Rugby Union

[ICTChris]

Scotland haven't beaten Ireland by more than seven points in a competitive match since the 2001 Six Nations when we beat them 32-10 at Murrayfield.  We've only beaten Ireland once in the last ten years.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

6 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

It will be very difficult - basically need bonus point win against Romania and then beating Ireland without them getting a bonus point.  

This is assuming that nothing mad happens like Tonga beating South Africa.

It's also irritating that Ireland let South Africa get a losing bonus point because otherwise there would be the possibility of Scotland vs Ireland producing a result where both teams went through.

Which would be nice in itself but the reaction from South Africans would be hilarious

[topcat(The most tip top)]

1 minute ago, ICTChris said:

Scotland haven't beaten Ireland by more than seven points in a competitive match since the 2001 Six Nations when we beat them 32-10 at Murrayfield.  We've only beaten Ireland once in the last ten years.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

54 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

If you lose by seven points or less then you get a losing bonus point.

It's that sort of needless and artificially constructed rule which annoys me about international rugby union.  It smacks of trying to engineer outcomes rather than simply letting the scoreboards and the tables do the arithmetic.

[IrishBhoy]

Something that’s been bugging me since Saturday after the Ireland - SA game… right at the very last play of the game SA seemed to have a maul rolling towards the try line and it collapsed about 2 metres before it. The referee went from one side of the ruck to the other shouting ‘it’s not out, it’s not out’ while the SA player at the very back had the ball in his hand, which was quite clear to see on TV. The ref started looking into the mass of bodies for a second before shouting ‘it’s not out’ and blew the final whistle. The SA number 12 who clearly had the ball in his control at the back of the pack showed the ball to the referee, but to my eye didn’t seem to make a big deal of it? Surely that’s quite a serious mistake by the referee, who had no idea where the ball was, and also is it not usually a penalty for collapsing a maul that has forward momentum? The SA players didn’t seem to make any sort of deal of it at all, especially considering the stage the game was at, which made me think I missed something? Anyone shed any light on that.?

[GHF-23]

28 minutes ago, IrishBhoy said:

Something that’s been bugging me since Saturday after the Ireland - SA game… right at the very last play of the game SA seemed to have a maul rolling towards the try line and it collapsed about 2 metres before it. The referee went from one side of the ruck to the other shouting ‘it’s not out, it’s not out’ while the SA player at the very back had the ball in his hand, which was quite clear to see on TV. The ref started looking into the mass of bodies for a second before shouting ‘it’s not out’ and blew the final whistle. The SA number 12 who clearly had the ball in his control at the back of the pack showed the ball to the referee, but to my eye didn’t seem to make a big deal of it? Surely that’s quite a serious mistake by the referee, who had no idea where the ball was, and also is it not usually a penalty for collapsing a maul that has forward momentum? The SA players didn’t seem to make any sort of deal of it at all, especially considering the stage the game was at, which made me think I missed something? Anyone shed any light on that.?

I would need to watch it back but my recollection is that by the time he blew the whistle and shouted it's not out the ball was with the SA player, but that there had been a fair amount of digging around prior to that, for a length of time that you'd usually say was fair enough for a collapsed maul/balls not coming out scrum to be awarded. He's called it late but probably fair enough, similar to Wales wanting to go back for a penalty on half time last night when no one had heard Barnes shout advantage over but they had obviously made enough ground for it to be over. 

Edited September 25, 2023 by GHF-23

[GHF-23]

Our record against Ireland is stinking, and my expectation is close to zero, but I think the situation in the group is a lot better than I expected with an Ireland win. Gives us a very clear goal for the players to work towards - beat them by more than 7. Whether or not we can do that is another question but give some of the key players a rest next week and we should still get a bonus point; and then it's a straight shoot out with what should be just about our best 15. We know we can cause them problems, we just have to have the game of our lives (and then get knocked out by France or New Zealand)

[Dunning1874]

In the scenario that we beat Ireland by 7 or more but South Africa then fail to get a bonus point against Tonga, that would put us out wouldn't it, unless we beat Romania by a large enough scoreline to overtake Ireland on points difference? Ireland top on points difference then South Africa through on head to head against us?

