Springboks v British & Irish Lions II
-
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
-
BILs changes for next week - apart from a whole new game plan. Wyn Jones if fit with Vunipola on the bench. George to the bench in place of Owens. If Alan-Wyn has anything left in the tank then he starts again with Itoje. Beirne at 6 with Lawes on the bench. Simmonds at 8. Navidi to the bench in place of Faletau. Otherwise no changes. In the backs, we have issues at 9 & 10 and I think the choice of 10 would dictate who plays at 9. I’d like to see Smith with Price but we won’t. Aki for Henshaw. Adams for Watson, Williams for Hogg. VDM stays by the skin of his teeth.
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
It's ludicrously reckless, not to mention bullshit. You can't disregard everyone else's safety just because you want to pretend you can only see the ball. Would certainly make for an interesting lineout as you don't even bother to compete and just get the guy at the front to run through the legs of the jumpers as he can't see them.
-
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
It's ludicrously reckless, not to mention bullshit. You can't disregard everyone else's safety just because you want to pretend you can only see the ball. Would certainly make for an interesting lineout as you don't even bother to compete and just get the guy at the front to run through the legs of the jumpers as he can't see them.
@bones
People saying "he never took his eyes off the ball", as if that's a defence.That just confirms it wasn't malicious, but nobody's suggesting that it was.
Not looking where you're running in that kind of situation is reckless.
-
@bones
People saying "he never took his eyes off the ball", as if that's a defence.That just confirms it wasn't malicious, but nobody's suggesting that it was.
Not looking where you're running in that kind of situation is reckless.
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
That just confirms it wasn't malicious
Does it though? The only reason why you would pretend to only be looking at the ball in that situation, is if you think there's a risk of taking someone out.
Maliciously reckless?
-
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
That just confirms it wasn't malicious
Does it though? The only reason why you would pretend to only be looking at the ball in that situation, is if you think there's a risk of taking someone out.
Maliciously reckless?
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Does it though?
For me, yes.
The counter argument is that you should be looking at whether anyone else might be in the zone. But then are you looking to line them up?
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Does it though?
For me, yes.
The counter argument is that you should be looking at whether anyone else might be in the zone. But then are you looking to line them up?
-
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
That just confirms it wasn't malicious
Does it though? The only reason why you would pretend to only be looking at the ball in that situation, is if you think there's a risk of taking someone out.
Maliciously reckless?
-
@bones
People saying "he never took his eyes off the ball", as if that's a defence.That just confirms it wasn't malicious, but nobody's suggesting that it was.
Not looking where you're running in that kind of situation is reckless.
@gibbonrib said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones
People saying "he never took his eyes off the ball", as if that's a defence.That just confirms it wasn't malicious, but nobody's suggesting that it was.
Not looking where you're running in that kind of situation is wreckless.
More likely wreckful!
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Does it though?
For me, yes.
The counter argument is that you should be looking at whether anyone else might be in the zone. But then are you looking to line them up?
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Does it though?
For me, yes.
The counter argument is that you should be looking at whether anyone else might be in the zone. But then are you looking to line them up?
Absurd example maybe, but in circumstance where ball was going to land on player with back to it, does approaching player have right to leap on top of him in order to catch ball?
I’d say yes.
If said approaching player tips and lands on his shoulder can unsighted player be penalised.
I’d say no.
The problem with all this is if someone wants to catch a high ball kicked to where they are they need to have all eyes on ball, not be looking away to scan who might be jumping into them.
I’d say if a player is standing still and looking to catch it is illogical for it to be a red card.
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nta if you glance at the Speedo when you drive, does that mean you're trying to speed?
Hardly comparable.
Intent is the thing you want to try and judge. Not always easy, which is why we have Laws and frameworks, not Rules.
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nta if you glance at the Speedo when you drive, does that mean you're trying to speed?
Hardly comparable.
Intent is the thing you want to try and judge. Not always easy, which is why we have Laws and frameworks, not Rules.
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Hardly comparable
Only because you're a model citizen.
-
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Hardly comparable
Only because you're a model citizen.
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Hardly comparable
Only because you're a model citizen.
Takes one to know one?
-
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Hardly comparable
Only because you're a model citizen.
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@nta said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Hardly comparable
Only because you're a model citizen.
And have had my car long enough to know pretty much exactly how fast I'm going without even looking
-
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
It's ludicrously reckless, not to mention bullshit. You can't disregard everyone else's safety just because you want to pretend you can only see the ball. Would certainly make for an interesting lineout as you don't even bother to compete and just get the guy at the front to run through the legs of the jumpers as he can't see them.
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
It's ludicrously reckless, not to mention bullshit. You can't disregard everyone else's safety just because you want to pretend you can only see the ball. Would certainly make for an interesting lineout as you don't even bother to compete and just get the guy at the front to run through the legs of the jumpers as he can't see them.
You are being absurd now as I try to get to grips with your point.
Do you agree that players can now no longer catch a ball when on the ground?
Is the basic coaching rule of always keep your eye on the ball no longer applicable? -
Sunday Times has Lions tight five outplaying Boks. Walrus gives Etzebeth ‘4K’ and call him overrated.
Only ratings which seem half decent are Rugby Pass.
@pakman said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Sunday Times has Lions tight five outplaying Boks. Walrus gives Etzebeth ‘4K’ and call him overrated.
Only ratings which seem half decent are Rugby Pass.
Oh my lord.
Did itoje get MOTM?
-
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
It's ludicrously reckless, not to mention bullshit. You can't disregard everyone else's safety just because you want to pretend you can only see the ball. Would certainly make for an interesting lineout as you don't even bother to compete and just get the guy at the front to run through the legs of the jumpers as he can't see them.
You are being absurd now as I try to get to grips with your point.
Do you agree that players can now no longer catch a ball when on the ground?
Is the basic coaching rule of always keep your eye on the ball no longer applicable?@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@bones said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
@majorrage said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
Kolbe had his eyes on the ball the entire time
Jesus Christ
️THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT OK!! THATS THE FUCKEN PROBLEM!!Why not?
It's ludicrously reckless, not to mention bullshit. You can't disregard everyone else's safety just because you want to pretend you can only see the ball. Would certainly make for an interesting lineout as you don't even bother to compete and just get the guy at the front to run through the legs of the jumpers as he can't see them.
You are being absurd now as I try to get to grips with your point.
Do you agree that players can now no longer catch a ball when on the ground?
Is the basic coaching rule of always keep your eye on the ball no longer applicable?Excuse me? I'm being absurd? You're the one saying you should be allowed to recklessly take players out as long as you pretend you could only see the ball and nothing else.
Righto.
-
BILs changes for next week - apart from a whole new game plan. Wyn Jones if fit with Vunipola on the bench. George to the bench in place of Owens. If Alan-Wyn has anything left in the tank then he starts again with Itoje. Beirne at 6 with Lawes on the bench. Simmonds at 8. Navidi to the bench in place of Faletau. Otherwise no changes. In the backs, we have issues at 9 & 10 and I think the choice of 10 would dictate who plays at 9. I’d like to see Smith with Price but we won’t. Aki for Henshaw. Adams for Watson, Williams for Hogg. VDM stays by the skin of his teeth.
@catogrande said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:
In the backs, we have issues at 9 & 10 and I think the choice of 10 would dictate who plays at 9. I’d like to see Smith with Price but we won’t. Aki for Henshaw.
I thought Henshaw was OK but the Harris inclusion didn't work.
Gatland and co needs to decide how they want to play and select accordingly.
