Brute force: Manu Tuilagi
Related links
Teams
Also see
England sidestepped their latest challenge on their way to a Grand Slam with a punishing 23-13 victory over France at Twickenham.
France were transformed from the sluggish side that were abysmal against Wales a fortnight ago - aggressive at the breakdown and benefiting from moving Wesley Fofana back into the centre after his ill-fated stint on the wing.
England were more clinical in the second-half and gained the lead thanks to a fortuitous try from Tuilagi, who enjoyed an excellent afternoon against his French counterpart Mathieu Bastareaud.
A brutally physical clash worth of its affectionate title, saw frequent crunching tackles whilst the scrum was a contest initially dominated by France, before England gained parity as the match progressed.
It was far from the greatest performance under Stuart Lancaster, but a crucial result that leaves England with Italy and Wales in their path on the way to a first Grand Slam since 2003.
Farrell opened the scoring for England after just two minutes following an infringement from Thierry Dusautoir at the breakdown.
France were unable to exploit a three-man overlap on the outside when Bastareaud knocked on, but with advantage being played Morgan Parra opened his account with a penalty from 39 metres out.
The visitors grabbed the initiative in the scrum to force England into conceding two consecutive penalties, with France benefiting from a smoother surface than the pot-holed Stade de France from a fortnight ago against Wales.
Both sides struggled to convert large periods of possession in attack - conceding penalties when faced by a physical backlash from the opposition at the breakdown.
An attacking line-out created the base for a promising English attack after Manu Tuilagi burst through the midfield, only for Farrell's chip across for Chris Ashton to go too deep. Farrell converted England's penalty advantage however to make the score 6-3 after 27 minutes.
Fofana then broke through several English tackles down the left flank to score the game's opening try, Ashton's tap tackle unable to bring the Clermont centre down as he crossed in the left-hand corner, with Parra converting.
Farrell hit back with a penalty to cut the deficit to one point with five minutes left before half-time, before Parra attempted to respond with a penalty of his own at the end of the half from long-range which fell wide to the left.
France showed no let-up in the scrum at the beginning of the second half, forcing the penalty, but Parra was unable to convert.
A punishing maul from England then handed Farrell the chance to regain the lead, with the Saracen again successful to move England 12-10 ahead.
England then furthered their lead thanks to Tuilagi, the Leicester centre snatching up a loose ball at the back of the French ruck to canter into the corner.
France struck back with a penalty immediately from the restart, substitute Frederic Michalak coming on to convert and leave the score at 17-13. More strict officiating at the breakdown from referee Craig Joubert handed England an opportunity to add more points, Farrell lining up a 48 metre attempt which fell low to the left.
A burst up the left from Picamoles had England scrambling, before Michalak failed to take a low pass having begun the passage of play with a perfect chip over the top of the English defence.
Another brilliant surge from Tuilagi left Bastareaud flat on his back in midfield, setting up a grubber kick for Toby Flood behind the French defence which was well fielded by Vincent Clerc.
England though were in the ascendency at the breakdown, with Michalak penalised to allow Toby Flood the easiest of opportunities to stretch the home side's lead. He made no mistake - sending England into a 20-13 lead with seven minutes remaining.
Another error at the breakdown handed Flood a further three points to give England a solid cushion heading into the closing minutes.
The home side's defence held despite a late French surge, confirming their victory on a bitterly cold night at Twickenham and condemning France to one of their worst starts to a Six Nations ever.
Man of the Match: Despite the presence of Tuilagi, Tom Wood was outstanding for England from the base of the scrum.
Moment of the Match: With a lucky break needed, Manu Tuilagi could scarcely believe his luck as he picked up a loose ball and scored England's first try.
Villain of the Match: Not the greatest of substitute appearances for Frederic Michalak, whose little errors gave up key points in the second half.
