Summer Tours 2018

Tigerandahalf

Are Argentina missing many guys playing with European sides? Have they some rule in place?
Isn't Imhoff with Racing?

Buer

Generally their rule of thumb in previous years was that those selected for the summer visiting tour wouldn't be selected for the RC. I don't know if it's the same this year but losing at home to a vastly understrength Welsh side suggests it is.

Dog Botherer

I don’t watch a whole lot of Super Rugby but from what i can tell that side was about half first team half second team. Not full strength but they really should be putting away a very mediocre Welsh B team.

Dog Botherer

Had a look at the side there. Kremer, Matera, Lavanini, Petti, and Creevy would be first choice in the pack, and Sanchez, Orlando, and Boffelli in the backs. These are all guys who’d either be starting or in the 23 in nearly every game for the Jaguares. Very close to a first choice pack really.

I’m not too familiar with their second string guys, couldn’t say for sure which are actual prospects and which are just filling jerseys but it might well have been just a bad day at the office. Argentina are historically very very poor during summer tours.

thomond2006

Buer wrote: »

Generally their rule of thumb in previous years was that those selected for the summer visiting tour wouldn't be selected for the RC. I don't know if it's the same this year but losing at home to a vastly understrength Welsh side suggests it is.

That was the case when the European players were still eligible though.

Tigerandahalf

Dog Botherer wrote: »

I don’t watch a whole lot of Super Rugby but from what i can tell that side was about half first team half second team. Not full strength but they really should be putting away a very mediocre Welsh B team.

I don't think Wales are that bad. They are clearly not loved around here but they always have talented players coming through. Gatland has a great reputation for backing young players.

I'd like to see Schimdt blooding more young players. I presume Beirne will start next week. Otherwise there is limited time left to get him into the team. Schimdt probably wants him to get upto scratch with the Ireland system before putting him - knowing lineout calls and positions around rucks etc.

Start Porter with Herring and Healy perhaps. Beirne and Henderson in the 2nd row. POM will probably start again as he is the best option for captain, with Leavy and Stander. Conan has been hit and miss when he plays. He is more of a danger off the back of the scrum as he lays off the ball whereas Stander will go for the crash ball.

I'd like to see Conway given a shot at FB as he offers more than Rob K going forward. Hopefully Larmour and Carberry will get another start too - give them plenty of game time now while there is a chance.

It will be interesting to see how Schmidt picks now - will he go back to the trusted first choice and win the series or continue to give game time to the younger players.

If Ringrose comes back in I wonder will he give him and Aki a chance together. A lot here seem to favour Henshaw Ringrose but that could be the Leinster blinkers on.

Burkie1203

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I don't think Wales are that bad. They are clearly not loved around here but they always have talented players coming through. Gatland has a great reputation for backing young players.

I'd like to see Schimdt blooding more young players. I presume Beirne will start next week. Otherwise there is limited time left to get him into the team. Schimdt probably wants him to get upto scratch with the Ireland system before putting him - knowing lineout calls and positions around rucks etc.

Start Porter with Herring and Healy perhaps. Beirne and Henderson in the 2nd row. POM will probably start again as he is the best option for captain, with Leavy and Stander. Conan has been hit and miss when he plays. He is more of a danger off the back of the scrum as he lays off the ball whereas Stander will go for the crash ball.

I'd like to see Conway given a shot at FB as he offers more than Rob K going forward. Hopefully Larmour and Carberry will get another start too - give them plenty of game time now while there is a chance.

It will be interesting to see how Schmidt picks now - will he go back to the trusted first choice and win the series or continue to give game time to the younger players.

If Ringrose comes back in I wonder will he give him and Aki a chance together. A lot here seem to favour Henshaw Ringrose but that could be the Leinster blinkers on.

Beirne getting an extra off the back of a long season like several others who werent involved.

I can see Beirne starting next week with Toner maybe.

Conan has had barely a few caps. He had an excellent run in this season. He offers something different so IMO it's worth a go.

