It is currently Sat May 27, 2017 10:24 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 221 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread. 
Author Message
Primary Schools Player

Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 9:25 pm
Posts: 15
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
najbritcol wrote:
WelshRuby93 wrote:
The way the media and pundits have been going on about how good this England team is, if you look back on the tournament as a whole, its only the scotland game that they have played well.

France should've won, Wales should've won, Italy caused them to question what a ruck was, and Ireland beat them today.

But they are champions. However if they do continue to start slow and rely on a last minute score to win, luck will run out and this winning run will be a distant memory. If New Zealand had played England today they would've won by 30-40 points.

Lions will lose 3-0


France were too sluggish, Wales too incompetent and Italy are, well, Italy, so I disagree that England did not deserve to win those games.


Ye that's fair enough, my main point is that the way ex-players and the media are talking it's as if the world cup final in 2019 is already decided, England vs New Zealand.

It's just annoying and is one of the reason why all the other nations just love beating England, but of course this doesn't reflect what England fans actually think and how the players act.

If England discover and out and out 7 and pick a different full-back they would go up a gear


Sat Mar 18, 2017 11:30 pm
Profile E-mail
British & Irish Lions Player
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:00 am
Posts: 2017
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
WelshRuby93 wrote:
The way the media and pundits have been going on about how good this England team is, if you look back on the tournament as a whole, its only the scotland game that they have played well.

France should've won, Wales should've won, Italy caused them to question what a ruck was, and Ireland beat them today.

But they are champions. However if they do continue to start slow and rely on a last minute score to win, luck will run out and this winning run will be a distant memory. If New Zealand had played England today they would've won by 30-40 points.

Lions will lose 3-0


There is no "should've" about it. you win or you don't. Those games we did, this game we didn't. France game have a point but the Wales game was equal and you cannot say would "should've" won that. We had a bad game and a bad 6 nations yet we lost 1 game. We know England can perform better, we know our youth programs are putting out good players and we have dead wood to remove from the side still, plus this England squad is one of the youngest in the 6N (I think only Scotland are younger on average).

Whilst there is a case fro toning down the hype surrounding England, there is a greater case for toning down the "England are just lucky" rhetoric. We may have been lucky some times but you don't get 18 wins without being a good team. We've had a bad patch, we will get through it. Let me put it to you, why was the Wales game against England a great performance by Wales but terrible by England? As it so happens, we have discovered an out and out 7 (Kvesic,Underhill and longer term Curry) and do have replacement Fullbacks.

_________________
Image


Sat Mar 18, 2017 11:35 pm
Profile E-mail
Primary Schools Player

Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 9:25 pm
Posts: 15
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
Troron wrote:
WelshRuby93 wrote:
The way the media and pundits have been going on about how good this England team is, if you look back on the tournament as a whole, its only the scotland game that they have played well.

France should've won, Wales should've won, Italy caused them to question what a ruck was, and Ireland beat them today.

But they are champions. However if they do continue to start slow and rely on a last minute score to win, luck will run out and this winning run will be a distant memory. If New Zealand had played England today they would've won by 30-40 points.

Lions will lose 3-0


There is no "should've" about it. you win or you don't. Those games we did, this game we didn't. France game have a point but the Wales game was equal and you cannot say would "should've" won that. We had a bad game and a bad 6 nations yet we lost 1 game. We know England can perform better, we know our youth programs are putting out good players and we have dead wood to remove from the side still, plus this England squad is one of the youngest in the 6N (I think only Scotland are younger on average).

Whilst there is a case fro toning down the hype surrounding England, there is a greater case for toning down the "England are just lucky" rhetoric. We may have been lucky some times but you don't get 18 wins without being a good team. We've had a bad patch, we will get through it. Let me put it to you, why was the Wales game against England a great performance by Wales but terrible by England? As it so happens, we have discovered an out and out 7 (Kvesic,Underhill and longer term Curry) and do have replacement Fullbacks.


I think you can say Wales should've won that game with them having a line-out in England's 22 with 4 minutes to go and leading, but i'm sure we wont agree on that one. I wouldn't call England a lucky team for scoring in the dying stages of a game, that if anything is what was impressive about England this campaign. The only sense I would say England are lucky is that teams don't score more points against them when they start slow, which new zealand obviously will.

I didn't think england were terrible in that game, in fact both teams contributed to a hell of a test match. I was probably perceived that they played badly because again the pre-match build up focussed on england's greatness and not giving wales any hope of winning.

