Scottish rugby

[Morgan]

How unlike the Oirish to cheat. 

[Tazio]

Talking about the teams people could meet in next stages makes you realise how awful the groups are. England in the final is entirely possible. 

[Malinga the Swinga]

Just now, Tazio said:

Talking about the teams people could meet in next stages makes you realise how awful the groups are. England in the final is entirely possible. 

Do they not have to play Ireland/South Africa(maybe Scotland) or New Zealand/France in semi? They might get Fiji in quarters if Australia screw up tomorrow and that will test them.

[Mikey1874]

24 minutes ago, Sooperstar said:

I think it means Scotland need a miracle. 

 

We know where we stand after Romania next week. Relying on having better points difference. Assuming South Africa get bonus point v Samoa looks like we can only knock out Ireland. Again assuming non bonus point win over Ireland.

 

 

 

Edited September 23, 2023 by Mikey1874

[Ulysses]

3 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

For about 2 minutes Uly. 🤣

 

I didn't name him, as I'd have gone for Lowe or O'Mahony. I'm just deferring to those who did. 

[Malinga the Swinga]

O'Mahony is the worst example of a thug who is admired because he plays a sport. In any other walk of life, he would be in jail.

 

[Roxy Hearts]

5 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

I didn't name him, as I'd have gone for Lowe or O'Mahony. I'm just deferring to those who did. 

Good, tough game as expected but wish SA had won obviously. I couldn't name best Irish player as were all good but SA should've won as missed 3 kicks.

Edited September 23, 2023 by Roxy Hearts

[Roxy Hearts]

1 minute ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

O'Mahony is the worst example of a thug who is admired because he plays a sport. In any other walk of life, he would be in jail.

 

O'Mahony is pish but in this game he did O'Mahony things!

[Mikey1874]

Johnny Sexton mentions decisions making a difference.

[Malinga the Swinga]

Just now, Roxy Hearts said:

Good, tough game as expected but wish SA had won obviously. I couldn't name best Irish player as were all good but SA should've won a missed 3 kicks.

4 kicks. They missed conversion of try as well.

The lad O'Keefe was Ireland's stand out player. Single handedly stopped several promising positions for South Africa and yet looked untackled at end of game.

Sure envelope will be passed to him shortly 

[Roxy Hearts]

1 minute ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

4 kicks. They missed conversion of try as well.

The lad O'Keefe was Ireland's stand out player. Single handedly stopped several promising positions for South Africa and yet looked untackled at end of game.

Sure envelope will be passed to him shortly 

That last passage of play was a joke. The ball was out!

[Mikey1874]

1 minute ago, Roxy Hearts said:

That last passage of play was a joke. The ball was out!

 

You could see the ball

[Roxy Hearts]

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

 

You could see the ball

That's what I meant. The referee at that point was a joke.

[willie wallace]

Does that bonus losing point for SA basically knock Scotland out barring some sort of miracle.

[Mikey1874]

5 minutes ago, willie wallace said:

Does that bonus losing point for SA basically knock Scotland out barring some sort of miracle.

 

Scotland need bonus point wins over Samoa and Romania then beat Ireland with a 140 point turnaround.

 

That would knock Ireland out with Scotland 2nd in group behind South Africa.

[I P Knightley]

16 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Scotland need bonus point wins over Samoa and Romania then beat Ireland with a 140 point turnaround.

 

That would knock Ireland out with Scotland 2nd in group behind South Africa.

It was always going to be a crap world cup once those pools were set. Obviously crapper for Scotland than most but if there were such a thing as a neutral it has to be crap that only two of the top 4/5 teams in the world can stand a chance of making the semi finals and pony teams like England and Wales stand a really good chance of making it. English pals who know their rugby (i.e. not one-eyed pundits hired by ITV) know that they're getting away with it and will be found out when they meet a team from our half of the draw.

[Mikey1874]

Re above also Scotland v Ireland either Scotland need try bonus point or avoid Ireland getting losing bonus point (beat them by 8 points or more)

 

Scotland can win group and play New Zealand instead of France (yay!!) by beating Ireland with try bonus point and overall 3 game 102 points swing. 

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, Jim_Duncan said:

I support Ireland. 

 

So do I, surprisingly enough.   

 

It's great for me.  When Ireland do well I get to enjoy it.  When Ireland lose then it's a case of not worrying because it's only rugby, a game about which I only care a wee bit.

 

South Africa set out to physically take at least one Irish player, preferably Sexton, out of the game, by whatever means were needed.  That didn't work.

 

South Africa brought on their notorious "Bomb Squad", and although it helped a little, it was more than balanced out by two things.  First of all, to win a tight low-scoring game you have to kick to win, and they did not.  For all the extraordinarily bitter people on here whining about the ref, South Africa were given three penalties to put away, and they absolutely ****ed up, and for that they have no-one to blame but themselves.  Secondly, when Ireland had to make a substitution we were able to bring one one of the best - if not THE best - hookers in the game.  South Africa brought on a guy who hadn't played in the position for about 16 years and who couldn't throw the ****ing ball straight in a lineout.  For all the shite talked about the weight and power of the Springbok forwards, the guy who scared me the most throughout that game was Faf De Klerk, and when he went off I started to believe Ireland would hold on and win.

 

Maybe the better team did lose, and maybe the team that got a couple of breaks won.  But also.  Maybe the more mentally resilient team won.  Maybe the team that spent more time inside the opposition 22 won.  Maybe the team that completed more passes and made more turnovers won.  Maybe the team that kicked better in a low-scoring game won.