The scorers:
For England:
Tries: Tuilagi
Pens: Farrell 4, Flood 2
Yellow Card: Cole
For France:
Tries: Fofana
Cons: Parra
Pens: Parra, Michalak
The teams:
England: 15 Alex Goode, 14 Chris Ashton, 13 Manu Tuilagi, 12 Brad Barritt, 11 Mike Brown, 10 Owen Farrell, 9 Ben Youngs, 8 Tom Wood, 7 Chris Robshaw (c), 6 Courtney Lawes, 5 Geoff Parling, 4 Joe Launchbury, 3 Dan Cole, 2 Dylan Hartley, 1 Joe Marler.
Replacements: 16 Tom Youngs, 17 David Wilson, 18 Mako Vunipola, 19 Thomas Waldrom, 20 James Haskell, 21 Danny Care, 22 Toby Flood, 23 Billy Twelvetrees.
France: 15 Yoann Huget, 14 Vincent Clerc, 13 Mathieu Bastareaud, 12 Wesley Fofana, 11 Benjamin Fall, 10 Francois Trinh-Duc, 9 Morgan Parra, 8 Louis Picamoles, 7 Thierry Dusautoir, 6 Yannick Nyanga, 5 Yoann Maestri, 4 Christophe Samson, 3 Nicolas Mas, 2 Benjamin Kayser, 1 Thomas Domingo
Replacements: 16 Dimitri Szarzewski, 17 Vincent Debaty, 18 Luc Ducalcon, 19 Jocelino Suta, 20 Antonie Claassen, 21 Maxime Machenaud, 22 Frederic Michalak, 23 Florian Fritz.
Referee: Craig Joubert (South Africa)
Assistant referees: John Lacey (Ireland), Leighton Hodges (Wales)
Television match official: Jim Yuille (Scotland)
by Ben Coles
@bencoles_
Comments
lawynd says...
@jontheref - from where I'm sitting, Fritz may have been entitled to the ball but Joubert called for him to release, multiple times. Now, as you suggest that you're a referee, even if you make the wrong call, don't you expect players to follow your directives? Add in the murk surrounding the breakdown and tackle area, and I think Joubert can be forgiven for erring in favour of the attacking team, as we've been clamouring for referees to do for donkey's years.
@Bambo - Tuilagi was onside from what I saw, but that matters not a jot as the ricochet was off Vunipola's leg, who was accidentally offside. Joubert can similarly be forgiven for missing that, as it happened at the bottom of a maul and on the other side of the field of play to where he was.
Posted 09:44 01st March 2013
new_j4a says...
@Bimbo, who in yet another spectacular example of your inability to understand the game says the following: "Later - you say on a following post that the refereeing website that you reference to support your persistent claims to your own refereeing infallibility declares Tuilagi offside and that a Joubert should have blown for a scrum. "
Here is what I said: "@all, here's the promised (self critical) verdict on the only English try from sareferees.com: accidental offside....should have been scrum to France..." Do you see the name Tuilagi there? Of course not...and you think you have the intelligence to understand rugby?? You can't even read.
Here's what sareferees.com says: "Tom Wood, the England No.8, kicks the ball forward. It bangs into the leg of Mako Vunipola. From Vunipola's leg the ball squirts out the side of the group of players where Manu Tuilagi picks up the ball......Vunipola was in front of Wood. Vunipola was in front of a team-mate who last played the ball. He was in an offside position" VUNIPOLA WAS OFFSIDE NOT TUILAGI (caps used for emphasis.....sometimes necessary when talking to really stupid people.
Here's another example. I said "The IRB rewarded Joubert for his almost flawless performance." Please note the word "almost." You and lacroix are clearly not bright enough to know the difference between "ALMOST flawless" and flawless (caps added for the same reason as above).
As to your mums flaws, I recall very few...so almost flawless too. our only disappointment is that you have inherited her brain and your father's obstinacy rather than vica versa.
Posted 09:29 01st March 2013
Bambo says...
new_j4a - we've had our disagreements in the past and you're now having them with several others. Progress?
Aside from the debate about refereeing or games or players these others are raising many of the points that I used to focus on; your suitability to lecture or belittle others. Evidence for their point of view is here for all to see, sooner or later.
1 example.
