understatement of the year .. 'I haven't done a good enough job' sayeth Eddie Jones .. the Qzzie bullshit expert chancer should have been sacked 18 months ago .. the RFU, like most other sports 'governing bodies' is just about useless when it comes to appointing suitable mangers/head coaches Congratulations to France, with the caveat that their back up players are nowhere near as good as the first choices, and to Ireland, a k a Leinster and guests for the Triple Crown .. England player wise are spoilt for choice, alas, Jones forever makes the wrong choices. Bring back Clive Woodward as England manager/coaching supervisor before we suffer another underwhelming World Cup next year. The main guiding lights of Ireland and France are English, while we are stuck with Kangaroo Eddie
Can anyone explain to me the reason for the new law which means that if the ball is held up (not grounded) in a try attempt a drop out is then awarded to the defending team instead of a five yard scrum…..with attackers put in. This seems farcical, especially considering how long and how hard teams often have to struggle to get to the line…..and when they do it’s all for nothing if it’s held up! Ok, well done to the defence for holding it up but the drop out law now penalises the attacking side……isn’t the idea to promote excitement by the law makers and ergo encourage the attackers and hence the possibility of more points scored! Seems illogical to me……or is there actually a valid reason for this change? I’m struggling to think of one if there is.
Can anyone explain to me the reason for the new law which means that if the ball is held up (not grounded) in a try attempt a drop out is then awarded to the defending team instead of a five yard scrum…..with attackers put in. This seems farcical, especially considering how long and how hard teams often have to struggle to get to the line…..and when they do it’s all for nothing if it’s held up! Ok, well done to the defence for holding it up but the drop out law now penalises the attacking side……isn’t the idea to promote excitement by the law makers and ergo encourage the attackers and hence the possibility of more points scored! Seems illogical to me……or is there actually a valid reason for this change? I’m struggling to think of one if there is.
Can anyone explain to me the reason for the new law which means that if the ball is held up (not grounded) in a try attempt a drop out is then awarded to the defending team instead of a five yard scrum…..with attackers put in. This seems farcical, especially considering how long and how hard teams often have to struggle to get to the line…..and when they do it’s all for nothing if it’s held up! Ok, well done to the defence for holding it up but the drop out law now penalises the attacking side……isn’t the idea to promote excitement by the law makers and ergo encourage the attackers and hence the possibility of more points scored! Seems illogical to me……or is there actually a valid reason for this change? I’m struggling to think of one if there is.
The law change avoids the interminable, dull spectacle (for everyone, other than committed supporters of the two teams) of play after play being held up at, or over the line.
It's far more interesting and exciting to see a team building an attack from 20, 30 or 40m out, than see a time-consuming, orchestrated meat-grinder exercise repeated ad nauseum.
Can anyone explain to me the reason for the new law which means that if the ball is held up (not grounded) in a try attempt a drop out is then awarded to the defending team instead of a five yard scrum…..with attackers put in. This seems farcical, especially considering how long and how hard teams often have to struggle to get to the line…..and when they do it’s all for nothing if it’s held up! Ok, well done to the defence for holding it up but the drop out law now penalises the attacking side……isn’t the idea to promote excitement by the law makers and ergo encourage the attackers and hence the possibility of more points scored! Seems illogical to me……or is there actually a valid reason for this change? I’m struggling to think of one if there is.
The law change avoids the interminable, dull spectacle (for everyone, other than committed supporters of the two teams) of play after play being held up at, or over the line.
It's far more interesting and exciting to see a team building an attack from 20, 30 or 40m out, than see a time-consuming, orchestrated meat-grinder exercise repeated ad nauseum.
Then you may as well limit the phases to six & be done with it 🙄😜🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Building a team eh…what a load of nonsense, just wait come the next 6 nations or WC he will still be looking to play Tuilagi and overweight Billy V at no8. The clown bought on George Ford last 2 matches as a centre…how can that be building a team. He’s lost the plot unfortunately team’s regressed since that glorious semi final victory against the All Blacks.
Not 6 Nations but Ireland have just battered Kiwis. Fully deserved win as well.
Kiwis had one sent off and possibly should have had another as well.
The ABs even tried to sneak a player on to pitch to make it 15 again.
Looking forward to next week’s game, hopefully Ireland winning the series.
was about to give this the new post it deserves .. the ABs had one sent off and were lucky it was only one .. a pity in a way that the Irish beat 14, the arrogant ABs will always have that as an excuse England in front at 1/2 time in Brisbane, still not using the backs at all other than chasing kicks and tough defending .. love the way the Antipodean crowds boo the oppo place kickers .. twunts
Going to have to take more of an interest in this game… my 15 year old nephew has been offered a spot at Leicester Tigers academy beginning September. Very proud Aunt.
Going to have to take more of an interest in this game… my 15 year old nephew has been offered a spot at Leicester Tigers academy beginning September. Very proud Aunt.
Going to have to take more of an interest in this game… my 15 year old nephew has been offered a spot at Leicester Tigers academy beginning September. Very proud Aunt.
It must be in the genes. Tell me, he’s either a tight head or loose head prop.
Ha yes! How did you guess - cheeky!!? He’s a tight head prop. Currently standing about 6.2 but I got a crick in me neck looking up. Still got a bit of growth to go.
Comments
Congratulations to France, with the caveat that their back up players are nowhere near as good as the first choices, and to Ireland, a k a Leinster and guests for the Triple Crown .. England player wise are spoilt for choice, alas, Jones forever makes the wrong choices. Bring back Clive Woodward as England manager/coaching supervisor before we suffer another underwhelming World Cup next year. The main guiding lights of Ireland and France are English, while we are stuck with Kangaroo Eddie
Unfortunately you are correct though.
This seems farcical, especially considering how long and how hard teams often have to struggle to get to the line…..and when they do it’s all for nothing if it’s held up!
Ok, well done to the defence for holding it up but the drop out law now penalises the attacking side……isn’t the idea to promote excitement by the law makers and ergo encourage the attackers and hence the possibility of more points scored!
Seems illogical to me……or is there actually a valid reason for this change?
I’m struggling to think of one if there is.
Own goal imho.
And, while it may disadvantage the attacking side in this instance, the same is true for the defending side with the loss of the 22 drop out.
It's far more interesting and exciting to see a team building an attack from 20, 30 or 40m out, than see a time-consuming, orchestrated meat-grinder exercise repeated ad nauseum.
Eddie Jones: RFU's England progress claim is 'dishonest', says Ugo Monye - BBC Sport .. and Ugo is spot on
Ugo is right
Looking forward to next week’s game, hopefully Ireland winning the series.
England in front at 1/2 time in Brisbane, still not using the backs at all other than chasing kicks and tough defending .. love the way the Antipodean crowds boo the oppo place kickers .. twunts