 

Watching the post-match interviews tonight, I saw none of the "Oirish arrogance" described by people on here.  Farrell, Sexton, Hansen, Aki, Lowe, all with the same message.  It was a great win, but we got the bounce of the ball and we can't always guarantee that.  It's not the first time we've beaten them, and we got LESS points than we did against Romania and Tonga.  We can't get to the semis without having to play Scotland, and without having to play France or NZ, any of whom are good enough to **** us over.  And even if we do, what happens if we face the same South Africans later?  There's no way they'll kick as badly again, so we would be really and truly up against it.   And by the way, our own media and pundits said exactly the same.  Above all, Farrell said tonight that if Ireland want to progress we will have to be better against Scotland than we were tonight, and until that game gets under way there's no way of knowing if that will happen.

 

As an aside, I was disappointed when Scotland didn't get a result against South Africa.  Why?  I like Scotland.  Not the rugby team - I don't care about that - but the country.  It's probably my favourite place on Earth, closer to me and dearer to my heart than somewhere like South Africa could ever be.  If some miracle combination of results were to happen and we lose out and Scotland go through I'd be disappointed.  But because I'm a fair-weather fan, it wouldn't be the end of the world, and I'd be delighted - genuinely delighted - to see Scotland go through and have a run at the knock-out stage.  Alternatively, if there's a combination of results that sees both my Ireland and your Scotland through, I'd be utterly delighted to see it.

 

Whatever else, I could not imagine any set of circumstances in which I would refer to Scotland, Scottish people, or the Scottish rugby team, as "vermin".  I would be utterly ashamed of myself if I did.

 

Coming back to tonight, it wouldn't have been the end of my world if we'd lost, so it hardly makes my world that we won.  But when the final whistle blew at the end of that gladiatorial contest, they put on the Cranberries in the stadium, and 30,000 people - men and women of Leinster, Munster and Connacht and Ulster alike - sang along to "Zombie" (IYKYK), and to see and hear them do that beneath the Tricolour and the Red Hand Ulster Banner was an emotional experience.  I would have preferred to experience it in Paris instead of on the telly, but you can't have everything.  So even if we screw up and get chucked out of the competition after, at least I've been able to savour that moment.

[Malinga the Swinga]

Many reasons why I want Ireland out. The manufactured coming together in rugby is one of them with the pretence that they're a united bunch and full of 'the craic'.

Polluted some of Scotland, mainly Glasgow and the West as well as parts of US with their issues.

Also family incident going back over 50 years that I'll never forget and certainly never forgive 

[Roxy Hearts]

7 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

So do I, surprisingly enough.   

 

It's great for me.  When Ireland do well I get to enjoy it.  When Ireland lose then it's a case of not worrying because it's only rugby, a game about which I only care a wee bit.

 

South Africa set out to physically take at least one Irish player, preferably Sexton, out of the game, by whatever means were needed.  That didn't work.

 

South Africa brought on their notorious "Bomb Squad", and although it helped a little, it was more than balanced out by two things.  First of all, to win a tight low-scoring game you have to kick to win, and they did not.  For all the extraordinarily bitter people on here whining about the ref, South Africa were given three penalties to put away, and they absolutely ****ed up, and for that they have no-one to blame but themselves.  Secondly, when Ireland had to make a substitution we were able to bring one one of the best - if not THE best - hookers in the game.  South Africa brought on a guy who hadn't played in the position for about 16 years and who couldn't throw the ****ing ball straight in a lineout.  For all the shite talked about the weight and power of the Springbok forwards, the guy who scared me the most throughout that game was Faf De Klerk, and when he went off I started to believe Ireland would hold on and win.

 

Maybe the better team did lose, and maybe the team that got a couple of breaks won.  But also.  Maybe the more mentally resilient team won.  Maybe the team that spent more time inside the opposition 22 won.  Maybe the team that completed more passes and made more turnovers won.  Maybe the team that kicked better in a low-scoring game won.

 

Watching the post-match interviews tonight, I saw none of the "Oirish arrogance" described by people on here.  Farrell, Sexton, Hansen, Aki, Lowe, all with the same message.  It was a great win, but we got the bounce of the ball and we can't always guarantee that.  It's not the first time we've beaten them, and we got LESS points than we did against Romania and Tonga.  We can't get to the semis without having to play Scotland, and without having to play France or NZ, any of whom are good enough to **** us over.  And even if we do, what happens if we face the same South Africans later?  There's no way they'll kick as badly again, so we would be really and truly up against it.   And by the way, our own media and pundits said exactly the same.  Above all, Farrell said tonight that if Ireland want to progress we will have to be better against Scotland than we were tonight, and until that game gets under way there's no way of knowing if that will happen.

 

As an aside, I was disappointed when Scotland didn't get a result against South Africa.  Why?  I like Scotland.  Not the rugby team - I don't care about that - but the country.  It's probably my favourite place on Earth, closer to me and dearer to my heart than somewhere like South Africa could ever be.  If some miracle combination of results were to happen and we lose out and Scotland go through I'd be disappointed.  But because I'm a fair-weather fan, it wouldn't be the end of the world, and I'd be delighted - genuinely delighted - to see Scotland go through and have a run at the knock-out stage.  Alternatively, if there's a combination of results that sees both my Ireland and your Scotland through, I'd be utterly delighted to see it.

