Is Michael Cheika blinking at the Welsh and English try-fest?

HarryT; I'd argue that what you've seen be a 'yellow or red card offence over the last 5 years' is a tip or spear tackle. Lawes didn't lift the player, he tackled him conventionally and the force of the tackle put Plisson in that position. Lawes couldn't have prevented Plisson being in that position without defying the laws of physics and stopping his own momentum half way through the tackle. With a tip tackle the player has a responsibility to bring the player down safely (hence the yellow and red cards when he doesn't). There's no such responsibility with a straightforward tackle when the player's legs aren't lifted. Lawes didn't 'drive the players head into the turf' he produced a straightforward legal tackle and that's where the player ended up in the same way as a prop can end up on his head and neck in a scrum through no fault of the opposing prop. It looked unusual because of the force of the tackle not through anything Lawes did or didn't do.

I welcome your opinion Birdy but I beg to differ. I feel there is a lot of serendipity in Owens' decisions when the pace of the game increases. My point about the Lawes tackle was that he ends up driving Plisson's head and shoulder into the ground, with his legs at 45 degrees to the horizontal. In every game I've watched in the last 5 years this is a yellow or red card offence, yet it was missed by Owens and the TMO. I've not expressed any concerns about the lateness of the tackle. Haskell's trip happened 3 metres in front of Owens out in the open at the end of a line out and if you watch the replay he is clearly looking at the contact, yet he is oblivious of the fact it was a trip. What must Owens have been thinking when the replay over his shoulder showed him looking at a yellow card offence, yet it didn't register and he took no action.

Like it, nice one.

I wasn't trying to have a go, Mike. I do think though that there's been a discernible pattern over the last decade or so. The Wallabies have a scrum nightmare (not necessarily always against England) and Aussie fans and press lament the fact they can't scrum. Then they go a few tests where it's not an issue and the mood changes to 'we seem to have sorted it out' then there's another scrum disaster. I do think part of the explanation is that the Wallabies have had a weak scrum since about 2001, but have been quite clever at times in depowering it in certain tests to mask this (usually by collapsing). It's not a criticism; all props 'cheat' or they wouldn't be international props. There was a significant period where the Eddie Jones school of 'the scrum is just to restart the game' held sway certainly in Australia and also elsewhere in the SH for a short period. It's unlikely that SH refs that cut their teeth at this time would have the solid grounding in understanding the scrum as, say, a French referee learning his trade somewhere the scrum is revered. Most of the Aussie scrum disasters have been with NH refs; but not exclusively. Think back to the Lion's series. The scrum was fine under the NZ and SA ref but was obliterated in the 3rd test when the props were told, effectively, make a contest of it or get pinged. When they're forced into a power and technique battle the result has usually been grim. I won't bite at the 2008 point (Colin N above does it for me) but if you genuinely believe that Al Baxter was an international class scrummager and on the same planet as Sheridan and Vickery there isn't much hope for you.

Yeah, that first yellow was a shocker. Davies ran a decoy line and Masi took the bait - although he hardly made any contact - and got yellow carded for it. Poor call.

Neil, I can't believe that you think the 1969 Chevy Camaro ZL1 is faster over the quarter mile than the Aston Martin DB5! Or that the Costa Rican saddle horse can stands under 13 hands. Probably. I only skimmed your comment before becoming outraged.

Italy did for Wales in the same way they did for Ireland when the Championship came down to a last-day points chase in 2007. Italy scored a last minute try against Wales to knock seven points off Ireland's "run chase" against Scotland. You might argue that Ireland surpassed it anyway (which they did) but the added pressure of knowing you needed 28 points instead of the 21 that was set could have been crucial. In 2007, Ireland were in the same position as Wales. They had to play Italy first in Rome and set a target for France, who were at home to Scotland later in the day, to chase. With a sizable total run up and the match over, Ireland had a penalty in their own half. They opted to run it, instead of end the game, to extend their total. Italy turned it over and ran in a try themselves. In the end it was crucial as France won the title with a last minute try that occupied the TMO for several minutes to confirm. So they bloody well owed us one!! Grazie Italia!!!! Well played

Do enjoy the fact that an Australian's view of a dominant scrum (such is the rarity they receive parity against England) is when the front-row collapses every time and the referee plays penalty bingo, which is what happened in 2008.

