the opposition half.

I think if we fix our set piece, we become a team who can battle to beat top opposition some of the time. If we fix our set piece and introduce an ability to break the line in open play (which we could be as little as one player away from), then we become a top 3 team again. The set piece may just require a lot of time and work with inexperienced tight 5, might need to be quite patient on that one.

Dog Botherer · 23-11-2020 3:45pm

I’m not too worried about the set piece. the lineout has been a mess but i don’t think we’ve gone longer than a couple of games with the same 2-4-5 axis. very hard to build set piece consistency without consistent selection. that will come in time.

also, we went to Twickenham, had a prop pull up the morning of, then another in the warm up, and had to play a 24 year old prop for 80 minutes against one of the biggest packs in the game. and it was fine. did we shunt them off their ball or win penalties consistently? no, but really only South Africa can do that to England. we had parity, and never really looked like getting mulched. and that was without Furlong! the days of Tom Court are long gone.

UAEguy2020 · 23-11-2020 3:58pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I’m just not that pushed about this game, aside from our line out really.

That back line can’t be successful. Ross Byrne can’t play in that midfield at the highest level. The only way I could ever see that working would be if Carberry or similar was able to join the line as a 2nd pivot. It doesn’t mean Byrne isn’t a good player, I’m a big fan of his. Just not in this team with that supporting cast.

As soon as you resign yourself to the fact that breaking the line in open play is going to be very difficult, then your only option is really to dominate territory. Unfortunately our set piece made that impossible. If our line out had been 100% then I reckon we could still have won that game, especially when you consider one of their line outs was off a throw deep in their 22, so potentially a 10-14 point swing.

The set piece is far more concerning to me. We need to get ahead of that problem. The scrum wasn’t a disaster but I don’t see where points are going to come from if we can’t reliably win line outs in the opposition half.

I think if we fix our set piece, we become a team who can battle to beat top opposition some of the time. If we fix our set piece and introduce an ability to break the line in open play (which we could be as little as one player away from), then we become a top 3 team again. The set piece may just require a lot of time and work with inexperienced tight 5, might need to be quite patient on that one.

I think if we are to play with Ross in future we need to play with 2 play makers.

I’m with you on everything you said. The line out is a complete crap shoot, it’s quite clearly a system error because it seems no matter who’s throwing or jumping the lineout ends up the same way.

In regards to the back line we are missing one key component from potentially being lethal and that one component is the same as I said earlier, a second play maker. For us that Ringrose but sadly he has only really had one game in a Farrell team because in the game v Italy he spent all the time being a SH thanks to Murray’s Yellow.

It does feel the pieces are there to build us into a very strong team again but we need to piece them together and hopefully by March next year we are some way closer to that.

crisco10 · 23-11-2020 4:00pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I’m just not that pushed about this game, aside from our line out really.

That back line can’t be successful. Ross Byrne can’t play in that midfield at the highest level. The only way I could ever see that working would be if Carberry or similar was able to join the line as a 2nd pivot. It doesn’t mean Byrne isn’t a good player, I’m a big fan of his. Just not in this team with that supporting cast.

As soon as you resign yourself to the fact that breaking the line in open play is going to be very difficult, then your only option is really to dominate territory. Unfortunately our set piece made that impossible. If our line out had been 100% then I reckon we could still have won that game, especially when you consider one of their line outs was off a throw deep in their 22, so potentially a 10-14 point swing.

The set piece is far more concerning to me. We need to get ahead of that problem. The scrum wasn’t a disaster but I don’t see where points are going to come from if we can’t reliably win line outs in the opposition half.

I think if we fix our set piece, we become a team who can battle to beat top opposition some of the time. If we fix our set piece and introduce an ability to break the line in open play (which we could be as little as one player away from), then we become a top 3 team again. The set piece may just require a lot of time and work with inexperienced tight 5, might need to be quite patient on that one.

I actually agree with most/all of this. Well said. For me if our lineout works, we probably win in Paris and have a chance to in Twickenham and most of this hand wringing doesn't happen.