 

Whatever else, I could not imagine any set of circumstances in which I would refer to Scotland, Scottish people, or the Scottish rugby team, as "vermin".  I would be utterly ashamed of myself if I did.

 

Coming back to tonight, it wouldn't have been the end of my world if we'd lost, so it hardly makes my world that we won.  But when the final whistle blew at the end of that gladiatorial contest, they put on the Cranberries in the stadium, and 30,000 people - men and women of Leinster, Munster and Connacht and Ulster alike - sang along to "Zombie" (IYKYK), and to see and hear them do that beneath the Tricolour and the Red Hand Ulster Banner was an emotional experience.  I would have preferred to experience it in Paris instead of on the telly, but you can't have everything.  So even if we screw up and get chucked out of the competition after, at least I've been able to savour that moment.

Great post Uly. Ireland are a great team and could win it. The ref did muck up the last play though but then again I'm looking for a crumb  of comfort as a Scotland fan. The "vermin" quote is out of order. Enjoy the rest of the tournament.

[Roxy Hearts]

57 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Many reasons why I want Ireland out. The manufactured coming together in rugby is one of them with the pretence that they're a united bunch and full of 'the craic'.

Polluted some of Scotland, mainly Glasgow and the West as well as parts of US with their issues.

Also family incident going back over 50 years that I'll never forget and certainly never forgive 

I understand where your coming from a little. I also have a family issue from years ago that I won't forget. I don't want to go OT but we can't blame all the Irish people. 

 

I can't be doing with all Celtic "plastic Paddy" crap and their songs! 

 

Ireland are a great team as far as rugby is concerned.

[Victorian]

That referee should be severely sanctioned for that last phase of play.  There's also a glaring defect in the rules regarding reviews by TMO.  For a sport that is so scrutinised by separate review,  how can such an important,  potentially match deciding referee decision pass without any recourse?  

[All roads lead to Gorgie]

8 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

So do I, surprisingly enough.   

 

It's great for me.  When Ireland do well I get to enjoy it.  When Ireland lose then it's a case of not worrying because it's only rugby, a game about which I only care a wee bit.

 

South Africa set out to physically take at least one Irish player, preferably Sexton, out of the game, by whatever means were needed.  That didn't work.

 

South Africa brought on their notorious "Bomb Squad", and although it helped a little, it was more than balanced out by two things.  First of all, to win a tight low-scoring game you have to kick to win, and they did not.  For all the extraordinarily bitter people on here whining about the ref, South Africa were given three penalties to put away, and they absolutely ****ed up, and for that they have no-one to blame but themselves.  Secondly, when Ireland had to make a substitution we were able to bring one one of the best - if not THE best - hookers in the game.  South Africa brought on a guy who hadn't played in the position for about 16 years and who couldn't throw the ****ing ball straight in a lineout.  For all the shite talked about the weight and power of the Springbok forwards, the guy who scared me the most throughout that game was Faf De Klerk, and when he went off I started to believe Ireland would hold on and win.

 

Maybe the better team did lose, and maybe the team that got a couple of breaks won.  But also.  Maybe the more mentally resilient team won.  Maybe the team that spent more time inside the opposition 22 won.  Maybe the team that completed more passes and made more turnovers won.  Maybe the team that kicked better in a low-scoring game won.

 

Watching the post-match interviews tonight, I saw none of the "Oirish arrogance" described by people on here.  Farrell, Sexton, Hansen, Aki, Lowe, all with the same message.  It was a great win, but we got the bounce of the ball and we can't always guarantee that.  It's not the first time we've beaten them, and we got LESS points than we did against Romania and Tonga.  We can't get to the semis without having to play Scotland, and without having to play France or NZ, any of whom are good enough to **** us over.  And even if we do, what happens if we face the same South Africans later?  There's no way they'll kick as badly again, so we would be really and truly up against it.   And by the way, our own media and pundits said exactly the same.  Above all, Farrell said tonight that if Ireland want to progress we will have to be better against Scotland than we were tonight, and until that game gets under way there's no way of knowing if that will happen.

 

As an aside, I was disappointed when Scotland didn't get a result against South Africa.  Why?  I like Scotland.  Not the rugby team - I don't care about that - but the country.  It's probably my favourite place on Earth, closer to me and dearer to my heart than somewhere like South Africa could ever be.  If some miracle combination of results were to happen and we lose out and Scotland go through I'd be disappointed.  But because I'm a fair-weather fan, it wouldn't be the end of the world, and I'd be delighted - genuinely delighted - to see Scotland go through and have a run at the knock-out stage.  Alternatively, if there's a combination of results that sees both my Ireland and your Scotland through, I'd be utterly delighted to see it.

 

Whatever else, I could not imagine any set of circumstances in which I would refer to Scotland, Scottish people, or the Scottish rugby team, as "vermin".  I would be utterly ashamed of myself if I did.

 

Coming back to tonight, it wouldn't have been the end of my world if we'd lost, so it hardly makes my world that we won.  But when the final whistle blew at the end of that gladiatorial contest, they put on the Cranberries in the stadium, and 30,000 people - men and women of Leinster, Munster and Connacht and Ulster alike - sang along to "Zombie" (IYKYK), and to see and hear them do that beneath the Tricolour and the Red Hand Ulster Banner was an emotional experience.  I would have preferred to experience it in Paris instead of on the telly, but you can't have everything.  So even if we screw up and get chucked out of the competition after, at least I've been able to savour that moment.