Lawes has injured someone, he broke Morgan Parra's ribs, but once again the hit was legal and he was already committed. However, if Lawes is looking to smash players after they've received the ball, why is, on every occasion, he committed? That fact is, naturally when half-backs see a 6ft 7 forward coming they are looking to shift the ball on. Of course, if they don't want to get potentially injured they could keep hold of the ball and prepare themselves for the impact, but they could possibly knock it on, get turned over and succumb to Lawes' reputation, which would show that he has done his job. Lawes, I'm sure, looks to ruffle half-backs and, judging by the way Plisson played and kicked after that hit, he did his job. What's the point in hitting 20st forwards when doing that won't really do anything for your team? Half-backs are the playmakers, they dictate the game so if Lawes can get to them, he's doing a significant job for the team. When Brian O'Driscoll made that massive tackle on Danie Roussouw for the Lions and had to be taken off it hardly benefitted the side did it? In fact, Jamie Roberts then got injured which forced O'Gara to come onto the field and he was the person who missed the tackle on Fourie and gave away the penalty for Steyn to win the game. If O'Driscoll had stayed on, O'Gara wouldn't have come onto the field at centre.

Sammy fair enough - I agree with all of these points.

SP. You also seem to have a reading disorder but one that not only lacks comprehension but also insets words. I never said a superior game. I also only said NH teams do and can play expansive rugby. Why the rant? By the way, if you want to talk RWC results, be careful. Since this game turned professional for all, around about the turn of the century I'd suggest, the Wallabies record against the NH is not as flash as I think you think. They have a 100% losing record against the English, are on par with the Irish and their last outing against the Welsh in 2011 very nearly saw them catch a nasty cold. That Welsh team has arguably improved - the Wallaby side hasn't. As I said, if you're a Wallaby fan you might want to be thinking about who you're going to be cheering for in the knock out rounds this RWC.

"the classic being a nasty blatant trip on the ball carrier way out in the open. There was an instant when Lawes smashed the French #10 and Owens and the TMO debated endlessly about the lateness of the tackle but totally disregarded the fact that the #10 was put in a dangerous position and was driven head first into the ground." So you've found two instances, one of which was completely legal. Congratulations. Also, re: the Lawes tackle, I believe he said in real time that it was fine but only had a look because of the following scuffle and the recommendation of the TMO. So in that instance, his instinct was correct. If you want to change how fly-halves are tackled, go to the law-makers, don't blame Owens for applying them correctly. As for the trip, I initially thought Haskell was going for the loose ball and missed it, with Plisson going over his trailing leg, but obviously on the replay he sticks a leg out. Owens' mistake was for not checking it immediately, but the TMO intervened and the right decision was made. That's what it's there for. Robshaw did indeed question decisions but Owens put him in his place - have you not seen some of the clips going around? Instead of focusing on two examples - in which the right decisions were made anyway - how about judging the general performance where he applied the laws consistently. A captain looking bemused isn't the sign of a poor refereeing performance. The Irish constantly try to referee the game for the man in the middle and Paul O'Connell regularly has chats with the officials, but it doesn't mean he's wrong.

Messa. I live in a universe where most people can read. I never said the Boks play expansive rugby, I said they know how to play the kick chase game. I'd suggest having another go but I don't think it's gonna help.

