@brodean understand your point etc, but I doubt whether Love is even been considered starting for ABs this week, after about 4-5 games at most starting for Canes. And I a Canes man (and Love fan). I doubt any test coach in world would consider a starting 10 with so little experience.
You're probably right about consideration from the coaches. Doesn't mean they're right.
The guy is 24 now. He's had 5 years of Super Rugby experience and started 13 games for the Canes at 10. It's an experimental French B/C team. Beauden Barrett had already played 24 tests at 24. We're too conservative now.
Problem is that coaches at Canes (rightly or wrongly) haven't thought Love is good enough to steer them around field at 10. Their job is to do what they think is best for Canes, and selectors have to (I think) select on a good body of work, so they have confidence they won't cock up in tests.
I tend to agree I would like to see more of Love, but if at 10 off bench. Her starts and makes a few balls ups, imagine the melt down (and in press etc) about playing him before he ready.
Laidlaw shat the bed by reinstating Cameron as the starter when he returned from injury. Bad for the Canes, bad for Love and his AB potential
Speaking of body of work - there was more than enough body of work to show that Brett Cameron wasn't the answer but Laidlaw went that path anyway.
@No-Quarter I think in that case, Proctor was too close to JB than simply that he was skinned for pace, his opposite was standing well outside him, there was such a massive gap between Proctor and whoever was defending at wing in that play.
That said, it a major error on his part, but you'd hope Jordie and whoever was at wing (Jordan?) should also be talking as they can see things too.
I think it was the second Test when Holland dropped a few kickoffs?
Yeah, one where he misjudged the depth of the kick, at around the 15' mark, where Attissogbe beats him to the ball in the air (but knocks on himself). And the other one was at the 2nd half restart, with the ball slipping through his fingers and eventually going into touch.
For all three Tests, the ABs kicked off in the first half and received the kick-off in the second. Interestingly, they weren't able to secure one of those 2nd half restarts (Test 1: Ioane knock on; Test 2: Holland error; Test 3: VilliĆØre beats Tuipulotu to the ball). It was a consistent aspect of the pressure the ABs put themselves under at the beginning of the 2nd half, giving the French easy 22 access, alongside the quick impact of the French bench forwards who would come on around the same time.
They butchered some chances but by the same token, it was nice to see some dogged scramble defence - how Sleightholme got across to force the ball inside from BB is a mystery to me.
I have personally reckoned that any team using the pod system are illegal 5/10 times. France seem to be pushing it, and I put it down to how game has changed. Just know when I played you tried to never have a team mate with the ball behind you as you would get pinged for offside. I did think some of the French ones were extreme, even for whats allowed these days.
Ireland dined out on it for years during their recent golden age. Players ahead of ball carriers all over the place masquerading as bodies in motion.
Itās no wonder a geriatric sexton had an arm chair ride in his latter years.
He was basically walking around out there.
Yep we weren't adverse to using it either, don't know any team that was. Though some seemed to overdo it I agree.
I think rugby peaked around 2003-2007. The 05 lions tour was Rugby as I liked it.
Maybe Iām getting old (40) but the current overly busy refs, and skullduggery such as this du Pont stuff does nothing for me.
I preferred when backs were backs, forwards were forwards, and you could have a bit of a āsort outā without being sent off.
The TMO is a good addition for adjudicating on whether a try is scored but going back a couple of phases to see something technical that was missed leaves me cold.
Camel. Horse. Committee. Etc
TLDR : āgames goneā
Old at 40??? But genuinely mate I perhaps 30 years older, but I agree wholeheartedly.
Scotland should have won that game twice over in the first half but didn't take advantage of a France looking very Old French without Dupont and Ntamack.
Yeah the last decision is going to be talked about, but don't put it in the ref's hands.
Christ I hate that line of thinking. The old āthe ref didnāt cost us, we should have have put it away earlierā. It makes no sense. They did what they had to do to be in a position to win the game and the TMO screwed them. Both teams made mistakes prior to then, itās called āsportā
No, this is a good point which is on the players.
Same point applies to lions 3 in 2017, and from a personal point of view, missing out my marathon time by 23 seconds.
Re TMO. His call was correct following protocols. He has to overturn the ref. Evidence wasnāt 100% conclusive.
New Zealandās Chryss Viliko attended an independent Disciplinary Committee hearing for an offence contrary to Law 9.20(a) (dangerous charging in a ruck or maul) in New Zealandās WXV 1 match against France on 20 October. The player was suspended for two matches subject to the successful completion...
Eddie Jones: Le Bomb squad criticism 'plain daft', Ireland sorely missed their 'glitter man' and the 'elephant in the room' regarding Antoine Dupont
Independent Disciplinary Committee decision: Chryss Viliko (New Zealand) | World Rugby
World Rugby identify FIVE refereeing mistakes from controversial France-South Africa clash