GRcade

twitter.com/matt9dawson/status/835887286948626438

He really is a tool.

strawberry float!

Woop

Starbreaker wrote:

twitter.com/matt9dawson/status/835887286948626438

He really is a tool.

A lot of 'real' rugby fans seem to be going mad about Italy's tactics. I have no idea what they have done wrong. I don't understand it, but i'm a casual rugby fan and don't understand all the rules. What i do know is that rugby's rule book is very strict and is very alien to a football fan. Every team has to play the same formation for example. That's the rules of rugby, unlike football where you can position players where you like.

Why on earth weren't we doing that against the no-contest rucks in the first half.

Farrell has had lead in his boots today. Not a lot to take from this really, least we get a bonus point somehow.

36-15, easy win.

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:

Starbreaker wrote:

twitter.com/matt9dawson/status/835887286948626438

He really is a tool.

A lot of 'real' rugby fans seem to be going mad about Italy's tactics. I have no idea what they have done wrong. I don't understand it, but i'm a casual rugby fan and don't understand all the rules. What i do know is that rugby's rule book is very strict and is very alien to a football fan. Every team has to play the same formation for example. That's the rules of rugby, unlike football where you can position players where you like.

First off: laws not rules

Secondly, it's almost the same as football in regards to that. Yeah, you have to have players in named positions (so forwards for the scrum for instance) but there's nowt t stop you playing them where you want except in set pieces, sorta like you have to have the keeper in goal in a penalty shoot out. Obviously the brunt of the tactics are pretty similar (forwards tend to be bigger, second rows taller etc) but there's a surprising amount of variation, I'd argue more so than in football. So you could have a winger who's speedy or a winger who's bigger and slower who can break tackles. Or centres who are more like pseudo-fly half/wingers or centres who play crash ball and build a base for the big boys. I get all that but what I don't get is Matt Dawson frothing at the mouth for Italy using a legitimate (if odd) tactic that England didn't have the wherewithal to figure out and it nearly cost them.

Never in doubt

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:

Starbreaker wrote:

twitter.com/matt9dawson/status/835887286948626438

He really is a tool.

A lot of 'real' rugby fans seem to be going mad about Italy's tactics. I have no idea what they have done wrong. I don't understand it, but i'm a casual rugby fan and don't understand all the rules. What i do know is that rugby's rule book is very strict and is very alien to a football fan. Every team has to play the same formation for example. That's the rules of rugby, unlike football where you can position players where you like.

It's a popular tactic in Super Rugby, and Australia have used it against Northern Hemisphere teams before as well. It's just not something that's really seen in NH rugby. I really hope Dawson is joking, there, but all Italy were doing was playing to the rules of the breakdown. Anyone going mad about it as a tactic would be better off directing their anger at the inability of the English side to work out a counter to it.

Yup. Totally clueless, if they'd recycled as soon as the tackle went in there'd have been no problem as shown in the second half. Italy using the laws of the game to exploit a flaw is...well, rugby.

http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-sup ... =shortlink

There has already been talk of the laws being changed so the offside line appears after a tackle. Hasn't happened yet though.

Its on of the ELVs being trialed somewhere I believe. The currently wording is a ruck forms when at least one player from each side is engaged over the tackle. The new wording just the "from each side is engaged" part so anyone over the tackle area is forming a ruck.

The really interesting thing about Italys tactic is none of the English players seem to actually know the rules at ruck time, very strange considering theyre professionals who should know these little intricacies.

Well yeah but forwards nowadays are drilled to play the game a certain way, it's so drilled into them from the training ground that it's just instinct. Not that surprising that in the middle of the action 7 or 8 players can't immediately adapt to something so alien.

Rax wrote:Its on of the ELVs being trialed somewhere I believe. The currently wording is a ruck forms when at least one player from each side is engaged over the tackle. The new wording just the "from each side is engaged" part so anyone over the tackle area is forming a ruck.

The really interesting thing about Italys tactic is none of the English players seem to actually know the rules at ruck time, very strange considering theyre professionals who should know these little intricacies.

I suppose they just become robots and are conditioned to play one way, suddenly something different happens and they don't know what to do.

Its definitely a case of having it drilled into them how to behave and being a bit robotic but Im still a little surprised that players at that level arent able to adapt a bit quicker.

IMO Italy should be commended for employing a tactic that is a little 'out of the box' and completely flummoxing England for the entire first half, so much so that it visibly affected their performance level.

Drumstick wrote:IMO Italy should be commended for employing a tactic that is a little 'out of the box' and completely flummoxing England for the entire first half, so much so that it visibly affected their performance level.

I've read more about it this morning and I have no problem with what Italy did. It's all within the rules, just because everyone does it one way doesn't mean you have to do the same.

Drumstick wrote:IMO Italy should be commended for employing a tactic that is a little 'out of the box' and completely flummoxing England for the entire first half, so much so that it visibly affected their performance level.

A better tactic would have been to spring it on them in the second half and not give England the luxury of regrouping at half time. Of course they werent to know that once they started it the 15 lads in white wouldnt have a clue what was happening or how they should counteract it.

Rax wrote:

Drumstick wrote:IMO Italy should be commended for employing a tactic that is a little 'out of the box' and completely flummoxing England for the entire first half, so much so that it visibly affected their performance level.

A better tactic would have been to spring it on them in the second half and not give England the luxury of regrouping at half time. Of course they werent to know that once they started it the 15 lads in white wouldnt have a clue what was happening or how they should counteract it.

If they had waited until half time England would probably have been too far ahead.

Thats also true.