Don't get me wrong, they are legal hits, but the sheer number of the same type of hits he is putting on, I think it is only a matter of time before he seriously injures someone, simply because of what he doing, and I am putting this out there before that happens. I have now seen countless "highlights" from Lawes, and if you put them all together, they are all exactly the same thing... rush out, get in great body position, and absolutely belt the ball carrier a second after he passed it... as his back is turned, or half turned... They are all mirror images of the same thing. I can't recall another "hitman" when that is the case. Brian Lima belted all comers... Jerry Collins didn't JUST chase 5/8s who had passed the ball... I disagree with Harry, in that ball players don't have to be protected, but to see a single player have a highlights reel like Lawes... I just feel that Lawes is smashing unprotected players, most of them when they don't have the ball.

Looks like someone hit a nerve Neil. Yes, the Wallaby players so afraid they are fling the ball about in terror. I heard that all of them want to play in the NRL but aren't good enough. "Secondly, a number of the best NH teams have consistently demonstrated both a willingness and ability to put the ball through hands for years. Don’t be confused by the fact that they also understand other facets of the great game of rugby union and both have the skills and players to turn to them when circumstances dictate." And how many times has this "consistently demonstrated", more rounded and superior game won an NH team a world cup? Or why is it that every NH team has a losing record against the Wallabies, let alone the Springboks and All Blacks? The Wallabies have won twice the amount of World Cups than the NH combined, both of which incidentally, were won on UK soil. So don't count on seeing "the Wallabys on an early plane home this RWC."". Amazing, considering the lack of personnel"" wouldn't you think? Every NH side would kill for the Wallabies record. Only SA and NZ have better. Agree with messa - You are living in a parallel universe

What are you talking about, Harry? How do you know what the French forwards were or were not 'inviting' Lawes to do? If miraculously you've managed to guess right, Lawes could probably have kissed his WC place goodbye if he'd responded to a bit of push and shove by losing his discipline and got sent-off during a Championship deciding game. Your posts about this are becoming more and more bizarre. You seem to think that Lawes did something cowardly and wrong by trying to legally put as much physical pressure on the opposition fly-half as possible. Can you name me one top international forward who given the chance to put a big, legal hit on an opposition fly-half wouldn't do it? I've now reached the point where I don't even know what you're trying to say.

well put michael.. sometimes our belly button gazing gets very irritating.. personally i loved all saturday's game.. an incredible day for rugby.. and one of the very few days that in the 2 pubs was in to watch the games there was 90% watching rugby in comparison to football.. happy days for this rugger lover!!

perfectly legal hit.. sorry.. can't agree.. arms were used, was committed before the ball had left pilson hands..

"as it’s mostly Wallaby on Wallaby in a game like that. It’s equivalent to saying ‘we’ve been srcummaging well in training’." Sorry Birdy I don't follow your reasoning at all - so because each team is scrumming against quality opponents, that somehow devalues their performance? And forgive me, but I just looked at what they were actually doing. Of course its only what can be observed from the sidelines or on TV, but the point is that I wasn't trying to squash what I saw into some sort of preconception of what Australian scrummaging "should" be like. Just appraising it the same as I would any game, whether Boks, NH or whatever. And I thought both packs looked fairly good, actually. And your comment about French refs just appears to be a case of ex-post facto reasoning: "Australians always have bad scrums; they did badly in 2005 and the referee was French, therefore French referees must understand scrums better than other people". I suppose that lets us blank out 2008 at Twickenham from memory: "Oh it was a kiwi referee and they are from the southern hemisphere so they don't really understand scrums. So we can just forget the fact that a scrum with Al Baxter in it smashed Vickery and Sheridan off the park". Yep, easy to understand. :D The fact that one of Australia's other worst scrum disasters was under Craig Joubert who is from the, shock, southern hemisphere just doesn't fit the theory. Too bad. Anyway, its always "difficult to judge" if we try to fit things into a grand plan and into sweeping generalisations, rather than just take each game as it comes. Yesterday both scrums did well. Maybe they won't next week - let's wait and see.

The French forwards were inviting Lawes to have a go at someone who wasn't five feet tall and 85 kg. Seems he declined.