Sooner - you say on an earlier post that Tuilagi was (caps on) on side and thus the try was legitimate and, consequently, Joubert 'flawless'. You watched this play something like 4 times on the BBC.
Later - you say on a following post that the refereeing website that you reference to support your persistent claims to your own refereeing infallibility declares Tuilagi offside and that a Joubert should have blown for a scrum.
Consistency is consistently missing with you. Contradiction? Flawed decisions making despite repeated views?
I know you'll now suggest my mother has sexual flaws (past posts) or that I, as a male teacher, must be a pederast (past posts) but, trust me, as Jon, Fox and Lacroix have all pointed out such insults do nothing for your case that Joubert is flawless. Trust me too, your frequently nasty posts do very little for the game you claim to love.
Allez rugby! Arreter new_j4a!!!!!!
Posted 20:32 28th February 2013
jontheref says...
new_j4a
I suggest you take the blinkers off, and look at the Fritz PK again, he tackles, releases whilst getting up, comes in again.
If you cannot see that, you are as blind as the ref was.
He was under pressure, 5 minutes to go, so fade could be attributed.
As for you, I doubt you even know what I mean!
My, you have returned to form haven't you?
Spluttering away, profanities etc., because you don't like being wrong?
harping on about "materiality" one of the great cons of excuse making.
My comment to you about wartching the game to see the inconsistencies, is obviously not understood by you.
Don't you remember when you said "I can work with you", but once I give a contrary opinion to you, I am pants again?
Please, stop spouting your delusional fantasy about Joubert and the RWC being an almost perfectly refereed game, and Joubert being praised for it.
You are such a sycophant about Joubert, he must be embarrassed by you!
Posted 16:41 28th February 2013
foxrock says...
@ new_j4a This comments thread is concerned with the England:France match. McCheat was not a participant. Do try to keep up. Predictably enough you demonstrate yourself to be the sort who needs the last word and so I invite you to have it in considering the amusing irony (to date surely lost on you) of an illiterate repeatedly proclaiming others ignorant.
Posted 15:36 28th February 2013
jontheref says...
kybone,
With logic like yours, you ought to do the lottery more often!
Farrells elbow to the throat has nothing to do with a trip on farrell, different incident.
Go complain about that, separately, one does not justify the other.
As I said on my first post, England had luck, and France played poorly, especially the coaching team.
If you cannot see the difference in the Fritz penalty, and some of the none ones not given to France, you have blinkers on.
Posted 15:35 28th February 2013
jontheref says...
kybone,
With logic like yours, you ought to do the lottery more often!
Farrells elbow to the throat has nothing to do with a trip on farrell, different incident.
Go complain about that, separately, one does not justify the other.
As I said on my first post, England had luck, and France played poorly, especially the coaching team.
If you cannot see the difference in the Fritz penalty, and some of the none ones not given to France, you have blinkers on.
Posted 15:31 28th February 2013
Rosbif says...
Thanks for the url new_j4a. Interesting indeed. Especially the discussion about the lack of TMO powers leading up to a try which is being used quite frequently now in domestic leagues. It also shows how quickly things can go wrong for you. France are essentially pinged for an early engagement on the Eng 10m line and end up conceding a try. Was Eng midfield in front of Goode when he kicked? Did Eng or French hands knock on or knock back the ball as it landed? Who kicked the ball, how did that player get into that position, how did the ball ricochet etc etc. These are all things a TMO can look at in ultra slow mo. Hardly CJ's fault when he is trying to follow play!
Anyhow, peace to all, go well and catch you all on another thread :-)
Posted 14:40 28th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@all, here's the promised (self critical) verdict on the only English try from sareferees.com: accidental offside....should have been scrum to France and would quite possibly have been if the 6N allowed a TMO clarification. For those interested, http://www.sareferees.com/laws/view/2830005/
Pity about the missed French 8 trip and YC as well??
Posted 06:49 28th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@lacroix, read your response....I have no further comment. I see no point in arguing with somebody who knows far more about table manners than rugby. Idiot!