UAEguy2020 · 23-11-2020 4:02pm

Dog Botherer wrote: »

I’m not too worried about the set piece. the lineout has been a mess but i don’t think we’ve gone longer than a couple of games with the same 2-4-5 axis. very hard to build set piece consistency without consistent selection. that will come in time.

also, we went to Twickenham, had a prop pull up the morning of, then another in the warm up, and had to play a 24 year old prop for 80 minutes against one of the biggest packs in the game. and it was fine. did we shunt them off their ball or win penalties consistently? no, but really only South Africa can do that to England. we had parity, and never really looked like getting mulched. and that was without Furlong! the days of Tom Court are long gone.

Truth be told you will never get anything other that parity against England so even getting that was a huge plus.

Clearlier · 23-11-2020 4:19pm

I've rewatched the match and have a couple of observations:
Notwithstanding the try Keenan is good in the air and his positional sense while difficult gauge on tv seems pretty good. His kicking game though needs urgent work.

Our lineout is a shambles and it's not just one reason. Our defensive lineout wasn't any better.

Further to the lineout we should start kicking penalties instead of putting them into touch. This England team in particular needs to be pressurised on the scoreboard. I didn't count but we had about a half dozen penalties that could have been kicked. Even if we're only getting half that's another 9 points which makes the game a lot more competitive. Also England were happy to be ultra-aggressive in rucks, risking penalties but backing their lineout and defence if Ireland got a penalty.

The quality of our rucking needs to improve. I know that Itoje is a monster but we really can't afford to concede as many turnovers as we do. Taking our kicks at goal as mentioned above may well make life easier in this area.

Our defence was pretty good.

We were nowhere near as clinical as we used to be when we got near their line.

Our maul was not a threat at all.

We started off kicking a lot which is the correct tactic against England but then largely stopped aside from the grubber and the try.

Our scrum held up. (I've still never once seen Sinckler push straight but he gets away with it).

It's not so much that Byrne was taking the ball too deep but that he was too static. While he's certainly not a destructive runner he has enough about him to be a threat and needs to use it a little more. Notwithstanding that we were generally able to make ground ball in hand until we got to their 22 - I'm assuming that there was an extra man in the line that allowed England to be more aggressive. If that's the case then we need to get better at spotting the extra space behind the defensive line and exploiting it as with the grubber kick.

England offer little in attack - they actually remind me of Ireland at their peak under Schmidt. Excellent rucking, good kicking and lots of it - generally low risk rugby.

Burns' kicking game against Wales was poor. I don't know how it is for Ulster but if that was his normal standard then it needs to be addressed before he can become a serious option as a starter

Yeah_Right · 23-11-2020 4:20pm

I've seen a few people refer to the English pack as being massive and a lot bigger than the Irish pack. Are they? Apart from Billy, I wouldn't have thought any of them were that much bigger than their Irish counter part.

Dog Botherer · 23-11-2020 4:26pm

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I've seen a few people refer to the English pack as being massive and a lot bigger than the Irish pack. Are they? Apart from Billy, I wouldn't have thought any of them were that much bigger than their Irish counter part.

don’t have the stats to hand but the commentator said the English bench forwards were almost 20kg a man bigger than their counterparts.

Clearlier · 23-11-2020 4:27pm

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I've seen a few people refer to the English pack as being massive and a lot bigger than the Irish pack. Are they? Apart from Billy, I wouldn't have thought any of them were that much bigger than their Irish counter part.

His brother is listed as being 5kgs heavier than Healy but looks a bit more. Mind you Andrew Porter is listed as 135kgs on Wikipedia which seems a touch optimistic.

Your point about relative sizes is well taken though.

Yeah_Right · 23-11-2020 4:54pm

Dog Botherer wrote: »

don’t have the stats to hand but the commentator said the English bench forwards were almost 20kg a man bigger than their counterparts.

That can't be right :eek: Maybe 20kg overall? Ben Earl isn't big. And I didn't think any of the others were giants.

shootermacg · 23-11-2020 5:00pm

Ireland used to play the exact game England use now. They won a lot with it. But people were always moaning about the style of rugby they were playing and how we were kicking away everything.

We progressed to a team that just held possession all the time and kicked less.

Then other teams started putting screen runners in front of our chasers. A simple cure for this would have been to kick off ten instead of box kicking, we didn't do that.