Henshaw and Ringrose are a top quality centre pairing. It's not Leinster blinkers to suggest they might be our best centre pairing. Both are proven performers at the highest level.

ScrubsfanChris

Overnight results:

Canada 10 - 42 Scotland
USA 62 - 13 Russia

That's some result in Denver!

uberwolf

uberwolf wrote: »

Even the NZ herald now seems to acknowledge that at least one red was merited.

Link? Can't see a statement from the paper anywhere publicly acknowledging this. Did they put out a press release?

I don't think anyone would dispute that it *could* have been a red, but it would have been extremely unlucky if so. The only reason I wouldn't be surprised is because the French were harshly given a yellow, and all we really want is some kind of consistency.

Clegg

The French should go full ****house next week.

Pick 15 Pape's.

GiftofGab

uberwolf wrote: »

Even the NZ herald now seems to acknowledge that at least one red was merited.

It looked like 2 yellows to me. The shoulder was boardline red but give him the benefit of the doubt.

GiftofGab

GiftofGab wrote: »

It looked like 2 yellows to me. The shoulder was boardline red but give him the benefit of the doubt.

Nah, a shoulder to the face is a straight up red card. What benefit are we giving him?

umop episdn

Mitchell Jolly Meteorology wrote: »

Nah, a shoulder to the face is a straight up red card. What benefit are we giving him?

Colour of his jersey

irishbucsfan

Even if not a red, 2 yellows would have had a big impact. Especially when you consider the turning point in the game was a yellow that shouldn't have been given.

I think NZ were always going to win that game, even if down to 13 for 10 minutes I think they would have won it when the likes of McKenzie cut loose, but a shame we didn't see them tested by their indiscipline.

swiwi_

awec wrote: »

Isiekwe subbed already.

Only just clicked he was playing for England

Dubinusa

Just watched the highlights of the boks match. My God, the chariot is in freefall. They look like a team with no cohesiveness defending wise. It's amazing how the tide has turned.

twinytwo

Given teddy Thomas is excellent going forward he has to a massive liability to france defensively.

Only time I can recall a player obviously pulling out of tackles, or just not even bothering to make them.

thomond2006

twinytwo wrote: »

Given teddy Thomas is excellent going forward he has to a massive liability to france defensively.

Only time I can recall a player obviously pulling out of tackles, or just not even bothering to make them.

He surely won't last in the lineup.

GiftofGab

Mitchell Jolly Meteorology wrote: »

Nah, a shoulder to the face is a straight up red card. What benefit are we giving him?

Yeah could be red....benefit of the doubt was it could be interpreted as a non cynical foul on a falling player. France will argue that it was cynical.

GiftofGab

GiftofGab wrote: »

Yeah could be red....benefit of the doubt was it could be interpreted as a non cynical foul on a falling player. France will argue that it was cynical.

Watch the incident in real time. Not a chance it was cynical. The entire thing happened incredibly quickly.

Then again, maybe it's all well rehearsed. I'd say most of the All Black's have pretty sore heads from headbutting each other in training.

irishbucsfan

Doesn't have to be cynical. I don't think SBW's was cynical.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Doesn't have to be cynical. I don't think SBW's was cynical.

He used illegal technique, though.

GiftofGab

GiftofGab wrote: »

Yeah could be red....benefit of the doubt was it could be interpreted as a non cynical foul on a falling player. France will argue that it was cynical.

I don't think cynical-ness or intent or anything comes into it. The ref isn't a mind reader, all he can judge on is that there was a shoulder to the face causing a serious injury.

I missed this incident live, am I right in saying the NZ player didn't get a card of any colour? I find that really outrageous, especially for the nothing yellow card he gave the French player. He should have carded both NZ players in this incident based on the card he gave the French player earlier.

Burkie1203

If this is true it is truly shameful

https://twitter.com/simonrug/status/1005791072432336896?s=19

Burkie1203

Burkie1203 wrote: »

If this is true it is truly shameful

https://twitter.com/simonrug/status/1005791072432336896?s=19

Why so? Is it because of the very harsh yellow the French received? I think this is what is clouding judgment for most people here.

