General Rugby Discussion

Tox56

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He's also had a Heaslip-esque meltdown previously. (the yellow). And then loses it again for the red.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNgWg8kGMWk

The Heaslip meltdown is one reason im generally slow to judge players too harshly on a moment of madness, you could hardly find a more calm and disciplined rugby player than Heaslip 99% of the time, I've no idea where that meltdown came from but it shows it can happen to anyone

But Clark has a special place for that arm break, absolutely disgusting

Eat My Point

Apologies for ignorance but what was the Heaslip meltdown?

And yes Clark is scum

Eat My Point

Eat My Point wrote: »

Apologies for ignorance but what was the Heaslip meltdown?

The red card against NZ for kneeing a head in the ruck. It was absolutely and utterly insane and indefensible. @ 15s & 1min 15s+

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u32QIRXZwtE

Eat My Point

Deleted User wrote: »

The red card against NZ for kneeing a head in the ruck. It was absolutely and utterly insane and indefensible. @ 15s & 1min 15s+

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u32QIRXZwtE

Thanks, had just found it myself. Totally forgotten about it, it was pretty mental alright and very out of character for Heaslip. Would be surprised to ever see him do something like that again....whereas I'd expect it from Clark

who_me

nc6000 wrote: »

Here's a video of Calum Clark breaking Rob Hawkins' arm......shocking stuff.

Brainless. You'd wonder if it's an anger issue, but looking at the previous card (video above) he seemed very controlled, just bemused he was being called up on it.

Molester Stallone II

Tinus Linee the SA center who played with Western Province and the Stormers, and also toured with the Springboks has died today of MND. He was 45.

conf101

Buer wrote: »

I will never be able to separate that incident from him no matter what he goes on to achieve. It was the single most grotesque and violent incident I've seen on a pitch.

Even worse than the assault on O'Gara in the 2001 Lions?

I agree with you btw that what Clark did was despicable an I don't think he got a long enough ban but I think there have been more violent acts carried out.

CatFromHue

ROG's was more violent to the eye, no pun intended, but ultimately only left him with a bruised/cut face.

Clark's was more calculated and left the guy badly injured so yeah it's much worse than what happened to ROG.

conf101

CatFromHue wrote: »

ROG's was more violent to the eye, no pun intended, but ultimately only left him with a bruised/cut face.

Clark's was more calculated and left the guy badly injured so yeah it's much worse than what happened to ROG.

Yeah that's true I guess. In my opinion they should both have been lifetime bans.

nc6000

The Clark incident was much worse than the O'Gara-McRae incident. I know the ROG one was pretty bad and he wasn't in great shape after it but it was just a series of punches to the face. Clark went in and deliberately bent the guys arm the wrong way and didn't stop until it snapped.

Molester Stallone II

Molester Stallone II wrote: »

Tinus Linee the SA center who played with Western Province and the Stormers, and also toured with the Springboks has died today of MND. He was 45.

One of the scariest diseases there is. The idea of your body becoming useless around a fully functioning brain is terrifying.

conf101

nc6000 wrote: »

The Clark incident was much worse than the O'Gara-McRae incident. I know the ROG one was pretty bad and he wasn't in great shape after it but it was just a series of punches to the face. Clark went in and deliberately bent the guys arm the wrong way and didn't stop until it snapped.

I agree on the Clark incident but 'just a series of punches' for the ROG McRae one? It was a good 9 or 10 punches when they guy was held in a headlock on the ground. I don't get how that can be 'just' anything?

Buer

conf101 wrote: »

Even worse than the assault on O'Gara in the 2001 Lions?

I agree with you btw that what Clark did was despicable an I don't think he got a long enough ban but I think there have been more violent acts carried out.

100% more for me. McRae was a thug and threw multiple punches. He did not purposely and maliciously injure a player seriously, knowing his actions were going to put that player out of action for a significant period. What Clark did was something you'd expect in a film.