Great post and if I was Irish myself I would be annoyed too at some of the comments away from the game itself. I was just thinking what gives Scotland a chance if any of progressing and that probably meant a SA win. I still think that would have happened if the ref allowed the emerging ball to come out the SA side in the last seconds of the game. However, they did miss fairly easy penalty chances beforehand. Ireland are worthy of the world rankings no doubt about that though.

[PortyJambo]

At least Scotland know what they've got to do now, score as many points as they can against Tonga and especially Romania, pile it on and don't let up, then hope they can pull off the upset against Ireland. It might even be just about over before the Ireland game if we can't get a massive points differential in the next two games.

 

Very slim chance to make the quarter finals, and it's a shame they've only played one game against the World Champions and that's their World Cup almost over, but I'm sure the players won't be giving up just yet.

[I P Knightley]

2 hours ago, Victorian said:

That referee should be severely sanctioned for that last phase of play.  There's also a glaring defect in the rules regarding reviews by TMO.  For a sport that is so scrutinised by separate review,  how can such an important,  potentially match deciding referee decision pass without any recourse?  

The impact of that decision is almost as big as Craig Joubert giving the Aussies a penalty for free against us in 2015. Had SA scored a try from that position, there was still a chance that Scotland v Ireland would be a meaningful crunch match. As it is, Scotland are all but out of the cup. It's what we expected since the pool was drawn but that doesn't make it any easier to swallow.

 

Joubert did the decent thing and gave up refereeing. The circumstances were, of course, different. Joubert acted like a coward and ran off the pitch without shaking hands with players; O'Keefe, I think, was oblivious with his error and probably believed he'd done things right until he saw the replay. The Saffers were not as vocal about it as I thought they'd be - although we may have been drowning them out, shouting at the telly.

 

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, I P Knightley said:

The impact of that decision is almost as big as Craig Joubert giving the Aussies a penalty for free against us in 2015. Had SA scored a try from that position, there was still a chance that Scotland v Ireland would be a meaningful crunch match. As it is, Scotland are all but out of the cup. It's what we expected since the pool was drawn but that doesn't make it any easier to swallow.

 

Joubert did the decent thing and gave up refereeing. The circumstances were, of course, different. Joubert acted like a coward and ran off the pitch without shaking hands with players; O'Keefe, I think, was oblivious with his error and probably believed he'd done things right until he saw the replay. The Saffers were not as vocal about it as I thought they'd be - although we may have been drowning them out, shouting at the telly.

 

 

Spot and similar.  Joubert literally cheated Scotland out of a match vs Argentina for a place in the final.  No guarantees but it was at least a 50-50 chance to be in a final.  

 

I'm not sure why S.A. weren't going tonto about last night but I suspect partly out of rugby's more philosophical acceptance of decisions,  compared to football.  Partly because it wasn't make or break for them.  

[leginten]

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

That referee should be severely sanctioned for that last phase of play.  There's also a glaring defect in the rules regarding reviews by TMO.  For a sport that is so scrutinised by separate review,  how can such an important,  potentially match deciding referee decision pass without any recourse?  

France is putting on a great tournament, but there have been a number of issues which are down to the rugby authorities, not least the inexcusable drawing of the groups back in 2020. It’s also bizarre that some teams have nearly finished their pool matches while others have barely started.

 

And then there’s the officiating, an area in which international rugby never fails to make itself look totally ridiculous. There’s the inconsistency of the application of head contact in the tackle, as you mention. Much discussed already. Then there’s the scrum. When is a collapsed scrum not a collapsed scrum? The answer appears to be: when it’s late in the game and the referee can’t decide who’s responsible and can’t be bothered resetting the scrum for the fiftieth time in the game, so if the ball’s emerging he just plays on and lets a game of rugby break out. Which begs an obvious question.

 

The forward pass? There are so many. Institutionalised in international rugby for at least a quarter of a century, stemming from the days when it was such an eight-man grind that referees couldn’t bring themselves to interrupt the rare passing moves that broke out. The non-forward pass is probably in the minority. Any move leading to a try will probably contain several. When do the referees call it? Seemingly - hopefully - at random. Pot luck.

 

Offside behind the ruck? A lottery. Almost any team could be pinged at any ruck. Routinely ignored, but occasionally applied. Can be an absolute game-changer, obviously.

 

Offside at restart kicks? Again, institutionalised. Every team is offside at every restart kick. I remember England were once pinged for it at Murrayfield and their players stared in disbelief at the ref as if he had just plucked a new law out of thin air. Routinely ignored by referees but actually leads to lots of penalties for the kicking team, whose players arrive at the catcher much sooner than they have any right to and disrupt the defending team’s possession. Once yesterday when Georgia took a restart kick most of their players were closer to the Portugal ten than to halfway when the kick was made. The referee was looking straight at it. Upshot: penalty to Georgia.

 

My point is that the basics of the game are routinely ignored by officials. Because there are so many stoppages - and here the scrum (which of course always features the most obvious flouting of what still, laughably, appears to be in the law-book, the crooked feed) - is the main culprit (and then there are the injuries, the endless substitutions, the endless TMO referrals) referees are reluctant to halt any open play.. For me, it renders much of the modern game flawed. And of course, in the professional era, laws are pushed to their limits and beyond by all players. Bit of an old man rant, but hey.