IMO Cane should have received a yellow, but his tackle doesn't pass the red card test for me.

topdecko

Definite Red card for the shoulder  by Ofa and a yellow for Cane. It is becoming a recurrent theme with the All Blacks that their level of aggression oversteps the duty of care they have to be safe in their conduct towards other players and they seem to routinely get away with dangerous tackles. Cane almost decapitated Henshaw in a similar fashion in Dublin in a tense game some years ago.

Grosso has bilateral facial fractures and if World rugby are serious about addressing safety concerns surrounding rugby then these incidents have to be investigated. It is quite amazing that someone has his face broken and the incident is not reviewed.

swiwi_

topdecko wrote: »

Definite Red card for the shoulder  by Ofa and a yellow for Cane. It is becoming a recurrent theme with the All Blacks that their level of aggression oversteps the duty of care they have to be safe in their conduct towards other players and they seem to routinely get away with dangerous tackles. Cane almost decapitated Henshaw in a similar fashion in Dublin in a tense game some years ago.

Grosso has bilateral facial fractures and if World rugby are serious about addressing safety concerns surrounding rugby then these incidents have to be investigated. It is quite amazing that someone has his face broken and the incident is not reviewed.

It was reviewed and the independent citing commissioner decided neither warranted a red card - you could always write to World Rugby contesting the decision in a a coherent fashion... The trouble with some posters here is that they just can't be objective - look at your hyperbole "almost decapitated". I know you wont change your ingrained begrudged views, there are a lot of similar posters from all countries out there. Injury or not has nothing do with whether a player should be cited - if you use your logic, then no injury means no citing...What makes it worse is you'll no doubt apply a completely different standard when an Irish player is the one under the spotlight, that is pretty common here.

The fact the independent citing commissioner didn't cite the players means by definition your take on it is patently wrong - unless you are party of the conspiracy club whereby NZ rugby controls World Rugby (are you?).

My 2c - French YC clearly the wrong call and marred the game. Sam Cane should have got a YC, as per the World Rugby charter. Ofa nothing to answer for, especially if you watch it in real time, rather than the isolated slowed down GIF especially selected for its hungry target audience.

I somewhat dread the game in Dublin in November - more mindless bleating if Ireland lose. Just look at the posters on the Ire vs Aus thread giving out about the ref, despite the fact Aussie got some questionable decisions too - sometimes I think many posters here are smug in victory and bitter in defeat, although I suppose you can apply that across all fans from all countries and all internet forums, human nature being, well, human nature.

The Lost Sheep

swiwi_ wrote: »

It was reviewed and the independent citing commissioner decided neither warranted a red card - you could always write to World Rugby contesting the decision in a a coherent fashion... The trouble with some posters here is that they just can't be objective - look at your hyperbole "almost decapitated". I know you wont change your ingrained begrudged views, there are a lot of similar posters from all countries out there. Injury or not has nothing do with whether a player should be cited - if you use your logic, then no injury means no citing...What makes it worse is you'll no doubt apply a completely different standard when an Irish player is the one under the spotlight, that is pretty common here.

The fact the independent citing commissioner didn't cite the players means by definition your take on it is patently wrong - unless you are party of the conspiracy club whereby NZ rugby controls World Rugby (are you?).

My 2c - French YC clearly the wrong call and marred the game. Sam Cane should have got a YC, as per the World Rugby charter. Ofa nothing to answer for, especially if you watch it in real time, rather than the isolated slowed down GIF especially selected for its hungry target audience.

I somewhat dread the game in Dublin in November - more mindless bleating if Ireland lose. Just look at the posters on the Ire vs Aus thread giving out about the ref, despite the fact Aussie got some questionable decisions too - sometimes I think many posters here are smug in victory and bitter in defeat, although I suppose you can apply that across all fans from all countries and all internet forums, human nature being, well, human nature.