.ak

Yeah it was a rough pasting. But nothing nearly as bad as the clarke thing. Rugby is a physical game so punch ups will always happen in the game. For someone to coldly grab and arm and roll it until they feel a pop is sickening and nothing to do with the phsyical edge of the game, just purely out to cause a serious injury to a defenceless player that could end a career.

thomond2006

Wasn't Hawkins the first choice hooker for Leicester at the time? Now he's at Newcastle. The injury cost Hawkins a lot more than just a spell on the sidelines.

Buer

On a different note, are Trevor Hogan and Bernard Jackman the dullest pundits around? MNR on Newstalk is simply painful. There's very little insight from them and completely bland. The only time they say something interesting is when they get something wrong.

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

Wasn't Hawkins the first choice hooker for Leicester at the time? Now he's at Newcastle. The injury cost Hawkins a lot more than just a spell on the sidelines.

Nah, he was only ever just a fringe player.

postitnote

Well I'm glad my post generated some talk about Clarke. As I said before, I'm not a fan of him.

Having seen that video again of him breaking yer man's arm I'd have to change my mind and agree with the sentiment that he should have had a lifetime ban.

To pass off such a blatant case of GBH as casually as it is now being portrayed is awful. It wasn't an "inner chimp", it was thuggish.

I still feel some people out there deserve another chance. I take back my thoughts that Clark should be one of them.

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

Nah, he was only ever just a fringe player.

Hawkins was first choice at the time. He was first choice for most of that season but it was due to injury.

I wonder how many times he did stuff like that growing up and got away with it.

Buer

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Hawkins was first choice at the time. He was first choice for most of that season but it was due to injury.

5 starts that season, 3 of which were in the LV Cup?

http://www.itsrugby.co.uk/player-1040.html

jacothelad

Buer wrote: »

On a different note, are Trevor Hogan and Bernard Jackman the dullest pundits around? MNR on Newstalk is simply painful. There's very little insight from them and completely bland. The only time they say something interesting is when they get something wrong.

McWhirter......... Awful

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

5 starts that season, 3 of which were in the LV Cup?

http://www.itsrugby.co.uk/player-1040.html

Ah sorry I didn't mean he was a starter, Chuter was still at hooker for Leicester at the time, but Hawkins was coming off the bench every week and was heavily involved that season. While he was injured Youngs took over from Chuter.

These are all great

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/11/04/12-feet-taller/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4MpaUdd2Ec

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjMho7lsb2s

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

Hagz

The Shane Williams one is brilliant. He's my rugby idol.

sydneybound

Very impressive result from Gloucester.... off the pitch that is...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/29896336

£512,000 pre tax profit is great going. They must be a well run club like Northampton and Leicester in many senses.

nc6000

Clarke won't be featuring against NZ on Saturday.....

phog

nc6000 wrote: »

Clarke won't be featuring against NZ on Saturday.....

7 Bath players, surprised at that

matthew8

Looks like:
1. Marler
2. Hartley
3. Wilson
4. Attwood
5. Lawes
6. Wood
7. Robshaw
8. Vunipola
9. Care
10. Ford
11. May
12. Eastmond
13. Farrell
14. Rokoduguni
15. Brown
16. Webber
17. Mullan
18. Brookes
19. Kruis
20. Morgan
21. Youngs
22. Barritt
23. Watson

Could also be trying Roko, Eastmond, Barritt or Watson at 13 but that lineup looks most likely to me. Kruis could get the nod over Attwood too but Attwood's been more involved previously. Wouldn't like to play the All Blacks with no one who regularly plays 13 in the side.

Hagz

I would have said
9. Care
10. Farrell
11. May
12. Barritt
13. Eastmond
14. Rokoduguni
15. Brown

Why do you think they'll play Farrell at 13. Is there talk of that happening?