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, leginten said:

France is putting on a great tournament, but there have been a number of issues which are down to the rugby authorities, not least the inexcusable drawing of the groups back in 2020. It’s also bizarre that some teams have nearly finished their pool matches while others have barely started.

 

And then there’s the officiating, an area in which international rugby never fails to make itself look totally ridiculous. There’s the inconsistency of the application of head contact in the tackle, as you mention. Much discussed already. Then there’s the scrum. When is a collapsed scrum not a collapsed scrum? The answer appears to be: when it’s late in the game and the referee can’t decide who’s responsible and can’t be bothered resetting the scrum for the fiftieth time in the game, so if the ball’s emerging he just plays on and lets a game of rugby break out. Which begs an obvious question.

 

The forward pass? There are so many. Institutionalised in international rugby for at least a quarter of a century, stemming from the days when it was such an eight-man grind that referees couldn’t bring themselves to interrupt the rare passing moves that broke out. The non-forward pass is probably in the minority. Any move leading to a try will probably contain several. When do the referees call it? Seemingly - hopefully - at random. Pot luck.

 

Offside behind the ruck? A lottery. Almost any team could be pinged at any ruck. Routinely ignored, but occasionally applied. Can be an absolute game-changer, obviously.

 

Offside at restart kicks? Again, institutionalised. Every team is offside at every restart kick. I remember England were once pinged for it at Murrayfield and their players stared in disbelief at the ref as if he had just plucked a new law out of thin air. Routinely ignored by referees but actually leads to lots of penalties for the kicking team, whose players arrive at the catcher much sooner than they have any right to and disrupt the defending team’s possession. Once yesterday when Georgia took a restart kick most of their players were closer to the Portugal ten than to halfway when the kick was made. The referee was looking straight at it. Upshot: penalty to Georgia.

 

My point is that the basics of the game are routinely ignored by officials. Because there are so many stoppages - and here the scrum (which of course always features the most obvious flouting of what still, laughably, appears to be in the law-book, the crooked feed) - is the main culprit (and then there are the injuries, the endless substitutions, the endless TMO referrals) referees are reluctant to halt any open play.. For me, it renders much of the modern game flawed. And of course, in the professional era, laws are pushed to their limits and beyond by all players. Bit of an old man rant, but hey.

 

It's bizarre beyond belief that a team (Scotland) that stands so high in the world rankings (5 at start of tournament) has been in camp for over 2 weeks since the tournament started,  as well as the lead up time before it started,  has merely had the opportunity to play 1 match of their 4 vs the reigning champions,  competed very well for at least a half,  then forced to sit idle for so long,  that now finds itself 95% eliminated with 75% of it's pool matches unplayed.

 

Howling.

[I P Knightley]

8 minutes ago, leginten said:

France is putting on a great tournament, but there have been a number of issues which are down to the rugby authorities, not least the inexcusable drawing of the groups back in 2020. It’s also bizarre that some teams have nearly finished their pool matches while others have barely started.

 

And then there’s the officiating, an area in which international rugby never fails to make itself look totally ridiculous. There’s the inconsistency of the application of head contact in the tackle, as you mention. Much discussed already. Then there’s the scrum. When is a collapsed scrum not a collapsed scrum? The answer appears to be: when it’s late in the game and the referee can’t decide who’s responsible and can’t be bothered resetting the scrum for the fiftieth time in the game, so if the ball’s emerging he just plays on and lets a game of rugby break out. Which begs an obvious question.

 

The forward pass? There are so many. Institutionalised in international rugby for at least a quarter of a century, stemming from the days when it was such an eight-man grind that referees couldn’t bring themselves to interrupt the rare passing moves that broke out. The non-forward pass is probably in the minority. Any move leading to a try will probably contain several. When do the referees call it? Seemingly - hopefully - at random. Pot luck.

 

Offside behind the ruck? A lottery. Almost any team could be pinged at any ruck. Routinely ignored, but occasionally applied. Can be an absolute game-changer, obviously.

 

Offside at restart kicks? Again, institutionalised. Every team is offside at every restart kick. I remember England were once pinged for it at Murrayfield and their players stared in disbelief at the ref as if he had just plucked a new law out of thin air. Routinely ignored by referees but actually leads to lots of penalties for the kicking team, whose players arrive at the catcher much sooner than they have any right to and disrupt the defending team’s possession. Once yesterday when Georgia took a restart kick most of their players were closer to the Portugal ten than to halfway when the kick was made. The referee was looking straight at it. Upshot: penalty to Georgia.

 

My point is that the basics of the game are routinely ignored by officials. Because there are so many stoppages - and here the scrum (which of course always features the most obvious flouting of what still, laughably, appears to be in the law-book, the crooked feed) - is the main culprit (and then there are the injuries, the endless substitutions, the endless TMO referrals) referees are reluctant to halt any open play.. For me, it renders much of the modern game flawed. And of course, in the professional era, laws are pushed to their limits and beyond by all players. Bit of an old man rant, but hey.

Great post.

 

Kolbe's try yesterday: the pass to him was sent out a pace or two outside the 5m line and Kolbe collected it two paces inside. Not forwards apparently. I know there's a bit of a margin given but 3m across a white line painted on the pitch? That's taking the piss.

[Mikey1874]

The refereeing has allowed the players to push it. Maybe some things including the offsides and forwards passes make it a better game. But the inconsistency with lines outs and scrums is maddening. 