Yep I've watched underhill several times and looks the answer, and will develop even more in the prem next year. I think that ford's form is a worry and england looked a better team today when he was off the field.


Sat Mar 18, 2017 11:48 pm
Profile E-mail
International Player

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 4:00 pm
Posts: 904
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
I'm unconvinced by Ford's ability to deliver in the big, high-stakes, high-instensity games, he seems to flounder where others rise to the occasion.


Sat Mar 18, 2017 11:58 pm
Profile E-mail
British & Irish Lions Player
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:00 am
Posts: 2017
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
WelshRuby93 wrote:
Troron wrote:
WelshRuby93 wrote:
The way the media and pundits have been going on about how good this England team is, if you look back on the tournament as a whole, its only the scotland game that they have played well.

France should've won, Wales should've won, Italy caused them to question what a ruck was, and Ireland beat them today.

But they are champions. However if they do continue to start slow and rely on a last minute score to win, luck will run out and this winning run will be a distant memory. If New Zealand had played England today they would've won by 30-40 points.

Lions will lose 3-0


There is no "should've" about it. you win or you don't. Those games we did, this game we didn't. France game have a point but the Wales game was equal and you cannot say would "should've" won that. We had a bad game and a bad 6 nations yet we lost 1 game. We know England can perform better, we know our youth programs are putting out good players and we have dead wood to remove from the side still, plus this England squad is one of the youngest in the 6N (I think only Scotland are younger on average).

Whilst there is a case fro toning down the hype surrounding England, there is a greater case for toning down the "England are just lucky" rhetoric. We may have been lucky some times but you don't get 18 wins without being a good team. We've had a bad patch, we will get through it. Let me put it to you, why was the Wales game against England a great performance by Wales but terrible by England? As it so happens, we have discovered an out and out 7 (Kvesic,Underhill and longer term Curry) and do have replacement Fullbacks.


I think you can say Wales should've won that game with them having a line-out in England's 22 with 4 minutes to go and leading, but i'm sure we wont agree on that one. I wouldn't call England a lucky team for scoring in the dying stages of a game, that if anything is what was impressive about England this campaign. The only sense I would say England are lucky is that teams don't score more points against them when they start slow, which new zealand obviously will.

I didn't think england were terrible in that game, in fact both teams contributed to a hell of a test match. I was probably perceived that they played badly because again the pre-match build up focussed on england's greatness and not giving wales any hope of winning.

Yep I've watched underhill several times and looks the answer, and will develop even more in the prem next year. I think that ford's form is a worry and england looked a better team today when he was off the field.


No you can't because Wales DIDN'T win. England "Shoul've" won when we were on your try line and youngs threw the intercept, we "should've" won when Williams made an illegal turnover (which led to the kick and then a try but still illegal). You can't arbitrarily draw a line at a point in the game and go "we were leading here therefore we should've won" or choose to imagine something going a different way and then saying should've. Even from a failed lineout you still ended up back in your 22 with a try on the verge of being scored, if anything that shows wales should not have won.

_________________
Image


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:04 am
Profile E-mail
Primary Schools Player

Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 9:25 pm
Posts: 15
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
Troron wrote:
WelshRuby93 wrote:
Troron wrote:
WelshRuby93 wrote:
The way the media and pundits have been going on about how good this England team is, if you look back on the tournament as a whole, its only the scotland game that they have played well.

France should've won, Wales should've won, Italy caused them to question what a ruck was, and Ireland beat them today.

But they are champions. However if they do continue to start slow and rely on a last minute score to win, luck will run out and this winning run will be a distant memory. If New Zealand had played England today they would've won by 30-40 points.

Lions will lose 3-0


There is no "should've" about it. you win or you don't. Those games we did, this game we didn't. France game have a point but the Wales game was equal and you cannot say would "should've" won that. We had a bad game and a bad 6 nations yet we lost 1 game. We know England can perform better, we know our youth programs are putting out good players and we have dead wood to remove from the side still, plus this England squad is one of the youngest in the 6N (I think only Scotland are younger on average).

Whilst there is a case fro toning down the hype surrounding England, there is a greater case for toning down the "England are just lucky" rhetoric. We may have been lucky some times but you don't get 18 wins without being a good team. We've had a bad patch, we will get through it. Let me put it to you, why was the Wales game against England a great performance by Wales but terrible by England? As it so happens, we have discovered an out and out 7 (Kvesic,Underhill and longer term Curry) and do have replacement Fullbacks.