Swiwi.

matthew8 wrote: »

Looks like:
1. Marler
2. Hartley
3. Wilson
4. Attwood
5. Lawes
6. Wood
7. Robshaw
8. Vunipola
9. Care
10. Ford => Farrell
11. May
12. Eastmond
13. Farrell => Barritt
14. Rokoduguni
15. Brown
16. Webber
17. Mullan
18. Brookes
19. Kruis
20. Morgan
21. Youngs
22. Barritt => Ford
23. Watson

I'm pretty sure Lancaster already name-checked Barritt as the 13. I will be extremely surprised if Farrell doesn't start at 10. I'll be interested to see what EL thinks, but that English tight 5 and midfield could be stronger, the injuries playing their part of course.

matthew8

Hagz wrote: »

I would have said
9. Care
10. Farrell
11. May
12. Barritt
13. Eastmond
14. Rokoduguni
15. Brown

Why do you think they'll play Farrell at 13. Is there talk of that happening?

13 is a complete guessing game but you don't want Eastmond defending there. They might want to get Ford into the team is my thinking. If he's name checked Barritt at 13 though surely he'll be the one.

errlloyd

I am not as worried about this as GT, because I think the SA NZ call was okay. Common sense needs to prevail though, I think for a try to be disallowed it needs to be very likely it wouldn't have been scored.

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/wayne-barnes-sets-dangerous-precedent-by-allowing-tv-producers-influence-games-1.1986585

.ak

errlloyd wrote: »

I am not as worried about this as GT, because I think the SA NZ call was okay. Common sense needs to prevail though, I think for a try to be disallowed it needs to be very likely it wouldn't have been scored.

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/wayne-barnes-sets-dangerous-precedent-by-allowing-tv-producers-influence-games-1.1986585

Was just about to post this link. What rock has GT been living under? That wasn't even a bad call. The captain brought his attention to it, which is his right.

I've seen plenty of refs just look at the big screen without any prompt and make a call or reverse a decision. Nigel Owens, who most consider the current best, does it all the time. He just makes a snappy decision and doesn't generally draw the Tmo into it.

I thoroughly disagree with GT. Whilst I think overuse of the Tmo is ridiculous at times, I do believe that the ref having the ability to utilise technology to ensure he makes the right call is a good thing.

English Lurker

Swiwi. wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Lancaster already name-checked Barritt as the 13. I will be extremely surprised if Farrell doesn't start at 10. I'll be interested to see what EL thinks, but that English tight 5 and midfield could be stronger, the injuries playing their part of course.

12. Eastmond 13. Barritt does seem to be the anointed midfield here.

Burrell's out for this one but I'm not sure he'd have played anyway; he's been in poor enough form and didn't cover himself in glory down in NZ. We're obviously missing Tuilagi with injury, but that might be a blessing in disguise. Eastmond-Tuilagi is probably England's best attacking partnership but defensively it seems rickety.

Eastmond-Barritt allows us to play our strongest attacker (of the moment) and to also give him a defensive babysitter to run the system. Barritt's record as an attacking 12 is probably worse than Tony Buckley's record as a scrummager but he seems to do ok when played at 13. Probably because he gets more space.

I actually suggest that partnership to friends a while back as a purely theoretical idea that I never thought would happen. Interested to see how it goes, arguments both way. In any case, I think I prefer it to Barritt-Tuilagi, the resumption of the tried and failed.

The tight five however could be stronger and injuries have played a part. Corbisiero, Youngs, Cole, Launchbury and Parling are all out injured, which is arguably our best tight five, and Vunpiola and Ed Slater are also injured out of the back-ups. Now, that is arguable - Youngs, Cole and Parling aren't guaranteed members, but all would be in a first choice 23. Makes me somewhat pessimistic as imo England's tight five is the best thing about the team at the moment, particularly as guys like Launchbury and Cole have more influence on the breakdown than our back row. If England can't edge NZ in the tight five, where can we edge them on the pitch - and, even worse, ask the same question about Australia...

Yeah_Right

.ak wrote: »

Was just about to post this link. What rock has GT been living under? That wasn't even a bad call. The captain brought his attention to it, which is his right.