[leginten]

5 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

It's bizarre beyond belief that a team (Scotland) that stands so high in the world rankings (5 at start of tournament) has been in camp for over 2 weeks since the tournament started,  as well as the lead up time before it started,  has merely had the opportunity to play 1 match of their 4 vs the reigning champions,  competed very well for at least a half,  then forced to sit idle for so long,  that now finds itself 95% eliminated with 75% of it's pool matches unplayed.

 

Howling.

And of course the thought that you are more or less eliminated after one game (because of the result in two other teams’ third game) is bound to have a psychological effect on you as you go into your second game. Ridiculous beyond belief.

[Tazio]

10 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

So do I, surprisingly enough.   

 

It's great for me.  When Ireland do well I get to enjoy it.  When Ireland lose then it's a case of not worrying because it's only rugby, a game about which I only care a wee bit.

 

South Africa set out to physically take at least one Irish player, preferably Sexton, out of the game, by whatever means were needed.  That didn't work.

 

South Africa brought on their notorious "Bomb Squad", and although it helped a little, it was more than balanced out by two things.  First of all, to win a tight low-scoring game you have to kick to win, and they did not.  For all the extraordinarily bitter people on here whining about the ref, South Africa were given three penalties to put away, and they absolutely ****ed up, and for that they have no-one to blame but themselves.  Secondly, when Ireland had to make a substitution we were able to bring one one of the best - if not THE best - hookers in the game.  South Africa brought on a guy who hadn't played in the position for about 16 years and who couldn't throw the ****ing ball straight in a lineout.  For all the shite talked about the weight and power of the Springbok forwards, the guy who scared me the most throughout that game was Faf De Klerk, and when he went off I started to believe Ireland would hold on and win.

 

Maybe the better team did lose, and maybe the team that got a couple of breaks won.  But also.  Maybe the more mentally resilient team won.  Maybe the team that spent more time inside the opposition 22 won.  Maybe the team that completed more passes and made more turnovers won.  Maybe the team that kicked better in a low-scoring game won.

 

Watching the post-match interviews tonight, I saw none of the "Oirish arrogance" described by people on here.  Farrell, Sexton, Hansen, Aki, Lowe, all with the same message.  It was a great win, but we got the bounce of the ball and we can't always guarantee that.  It's not the first time we've beaten them, and we got LESS points than we did against Romania and Tonga.  We can't get to the semis without having to play Scotland, and without having to play France or NZ, any of whom are good enough to **** us over.  And even if we do, what happens if we face the same South Africans later?  There's no way they'll kick as badly again, so we would be really and truly up against it.   And by the way, our own media and pundits said exactly the same.  Above all, Farrell said tonight that if Ireland want to progress we will have to be better against Scotland than we were tonight, and until that game gets under way there's no way of knowing if that will happen.

 

As an aside, I was disappointed when Scotland didn't get a result against South Africa.  Why?  I like Scotland.  Not the rugby team - I don't care about that - but the country.  It's probably my favourite place on Earth, closer to me and dearer to my heart than somewhere like South Africa could ever be.  If some miracle combination of results were to happen and we lose out and Scotland go through I'd be disappointed.  But because I'm a fair-weather fan, it wouldn't be the end of the world, and I'd be delighted - genuinely delighted - to see Scotland go through and have a run at the knock-out stage.  Alternatively, if there's a combination of results that sees both my Ireland and your Scotland through, I'd be utterly delighted to see it.

 

Whatever else, I could not imagine any set of circumstances in which I would refer to Scotland, Scottish people, or the Scottish rugby team, as "vermin".  I would be utterly ashamed of myself if I did.

 

Coming back to tonight, it wouldn't have been the end of my world if we'd lost, so it hardly makes my world that we won.  But when the final whistle blew at the end of that gladiatorial contest, they put on the Cranberries in the stadium, and 30,000 people - men and women of Leinster, Munster and Connacht and Ulster alike - sang along to "Zombie" (IYKYK), and to see and hear them do that beneath the Tricolour and the Red Hand Ulster Banner was an emotional experience.  I would have preferred to experience it in Paris instead of on the telly, but you can't have everything.  So even if we screw up and get chucked out of the competition after, at least I've been able to savour that moment.

Good post, one thing I’d pick up on though. We’ve been hearing the line about Sexton being targeted for years now. Of course he is, the same way that every player in his position is targeted. If you want to stop a team take away the playmaker, Scotland being a good example, without Russell we lose all our creativity. Ireland lose kicks and the brains that make it tick. In American football sacking the quarterback is a massive thing, the rugby equivalent being setting your flankers on the opposition stand off. I didn’t see anything last night out of the norm in terms of that. 

[Victorian]

What's the predictions for Tonga? I see the bookies see it as a 25 point match for Scotland.  It's all academic of course and may be fanciful in the extreme,  but to qualify Scotland need to beat Ireland by more than 7.  Let's be kind and assume a 15 point win (🤣) which leaves Scotland needing to get about 45 or 50 from Tonga and 65+ vs Romania.  

 

45 possible vs Tonga?  Doubt it.

 

 

[Tazio]

8 minutes ago, Victorian said:

What's the predictions for Tonga? I see the bookies see it as a 25 point match for Scotland.  It's all academic of course and may be fanciful in the extreme,  but to qualify Scotland need to beat Ireland by more than 7.  Let's be kind and assume a 15 point win (🤣) which leaves Scotland needing to get about 45 or 50 from Tonga and 65+ vs Romania.  

 

45 possible vs Tonga?  Doubt it.

 

 

In a very Scottish way we’ll cock it up leaving us with 2 meaningless games. 