[topcat(The most tip top)]

2 hours ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

It's that sort of needless and artificially constructed rule which annoys me about international rugby union.  It smacks of trying to engineer outcomes rather than simply letting the scoreboards and the tables do the arithmetic.

I assume some people felt similarly about football introducing 3 points for a win

[ajwffc]

Johnny Matthews replaces Stuart McInally in our Rugby World Cup squad after the Edinburgh hooker sustained a neck injury. 

What a shit way for McInally to end his career 

[O'Kelly Isley III]

2 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

I assume some people felt similarly about football introducing 3 points for a win

Yep, and of course the main beneficiaries were those teams already recording the most wins.  In the Scottish context you'll never again see a title win by anyone other than the OF.

[IrishBhoy]

4 hours ago, GHF-23 said:

I would need to watch it back but my recollection is that by the time he blew the whistle and shouted it's not out the ball was with the SA player, but that there had been a fair amount of digging around prior to that, for a length of time that you'd usually say was fair enough for a collapsed maul/balls not coming out scrum to be awarded. He's called it late but probably fair enough, similar to Wales wanting to go back for a penalty on half time last night when no one had heard Barnes shout advantage over but they had obviously made enough ground for it to be over. 

Just seemed like a very strange ending to the game, especially when South Africa were so close to the try line. I actually think the South African number 12 was too fly for his own good, because the referee didn’t have a clue where the ball was and neither did most of the players. If he had offloaded it a couple of seconds earlier there would surely have been space on the far side. Moot point now anyway but could have done Scotland a favour if they had managed to get the try. 

[Lurkst]

9 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

My reading of the rules is that under those circumstances South Africa would probably top the group and then Scotland would take 2nd on the head to head (but that depends quite how much the  Springboks put past Tonga)

I think if the three teams are tied on 14 or 15 it goes on points difference in the group, so we'd be needing to annihilate Romania.

 

7 hours ago, Dunning1874 said:

In the scenario that we beat Ireland by 7 or more but South Africa then fail to get a bonus point against Tonga, that would put us out wouldn't it, unless we beat Romania by a large enough scoreline to overtake Ireland on points difference? Ireland top on points difference then South Africa through on head to head against us?

If South Africa fail to get a bonus point against Tonga, Scotland and Ireland could "engineer" a result where we win but both teams bonus point. Putting the Saffers out Austria v West Germany style.

 

[GAD]

It'll be interesting to see who we pick against Romania. I think we need to pick a team that can aim to score 80-100 points, (and not concede many) which will be very difficult. However, I think the team I'd pick to do that isn't necessarily our best team. Can see a pack of Bhatti, Ashman, Fagerson, Cummings, Skinner, Watson, M.Fagerson and Dempsey starting, with Horne, Russell, Redpath, Jones, Graham, DVM and Kinghorn. Lots of big carriers up front, who should still be able to deliver a functional set piece against Romania, then two playmakers surrounded by loads of line breakers and pace in the backs.

[Eednud]

@peasy23 you asked for it. First up today’s Sydney Morning Herald, they broke the Eddie Jones Japan story.

 

[Eednud]

The Australian. No mention on front page although something in editorial.

 

[Eednud]

The Daily Telegraph (Sydney) 

[Eednud]

The Courier Mail (Brisbane) has the Code red story plus a small pic of Eddie Jones on back page. Herald Sun (Melbourne) the Code red story. The Advertiser (Adelaide) has a match report. These 3 plus the Daily Telegraph are all Newscorp publication as is The Australian.

The SMH letters page as well.
 

 

 

[ajwffc]

he should stay 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/66914086

[Sensible Soccer🏴]

On 24/09/2023 at 19:27, Bully Wee Villa said:

Not really. If we could beat them by 100 points we'd have a chance of qualifying without a bonus point against Ireland.

Is this the last straw we're grasping at, skelping the Romanians, would allow just a regular (8 point) victory over Ireland?