Ireland V Scotland Saturday 5th Dec 14.15

[Oldschoolsocks]

I thought Eric O’Sullivan looked the part for his cameo

[ronk]

That was a fair bit better than I expected. All of our recent failings were back in the opening half and then we seemed to flick a switch and improve significantly.

Our scrum solidified, lineout was better and rucks got faster. It helped that the referee actually applied some semblance of the laws to Scotland - that didn’t happen in Twickenham.

Our maul still wasn’t much of a threat, in general we were still a bit blunt inside the Scots 22. But it was an uptick on recent weeks.

Eric O’Sullivan looked the part when he came on. Porter has been an absolute laoch this season. I dunno how much he’ll have left in him when we go to Montpellier because he’s put in a huge effort. POM won’t get much credit here but on first viewing I thought he was excellent today. Shame about the non-try

I thought we were improved and played some decent rugby.

Changing the system to get POM in the wide channels was something that POM did well early in his career and gets the best out of him. I’ve long felt that he drifts out of games for runs of phases without getting involved. Putting him on the wing at least makes him useful. Ireland weren’t very dangerous when we got to the edge, most of the time. Earls finished well but Stockdale was missed there. We need to get a bit better at passing against rush defences because the space was there, we were a tiny bit too slow or out of our comfort zone when we did get the pace — POM’s grabber kick and Healy’s forward pass being good examples.

[brenno]

Surprised not more said about the alleged gouging claim by Fraser Brown. TV showed no connection with Brown's eye by Roux - at worst his hand brushed against his cheekbone. We all accept that eye gouging is probably one of the worst foul plays when proven and usually ends up with a very heavy suspension (unless you're Schalk Burger trying to take Luke Fitz's eye out).

For that reason, if there is no evidence of gouging - and Carley said to Hogg that it would be for somebody else to take a further look - then should action be taken against Brown for accusing an Irish player of one of the worst bits of foul play imaginable. If not, there'll be vague suspicions of "no smoke without fire" and Scots will say that an experienced international like Brown wouldn't make such a serious claim unless he really believed he was gouged. Roux's reputation gets tarnished by Brown walks away scot free - stinks.

[Dexter]

Surprised not more said about the alleged gouging claim by Fraser Brown. TV showed no connection with Brown's eye by Roux - at worst his hand brushed against his cheekbone. We all accept that eye gouging is probably one of the worst foul plays when proven and usually ends up with a very heavy suspension (unless you're Schalk Burger trying to take Luke Fitz's eye out).

For that reason, if there is no evidence of gouging - and Carley said to Hogg that it would be for somebody else to take a further look - then should action be taken against Brown for accusing an Irish player of one of the worst bits of foul play imaginable. If not, there'll be vague suspicions of "no smoke without fire" and Scots will say that an experienced international like Brown wouldn't make such a serious claim unless he really believed he was gouged. Roux's reputation gets tarnished by Brown walks away scot free - stinks.

Yeah unless there was something we couldn't see that was very poor from Brown. Let's see if anything comes out in the next few days.
On a separate note, EOS was hilariously scathing of Scotland talking themselves up, post game.

[wixfjord]

Surprised not more said about the alleged gouging claim by Fraser Brown. TV showed no connection with Brown's eye by Roux - at worst his hand brushed against his cheekbone. We all accept that eye gouging is probably one of the worst foul plays when proven and usually ends up with a very heavy suspension (unless you're Schalk Burger trying to take Luke Fitz's eye out).

For that reason, if there is no evidence of gouging - and Carley said to Hogg that it would be for somebody else to take a further look - then should action be taken against Brown for accusing an Irish player of one of the worst bits of foul play imaginable. If not, there'll be vague suspicions of "no smoke without fire" and Scots will say that an experienced international like Brown wouldn't make such a serious claim unless he really believed he was gouged. Roux's reputation gets tarnished by Brown walks away scot free - stinks.

It's not a black and white scenario of 'either Brown is lying or Roux is a gouger' though.

Brown could've felt contact with his eye and not have been 'gouged'.

Or Roux could've accidentally made contact with his eye while pushing his hands through the maul.

[Oldschoolsocks]

Absolutely zero evidence of eye contact beyond a false complaint, not sure what law he broke but accusing someone of gouging like that is a bit scummy

[wixfjord]

Absolutely zero evidence of eye contact beyond a false complaint, not sure what law he broke but accusing someone of gouging like that is a bit scummy

Once again, it not showing on video doesn't mean he didn't feel eye contact or it didn't happen.