Then it was like .... play like Japan do!

The fact of the matter is Ireland should have stuck to a pressure game while making small adjustments to our kicking strategy to allow our chasers to be more competitive, it's what we were really good at.

Currently SA and England play a style that is pretty much Joe-ball with a few changes and strike plays.

I would have been happy if we'd have gone down that road.

The Lost Sheep · 23-11-2020 5:05pm

Yeah_Right wrote: »

That can't be right :eek: Maybe 20kg overall? Ben Earl isn't big. And I didn't think any of the others were giants.

Its not right. Between starters and subs england were 40kg heavier.

aloooof · 23-11-2020 5:08pm

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

For us that Ringrose but sadly he has only really had one game in a Farrell team because in the game v Italy he spent all the time being a SH thanks to Murray’s Yellow.

All the time? Or, yknow, 10 mins?

Ardillaun · 23-11-2020 5:11pm

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I've seen a few people refer to the English pack as being massive and a lot bigger than the Irish pack. Are they? Apart from Billy, I wouldn't have thought any of them were that much bigger than their Irish counter part.

The Irish pack is usually lighter than its opponents these days. 922 vs 895 is listed here:

https://www.ruck.co.uk/england-vs-ireland-pack-weights-and-more-interesting-stats/

That’s heavier than recent outings for an Irish pack with VdF out.

Ardillaun · 23-11-2020 5:42pm

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Its not right. Between starters and subs england were 40kg heavier.

Mark Robson claimed the English bench forwards were 10 kg, so around 20 pounds, heavier a man than the starting players, which is as good an excuse as any to drag in an infamous pun of his, first made in happier times; CJ was outstanderingly inconspicuous on this occasion.

I think it’s the power of the English players that’s the real problem. Itoje is not that tall or heavy, just incredibly fit and strong.

Ardillaun · 23-11-2020 5:53pm

OK, as an NH loyalist, I really don’t begrudge England their recent success (too much) but, for the sake of the game as a spectacle, I have to hope they don’t become the dominant team in world rugby. Tackling the bejaysus out of weaker opposition and relying on opportunistic scores sounds like Italian soccer in its grim heyday.

Ardillaun · 23-11-2020 6:15pm

California Dreamer wrote: »

I am disappointed that Devin Toner is not part of this squad and Andy Farrell doesn't hold him in any high regard.

Did we ever fully adjust to the post-Toner era in the lineout?

sydthebeat · 23-11-2020 6:21pm

Ardillaun wrote: »

OK, as an NH loyalist, I really don’t begrudge England their recent success (too much) but, for the sake of the game as a spectacle, I have to hope they don’t become the dominant team in world rugby. Tackling the bejaysus out of weaker opposition and relying on opportunistic scores sounds like Italian soccer in its grim heyday.

i agree to a certain degree

rugby is becoming a game that your chances of win are better without the ball.

The south africa v wales semi final last year really was a disgraceful advertisement for the game. 73 kicks in an 80 min game. SA winning the game comfortably enough with 39% possession and 38% territory.

as sam warburton said over the weekend, the reason teams kick the ball 60 meters up the field is because its the easiest way to get up the field with todays defensive systems. With the new jackal interpretations you can no bash up for 40 phases a la ireland v france 2018.. to much risk of a turnover for a split second slow clean out, or a slightly wrong angle on the clean. Result, penalty against you in a kickable position.

Ill be interested to see how France v England goes in a couple of weeks, to see if england can win with less than 40% possession again.

Richie_Rich89 · 23-11-2020 6:51pm

Not sure about the Aki, Farrell centre partnership. To me, you either stick Farrell at 12, or, if he's at 13, put him in with an Aussie-style playmaker 12 like Frawley.

sydthebeat · 23-11-2020 7:19pm

Richie_Rich89 wrote: »

Not sure about the Aki, Farrell centre partnership. To me, you either stick Farrell at 12, or, if he's at 13, put him in with an Aussie-style playmaker 12 like Frawley.

while its extremely early, im liking what Jimmy O Brien is bringing in regards to a 2nd pivot.. whether from 15 or 12.

it will be good to see how he gets on in european games going forward

Richie_Rich89 · 23-11-2020 7:28pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

while its extremely early, im liking what Jimmy O Brien is bringing in regards to a 2nd pivot.. whether from 15 or 12.

it will be good to see how he gets on in european games going forward

Not sure we'll see him return to playing 12, but yeah, he looks very polished in what he does. He should at least make the bench for the big games for Leinster and he probably should be starting.