Ah swiwi stop with the big generalisations about the irish and not being objective.
The call on the french yellow was incorrect but what can you do.
And leave out the last paragraph. Just makes you look petty.

joseywhales

If France lose the second game and there are similar high shots unpunished, I would expect a bloodbath for the thrid test as teams adapt to the interpretation. It's hard to read referees now, they clamp down on pedestrian tackles with the arm over the shoulder and chest like a seatbelt which honestly hurt nobody but they overlook high speed jaw height collisions ocassionally which actually spark players out.

swiwi_

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Ah swiwi stop with the big generalisations about the irish and not being objective.
The call on the french yellow was incorrect but what can you do.
And leave out the last paragraph. Just makes you look petty.

Fair enough Lost Sheep.

And what can you do? Nothing.

For the record, here's Cian Healy not penalised, carded or cited despite a shoulder to the head of Picamoles : https://youtu.be/ifEvDBfZe0w

Leave it at that, as it is I broke my own rule of not commenting on such matters. I suppose I can resist everything but temptation.

razorblunt

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Wales won 23- 10. Poor game with a poor atmosphere.
20,000 crowd at St Juan.

Hard to blame the crowd Argentina were very frustrating to watch there was just knock on after knock on, and poor execution, it was like watching a 2nd Club Team. We all know Sanchez is flaky,but their backup 10 was downright appalling, so far off any standard.

CatFromHue

Healy did gave away a penalty there

The Lost Sheep

swiwi_ wrote: »

Fair enough Lost Sheep.

And what can you do? Nothing.

For the record, here's Cian Healy not penalised, carded or cited despite a shoulder to the head of Picamoles : https://youtu.be/ifEvDBfZe0w

Leave it at that, as it is I broke my own rule of not commenting on such matters. I suppose I can resist everything but temptation.

Eh Healy was very clearly penalised there. The ref stuck arm out for penalty against him ......

swiwi_

swiwi_ wrote: »

For the record, here's Cian Healy not penalised, carded or cited despite a shoulder to the head of Picamoles : https://youtu.be/ifEvDBfZe0w

Leave it at that, as it is I broke my own rule of not commenting on such matters. I suppose I can resist everything but temptation.

That's an obvious penalty. What is your point?

Mitchell Jolly Meteorology

Mitchell Jolly Meteorology wrote: »

That's an obvious penalty. What is your point?

I do wonder if anyone regards Ofa's tackle as being anywhere even remotely near as bad as what Healy did in that clip.

irishbucsfan

Basil3 wrote: »

I do wonder if anyone regards Ofa's tackle as being anywhere even remotely near as bad as what Healy did in that clip.

They’re both potential red cards

Bridge93

I find the generalisation of Irish fans after that autumn game peculiar. Like it would be easy for me to make a sweeping statement about NZ fans after Wayne Barnes received death threats in 2007. Or the embarrassing scenes post Lions tour.
But I won't. Because that would be stupid. Most fans can appreciate every fan base as idiots among them or as often is the case it's fans who aren't quite as clued in to the intricacies of the game and are emotional.

penybont exile

Back from my hols .....anything interesting happen.

I heard our youngsters had a decent win in the land of the tango ....

Tigerandahalf

I am surprised that people are saying the French player shouldn't have been yellow carded. His hand is clearly above the shoulder and the referee is within his rights to give a yellow.

The referee would also be within the laws of the game if he dished out a red and a yellow card for the tackles on Grosso.

The question has to be how could the referee not give out either card when they were so blatant.

CJ Stander got a red for taking out Pat Lambie with a flying hip to the head. I didn't think he meant it at the time but the player has a duty now not to carelessly hurt a player. Lambie was out for a long time with that head injury and it could have ended his career.

Grosso receives two facial fractures and nothing is done. Where is the consistency?

Tigerandahalf

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I am surprised that people are saying the French player shouldn't have been yellow carded. His hand is clearly above the shoulder and the referee is within his rights to give a yellow.

The referee would also be within the laws of the game if he dished out a red and a yellow card for the tackles on Grosso.

The question has to be how could the referee not give out either card when they were so blatant.