I think you can say Wales should've won that game with them having a line-out in England's 22 with 4 minutes to go and leading, but i'm sure we wont agree on that one. I wouldn't call England a lucky team for scoring in the dying stages of a game, that if anything is what was impressive about England this campaign. The only sense I would say England are lucky is that teams don't score more points against them when they start slow, which new zealand obviously will.

I didn't think england were terrible in that game, in fact both teams contributed to a hell of a test match. I was probably perceived that they played badly because again the pre-match build up focussed on england's greatness and not giving wales any hope of winning.

Yep I've watched underhill several times and looks the answer, and will develop even more in the prem next year. I think that ford's form is a worry and england looked a better team today when he was off the field.


No you can't because Wales DIDN'T win. England "Shoul've" won when we were on your try line and youngs threw the intercept, we "should've" won when Williams made an illegal turnover (which led to the kick and then a try but still illegal). You can't arbitrarily draw a line at a point in the game and go "we were leading here therefore we should've won" or choose to imagine something going a different way and then saying should've. Even from a failed lineout you still ended up back in your 22 with a try on the verge of being scored, if anything that shows wales should not have won.


Look, we can go through the entire 80 minutes if you want and pick out every play that led one team to win. I was only stating my opinion that at that stage of the game Wales should have seen the game out and won. Probably the same way you felt at world cup with that famous line-out of yours instead of going for points.

Told you we wouldn't agree :P


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:15 am
Profile E-mail
British & Irish Lions Player
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:00 am
Posts: 2017
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
WelshRuby93 wrote:

Look, we can go through the entire 80 minutes if you want and pick out every play that led one team to win. I was only stating my opinion that at that stage of the game Wales should have seen the game out and won. Probably the same way you felt at world cup with that famous line-out of yours instead of going for points.

Told you we wouldn't agree :P


And I'm stating my opinion which is the team that should have won is the team that did. Ireland should have won today and England should have won against Wales. If you can't see games out and concede in the dying minutes, that's your problem and England's gain.

Of course we wouldn't agree, your starting premise was Wales should have won... I'm not overly in favour of doings "ifs" and "buts". If you're good enough the ifs and buts won't matter.

_________________
Image


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:20 am
Profile E-mail
International Player

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 4:00 pm
Posts: 904
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
Perhaps we should do away with final scorelines completely and decide matches posthumously via a rigorous analysis of stats- metres made, tackle count, merits given for exciting pieces of play, heroism etc- and then deliver a 'worthy winners' verdict the following morning. That way, people wouldn't complain so much.

Not that anyone really takes any notice of what anyone writes in some murky ventricle of the internet.


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:25 am
Profile E-mail
British & Irish Lions Player
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:00 am
Posts: 2017
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
tyleri82 wrote:
Perhaps we should do away with final scorelines completely and decide matches posthumously via a rigorous analysis of stats- metres made, tackle count, merits given for exciting pieces of play, heroism etc- and then deliver a 'worthy winners' verdict the following morning. That way, people wouldn't complain so much.

Not that anyone really takes any notice of what anyone writes in some murky ventricle of the internet.


Tell that to Trump supporters.

_________________
Image


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:26 am
Profile E-mail
International Player

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 4:00 pm
Posts: 904
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
...or Leave voters


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:27 am
Profile E-mail
World XV Player
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 7:09 am
Posts: 3109
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
eog wrote:
Forrealz wrote:
Grand Moff Wilhuff Tarkin wrote:
Can the BaaBaa's have their match vs NZ back now thankyouplease?

I bloody reccon, we should all be focusing on the Lions now

Don't start rattling your begging bowl yet please. The notes will be stuffed into it soon enough

Apparently we get half of your guys gate takings no in it

:occasion5:

We gonna smash the LIONS

_________________
Don't tell me we have too many, and take too many PI players, we were founded by Pasifika people, we're a Pasific Island you bleep bleep..

Scuse my English/spelling/gramma and foul language


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:28 am
Profile E-mail
World XV Player
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:42 am
Posts: 4018
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
Troron wrote:
WelshRuby93 wrote:
Troron wrote:
WelshRuby93 wrote:
The way the media and pundits have been going on about how good this England team is, if you look back on the tournament as a whole, its only the scotland game that they have played well.

France should've won, Wales should've won, Italy caused them to question what a ruck was, and Ireland beat them today.

But they are champions. However if they do continue to start slow and rely on a last minute score to win, luck will run out and this winning run will be a distant memory. If New Zealand had played England today they would've won by 30-40 points.