I've seen plenty of refs just look at the big screen without any prompt and make a call or reverse a decision. Nigel Owens, who most consider the current best, does it all the time. He just makes a snappy decision and doesn't generally draw the Tmo into it.

I thoroughly disagree with GT. Whilst I think overuse of the Tmo is ridiculous at times, I do believe that the ref having the ability to utilise technology to ensure he makes the right call is a good thing.

Sorry but you are wrong. GT is right (can't believe I just said that). It was a terrible call by Barnes and should never have been allowed.It's all part of a greater conspiracy by the IRB to undermine the ABs.

And no I'm not biased in any way

Swiwi.

English Lurker wrote: »

12. Eastmond 13. Barritt does seem to be the anointed midfield here.

Burrell's out for this one but I'm not sure he'd have played anyway; he's been in poor enough form and didn't cover himself in glory down in NZ. We're obviously missing Tuilagi with injury, but that might be a blessing in disguise. Eastmond-Tuilagi is probably England's best attacking partnership but defensively it seems rickety.

Eastmond-Barritt allows us to play our strongest attacker (of the moment) and to also give him a defensive babysitter to run the system. Barritt's record as an attacking 12 is probably worse than Tony Buckley's record as a scrummager but he seems to do ok when played at 13. Probably because he gets more space.

I actually suggest that partnership to friends a while back as a purely theoretical idea that I never thought would happen. Interested to see how it goes, arguments both way. In any case, I think I prefer it to Barritt-Tuilagi, the resumption of the tried and failed.

The tight five however could be stronger and injuries have played a part. Corbisiero, Youngs, Cole, Launchbury and Parling are all out injured, which is arguably our best tight five, and Vunpiola and Ed Slater are also injured out of the back-ups. Now, that is arguable - Youngs, Cole and Parling aren't guaranteed members, but all would be in a first choice 23. Makes me somewhat pessimistic as imo England's tight five is the best thing about the team at the moment, particularly as guys like Launchbury and Cole have more influence on the breakdown than our back row. If England can't edge NZ in the tight five, where can we edge them on the pitch - and, even worse, ask the same question about Australia...

I think your best 5 is Corbs, Hartley, Cole, Lauchbury, Lawes. There must be some doubt about Corbs making the RWC, seems to be frequently injured.

What is your take on the Fijian winger, I haven't really seem him play?

English Lurker

Well it's a nice story if nothing else. From serving soldier playing some sevens to international rugby player is one hell of a story in this day and age. At the risk of seeming a little cliche, Semesa Rokoduguni gives you what you'd expect from a Fijian wing. He's got power, he's got pace, he's got a step but no one really talks much about his kicking or fielding, and he got out of position a lot when playing against the Baabaas in the summer. Has been the form English winger though and he's got all the potential, be interesting to see how he goes.

And Corbs' injury proneness is a worry, but this isn't his knee, which was giving him all the problems and is supposedly cleared up, so maybe he'll be ok going forwards.

Yeah_Right

English Lurker wrote: »

Well it's a nice story if nothing else. From serving soldier playing some sevens to international rugby player is one hell of a story in this day and age. At the risk of seeming a little cliche, Semesa Rokoduguni gives you what you'd expect from a Fijian wing. He's got power, he's got pace, he's got a step but no one really talks much about his kicking or fielding, and he got out of position a lot when playing against the Baabaas in the summer. Has been the form English winger though and he's got all the potential, be interesting to see how he goes.

And Corbs' injury proneness is a worry, but this isn't his knee, which was giving him all the problems and is supposedly cleared up, so maybe he'll be ok going forwards.

Damn English poaching from the Pacific Islands again!!

It is a good story though. Will be interested to see how he goes at test level. Seen a bit of him in 7s and he was pretty good.

Teferi

How does his soldiering work with the rugby? Is rugby just considered as part of his duties and he does a bit of token military stuff on his day off?

sydneybound

Yeah_Right wrote: »

DamnEnglish poaching from the Pacific Islands again!!