CJ Stander got a red for taking out Pat Lambie with a flying hip to the head. I didn't think he meant it at the time but the player has a duty now not to carelessly hurt a player. Lambie was out for a long time with that head injury and it could have ended his career.

Grosso receives two facial fractures and nothing is done. Where is the consistency?

Who should have got a red out of the two NZ players?

Funnily enough, the French have backtracked on calling the all blacks cheats and said after reviewing all angles of the incident, they realise it was an unfortunate accident. Not only can they influence refs, world rugby, and the citing commissioner....they even have opposition teams in their back pocket now.

Tigerandahalf

The shoulder to the head is a clear red card.
The player may not have meant it but his arm is folded in exposing his shoulder to the opponent.
He has a duty of care to tackle with his arms opened to effect the tackle.

irishbucsfan

Basil3 wrote: »

Who should have got a red out of the two NZ players?

Funnily enough, the French have backtracked on calling the all blacks cheats and said after reviewing all angles of the incident, they realise it was an unfortunate accident. Not only can they influence refs, world rugby, and the citing commissioner....they even have opposition teams in their back pocket now.

Red cards can still be given for unfortunate accidents. Stander taking Lambie out was an unfortunate accident but was a completely justified red card.

Yeah_Right

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Red cards can still be given for unfortunate accidents. Stander taking Lambie out was an unfortunate accident but was a completely justified red card.

I disagree that Stander v Lambie was a justified red. I would say yellow only. But then again you and I tend to disagree a lot on punishments for tackles, hits etc

If either of the of the ABs should have got a card I would say its Cane. His tackle was always high and it connects with Grosso's jaw. Ofa was making a perfectly legal tackle (he wasn't tucking the arm as another poster said) and Grosso dropped (due to Cane's high tackle). Grosso is nearly kneeling when Ofa hits him. Cane should have got a yellow.

I understand why the French player got carded because it looked bad in real time. High, swinging arm that jerked Crotty back. However the ref should have checked it and would have see it was just a penalty.

Jump_In_Jack

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I disagree that Stander v Lambie was a justified red. I would say yellow only. But then again you and I tend to disagree a lot on punishments for tackles, hits etc

If either of the of the ABs should have got a card I would say its Cane. His tackle was always high and it connects with Grosso's jaw. Ofa was making a perfectly legal tackle (he wasn't tucking the arm as another poster said) and Grosso dropped (due to Cane's high tackle). Grosso is nearly kneeling when Ofa hits him. Cane should have got a yellow.

I understand why the French player got carded because it looked bad in real time. High, swinging arm that jerked Crotty back. However the ref should have checked it and would have see it was just a penalty.

The commentators at the time all commented and pointed out in the replay how the French player never connected with the neck or head, he tackled around the shoulders which is a legit tackle,
I’ve heard people call it a seat-belt tackle, but I think not quite in this case, I think you have to grab around the neck for a seat-belt tackle.

Neither was it a swinging arm, for an example of a swinging arm see Fekitoa’s card against Ireland.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=RndDxZ8UfPQ

The referee made a mistake by not checking with the TMO, it wasn’t even a penalty not to mind a yellow.


Cane’s tackle was a seat-belt tackle as I understand it, he locked on around the neck with one arm and with the other arm a bit lower around the back.

The prop made an error, very comparable to Stander’s hip to head incident mentioned by others,
It was accidental but no matter, it was a clear shoulder directly to the head and the player was upright at least 5 feet off the ground on impact, he was a bit stooped due to the Cane tackle but no excuse, he should be aiming well below the danger zone around neck high.
It was clumsy but that’s the drawback of having a big heavy tight head come on that hasn’t got the co-ordination or flexibility to bend lower and tackle properly.

By leaving these incidents go without comment World Rugby are doing the sport a disservice.

And for the last time can we not have misinformation being spread about it being a head clash, it was a head-clash between the two players that were at fault, which is irrelevant to the damage they did to the French player by their illegal tackles.

What this all boils down to is that the tackling height is very high in modern rugby and should be lowered to remove the ambiguity about players aiming for shoulders and accidentally hitting heads/necks.