UAEguy2020 · 23-11-2020 8:35pm

aloooof wrote: »

All the time? Or, yknow, 10 mins?

Yes all the time, he was only on for about that long and it was all spent at SH.

UAEguy2020 · 23-11-2020 8:36pm

Ardillaun wrote: »

OK, as an NH loyalist, I really don’t begrudge England their recent success (too much) but, for the sake of the game as a spectacle, I have to hope they don’t become the dominant team in world rugby. Tackling the bejaysus out of weaker opposition and relying on opportunistic scores sounds like Italian soccer in its grim heyday.

If they were going to be the dominant team in rugby they would have done so by now.

UAEguy2020 · 23-11-2020 8:38pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

i agree to a certain degree

rugby is becoming a game that your chances of win are better without the ball.

The south africa v wales semi final last year really was a disgraceful advertisement for the game. 73 kicks in an 80 min game. SA winning the game comfortably enough with 39% possession and 38% territory.

as sam warburton said over the weekend, the reason teams kick the ball 60 meters up the field is because its the easiest way to get up the field with todays defensive systems. With the new jackal interpretations you can no bash up for 40 phases a la ireland v france 2018.. to much risk of a turnover for a split second slow clean out, or a slightly wrong angle on the clean. Result, penalty against you in a kickable position.

Ill be interested to see how France v England goes in a couple of weeks, to see if england can win with less than 40% possession again.

It might actually work as France tend to be better when they don’t have the ball much, intact the one 6N game that they dominated possession (vs Scotland away) they lost.

aloooof · 23-11-2020 9:33pm

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

Yes all the time, he was only on for about that long and it was all spent at SH.

In which case, I've fixed your post:

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

For us that Ringrose but sadly he has only really had one game in a Farrell team because in the game v Italy he spent all the time being a SH thanks to Murray’s Yellow he got injured.

molloyjh · 23-11-2020 10:10pm

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

Yes all the time, he was only on for about that long and it was all spent at SH.

Purely point of fact, Ringrose was replaced after 27 mins, so he played 9 for less than half of the time that he was on the pitch.

Ardillaun · 23-11-2020 10:44pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

i agree to a certain degree

rugby is becoming a game that your chances of win are better without the ball.

The south africa v wales semi final last year really was a disgraceful advertisement for the game. 73 kicks in an 80 min game. SA winning the game comfortably enough with 39% possession and 38% territory.

That was a depressing game. RSA just strangled the life out of it. Rugby isn’t going to grow its viewing audience with product like that.

24-11-2020 7:30am

Ardillaun wrote: »

That was a depressing game. RSA just strangled the life out of it. Rugby isn’t going to grow its viewing audience with product like that.

If it wins trophies the fans don't care. Our best successes under Joe were some of the dullest games for the neutral.

pickarooney · 24-11-2020 7:43am

clsmooth wrote: »

I’m surprised you’d don’t realise what being stuck between a rock and hard place looks like. But then I guess that helps explain your strange argument. What percentage chance would you give both May and Keenan of winning the ball once it left Farrell’s foot?

If Keenan is waiting until it leaves Farrell's foot to start moving he's already setting himself up for a beating in the air. He needs to anticipate the kick and be coming on to it running from behind the goal line. He did make the run but overshot it and was not high enough. If he comes from a metre further back he's in full flight and in front of May.

Compare with Farrell's movement to claim that mark where he ran off the pitch. He's haring across to claim it even before Lowe shapes to kick.

Or Kearney when he strolled around against SA and the ball just dropped into his arms. Granted, no opposition makes those catches a lot easier but positioning is the most important aspect of dominating the back field.

It's severe to 'blame' Keenan for not having the vision and experience to be a quality international FB. He'll learn this stuff quickly enough.

pickarooney · 24-11-2020 7:48am

molloyjh wrote: »

GIVE NEW GUYS A CHANCE!!!!!

