Scotland France for the lazy buggers

[Yr Alban]

Blatantly wrong decision from the TMO. No only did the ball visibly touch the ground on one angle, you can see it rebound slightly afterwards. It isn’t controversial. It’s just wrong.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

As much as the finish is utterly farcical, I have just rewatched VdM’s ‘defence’ after Fickou’s break. Penalty try every day of the week

No no no no.

The Scots are clear. Nigel Owens says it wasnt a pen, and even though he also said he was offside for the intercept, as did Beattie and everyone else, VDM was in fact totally innocent and the ref was correct.

We are all wrong, the Scots have it right.

A night on the sauce, Jim?

I didn't hear what John Beattie said, or even what his son Johnnie Beattie had to say, they weren't involved in the coms, but they are both journalists and/or rugby commentators so they may have said something about the game. but neither of them were there at Murrayfield.

I saw a hand on the shoulder from vdM, I didn't see the classic seatbelt tackle where the arm is over the shoulder and near the neck - that was the point Owens was making - is he wrong and you are right?

I'm not 100% either way on the offside, some say there was a ruck there and so an offside line was in play, others say otherwise - but a ruck is defined as having players on their feet - you can check world rugby laws on this if you like and get back to me, I'll take your guidance on it either way, but from my one time viewing of it, there weren't too many players on their feet there

And yet in practice...

I don't have a problem with the tackle, we've seen them given but if they're being a little more sensible that's good. But he looked clearly offside making the intercept, so that was a miss.

[topofthemoon]

This is probably something that World Rugby could do with putting out a specific clarification on. When the Decision Making Framework for High Tackles was in place from May 2019, the seat belt tackle was specifically defined under Penalty only offences:

High tackle with first contact above or over the shoulder of the ball carrier, but without contact to the head or neck of the ball carrier during the execution of the tackle (seat belt tackle)

When this was superseded by the Head Contact Process in March 2021 the law application guidance that accompanied this had (as the first clip) as an example of play on, Nigel Owens reffing a seat belt tackle that doesn't make contact with the head or neck as "over the shoulder, not high, play on".

[Tichtheid]

And yet in practice...

I don't have a problem with the tackle, we've seen them given but if they're being a little more sensible that's good. But he looked clearly offside making the intercept, so that was a miss.

The thing is, as Top of The Moon has said, if there was a ruck there was an offside line, if not it is open play and therefore there is no offside line

I'm open minded on it, I've only seen it the once, if someone can definitively illustrate why it's offside I'll be okay with it and agree it should have been a penalty against vdM.

[topofthemoon]

Shambolic decision at the end.

I guess on balance there is no doubt the Scots had the rub of the green the whole game from the ref. But still, that fuck up at the end probably overrides VDM's clear and obvious pen try.

It was a tackle only, no offside lines created as the arriving French player doesn't go over the ball but rather just immediately picks it up and passes it.

Even if it had been a situation where offside lines had been created, it was a penalty and yellow card at worst - there was a defender left to make a tackle on Ramos so don't think it was a probable try.

Penaud had a massive knock on that would have given a scrum just outside the French 22. Followed by a kicking battle that ended with the scrum France scored from. Le Garrec's pass to Bielle-Biarrey was forward. He had no momentum, forward out the hands.

French wing clearly goes over the tackled player. He gets shoved in the back by a Scot, and goes past, but that's irrelevant, once he's been in place the offside lines are formed and don't disappear after.

I think we may be having the same discussion on Twitter! There's no point that Bielle-Biarrey can be said to have been on his feet over the ball - he never stops moving as he goes round the side of Fickou (not over the ball) and straight to ground.

[Blackmac]

Shambolic decision at the end.

I guess on balance there is no doubt the Scots had the rub of the green the whole game from the ref. But still, that fuck up at the end probably overrides VDM's clear and obvious pen try.

It was a tackle only, no offside lines created as the arriving French player doesn't go over the ball but rather just immediately picks it up and passes it.

Even if it had been a situation where offside lines had been created, it was a penalty and yellow card at worst - there was a defender left to make a tackle on Ramos so don't think it was a probable try.

Penaud had a massive knock on that would have given a scrum just outside the French 22. Followed by a kicking battle that ended with the scrum France scored from. Le Garrec's pass to Bielle-Biarrey was forward. He had no momentum, forward out the hands.

French wing clearly goes over the tackled player. He gets shoved in the back by a Scot, and goes past, but that's irrelevant, once he's been in place the offside lines are formed and don't disappear after.