[PortyJambo]

11 minutes ago, Victorian said:

What's the predictions for Tonga? I see the bookies see it as a 25 point match for Scotland.  It's all academic of course and may be fanciful in the extreme,  but to qualify Scotland need to beat Ireland by more than 7.  Let's be kind and assume a 15 point win (🤣) which leaves Scotland needing to get about 45 or 50 from Tonga and 65+ vs Romania.  

 

45 possible vs Tonga?  Doubt it.

 

 

Will probably be a 5 point win over Tonga, then a 30 point win over Romania, leaving us only having to beat Ireland by 100 or so....all to play for!

[Victorian]

We'll probably revert to the principle of shooting off a foot at every opportunity,  run in 8 tries vs Tonga and 10 vs Romania,  but miss 13 of the conversions.  Then beat Ireland and come up 2 points short.

[heatonjambo]

1 hour ago, leginten said:

France is putting on a great tournament, but there have been a number of issues which are down to the rugby authorities, not least the inexcusable drawing of the groups back in 2020. It’s also bizarre that some teams have nearly finished their pool matches while others have barely started.

 

And then there’s the officiating, an area in which international rugby never fails to make itself look totally ridiculous. There’s the inconsistency of the application of head contact in the tackle, as you mention. Much discussed already. Then there’s the scrum. When is a collapsed scrum not a collapsed scrum? The answer appears to be: when it’s late in the game and the referee can’t decide who’s responsible and can’t be bothered resetting the scrum for the fiftieth time in the game, so if the ball’s emerging he just plays on and lets a game of rugby break out. Which begs an obvious question.

 

The forward pass? There are so many. Institutionalised in international rugby for at least a quarter of a century, stemming from the days when it was such an eight-man grind that referees couldn’t bring themselves to interrupt the rare passing moves that broke out. The non-forward pass is probably in the minority. Any move leading to a try will probably contain several. When do the referees call it? Seemingly - hopefully - at random. Pot luck.

 

Offside behind the ruck? A lottery. Almost any team could be pinged at any ruck. Routinely ignored, but occasionally applied. Can be an absolute game-changer, obviously.

 

Offside at restart kicks? Again, institutionalised. Every team is offside at every restart kick. I remember England were once pinged for it at Murrayfield and their players stared in disbelief at the ref as if he had just plucked a new law out of thin air. Routinely ignored by referees but actually leads to lots of penalties for the kicking team, whose players arrive at the catcher much sooner than they have any right to and disrupt the defending team’s possession. Once yesterday when Georgia took a restart kick most of their players were closer to the Portugal ten than to halfway when the kick was made. The referee was looking straight at it. Upshot: penalty to Georgia.

 

My point is that the basics of the game are routinely ignored by officials. Because there are so many stoppages - and here the scrum (which of course always features the most obvious flouting of what still, laughably, appears to be in the law-book, the crooked feed) - is the main culprit (and then there are the injuries, the endless substitutions, the endless TMO referrals) referees are reluctant to halt any open play.. For me, it renders much of the modern game flawed. And of course, in the professional era, laws are pushed to their limits and beyond by all players. Bit of an old man rant, but hey.

A rant but a very accurate and good one

[Malinga the Swinga]

2 hours ago, leginten said:

France is putting on a great tournament, but there have been a number of issues which are down to the rugby authorities, not least the inexcusable drawing of the groups back in 2020. It’s also bizarre that some teams have nearly finished their pool matches while others have barely started.

 

And then there’s the officiating, an area in which international rugby never fails to make itself look totally ridiculous. There’s the inconsistency of the application of head contact in the tackle, as you mention. Much discussed already. Then there’s the scrum. When is a collapsed scrum not a collapsed scrum? The answer appears to be: when it’s late in the game and the referee can’t decide who’s responsible and can’t be bothered resetting the scrum for the fiftieth time in the game, so if the ball’s emerging he just plays on and lets a game of rugby break out. Which begs an obvious question.

 

The forward pass? There are so many. Institutionalised in international rugby for at least a quarter of a century, stemming from the days when it was such an eight-man grind that referees couldn’t bring themselves to interrupt the rare passing moves that broke out. The non-forward pass is probably in the minority. Any move leading to a try will probably contain several. When do the referees call it? Seemingly - hopefully - at random. Pot luck.

 

Offside behind the ruck? A lottery. Almost any team could be pinged at any ruck. Routinely ignored, but occasionally applied. Can be an absolute game-changer, obviously.

 

Offside at restart kicks? Again, institutionalised. Every team is offside at every restart kick. I remember England were once pinged for it at Murrayfield and their players stared in disbelief at the ref as if he had just plucked a new law out of thin air. Routinely ignored by referees but actually leads to lots of penalties for the kicking team, whose players arrive at the catcher much sooner than they have any right to and disrupt the defending team’s possession. Once yesterday when Georgia took a restart kick most of their players were closer to the Portugal ten than to halfway when the kick was made. The referee was looking straight at it. Upshot: penalty to Georgia.

 

My point is that the basics of the game are routinely ignored by officials. Because there are so many stoppages - and here the scrum (which of course always features the most obvious flouting of what still, laughably, appears to be in the law-book, the crooked feed) - is the main culprit (and then there are the injuries, the endless substitutions, the endless TMO referrals) referees are reluctant to halt any open play.. For me, it renders much of the modern game flawed. And of course, in the professional era, laws are pushed to their limits and beyond by all players. Bit of an old man rant, but hey.