Roux reached into the ruck and pulled at Brown's head area. We didn't see any eye contact on the replay. That doesn't mean it didn't happen or Brown didn't think he felt it.

It's nonsense to accuse someone of making up an eye gouge (or to want them banned for it), just because the footage we saw didn't prove it. No proof doesn't mean he made it up.

[Oldschoolsocks]

The man has form

[Oldschoolsocks]

And it is scummy to accuse someone of gouging when it didn’t happen

[wixfjord]

The man has form

Fraser Brown has form of accusing eye gouges does he? You'll have to explain that one.

[Oldschoolsocks]

No, it’s on you to look at every single minute of every match he ever played and show proof that he doesn’t.

See how that works...

[wixfjord]

No, it’s on you to look at every single minute of every match he ever played and show proof that he doesn’t.

See how that works...

That doesn’t even make sense.

Jaysus you can do better than that surely?!

[Oldschoolsocks]

No, it’s on you to look at every single minute of every match he ever played and show proof that he doesn’t.

See how that works...

That doesn’t even make sense.

Jaysus you can do better than that surely?!

The man has form for being a scumbag, prove me wrong...

[wixfjord]

No, it’s on you to look at every single minute of every match he ever played and show proof that he doesn’t.

See how that works...

That doesn’t even make sense.

Jaysus you can do better than that surely?!

The man has form for being a scumbag, prove me wrong...

Dude I think you have the wrong player or else you're making stuff up. Brown has never been suspended or given a red as far as I'm aware. He was of course dropped on his neck by Keith Earls. Typical scumbag behaviour to be the injured party in a dangerous tackle right?

So QED really.

[Oldschoolsocks]

That doesn’t even make sense.

Jaysus you can do better than that surely?!

The man has form for being a scumbag, prove me wrong...

Dude I think you have the wrong player or else you're making stuff up. Brown has never been suspended or given a red as far as I'm aware. He was of course dropped on his neck by Keith Earls. Typical scumbag behaviour to be the injured party in a dangerous tackle right?

So QED really.

So I’d the QED the laughy face ?

The proof of him being a scumbag on the pitch is him basing a scumbag on the pitch.

The unfounded allegations of being gouged when he clearly wasn’t gouged. He’s a lowlife...

[Oldschoolsocks]

While you’re on the topic wixford, what’s funny about a player being lifted up and planted on his head?

[wixfjord]

The man has form for being a scumbag, prove me wrong...

Dude I think you have the wrong player or else you're making stuff up. Brown has never been suspended or given a red as far as I'm aware. He was of course dropped on his neck by Keith Earls. Typical scumbag behaviour to be the injured party in a dangerous tackle right?

So QED really.

So I’d the QED the laughy face ?

The proof of him being a scumbag on the pitch is him basing a scumbag on the pitch.

The unfounded allegations of being gouged when he clearly wasn’t gouged. He’s a lowlife...

Ok, what are examples of him 'being a scumbag on the pitch'?

You said he 'has form for being a scumbag'. What form?

[wixfjord]

While you’re on the topic wixford, what’s funny about a player being lifted up and planted on his head?

Christ you're not covering yourself in glory here OSS.

[Oldschool]

Absolutely zero evidence of eye contact beyond a false complaint, not sure what law he broke but accusing someone of gouging like that is a bit scummy

Once again, it not showing on video doesn't mean he didn't feel eye contact or it didn't happen.

Roux reached into the ruck and pulled at Brown's head area. We didn't see any eye contact on the replay. That doesn't mean it didn't happen or Brown didn't think he felt it.

It's nonsense to accuse someone of making up an eye gouge (or to want them banned for it), just because the footage we saw didn't prove it. No proof doesn't mean he made it up.

Or he felt a hand near by his head and decided he might get a peno for a "high tackle/dangerous play" type infringement.
The only way to get it reviewed was to make a claim of serious foul play like gouging.
Very cynical if that's the case and if there's no evidence to back up his charge then Roux is innocent and his accuser is the one who should be interrogated.

[Oldschoolsocks]

While you’re on the topic wixford, what’s funny about a player being lifted up and planted on his head?

Christ you're not covering yourself in glory here OSS.

You’re the one laughing at a potentially career ending injury