That's absolute nonsense and you know it. Whether he was pushed it's utterly irrelevant. Just being there is a laughable comment. There was never a ruck created, ball went lose and the first arriving French player passed it off the floor.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

And yet in practice...

I don't have a problem with the tackle, we've seen them given but if they're being a little more sensible that's good. But he looked clearly offside making the intercept, so that was a miss.

The thing is, as Top of The Moon has said, if there was a ruck there was an offside line, if not it is open play and therefore there is no offside line

I'm open minded on it, I've only seen it the once, if someone can definitively illustrate why it's offside I'll be okay with it and agree it should have been a penalty against vdM.

I guess that's a thing, though France might argue there could have been a ruck but for Blue 14 playing White 11 off the ball, and then VdM and someone else are trying to play the France 9 whilst they're off their feet and in theory out of the game.

[Blackmac]

As much as the finish is utterly farcical, I have just rewatched VdM’s ‘defence’ after Fickou’s break. Penalty try every day of the week

Absolute nonsense comment. There was no ruck.

[Blackmac]

And yet in practice...

I don't have a problem with the tackle, we've seen them given but if they're being a little more sensible that's good. But he looked clearly offside making the intercept, so that was a miss.

The thing is, as Top of The Moon has said, if there was a ruck there was an offside line, if not it is open play and therefore there is no offside line

I'm open minded on it, I've only seen it the once, if someone can definitively illustrate why it's offside I'll be okay with it and agree it should have been a penalty against vdM.

I guess that's a thing, though France might argue there could have been a ruck but for Blue 14 playing White 11 off the ball, and then VdM and someone else are trying to play the France 9 whilst they're off their feet and in theory out of the game.

He didn't play him, they were both going for the ball and collided.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

The thing is, as Top of The Moon has said, if there was a ruck there was an offside line, if not it is open play and therefore there is no offside line

I'm open minded on it, I've only seen it the once, if someone can definitively illustrate why it's offside I'll be okay with it and agree it should have been a penalty against vdM.

I guess that's a thing, though France might argue there could have been a ruck but for Blue 14 playing White 11 off the ball, and then VdM and someone else are trying to play the France 9 whilst they're off their feet and in theory out of the game.

He didn't play him, they were both going for the ball and collided.

It's what I'd claim, but he didn't get there and did play the man who was ahead of him

[Enzedder]

Those pesky French ants

FB_IMG_1707611085992.jpg (67.75 KiB) Viewed 1451 times

[Blackmac]

I guess that's a thing, though France might argue there could have been a ruck but for Blue 14 playing White 11 off the ball, and then VdM and someone else are trying to play the France 9 whilst they're off their feet and in theory out of the game.

He didn't play him, they were both going for the ball and collided.

It's what I'd claim, but he didn't get there and did play the man who was ahead of him

Even if you could claim that, it's a separate discussion to VdM being offside. You can't claim if this happened and that didn't happen he would have been offside. What it boils down to is the run of play dictates that no offside was ever created.

[topofthemoon]

And yet in practice...

I don't have a problem with the tackle, we've seen them given but if they're being a little more sensible that's good. But he looked clearly offside making the intercept, so that was a miss.

The thing is, as Top of The Moon has said, if there was a ruck there was an offside line, if not it is open play and therefore there is no offside line

I'm open minded on it, I've only seen it the once, if someone can definitively illustrate why it's offside I'll be okay with it and agree it should have been a penalty against vdM.

I guess that's a thing, though France might argue there could have been a ruck but for Blue 14 playing White 11 off the ball, and then VdM and someone else are trying to play the France 9 whilst they're off their feet and in theory out of the game.

Rowe is never off his feet at any point. Van der Merwe never plays the scrum half. Gets back on his feet which is why he's able intercept Lucu's pass and break away.

[Camroc2]

It was a tackle only, no offside lines created as the arriving French player doesn't go over the ball but rather just immediately picks it up and passes it.

Even if it had been a situation where offside lines had been created, it was a penalty and yellow card at worst - there was a defender left to make a tackle on Ramos so don't think it was a probable try.

Penaud had a massive knock on that would have given a scrum just outside the French 22. Followed by a kicking battle that ended with the scrum France scored from. Le Garrec's pass to Bielle-Biarrey was forward. He had no momentum, forward out the hands.

French wing clearly goes over the tackled player. He gets shoved in the back by a Scot, and goes past, but that's irrelevant, once he's been in place the offside lines are formed and don't disappear after.

That's absolute nonsense and you know it. Whether he was pushed it's utterly irrelevant. Just being there is a laughable comment. There was never a ruck created, ball went lose and the first arriving French player passed it off the floor.

Lads, it was a ruck once the second Frenchie arrives, and is reffed like that normally. How the TMO (Irish, I'll have you know) didn't intervene is beyond me. And it was also a seatbelt tackle, that is normally, usually, like 90% + of times penalised.

What I haven't seen a second time is whether Russell was offside when the ball mysteriously flew out of the French ruck.

[Paddington Bear]

As much as the finish is utterly farcical, I have just rewatched VdM’s ‘defence’ after Fickou’s break. Penalty try every day of the week

Absolute nonsense comment. There was no ruck.

Sorry, this just isn’t true.

I’d be fuming if I was Scottish and you all quite genuinely have my sympathy. that’s the most egregious game defining decision there’s been in the 6N for years (since Wales were given two nonsense tries vs England during covid IMO). What we saw all game (and in the England game as well) was teams of officials who simply weren’t up to the job. This is an issue for the 6N organisers and world rugby. The money and time invested in this tournament deserves much much better.

[Slick]

Shambolic decision at the end.

I guess on balance there is no doubt the Scots had the rub of the green the whole game from the ref. But still, that fuck up at the end probably overrides VDM's clear and obvious pen try.

It was a tackle only, no offside lines created as the arriving French player doesn't go over the ball but rather just immediately picks it up and passes it.

Even if it had been a situation where offside lines had been created, it was a penalty and yellow card at worst - there was a defender left to make a tackle on Ramos so don't think it was a probable try.

Penaud had a massive knock on that would have given a scrum just outside the French 22. Followed by a kicking battle that ended with the scrum France scored from. Le Garrec's pass to Bielle-Biarrey was forward. He had no momentum, forward out the hands.

French wing clearly goes over the tackled player. He gets shoved in the back by a Scot, and goes past, but that's irrelevant, once he's been in place the offside lines are formed and don't disappear after.

Doesn’t he have to be “bound” for it to be a ruck? Even a hand gently laid on a player? Going flying past doesn’t matter

[Raggs]

As much as the finish is utterly farcical, I have just rewatched VdM’s ‘defence’ after Fickou’s break. Penalty try every day of the week

Absolute nonsense comment. There was no ruck.

The fact you're talking about a ruck being needed for offside lines means you're years out of date with the laws already.

[PCPhil]

Those pesky French ants

FB_IMG_1707611085992.jpg

Yes. That's the same picture I saw on slo mo.

[Raggs]

French player with one foot either side of the tackled player, , over him (left foot clearly gone beyond Fickou's back foot). Offside lines formed. Also clearly showing him getting shoved from behind by the Scottish player, so playing the man without the ball, or offside at the ruck, or whatever other offence you fancy calling it. He clearly hasn't run around the tackle area either.

[Tichtheid]

French player with one foot either side of the tackled player, , over him (left foot clearly gone beyond Fickou's back foot). Offside lines formed. Also clearly showing him getting shoved from behind by the Scottish player, so playing the man without the ball, or offside at the ruck, or whatever other offence you fancy calling it. He clearly hasn't run around the tackle area either.

You have a point about Rowe playing BB, but an offside line is only created at the tackle when one player is on his feet and over the ball. I’ve just replayed it several times and there isn’t a player on his feet over the ball.

It does feel instinctively that vdM is offside, but going through it with a fine-toothed comb I can’t see where he is offside because it looks to me like it becomes open play, to repeat myself, this because no one is on their feet over the ball

Law 14: Tackle
Offside lines are created at a tackle when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball, which is on the ground. Each team’s offside line runs parallel to the goal line through the hindmost point of any player in the tackle or on their feet over the ball. If that point is on or behind the goal line, the offside line for that team is the goal line.

[Slick]

French player with one foot either side of the tackled player, , over him (left foot clearly gone beyond Fickou's back foot). Offside lines formed. Also clearly showing him getting shoved from behind by the Scottish player, so playing the man without the ball, or offside at the ruck, or whatever other offence you fancy calling it. He clearly hasn't run around the tackle area either.

Doesn’t a ruck have to be formed for there to be an offside line? A ruck can only be formed when 2 players, one from each team, on their feet, over the ball. Your picture shows precisely none of that

[Yr Alban]

Can't say it was grounded. Probably was but can't say for sure.

Whilst it probably was, there is no angle that actually shows the ball grounded. With the question asked it can't be given.

Which does not alter the fact Scotland pissed the game away. At half time I thought the game was lost by the failure to score then. The kick tennis in the second half as we tried not to lose put the tin hat on it. Trying not to lose rather than trying to win is generally a sure fire way of losing.

Scotland's precision was poor, tactics questionable and just generally a poor game.

I disagree with this estimation. I thought Scotland played very well and were clearly the better side. In particular, our discipline was good, the lineout reliable, and we didn’t go to sleep for 10-20 minutes as we frequently do. In other words, the problems from last week were fixed.

I also think the tactics were correct. France were limited to very few chances, but were better at taking them. The BB try was genius from the player but the pass to him looked well forward and wasn’t checked.

What is definitely true is that we left points out there and shouldn’t remotely have needed a try at the end. But we still scored one and yet the officials found a way not to award it.

[Blackmac]

French player with one foot either side of the tackled player, , over him (left foot clearly gone beyond Fickou's back foot). Offside lines formed. Also clearly showing him getting shoved from behind by the Scottish player, so playing the man without the ball, or offside at the ruck, or whatever other offence you fancy calling it. He clearly hasn't run around the tackle area either.

The French player has lost his balance and is falling at that point and has absolutely no control over what he is doing. It's nonsense to suggest that forms an offside line.

[Blackmac]

As much as the finish is utterly farcical, I have just rewatched VdM’s ‘defence’ after Fickou’s break. Penalty try every day of the week

Absolute nonsense comment. There was no ruck.

Sorry, this just isn’t true.

I’d be fuming if I was Scottish and you all quite genuinely have my sympathy. that’s the most egregious game defining decision there’s been in the 6N for years (since Wales were given two nonsense tries vs England during covid IMO). What we saw all game (and in the England game as well) was teams of officials who simply weren’t up to the job. This is an issue for the 6N organisers and world rugby. The money and time invested in this tournament deserves much much better.

Game defining and the most egregious mistake in the 6N for years. Stop talking absolute bollocks man, even the most one eyed supporter couldn't define that as a game defining moment.

[Slick]

Can't say it was grounded. Probably was but can't say for sure.

Whilst it probably was, there is no angle that actually shows the ball grounded. With the question asked it can't be given.

Which does not alter the fact Scotland pissed the game away. At half time I thought the game was lost by the failure to score then. The kick tennis in the second half as we tried not to lose put the tin hat on it. Trying not to lose rather than trying to win is generally a sure fire way of losing.

Scotland's precision was poor, tactics questionable and just generally a poor game.

I disagree with this estimation. I thought Scotland played very well and were clearly the better side. In particular, our discipline was good, the lineout reliable, and we didn’t go to sleep for 10-20 minutes as we frequently do. In other words, the problems from last week were fixed.

I also think the tactics were correct. France were limited to very few chances, but were better at taking them. The BB try was genius from the player but the pass to him looked well forward and wasn’t checked.

What is definitely true is that we left points out there and shouldn’t remotely have needed a try at the end. But we still scored one and yet the officials found a way not to award it.

I agree.

Our usual moans are that we can’t physically match the big teams, we did. That our set pieces fall apart, they didn’t. That we switch off for 10-15 minutes, we didn’t. That our discipline is shite, it wasn’t.

The kick tennis was a French tactic and we were ahead at the time so it made little sense. Boring as it was , was quite happy seeing Finn field the kicks, have a wee rest and then boot it back, running the clock down.

What we all agree on is that we should have been miles ahead, but I don’t think it was all that bad.

[inactionman]

Whilst it probably was, there is no angle that actually shows the ball grounded. With the question asked it can't be given.

Which does not alter the fact Scotland pissed the game away. At half time I thought the game was lost by the failure to score then. The kick tennis in the second half as we tried not to lose put the tin hat on it. Trying not to lose rather than trying to win is generally a sure fire way of losing.

Scotland's precision was poor, tactics questionable and just generally a poor game.

I disagree with this estimation. I thought Scotland played very well and were clearly the better side. In particular, our discipline was good, the lineout reliable, and we didn’t go to sleep for 10-20 minutes as we frequently do. In other words, the problems from last week were fixed.

I also think the tactics were correct. France were limited to very few chances, but were better at taking them. The BB try was genius from the player but the pass to him looked well forward and wasn’t checked.

What is definitely true is that we left points out there and shouldn’t remotely have needed a try at the end. But we still scored one and yet the officials found a way not to award it.

I agree.

Our usual moans are that we can’t physically match the big teams, we did. That our set pieces fall apart, they didn’t. That we switch off for 10-15 minutes, we didn’t. That our discipline is shite, it wasn’t.

The kick tennis was a French tactic and we were ahead at the time so it made little sense. Boring as it was , was quite happy seeing Finn field the kicks, have a wee rest and then boot it back, running the clock down.

What we all agree on is that we should have been miles ahead, but I don’t think it was all that bad.

I thought he was going to have a little sit down at one point.

[Lobby]

Absolute nonsense comment. There was no ruck.

Sorry, this just isn’t true.

I’d be fuming if I was Scottish and you all quite genuinely have my sympathy. that’s the most egregious game defining decision there’s been in the 6N for years (since Wales were given two nonsense tries vs England during covid IMO). What we saw all game (and in the England game as well) was teams of officials who simply weren’t up to the job. This is an issue for the 6N organisers and world rugby. The money and time invested in this tournament deserves much much better.

Game defining and the most egregious mistake in the 6N for years. Stop talking absolute bollocks man, even the most one eyed supporter couldn't define that as a game defining moment.

Paddington is clearly referring to Scotland's disallowed try as the 'game defining decision'; or perhaps you believe that your fellow Scots who are up in arms about it are worse than the even the most one-eyed supporters?

[Slick]

I disagree with this estimation. I thought Scotland played very well and were clearly the better side. In particular, our discipline was good, the lineout reliable, and we didn’t go to sleep for 10-20 minutes as we frequently do. In other words, the problems from last week were fixed.

I also think the tactics were correct. France were limited to very few chances, but were better at taking them. The BB try was genius from the player but the pass to him looked well forward and wasn’t checked.

What is definitely true is that we left points out there and shouldn’t remotely have needed a try at the end. But we still scored one and yet the officials found a way not to award it.

I agree.

Our usual moans are that we can’t physically match the big teams, we did. That our set pieces fall apart, they didn’t. That we switch off for 10-15 minutes, we didn’t. That our discipline is shite, it wasn’t.

The kick tennis was a French tactic and we were ahead at the time so it made little sense. Boring as it was , was quite happy seeing Finn field the kicks, have a wee rest and then boot it back, running the clock down.

What we all agree on is that we should have been miles ahead, but I don’t think it was all that bad.

I thought he was going to have a little sit down at one point.

I genuinely thought he might just to make a point. Would have been very Finn, bet it was going through his head

[Blackmac]

Sorry, this just isn’t true.

I’d be fuming if I was Scottish and you all quite genuinely have my sympathy. that’s the most egregious game defining decision there’s been in the 6N for years (since Wales were given two nonsense tries vs England during covid IMO). What we saw all game (and in the England game as well) was teams of officials who simply weren’t up to the job. This is an issue for the 6N organisers and world rugby. The money and time invested in this tournament deserves much much better.

Game defining and the most egregious mistake in the 6N for years. Stop talking absolute bollocks man, even the most one eyed supporter couldn't define that as a game defining moment.

Paddington is clearly referring to Scotland's disallowed try as the 'game defining decision'; or perhaps you believe that your fellow Scots who are up in arms about it are worse than the even the most one-eyed supporters?

Apologies if that is the case. I thought we were still discussing the other incident.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

The thing is, as Top of The Moon has said, if there was a ruck there was an offside line, if not it is open play and therefore there is no offside line

I'm open minded on it, I've only seen it the once, if someone can definitively illustrate why it's offside I'll be okay with it and agree it should have been a penalty against vdM.

I guess that's a thing, though France might argue there could have been a ruck but for Blue 14 playing White 11 off the ball, and then VdM and someone else are trying to play the France 9 whilst they're off their feet and in theory out of the game.

Rowe is never off his feet at any point. Van der Merwe never plays the scrum half. Gets back on his feet which is why he's able intercept Lucu's pass and break away.

VdM is moving his right arm into a blocking position making it harder for the 9 to clear the ball before he regains his feet, if you want to consider that's not playing the 9 fair enough, what one probably could reasonably claim is his arm isn't as such in an unnatural position as he's regaining his feet and that it's moving to hinder the 9 is simply serendipity. And having watched it back now sorry yes, Rowe doesn't go off feet and Blue 15 is further away than I'd recalled.

Rowe does though clearly play the man without the ball even if not going off feet, albeit I think Rowe is entirely correct to do so, unlike England's penalties (or cards) that one has the correct call written all over it of taking one for the team to try and prevent a try and then the officials do him a favour by clean missing it.

[Big D]

No point dwelling on it now.

Games done and it's not going to change.

Some big tests of this Scotland side to come.

[topofthemoon]

French player with one foot either side of the tackled player, , over him (left foot clearly gone beyond Fickou's back foot). Offside lines formed. Also clearly showing him getting shoved from behind by the Scottish player, so playing the man without the ball, or offside at the ruck, or whatever other offence you fancy calling it. He clearly hasn't run around the tackle area either.

Doesn’t a ruck have to be formed for there to be an offside line? A ruck can only be formed when 2 players, one from each team, on their feet, over the ball. Your picture shows precisely none of that

Following the England v Italy game with the fox tactic they added to the tackle Law that an offside line was created simply by having 1 player on their feet, over the ball which is on the ground.

[SaintK]

Just caught up with the Sco/Fra match.
Haven't gone back up the thread but you wuz robbed lads, you wuz robbed!!!!

[Slick]

French player with one foot either side of the tackled player, , over him (left foot clearly gone beyond Fickou's back foot). Offside lines formed. Also clearly showing him getting shoved from behind by the Scottish player, so playing the man without the ball, or offside at the ruck, or whatever other offence you fancy calling it. He clearly hasn't run around the tackle area either.

Doesn’t a ruck have to be formed for there to be an offside line? A ruck can only be formed when 2 players, one from each team, on their feet, over the ball. Your picture shows precisely none of that

Following the England v Italy game with the fox tactic they added to the tackle Law that an offside line was created simply by having 1 player on their feet, over the ball which is on the ground.

Bloody English. Fair enough, but presumably that doesn’t include a player hurdling over at pace

[Paddington Bear]

Absolute nonsense comment. There was no ruck.

Sorry, this just isn’t true.

I’d be fuming if I was Scottish and you all quite genuinely have my sympathy. that’s the most egregious game defining decision there’s been in the 6N for years (since Wales were given two nonsense tries vs England during covid IMO). What we saw all game (and in the England game as well) was teams of officials who simply weren’t up to the job. This is an issue for the 6N organisers and world rugby. The money and time invested in this tournament deserves much much better.

Game defining and the most egregious mistake in the 6N for years. Stop talking absolute bollocks man, even the most one eyed supporter couldn't define that as a game defining moment.

Come on, I was very clearly referencing your try at the end

[C69]

Just caught up with the Sco/Fra match.
Haven't gone back up the thread but you wuz robbed lads, you wuz robbed!!!!

Yip, if the ref had asked "is there any reason I can not award the try ?" the result wouldhae been different.
The officiating yesterday was very poor, not as poor as Wales and Englands play but poor as feck.

[Blackmac]

Sorry, this just isn’t true.

I’d be fuming if I was Scottish and you all quite genuinely have my sympathy. that’s the most egregious game defining decision there’s been in the 6N for years (since Wales were given two nonsense tries vs England during covid IMO). What we saw all game (and in the England game as well) was teams of officials who simply weren’t up to the job. This is an issue for the 6N organisers and world rugby. The money and time invested in this tournament deserves much much better.

Game defining and the most egregious mistake in the 6N for years. Stop talking absolute bollocks man, even the most one eyed supporter couldn't define that as a game defining moment.

Come on, I was very clearly referencing your try at the end

Yeah, misunderstood the post. And again I apologise for doing so.

[Paddington Bear]

Game defining and the most egregious mistake in the 6N for years. Stop talking absolute bollocks man, even the most one eyed supporter couldn't define that as a game defining moment.

Come on, I was very clearly referencing your try at the end

Yeah, misunderstood the post. And again I apologise for doing so.

No dramas

[Openside]

Blatantly wrong decision from the TMO. No only did the ball visibly touch the ground on one angle, you can see it rebound slightly afterwards. It isn’t controversial. It’s just wrong.

This

[C69]

Blatantly wrong decision from the TMO. No only did the ball visibly touch the ground on one angle, you can see it rebound slightly afterwards. It isn’t controversial. It’s just wrong.

This

This, as clear and obvious as the blatant forward pass for the Dingwall try for England.
But at least in the England match the better team won.