Not a rant in the slightest and nothing that can be argued against.

Media play their part by their utter refusal to ever criticise the officials.

[AndrewB]

17 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Not a rant in the slightest and nothing that can be argued against.

Media play their part by their utter refusal to ever criticise the officials.

Very disappointed in ITV coverage.  Number 1 is having that git Pougatch fronting it, then number 2 is filling the studio with guys all saying the same thing.  Just like the football, there are too many pundits, presenters, commentators, co-commentators, pitchside reporters etc on a jolly....and very few of them are challenging the narrative.  At least we’re spared Matt Dawson and Jonathan Davies.

[Ulysses]

6 hours ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Also family incident going back over 50 years that I'll never forget and certainly never forgive 

 

I have no insight into your family incident, so I can't comment on it.

 

But you don't need me to remind you that whoever was to blame for that, it wasn't any member of the Ireland rugby squad, none of whom were born at the time.

 

People shouldn't ask you to forgive or forget whatever happened, but I would ask you not to blame people who aren't at fault.

 

Having said that, I wouldn't want to swap places with you and experience something similar, so my regrets to you for what happened, FWIW.

 

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, Tazio said:

Good post, one thing I’d pick up on though. We’ve been hearing the line about Sexton being targeted for years now. Of course he is, the same way that every player in his position is targeted. If you want to stop a team take away the playmaker, Scotland being a good example, without Russell we lose all our creativity. Ireland lose kicks and the brains that make it tick. In American football sacking the quarterback is a massive thing, the rugby equivalent being setting your flankers on the opposition stand off. I didn’t see anything last night out of the norm in terms of that. 

 

My point is not that they tried, but that they failed.  Cynical of me, but...

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, I P Knightley said:

Great post.

 

Kolbe's try yesterday: the pass to him was sent out a pace or two outside the 5m line and Kolbe collected it two paces inside. Not forwards apparently. I know there's a bit of a margin given but 3m across a white line painted on the pitch? That's taking the piss.

 

Was that pass not reviewed off-field?  I thought there was some delay in awarding the try, though I could be wrong - I was busy hiding behind the sofa at the time.

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, Victorian said:

 

It's bizarre beyond belief that a team (Scotland) that stands so high in the world rankings (5 at start of tournament) has been in camp for over 2 weeks since the tournament started,  as well as the lead up time before it started,  has merely had the opportunity to play 1 match of their 4 vs the reigning champions,  competed very well for at least a half,  then forced to sit idle for so long,  that now finds itself 95% eliminated with 75% of it's pool matches unplayed.

 

Howling.

 

There's no way in a sane world that Scotland should find themselves in a pool with both Ireland and South Africa - though of course Ireland and South Africa can quite legitimately make the same complaint.

 

Does anyone know why the draw was made so early?  The football World Cup is a much bigger affair, but FIFA can do the group stage draw 6 months before the tournament. The draw for this tournament could have been made in early 2023, surely?

 

As for the scheduling of games?  Was that also done by a bunch of French primary school kids?

[Mikey1874]

They said the draw was made so early to allow fans to book accommodation early.

 

The schedule is better this year. Extra week added to avoid some teams have 2 games in 4 days. One 2 week break for everyone welcome. 

[heatonjambo]

22 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

I have no insight into your family incident, so I can't comment on it.

 

But you don't need me to remind you that whoever was to blame for that, it wasn't any member of the Ireland rugby squad, none of whom were born at the time.

 

People shouldn't ask you to forgive or forget whatever happened, but I would ask you not to blame people who aren't at fault.

 

Having said that, I wouldn't want to swap places with you and experience something similar, so my regrets to you for what happened, FWIW.

 

i very appropriate statement 

 

but the bit in bold made me smile, having had lots of Irish people blame me for something that happened 400 years ago

 

🙂

[Ulysses]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

They said the draw was made so early to allow fans to book accommodation early.

 

The schedule is better this year. Extra week added to avoid some teams have 2 games in 4 days. One 2 week break for everyone welcome. 

 

Yes, but still FIFA and UEFA can do draws early enough to allow people to buy tickets and book flights and accommodation, but not so early that the rankings and seedings are out of date.

 

Are you saying that Scotland shouldn't have any complaints about the way the scheduling has worked out? 

[Mikey1874]

1 minute ago, Ulysses said:

 

Yes, but still FIFA and UEFA can do draws early enough to allow people to buy tickets and book flights and accommodation, but not so early that the rankings and seedings are out of date.

 

Are you saying that Scotland shouldn't have any complaints about the way the scheduling has worked out? 

 

Where did I say that.

 

I answered your question. 

[Ulysses]

8 minutes ago, heatonjambo said:

i very appropriate statement 

 

but the bit in bold made me smile, having had lots of Irish people blame me for something that happened 400 years ago

 

🙂

 

If I heard an Irish person do that, I'd probably suggest to them that they shouldn't.

[Tazio]

Trivia I learned yesterday. Bryan Gary Habana is named after Bryan Robson and Gary Baillie as his father was a huge Manchester United fan. 

[Ulysses]

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

 

Where did I say that.

 

I answered your question. 

 

I'm just wondering if you think Scotland have reason to complain about the scheduling?  Others on the thread seem to.  If it was the other way round and Ireland were in Scotland's position I might be a bit miffed.  But if the advantages of the fixture schedule outweigh the disadvantages, fair enough.