LOOK AT THAT CHILDISH MISTAKE THE NEW GUY MADE!!!!!!!

Who'd want to be a pro rugby player, eh?

New guy gets a chance to make a mistake in a meaningless game against world class opposition and learn from it.

Literally the only useful thing about this tournament.

First Up · 24-11-2020 8:23am

pickarooney wrote:

If Keenan is waiting until it leaves Farrell's foot to start moving he's already setting himself up for a beating in the air. He needs to anticipate the kick and be coming on to it running from behind the goal line. He did make the run but overshot it and was not high enough. If he comes from a metre further back he's in full flight and in front of May.

Has it occured to you that if Keenan had moved to a different position before Farrell kicked, then Farrell might have kicked it somewhere else or done something different?

Lee Roadie · 24-11-2020 11:59am

Excuse my ignorance, but if a hooker is having a bad day at lineout time, why don't they at least consider the props as an option, is there anything to prevent a prop throwing in?

Yeah_Right · 24-11-2020 12:13pm

Lee Roadie wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance, but if a hooker is having a bad day at lineout time, why don't they at least consider the props as an option, is there anything to prevent a prop throwing in?

There is nothing preventing any player from being the thrower into the lineout. The only issue is have they had any practice at it?

IAmTheReign · 24-11-2020 12:21pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

i agree to a certain degree

rugby is becoming a game that your chances of win are better without the ball.

The south africa v wales semi final last year really was a disgraceful advertisement for the game. 73 kicks in an 80 min game. SA winning the game comfortably enough with 39% possession and 38% territory.

as sam warburton said over the weekend, the reason teams kick the ball 60 meters up the field is because its the easiest way to get up the field with todays defensive systems. With the new jackal interpretations you can no bash up for 40 phases a la ireland v france 2018.. to much risk of a turnover for a split second slow clean out, or a slightly wrong angle on the clean. Result, penalty against you in a kickable position.

Ill be interested to see how France v England goes in a couple of weeks, to see if england can win with less than 40% possession again.

Properly enforcing the rule that the jackaling player has to support their own bodyweight would help a lot. A player propping himself up on a ruck is not supporting his own weight and should be penalised for playing the ball off his feet. Marginal calls should favour the attacking team.

First Up · 24-11-2020 12:44pm

Lee Roadie wrote:

Excuse my ignorance, but if a hooker is having a bad day at lineout time, why don't they at least consider the props as an option, is there anything to prevent a prop throwing in?

Wingers used to do it way back when.

Paul Smeenus · 24-11-2020 12:56pm

Yeah_Right wrote: »

There is nothing preventing any player from being the thrower into the lineout. The only issue is have they had any practice at it?

Yeah, in terms of laws, it can be anyone.

In terms of how that actually works - it takes a lot of skill and practice to be good. And the golden standard - consistent. Keith Wood said on the OTB podcast that throwing to the lineout in an international match adds a metre to your throw due to adrenaline, which I thought was just a killer detail - I found it fascinating that they'd quantified such stuff.
But that does mean that, if your hooker is having an off day, giving it to another team member who lacks that experience and muscle memory - it's gonna be worse. Whatever's happening with your hooker, it won't be better. That's before you starting asking the whole team to start memorising lineout calls.

Dog Botherer · 24-11-2020 2:19pm

I remember once either Ireland or Leinster had their hooker in the bin and Sean O’Brien took the lineout. would be interesting if they had a secondary thrower ready for that scenario or if they just didn’t want to make the sub.

Ardillaun · 24-11-2020 7:06pm

Deleted User wrote: »

If it wins trophies the fans don't care. Our best successes under Joe were some of the dullest games for the neutral.

Sure, but you’re talking about existing fans there. Rugby needs to grow its global audience. Tackling and kicking the ball away won’t do it.

Paul Weller · 24-11-2020 8:08pm

First Up wrote: »

Wingers used to do it way back when.

Didn't know Jaco had re-regged

England v Ireland Autumn Nations Cup | 21.11.20 KO 15:00 | RTE 1 Read Post #5

Comments