Jump_In_Jack

Jump_In_Jack wrote: »

What this all boils down to is that the tackling height is very high in modern rugby and should be lowered to remove the ambiguity about players aiming for shoulders and accidentally hitting heads/necks.

Would you like the choke tackle to be outlawed?

If the French player was upright, then Ofa's tackle would have been even below the new 'nipple line' rule that they're testing. Unfortunately he wasn't due to the tackle Cane was making immediately beforehand.

There's only so much a player can do, but Ofa's tackling technique looked spot on, and it was just an unfortunate incident. Watch it in real time, and there's very little that he could have done to readjust. I'm sure if he had time to react, he would have avoided whacking his own head?!

irishbucsfan

He was high. It doesn't matter if it was unintentional. Just as Cane's tackle on Henshaw was illegal, as proven in the aftermath, Ofa's tackle was illegal.

It's nothing to do with intent, its the law and it hasn't been applied. NZ should have been down to 13 men, they weren't. France should not have been down to 14 men, they were. It's not some major conspiracy, it's just inconsistent officiating and we'd all be better off if it was sorted out.

irishbucsfan

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I disagree that Stander v Lambie was a justified red. I would say yellow only. But then again you and I tend to disagree a lot on punishments for tackles, hits etc

Well, it absolutely was a red and a JO in the cold light of day confirmed it. So you can disagree with me all you like, the reality is that it was a red and the decision was upheld under pretty stringent review.

Citing commissioner seems very quiet this time around however.

Yeah_Right

Jump_In_Jack wrote: »

The commentators at the time all commented and pointed out in the replay how the French player never connected with the neck or head, he tackled around the shoulders which is a legit tackle,
I’ve heard people call it a seat-belt tackle, but I think not quite in this case, I think you have to grab around the neck for a seat-belt tackle.

Neither was it a swinging arm, for an example of a swinging arm see Fekitoa’s card against Ireland.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=RndDxZ8UfPQ

The referee made a mistake by not checking with the TMO, it wasn’t even a penalty not to mind a yellow.


Cane’s tackle was a seat-belt tackle as I understand it, he locked on around the neck with one arm and with the other arm a bit lower around the back.

The prop made an error, very comparable to Stander’s hip to head incident mentioned by others,
It was accidental but no matter, it was a clear shoulder directly to the head and the player was upright at least 5 feet off the ground on impact, he was a bit stooped due to the Cane tackle but no excuse, he should be aiming well below the danger zone around neck high.
It was clumsy but that’s the drawback of having a big heavy tight head come on that hasn’t got the co-ordination or flexibility to bend lower and tackle properly.

By leaving these incidents go without comment World Rugby are doing the sport a disservice.

And for the last time can we not have misinformation being spread about it being a head clash, it was a head-clash between the two players that were at fault, which is irrelevant to the damage they did to the French player by their illegal tackles.

What this all boils down to is that the tackling height is very high in modern rugby and should be lowered to remove the ambiguity about players aiming for shoulders and accidentally hitting heads/necks.

You are wrong about Gabrillagues (sp?) tackle not even being a penalty. Tackles over the shoulder are penalised these days. I think it was last year that the directive changed and anything over the shoulder was a high tackle even if they didn't touch the head or neck.

Also Grosso was not upright at the moment of impact. Thats BS. What misinformation about a head clash? There were 2 head clashes in that one incident.

Yeah_Right

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well, it absolutely was a red and a JO in the cold light of day confirmed it. So you can disagree with me all you like, the reality is that it was a red and the decision was upheld under pretty stringent review.

Citing commissioner seems very quiet this time around however.

Hold on. Are you saying that when you think it's a red card and a review agrees, then that's good but when you think it's a red card and a review disagrees, that's bad. Have you told World Rugby that you're available to be a citing commissioner?

irishbucsfan

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Hold on. Are you saying that when you think it's a red card and a review agrees, then that's good but when you think it's a red card and a review disagrees, that's bad. Have you told World Rugby that you're available to be a citing commissioner?

No?