Ireally despise Tier 1 countries taking islander players, not taking aboutEngland in particular here. The islanders have such a small population andlimited player resources I wish Samoa or Fiji could field a full proper team ofplayers born there.

Let’sbe honest his heart won't exactly be in it for England. He only moved therewhen he was 19 so I'm sure deep down he's a proud Fijian. However the extra £££are the main motive here otherwise he would be playing for Fiji. Henry Speightanother Fijian now playing for Australia.

ssaye2

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/All-Blacks-unveil-the-blackest-jersey-ever-PICTURE-20141105

Eat My Point

It's like, how much more black could this be? and the answer is none. None more black.

molloyjh

Eat My Point wrote: »

It's like, how much more black could this be? and the answer is none. None more black.

As I'm sure any die hard Kiwi would tell you it could get more black if they got rid of the AIG logo...

Teferi

ssaye2 wrote: »

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/All-Blacks-unveil-the-blackest-jersey-ever-PICTURE-20141105

Actually if you look closely, you'll see that they're very, very, very, very, very, very, very dark blue.

English Lurker

Teferi wrote: »

How does his soldiering work with the rugby? Is rugby just considered as part of his duties and he does a bit of token military stuff on his day off?

As far as I'm aware, he's basically just considered as being on secondment to Bath; believe he still lives at a barracks. A lot of the people playing on army sports teams tend to be near-strangers to their units anyway.

sydneybound wrote: »

Let’sbe honest his heart won't exactly be in it for England. He only moved therewhen he was 19 so I'm sure deep down he's a proud Fijian. However the extra £££are the main motive here otherwise he would be playing for Fiji. Henry Speightanother Fijian now playing for Australia.

Pretty sure it will be. It would be impossible for him to have gotten as far as he has in the England set-up if it wasn't.

I am sure he is a proud Fijian - just as I'm sure Manu Tuilagi is a proud Samoan, and the Vunipolas are proud Tongans. I would never question their commitment to England and I'd never question Rokoduguni's. A man can have more than one identity.

And, for the record, going off press reports Fiji never had much interest in picking him.

thomond2006

Le XV de France face au Fidji:
Spedding - Huget, Dumoulin, Fofana, Thomas - (o) Lopez, (m) Tillous-Borde -
Le Roux, Chouly, Dusautoir (cap.) - Papé, Maestri - Mas, Guirado, Ménini.

Remplaçants à choisir parmi:
Chiocci, Kayser, Atonio, Flanquart, Vahaamahina, Ollivon, Kockott, Tales, Bastareaud, Mermoz.

The big story is Scott Spedding starts. The bench is to be confirmed. One of Flanquart/Vahaaamahina and Mermoz/Bastareaud will be cut. The likely 23 will have 7 new caps: Chiocci, Atonio, Ollivon, Kockott, Thomas, Dumoulin and Spedding.

irishbucsfan

Quick non-internationals question.

Does anyone know if there's a good source to suggest how time spent in professional rugby games is broken down? IE x% in scrums, y% ball in play etc?

thomond2006

English Lurker wrote: »

As far as I'm aware, he's basically just considered as being on secondment to Bath; believe he still lives at a barracks. A lot of the people playing on army sports teams tend to be near-strangers to their units anyway.



Pretty sure it will be. It would be impossible for him to have gotten as far as he has in the England set-up if it wasn't.

I am sure he is a proud Fijian - just as I'm sure Manu Tuilagi is a proud Samoan, and the Vunipolas are proud Tongans. I would never question their commitment to England and I'd never question Rokoduguni's. A man can have more than one identity.

And, for the record, going off press reports Fiji never had much interest in picking him.

Fiji have more than enough back three players to chose from!

Eat My Point

Eat My Point wrote: »

It's like, how much more black could this be? and the answer is none. None more black.

No Spinal Tap fans on this thread?:(