Lions will lose 3-0


There is no "should've" about it. you win or you don't. Those games we did, this game we didn't. France game have a point but the Wales game was equal and you cannot say would "should've" won that. We had a bad game and a bad 6 nations yet we lost 1 game. We know England can perform better, we know our youth programs are putting out good players and we have dead wood to remove from the side still, plus this England squad is one of the youngest in the 6N (I think only Scotland are younger on average).

Whilst there is a case fro toning down the hype surrounding England, there is a greater case for toning down the "England are just lucky" rhetoric. We may have been lucky some times but you don't get 18 wins without being a good team. We've had a bad patch, we will get through it. Let me put it to you, why was the Wales game against England a great performance by Wales but terrible by England? As it so happens, we have discovered an out and out 7 (Kvesic,Underhill and longer term Curry) and do have replacement Fullbacks.


I think you can say Wales should've won that game with them having a line-out in England's 22 with 4 minutes to go and leading, but i'm sure we wont agree on that one. I wouldn't call England a lucky team for scoring in the dying stages of a game, that if anything is what was impressive about England this campaign. The only sense I would say England are lucky is that teams don't score more points against them when they start slow, which new zealand obviously will.

I didn't think england were terrible in that game, in fact both teams contributed to a hell of a test match. I was probably perceived that they played badly because again the pre-match build up focussed on england's greatness and not giving wales any hope of winning.

Yep I've watched underhill several times and looks the answer, and will develop even more in the prem next year. I think that ford's form is a worry and england looked a better team today when he was off the field.


No you can't because Wales DIDN'T win. England "Shoul've" won when we were on your try line and youngs threw the intercept, we "should've" won when Williams made an illegal turnover (which led to the kick and then a try but still illegal). You can't arbitrarily draw a line at a point in the game and go "we were leading here therefore we should've won" or choose to imagine something going a different way and then saying should've. Even from a failed lineout you still ended up back in your 22 with a try on the verge of being scored, if anything that shows wales should not have won.



So what you are actually saying, although you do not intend to is- England lucked in to it. :twisted:

Think about it. The way the dice falls. You have to be in the right position and prepared for it, but that is what it boils down to.

_________________
.
Live for ever or die trying


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:29 am
Profile E-mail
Primary Schools Player

Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 9:25 pm
Posts: 15
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
tyleri82 wrote:
Perhaps we should do away with final scorelines completely and decide matches posthumously via a rigorous analysis of stats- metres made, tackle count, merits given for exciting pieces of play, heroism etc- and then deliver a 'worthy winners' verdict the following morning. That way, people wouldn't complain so much.

Not that anyone really takes any notice of what anyone writes in some murky ventricle of the internet.


Jesus, I wasn't expecting me saying that I thought Wales should've won that game would cause such a reaction.

Surely you played/watched games were you've lost and thought to yourself, 'we should've won that game'. That's all I was saying.


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:35 am
Profile E-mail
British & Irish Lions Player
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:00 am
Posts: 2017
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
soap wrote:
So what you are actually saying, although you do not intend to is- England lucked in to it. :twisted:

Think about it. The way the dice falls. You have to be in the right position and prepared for it, but that is what it boils down to.


You know perfectly well I'm not saying that. If you put yourself in position to score the winning try after 78 minutes that's no different to putting yourself into position to score a try after 2 minutes (well it is but I'm speaking rhetorically). Scores in the dying moments are no less legitimate and no more lucky than scores at the start. There is always an element of luck, the difference is if you rely on it appearing or make it yourself.

_________________
Image


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:35 am
Profile E-mail
World XV Player
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:42 am
Posts: 4018
Post Re: Emerald vs Red Rose. Build up and match thread.
Troron wrote:
soap wrote:
So what you are actually saying, although you do not intend to is- England lucked in to it. :twisted:

Think about it. The way the dice falls. You have to be in the right position and prepared for it, but that is what it boils down to.


You know perfectly well I'm not saying that. If you put yourself in position to score the winning try after 78 minutes that's no different to putting yourself into position to score a try after 2 minutes (well it is but I'm speaking rhetorically). Scores in the dying moments are no less legitimate and no more lucky than scores at the start. There is always an element of luck, the difference is if you rely on it appearing or make it yourself.


I think England have been the best side all year, but as you said, one good or bad call per game from the ref is the difference between grand slam and lost 3.


Edit,

I see this as a very powerful weapon in Englands bag, they think they are going to win, and play accordingly.

_________________
.
Live for ever or die trying


Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:41 am
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 221 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Four More Years and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: