Seeing red. But not Alex Goode, apparently.

So, Jared Payne, the Ulster fullback, has been banned for two weeks for knocking Alex Goode out of the air like a clay pigeon. To continue the metaphor, Goode was then removed like a clay pigeon (i.e. carried off in a bucket) and Payne was shown a straight red card that has been causing much, much consternation on rugby forums up and down the land. Especially, it seems, if you happen to be an Ulsterman.

Opinion at the time was divided, it must be said, with Will Greenwood on Sky supporting the referee's decision and the other two (Irish) pundits maintaining it should have been yellow. Hmm. Meanwhile, RugbyDump's facebook page has gone literally mental with sage social-media users bemoaning the demise of the Gary Owen, the advent of diving in rugby and the mental state of the referee, among other things. I have yet to read a piece of serious journalism that says it shouldn't have been red, but then I've not looked at the papers from Ireland, give me an minute...

That didn't take long. Belfast Telegraph, anyone?
Ulster Rugby launch fight for justice over Jared Payne red card.

The point is, they would say that, wouldn't they? Further, their assertion that the decision caused consternation among 'the vast majority of supporters and neutrals alike' is simply not true, in my experience. I can only assume they haven't been asking the neutrals I've been keeping an eye on, or asking me. I'm neutral.

Anyway, I watched that game (Ulster should have won, in the end. One shudders at the size of the thumping Saracens would have been dealt if the Irishmen hadn't given them a fighting chance by having a bloke sent off) and will hereby chuck in my penny's worth, despite it being worth less than said proverbial penny, ironically. But it will give me something to do while I listen to the cricket (incidentally, if anyone fancies giving me a job and/or money, feel free to leave your contact details/bank account access information in the comments section). Also, as it turns out, the IRB have quite a nice website for those who wish to research the laws.

So, then: preliminaries. As far as I have been able to read, no one but no one is disputing the following:

• Jared Payne took Goode out in the air
• Goode went down on his head
• There was absolutely no intent or malice on the part of Payne, who had his eyes on the ball the whole time
• It was a stonewall penalty

We effectively have a guilty plea, m'lud, as it cannot be argued from any of the available evidence that Payne did NOT, in fact, take Goode out like that peeping Stark lad in the first episode of Game of Thrones. The case for the defence says that Payne is perfectly entitled to compete for the ball, and he clearly didn't mean to take out Goode like he did.

Here's the rub, because to my mind, that last point is in fact a case for the prosecution. Bear with me.

Payne is, indeed, perfectly entitled to compete for the ball. But it is also Payne's (and anyone else's) responsibility to ensure that he places no other player in danger while doing so. What made this dangerous, not only to Alex Goode but to Payne himself, was not bothering to look for a split second and see where the defenders were, then ploughing straight into someone's legs at full tilt. It's a bit like driving a tank through a building, then claiming you didn't see the building. What did he expect? How often do you NOT have to battle a defender to reclaim a Gary Owen? He should have known, as a professional rugby player, that there would be someone underneath the kick and it was his duty to make sure he didn't hurt them. That he couldn't be trusted to do that is, to my mind, the most damning thing about the whole incident. 

Now, following the laws, that clearly constitutes a dangerous tackle, and we come to the severity of the punishment. As I said, no one (not even the good people of Ulster) are disputing the penalty but many are saying that it was a yellow, tops. I have to admit, my first inclination was 'yellow, borderline red'. You don't see a lot of red cards for tackles in the air, but then they are hardly ever that reckless. What the referee has to look at is HOW DANGEROUS the tackle was. Nothing else. Not the intent, or the extent of Goode's injury, but how dangerous the tackle was. Given the facts that Payne went into his legs with absolutely no thought of Goode's being there, the speed at which he did so and the fact that Goode went down head-first (regardless of any injury), this amounted to it being about as dangerous as a tackle in the air can possibly get, hence the red.


Thankfully, Goode was OK and rejoined his team mates on the bench. But it could have been much, much worse and remember: the laws that govern the Heineken Cup are the same laws that govern Sunday league matches between clubs you've never heard of. If you were allowed to do things like that without punishment, then sooner or later someone would end up losing the ability to walk. If Payne, the next time he chases a Gary Owen, sees the defender, slows down, then smashes him as he lands, then Mr Garces will have done rugby - and indeed Payne - a service. I understand Ulster feeling hard done by, but I think the Belfast Telegraph would actually find a lot of neutrals agree with the ref.


Options at 10?
In a totally unrelated note, Danny Cipriani has been named Premiership Player of the Month. Good for him. The lad's had a great season generally and comprehensively out-played George Ford when the two met down in Bath 2 weeks ago. Given Freddie Burns recent 'form' a trip to New Zealand surely beckons for Cipriani.

Umpires are Rubbish. Fact.

I was just about to slate Jos Buttler on facebook for botching a simple run out vs the Netherlands, citing the incident as evidence of why the lad, as good as he is, should not be anywhere near the test team if Matt Prior can score runs at an average of more than 5.

If you haven't seen the incident, the Netherlands batsman (apologies for not knowing his name) was miles of of his ground trying for two in something like the 18th over. The throw came in, and Buttler duly removed the bails, with the batsman so far out that he continued running in the direction of the dug-out without further ado. But wait, the umpires are checking something - there is a suspicion the Buttler knocked the bails of with his elbow before he caught the ball. For those of you sketchy on the laws, if both bails are removed pre-contact of ball with glove, a stump must be removed from the ground to constitute breaking of the wicket. If one bail stays on and then is removed when the keeper has the ball in hand, that's fine.

A couple of replays (or more accurately, the same replay a couple of times) is shown from the square leg position which appear to show, very clearly, the bails being removed before Buttler catches the ball, and it doesn't take long for the 3rd umpire to relate his 'not-out' decision. Shortly after the batsman is called back to resume, another replay from the bowlers position is shown on TV which shows, even more clearly, that only one bail was knocked off, then Buttler caught the ball and got rid of the over. It should have been out.

Now, notwithstanding the fact it it really shouldn't have been an issue if the wicket keeper had been doing his job properly, it gives me something else to write about which should kill at least half an hour: namely, umpiring incompetence in the face of flaw-exposing technology.

This was further illustrated in England's earlier game against Sri Lanka, when a clear catch (as clear as it gets, actually) being given not out because low catches always look dodgy on TV. That's a line that is routinely used by umpires to justify their dodging making a decision. And that's not to mention the 2013 England Ashes series, where there were more DRS-based mistakes than a pre-school spelling test. These errors are compounded by (sometimes) ambiguity over the 'protocol' (think of Trotts first ball lbw, where some of the tech wasn't available because it was being used for another replay) or (always) by bad decisions being paraded in front of the crowd on a massive screen. When you have 20,000+ boozy Englishmen and Aussies gathered in a relatively confined space and stick replays like Usman Khawaja's phantom nick (not out - given out) or Ashton Agar failing to get his foot behind the line (out - given in) in front on them for scrutiny you're simply asking for trouble. Because every single one of those drunken fans, dressed as nuns and cartoon characters, now know themselves to be a superior umpire to the two blokes in the middle and the muppet in charge of the replays. Which is a ridiculous situation and should not be allowed to happen.

You hear a lot about DRS being introduced to 'eliminate the howler'. All well and good, but giving captains more reviews not less means that they will be used tactically, especially in tight situations and especially now that they are reset to 2 after 80 overs in tests. Batsmen have referred nicks they probably got bat on on the off chance that hotspot would show nothing, especially the last recognised batsman with the team at 100/5. And every batsman, EVERY batsman, is going to refer the low catch, given umpires track record with giving benefit of the doubt. Personally, I would like to see a change of policy as far as these are concerned, with the catch assumed to be clean unless you can see it bounce clearly - as in change direction and move up. 90% of these are clean catches that just aren't being given.

Other than that, proposed changes include giving discretion over whether a decision is reviewed or not to the umpires. Hmm. Well that would certainly lend a different dynamic to the situation and it seems to work in rugby, but then how long before they review everything? Umpires would effectively be absolved of responsibility for their decisions, unless limits are imposed on WHAT they can review. So where do you draw the line there? Can you check whether a ball pitched outside leg for an lbw but not have the benefit of the predictive path to see if it would have hit the stumps?

Or - and I'm about to suggest something a bit controversial here so bear with me -  how about simply finding competent umpires? I don't know if you've ever noticed, but nobody ever complains when the umpires get stuff right, it's only when they get it wrong. So the answer, it seems to me, would be to get new umpires, or improve the ones we have, until they get the decisions right. And, lets face it, if 20,000+ pissed up half naked lunatics can tell if a foot's behind the line or not, why can't the sober, extensively trained and experienced umpire watching in high definition at close quarters in the comfort of a van, brew at hand? How hard would it have been to check that second stump angle for Jos Buttler's run out? How difficult would it be to give more benefit of the doubt to the fielder, to use balance of probability rather than working out if the batsman has a straw to clutch at?

Overall I'm a fan of using the technology. It's a constant source of exasperation to me when the most lucrative sport on the planet (i.e. football) refuses to use simple technology not to get more decisions right (and in football, there are no foots-on-the-line. Decisions are far more obvious and work over much wider margins, with the possible exception of tight offsides). But it's far easier for the idiots at FIFA to dig their heals when they can point to these issues as evidence that the tech doesn't work. My point is, the tech DOES work. The people don't, and the ICC should really be doing something about that. So far, their response has been to chuck more reviews at the captains, which simply does not address the root of the problem.


In other news...
England, as I write, are 37-4 chasing 134 against the Netherlands. Speaking as someone who has said, for a while, that I don't think Ashley Giles is the man for the coaching job and that the likes of Moeen Ali and Jos Buttler shouldn't be considered for test selection, I face a moral dilemma as to whether I want England to win or not. 

6 Nations Round-Up

I appreciate I'm a little late on the uptake here, and that there certainly has been more than enough reaction, post-reaction, analysis and verdict giving to render this totally pointless. But by George, I started so I'll finish. I can only offer my not getting back from Rome until early Tuesday morning, and then taking the Wednesday to recover from the most nerve-racking taxi journey of my life, as explanation. Rather than reviewing the games, I'll run through the teams one by one and do my upmost to avoid the blindingly obvious. In ascending order:

Italy

Unlucky not to pick up a win somewhere, the Italians will be disappointed. While it is heartening to see them play with more ambition, the side is clearly a work in early progress, although potential is there. The two new centres showed glimpses, but they did not help themselves with indecision as to their best half-back combination. They need to settle on a 9 and a 10 and then stick by them.

Meanwhile, I can report that the Italians love Sherlock Holmes, do some astonishing pistachio ice cream and would be served very well by banning the selling of flowers by bloody-minded miscreants who don't know the meaning of the word 'no'.

Scotland

New coach Vern Cotter can't come quick enough. There are only so many amusing interviews you can paper over gaping chasms with, and this was the tournament when Scott Johnson's metaphorical platitudes finally stopped washing. Muddled and misguided selections went a long way to helping that happen, with decisions to leave out Kelly Brown, Dave Denton and Richie Gray akin to hunting polar bears with a zippo and a pointy stick when you could have been using a semi-automatic. Otherwise, Scotland simply lacked attacking zeal and have strikingly similar issues at half-back to Italy, which just goes to prove how crucial those two positions are.

Winners of the Alan Titchmarsh award for Soggiest Cabbage Patch.

Wales

Mixed bag for the reigning champions. Anyone who says the Lions tour didn't take a toll is deluded, but that should not excuse some pretty clueless performances against Ireland and England. Tactically, Wales were comprehensively out-thought in Dublin and Rhys Priestland was then given a kicking lesson at Twickenham by Owen Farrell. Sorry to bang on about this, but now that I think about it, the only two teams with a settled first choice 9 and 10 were the two teams that finished top. Neither Priestland nor Biggar is completely convincing and, for whatever reason, Gatland does not seem to like James Hook.

The challenge now is to re-build and refresh. Wales are still a very good side but there is a sense that maybe they have been found out slightly, and Adam Jones and Gethin Jenkins won't be around forever.

France

No one knows how they finished 3rd. France were lucky against England in the first game (and ultimately cost Lancaster's side a Grand Slam) and then failed spectacularly to kick on. The thick fog of denial that prompted Nicholas Mas to storm out of his press conference was to recall certain French football teams of the past, and most observers' surprise at how badly they were playing was equalled only by their surprise that France went into the last game with a shot at the title. As it was, they nearly did England a favour, but then the chronic anti-rugby they have been playing reared it's head and some nutcase chucked it forwards.

With such as the case, the most satisfying aspect for the French will be denying the English the title not once but twice: one by beating them in the first game, and again when they failed to beat Ireland. He did it on purpose.

England

Indisputably one of the two form teams of the championship, although they will face sterner tests next year when they have to play both Wales and Ireland away instead of at Twickenham. The pack is now a bona fide force to be reckoned with and the backs produced the best attacking rugby seen from white shirts in years.

For an England fan, now is the time to start being critical. The side has shown vast improvement since Lancaster took over and has now finished 2nd for 3 years running. Next year, they need to win the 6 Nations, but there is opportunity to set down an even more telling marker. If you can beat the All Blacks in New Zealand, you can beat anyone anywhere. Any sort of victory in the summer will make the world sit up and recognise England as genuine World Cup contenders.

Ireland

No one who knows anything about rugby begrudges Ireland this win, because O'Driscoll deserves it and that is that. Filling his shoes will not be easy, which is a bit of a pain when you consider his knack for unlocking stubborn defences in this tournament. In Joe Schmidt, though, they also have a coach who could make a game plan out of ashes and thin air: he'll come up with something. And Ireland remain a very talented side with players to come back, Sean O'Brien, for example.

With all due respect to Argentina, the Irish may now wish they were going to one of the big three the summer before a World Cup year but, with a relatively easy fixture list you'd back them to at least make the semis. Where they may well play England.

Overall, the best thing about the tournament was it's unpredictability, with 4 teams in it after 3 games. The standard may be better down south, but they'd kill for the 6N history and drama. Probably.

Worst Game: Wales vs France
Scrums were a mess and France played like a club team. At least Italy v Scotland had last-ditch drop-goal drama.

Best Game: England vs Ireland
A non-stop roller coaster of a game that swung one way then the other, with some brilliant rugby played by both sides. What the 6 Nations is all about.

Round 4 Preview

It's been a brilliantly close 6 Nations so far, with 4 teams level on 4 points after 3 games. After this weekend, that 4 will (probably) have been whittled down to at least 3 and possibly 2, depending on how useless the French continue to be (maybe). In a year that has perpetually defied the sagest of predictions it seems almost churlish to carry on, but here we go anyway.

Italy v Ireland

A potentially title-deciding tie if the Irish have their try-scoring hats on, it's very hard to see Joe Schmidts mean slipping up against Italy in Dublin, where they saw off Wales so impressively. While they will have been disappointed not to beat England it's not as if they played badly, and with points difference looking like it might be crucial expect the Irish to come out with all pints of Guinness blazing. Johnny Sexton has been confirmed as fit and starting, which is obviously a boost, and if Peter O'Mahony's absence will be felt at least it's at blindside, not opensi... Sean O'Brien's still injured, is he? Well the breakdowns might be interesting, then. Especially seeing as Parisse always seems to be in several places at once on rugby fields. He's like some sort of bald Michael J Fox.

Italy have been pretty good and extremely unlucky in all their games, especially against Scotland, where a Wilkinson-esque drop-goal in red dead time from Duncan Weir denied them a win that everyone had backed them to get. Though they've not been exactly setting the world alight, they have definitely displayed a greater sense of cohesion amongst the backs and were displaying far more ambition and attacking acumen than Scotland until the two met in Rome. Will their incessant pluckiness be enough to get a result in Dublin? Probably not. Especially with Ireland chasing the title on potential points difference. Did I mention that last bit?

Prediction: Ireland by 14, probably more.

Scotland v France

I could literally write entire blogs on the respective coaches of these two teams, if I a) had the time and b) was a psychologist of some description. I'm not, though, so it would be silly to try and second guess the inner thought processes of two guys who have had far more experience of international rugby than me and have so far exhibited all the selectorial and tactical competence of a knife-wielding baboon being presented with the original manuscript of War and Peace and the pitch for TOWIE before being asked to make a decision. Scott Johnson has, to date, sacked his captain, accused the replacement debutant of naivety, dropped his best ball-carrying forward, left out one of the few world-class players at his disposal, recalled his captain, claimed that black is white, cried wolf, mused on the merits or otherwise of bikinis and replaced the Murrayfield pitch with what appears to be Kendle Mint Cake. I have no idea what Scotland's game plan will be and can not for the life of me muster a prediction as to form, because he's changed a load of his team.

Phillipe St Andre, meanwhile, has thus far played his best player out of position for three years, stuck by a 10 with the game management qualities of a drunk goldfish, complained about the attitude of the French clubs, complained about the attitude of his No. 8, dropped his No. 8, flown in the face of decades of French rugby playing tradition, picked wingers on the basis of their Grandads being a bit handy and replaced the Stade Francais pitch with something that looks suspiciously like Brie. Watching the French last week was like watching a bunch of kids with only a dim grasp of the rules having a bash with blindfolds on. They can't possibly be that bad again, can they? No idea, because he's changed - literally - more than half his team.

Prediction: You're having a laugh, right?

England v Wales

Now we get to it. If we accept - and I am doing - that Ireland are almost certainly going to beat Italy and that the French points tally/being-a-bit-crap all but rules them out, then these two are battling it out for the right to challenge for the Championship. After the leek-handed mauling England suffered last year, they will be out there aiming to choke a few daffodils on a rose bush on their home patch and, if the Ireland game is anything to go by, it will be edge-of-the-seat, finger-chewing stuff. Under Stuart Lancaster, England have gone from absolutely nowhere after the last world cup, to being damn difficult to beat, to suddenly being a force to be reckoned with. The backline looks the most threatening it has since the days of the Wilkinson-Greenwood axis, with Tuilagi still to come back and Owen Farrell continuing to improve.

Wales, on the other hand, started the tournament looking like they'd rather be back in Australia. On the beach. Having a lie down. Cows with tetanus have been observed in more energetic fits of ball-playing. Maybe. Anyway, they were definitely better against France (although they would have done bloody well to lose against that lot) and having Jonathan Davies back means they have a potential right-foot/left-foot midfield kicking option to try and wrong-foot the so-far imperious Mike Brown with. As with Ireland, they travel to Twickenham with a team chock full of experience and game-playing nous attempting to shoot down Englands young guns. With Roiman Poite set to ref Wales will fancy their chances at the scrum, an area England got away with against Ireland by dint of losing the ones they lost deep in Irish territory. They still lost too many.

England will be looking to go out and prove that their pack is far tougher in the loose these days, after the pounding they took in Cardiff. Expect it to be ferocious up front. Actually, England could do worse than watch the Ireland game and maul them into the ground - even Ireland didn't fancy taking on the English at that game. When was the last time you saw a team defend a maul by stepping off? (As a side note: that definitely happened. I tried to find it on a replay of the game but failed and I couldn't be fussed watching the whole thing. The idea is to step everyone back from the maul at the setting up point when the line-out hits the floor - instead of piling defenders in - causing the attacking side to collapse under their own shove against thin air, looking a bit silly in the process. The reason you don't see it is because it's against to so-called 'spirit of the game'. In the incident in question, England kept their shape, walked forward and pulled Ireland into the maul anyway. Trust me.)

Prediction: Reverse mockers worked last time: Wales by 5.

Round 3 Round-Up

Three games gone. Four teams equal on four points each, two wins and one loss. Scotland waking up and playing rugby from nowhere.

Listen to any rugby fan born south of the equator and he/she'll waste no time telling you that the 6 Nations pales in comparison to the Rugby Championship. The standard of rugby is better, they'll say. You're unlikely to watch two sides rolling around in the mud, unable to gain foot purchase, much less see the ball for the shit caking their faces. Not for them the 9-6 wins, kicking tennis interspersed with penalties interspersed with collapsed scrums. Not for them.

The other thing that's not for them is any doubt, conjecture or tiniest sliver of uncertainty about who's going to win. Since its inception in 1996 as the Tri Nations, the tournament has been played 18 times. New Zealand have won it 12 times. South Africa and the Aussies have 3 wins each. Argentina, so far, have not got close. The All Blacks are fully 4 times as successful as anyone else.

In the long and illustrious history of the northerners, however, the figures are staggeringly more equal (at least if you ignore Italy, who have never won). They read, for Overall Tournament Wins in all versions (Four Nations, Five Nations, Home Nations etc...)

Eng         26
Wales      26
France     17
Scot       14
Ire           11

Obviously we've played a lot more, but the point stands. Every year most people go into the tournament saying 'any one of those 4 could win it'. As if to prove it, there have been 4 different winners in the last 5 years. Let no one tell you the Rugby Championship is better.

Wales v France

'Can Wales bounce back?' was the question everyone was asking. What they should have been asking was 'Can France consistently string more than 2 passes together?' The answer to this was a rather emphatic 'no'. In fact, the French capitulation made Agincourt look like a monstrously overwhelming victory and had amateur blog-writing type people reaching for the Thesaurus and looking up the word 'inept'. 'Incapable', 'incompetent' and 'maladroit' are three of my favourites. Seriously, the French could not conceivably have played any worse, given the supposed calibre of their so-called players. Mangled at the scrum, out-thought at the breakdown and relying on the laws of chaos to ensure the ball reached it's intended target, they would have been beaten by a decent club side. People pelted Scotland with rotten haggis after their tame defeat to England: they should now be slinging gangrenous snails at the French coaching staff because, given the array of talent they have to work with, that was nothing short of a disgrace. The lot of them want locking up for crimes against rugby.

Wales were better, there's no doubt about that. It isn't easy to force the French scrum backwards, but that's exactly what they did (although the scrums were a return to the bad old days at times. Had Brian Moore been commentating he would have been spitting brimstone). Warburton had a big game, and when their captain plays well the rest usually follow. It was good, but it wasn't vintage, and they're still missing Jonathan Davies in the centres. Can he return for the crucial clash against England?

Italy v Scotland

The traditional wooden spoon decider was only going to be won by one team judging by form so far. Scott Johnson's selection policy remains befuddlingly unfathomable (still no Kelly Brown, dropping Dave Denton) and for the first half, at least, it appeared to be business as grimly and direly usual. They deserved to be 10 points down at the break, Italy deserved to be in front.

Then, finally, Scotland started playing. Their second try was a gem of incisive running and deft off-loading, and Italy had to adjust to being in a contest, which they did. The drop goal was amazing for Scotland and heart breaking for an Italian side that you could not in all honesty say deserved to lose. The questions we are left with are: can Italy get the win their ambition in this tournament has deserved and can Scotland kick on? Italy have Ireland and England left to play, so the answer to the former may well be no, while for Scotland it's all about what happens when Vern Cotter takes over as coach as much as anything. It's puzzling times north of Hadrians Wall, and disappointing ones in Rome. Whether pulling their two teams, Treviso and Zebre, from the Pro 12 next season (for purely financial reasons) helps or hinders Italian rugby in general remains to be seen, but the tournament would be poorer for their loss.

England v Ireland

The big one of the weekend, this was a titanic clash wrapped in a giants punch-up basted in fucking massive gravy. Tenser than a tightrope walk over a piranha tank and so edge-of-the-seat you ended up crouching on thin air. It was brutal, punishing, intense stuff, and the resulting English victory is being billed the length and breadth of the land as the watershed moment for this emerging England side. I'm not sure about that - lose to Wales (again) in two weeks and all that might sound a bit premature - but the signs since the autumn have shifted from promising to encouraging to just downright bloody good. Players are beginning to nail down spots and there are more to come back, especially in the back line with the likes of Tuilgai and Marland of the Yarde, who returned to London Irish duty on Sunday. Mike Brown and Joe Launchbury were both immense.

The performance was far from perfect though. England again left points on the field (Johnny May in particular will be kicking himself) but the only way sides learn to be more clinical is by playing with each other more. This is still a growing side, and where they might be in 1 or 2 years is an exciting prospect.

Ireland, meanwhile, will be frustrated, but will not panic. They remain in the box seat with a superior points difference and Italy in Dublin for their next game. Win their remaining games, and it will take a huge effort from somebody to nick the trophy from them.

Coming up...

So on to round four. England and Wales will battle it out for the right to challenge Ireland, while Scotland will be hoping for a strong home-showing against the topsy-turvy French, who in turn will be demanding an improvement on their own hapless display against Wales. Now we start to separate the wheat from the chaff, and after the next game 4 contenders will have been whittled to two or three.

The question is, who will they be?

England v Ireland Game Preview

'A tight-head prop! A tight-head prop! My Kingdom for a tight-head prop!' is what Shakespeare almost certainly would have written, had Richard III been a known fan of Rugby Union and found himself in Stuart Lancaster's current position (unlikely: Richard, along with the rest of the House of York, was a colossal pervert who wore a white rose, not a red one, which as we know is incompatible with the laws of nature.

And cricket. Especially cricket.)

Anyway, the best laid schemes o' mice and top-level elite front-row scrummagers gang aft to bollocks (as Robbie Burns was quoted as saying, before changing it to be more inclusive) and rarely has a side won the 6 Nations without having to fill someone's injury-vacated boots. It is the performance of those that replace, not the replacee, that now matter, but it is a sign of the regard in which Dan Cole is held and his importance as a stalwart of this England team that papers were opened on Monday morning all over England with a groan and a wince. Cole has, for the last 2 years, been one of the first names on the team sheet, and with Cian Healy now looming like some sort of grisly green giant on the south-west London skyline, it would be preferable not to have to play one of either a returning crock or a 5 year-old boy. If we accept that Corbisiero would also be playing if fit (although Joe Marler has been filling his boots with aplomb), this means that England will be going into a crucial match with only one-third of a first choice front-row. And try saying that ten times fast.

Davey Wilson, his replacement, will at the very least be expected to hold his own physically in the loose. It is the scrum and maul that will have the greater bearing on the outcome though, and for that (I'm told) you need a bit more between the ears and actual technical skill. Or something. Because let's face it, if it was all physical, you just chuck Wilson on. I mean he's... he's got a torso like... just Google him. See? The Irish are world-weary and battle hardened, and come fresh from physically pulverising an equally world-weary and battle-hardened Welsh pack. The English, by contrast, are a relatively callow lot but have proved they can mix it with the best. They will now be hoping that the tight-head issue does not present Ireland (and specifically Cian Healy) with a match-surrenderingly weak link.

The other area where England must improve (and this is pretty well documented) is how strongly, or otherwise, they finish games. I've already harked already on about Tom Youngs' line-out throwing, but England are now making far too much of a habit of not scoring at all in the last quarter. You can't expect to win any tight games like that, and England, consequently, haven't won any tight games since Australia in the Autumn, a game in which the Wallabies failed to score in the second half full stop. The moral here, I suppose, is that the only tight games you can expect to win by not scoring in the final quarter are those in which you stop your opponents scoring in EITHER the 3rd or 4th quarters. Or all of them, to take the lesson to it's logical and futile conclusion. To this end, England have replaced Brad Barritt with George Ford on the bench, and I have to admit I'm salivating at the prospect of that lad (I'm allowed to say that: he's two years younger than I am) running at tired defenders with Farrell shifting to inside centre. If Barritt is parking the bus, then Ford is like chucking Messi on with 20 minutes left.

Meanwhile, and away from the game in question, Rugby League's Sam Burgess will be seeing the light, switching his codes and moving to Bath next season. He is expected to play centre, where England will suddenly be over-endowed in massive, speedy, wrecking-ball off-loading types. Manu Tuilagi is, we are told, not now far from a return but unlikely to feature in the tournament. With the Samoan tank-impressionist still to come back, Luther Burrell playing like he is and one of the best players of League in the world switching with the express desire of playing in the world cup, how Lancaster fits any, all, or something of a juggernaut-combo into his back line will be interesting, to say the least. In the end, the guy who comes out on top will probably be the one who proves he can do more than simply run over people, although sometimes that's the best way. Ask Dan Carter.

Across the water, Ireland have been quietly impressive so far, although their preferred tactics in their last game (namely, grinding down the opposition forwards, as if the Aviva Stadium were some sort of gargantuan mortar to Paul O'Connells monumental pestle) might hold rather less water against England at Twickenham than against Scotland and Wales in Dublin. A weak link there may well be, but there may well not be either (there's nothing to stop Wilson smashing Healy like an orange if both players are in the mood) and if there is, the only real opportunity to turn that hypothetically dodgy link into a corporeally recognisable points benefit is at scrum time. You never know, there might not be any knock-ons. The forecast looks good. My point is that Ireland will surely have more of a plan than 'put the fat guy on his arse' and that that may well involve increased involvement from their backs. They've been good, all of them, but Sexton aside they've not been setting the world alight in a trail-blazing dragon-blast of unstoppable attacking rugby fire. In fact their game plan against Wales was almost surprisingly one-dimensional, but with Joe Schimdt pulling the strings your money is on the Irish to know what they're about against anyone, anywhere.

I'm looking forward to this one, and at Twickenham I'm going to have to back... Ireland.

Reverse mockers, you see. None of my calls come true...

Round 2 Round-Up

The second weekend of the tournament continued to make a mockery of pre-game predictions, particularly those that started with the phrase: 'It'll be close'. In the event, none of this weeks games were, and France vs England remains the only game with less than 7 points between the sides. How crucial that score will be in deciding the final destination of the trophy remains to be seen, but despite the table England have emerged as one of the two best sides, and seeing as the other is Ireland, the next round could be very interesting indeed.

Ireland vs Wales
Much was made before this one of the Warren Gatland v Brian O'Driscoll, 'how-dare-you-drop-him?!' sub-plot. Irish romantics who were hoping for a match-defining contribution from the hand of BOD were to be disappointed though, as the Sluggin' in Dublin was decided by a stark triumph of brawn over brains. Specifically, Irish brawn, whose ferocity at the maul and breakdown out-muscled Wales to a worrying extent, if you happen to be Welsh. With the Irish travelling to Twickenham in two weeks time, where A) they suffered a similar forwards-based demolition job themselves 2 years ago and B) where they will face an England pack that has not been been outclassed by anyone, All Blacks included, since they played Wales last year, a close game looks set to be predicted. And then probably ignored by the players involved. With France playing like they are, the title is - potentially - there to be won for Ireland.

Wales, meanwhile, spectacularly failed to supply the improvement that was demanded after they stuttered past Italy last week. They looked, if anything, even more knackered and it's difficult to see what could be done to shake them up: one or two players aside, this was their strongest side. If they keep turning in performances of such little energy it may well be a case of a willing heart and unwilling limbs, though there was no sign of any such frailties in the leagues just before the 6 Nations began. Gatland has a job on his hands.

Scotland vs England
Anyone who has watched England play Scotland at Murrayfield in the last decade was eyeing up the pitch and pinpointing Owen Farrells right boot as the most important item of footwear in the ground. These are typically ferocious encounters, frequently decided by less than a try either way. Scotland were the other team that needed a big step up from the opening game - a limp performance in Dublin - and like Wales they steadfastly stuck to their guns and were duly shown to fresh depths of ineptitude. England won easily, Scotland hardly ever visited the opposition 22 and coach Scott Johnson was left to criticise his side for being 'naive' after dropping 2 of his most experienced players, Kelly Brown and Richie Gray, not just from the starting XV, but the squad altogether. This, understandably, has left many observers to wonder just how much cake the man wants, and also for at least one call for Stuart Hogg to be given the fly-half shirt. At this stage, giving their best attacking player the ball on a regular basis can hardly make them worse.

England, meanwhile, were disappointed not to score more than 20 points, and rightly so. Although there were encouraging signs of life from the back line (given the conditions, the opposition and the number of caps possessed by said line) they remain a work in progress, albeit one that is coming together rather pleasingly. Farrell is attacking with more purpose and Luther Burrell looks more assured in the centres than Joel Tomkins did in the autumn. It was the cutting edge of the finished article that was missing, and it is this that Ireland will test: England cannot afford to waste opportunities if they want to start being regular winners instead of unlucky losers. 

The other thing they can not afford to do is give away cheap ball with games on the line, as they did against France and New Zealand, to their cost. These came directly from England's own line-out, which is now habitually going to shit whenever Tom Youngs replaces Dylan Hartley at hooker, and did so again against Scotland. There was word in the week that Lee Mears had been brought in to help him sort his throwing out. It didn't work. Whilst it would be harsh and unwarranted to blame either of the defeats mentioned purely on Youngs' throwing, it is becoming too much of a trend to ignore, and needs to be shorn up. 

France vs Italy
France are still harder to work out than General Relativity equations. For long periods against Italy they possessed all the attacking flair of a bag of bricks in a bin, forced to defend desperately along their own try line and somehow, SOMEHOW managing to limit Italy to only a single try. A more clinical side would surely have scored more, given some of Italy's opportunities, and we might have had a very different game on our hands. As it was, France won at a canter thanks to 3 second half tries that game in spite of, rather than due to, their game plan. Two of these were down to the individual canniness of Wes Fofana, the other the bloody-mindedness of Louis Picamoles, but none of them came after a sustained period of attacking phases in Italy's half. They were sucker punches that the French got away with, unlike the ones thrown by Rabah Slimani and Michele Rizzo, which earned them a red card each. We were also treated to an early bid for Tosser of the Tournament from the confusingly-named Sebastien Vahaamahina, who was on for 2 minutes before kicking the ball away after the whistle in a dazzling display of petulance and receiving a yellow card, football style. He came back on after 10 minutes had elapsed for  a grand total of 30 seconds, whereupon the final whistle was blown.

Italy were, on the whole, hard done by, and should be supremely confident of beating Scotland in Rome. They're trying their damndest to play some decent attacking rugby and certainly look more likely than Scots, however when you're under the cosh for long periods of every game, as Italy are, then you can not afford to waste the opportunities you do create. Never mind missing out on potential tries, they need a goal kicker as a matter of urgency. Allan is still young enough to become a good one, but that won't help them much in this tournament. 

So, two games down, and the front runners look to be Ireland. France are two from two but were somewhat unconvincing, while England are starting to look good without being, as yet, excellent. See you in two weeks.