Posted 06:21 28th February 2013
lacroix says...
Oh dear. Poor 'old' new J4a writes:
"@lacroix, you can criticize Joubert, of course, but you have to be precis and correct or I will correct you and expose you as the kind of poor sportsman that doesn't understand rugby and lacks the necessary culture to participate in it."
Great- i look forward to it.. expose away: its just you never do...you just squeal about how mean everyone is to criticise him. and lets face it its a vast swathe of world media not just people here. and remember that just because you say a decision was right does not make it so.
"As it turned out, I was correct about the RWC. The IRB rewarded Joubert for his almost flawless performance"
erm...what does that prove? they appointed him..he embarassed them (and many new zealand fans).they can't admit they got it wrong. QED.
"and it is only children like you (mental age) who disagree and see a big conspiracy from the IRB."
No conspiracy at all.simple incompetence.weak too maybe.
" I have learned a lot from him and other top refs via ref websites which you say never materialized. Here is a starting point again for you: www.sareferees.com."
oh dear. you really don't get it.a link to the SARRA website doesnt prove that you're right about Craigs 'flawless' performances. LOL.
its hilarious. even joubert- i had the misfortune to be at a dinner he attended-( a charmless man with appalling table manners in case you're interested)- doesnt claim he's flawless and was disarmingly ready to admit how many calls he regretted. only an idiot would claim they were flawless- after all refs like everyone else are human.
your dismal failure to actually refute sensible analysis- like jontheref for instance- and the very fact you're reduced to puerile name calling and caps locked shouts of nonsensical rage rather undermines your pompous claim to be some kind of authority on refereeing and the laws of the game.
Posted 22:20 27th February 2013
yuri29 says...
"Villain of the Match? Gold, silver and bronze would be shared in no particular order amongst Farrell, Vunipola and Ashton. Meanwhile, Michalak has hardly had a week off playing since the beginning of last year's Super Rugby with the Sharks. Hardly a villain. More a walking shadow of himself... "
You're spot on about Michalak
Posted 18:54 27th February 2013
Coshie78 says...
For all the criticism of PSA I think his initial tactics were spot on, I'll explain...
He knows England are the fitter team with a stern defence. He knows England have a strong bench and are likely to be stronger in the final quarter...
He needs to have a lead going into the final 20 mins, he asks his team to give it everything in the first 20/30 hoping to rattle a young team into mistakes and hopefully creating a lack of cohesion making it difficult for the substitutes come on...
France threw everything they had at England and ran out of puff. If it wasn't for Fofana brilliance coupled with woeful tackling they wouldn't have had a lead at all...
In the first 10mins of 2nd half (after a little breather) the French were still competitive but starting to lose the 50/50 collisions they had been winning. Parra was blowing and not influecing the game and Trinh-Duc was getting less and slower ball. French defence was slower at getting around the corner and England runners were now making more yards. Youngs starting to interest the tired fringe defenders and find runners with more space. England finally had some parity in the scrum... On top of that Parra was mis-firing with the boot...
Then England call for the bench and all of the above is made worse by their impact. Tom Youngs carrying 2 tired front rowers back from a pick-up, in the 1st half they had been smashing people backwards. Care getting quick ball that hadn't been there previously and using fresh legs to get it away quickly...
France played to their game plan, however England were too good on the day...
Yes some influential decisions went England's way today, but anyone who thinks England were not good for the win is clutching at straws...
Posted 16:17 27th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@foxrock, I find your totally ignorant attacks on referees and your troll like behavior when it comes to McCaw offensive in the extreme as do many others to judge from the responses you receive, so please don't lecture me on the "prevailing tenor" here.
Your preoccupation with spelling just about sums up the limits of your intellect....try understanding the laws of the game...(remember they are not rules....something you will understand if you ever edukate yourself)....the spelling error is my little gift to you....you are correct about so few things.
Posted 10:15 27th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@foxrock, there is, of course, one important and well documented difference: Bryce Laurence was punished by the IRB after the RWC QF by withdrawing him from top level reffing (one example, no 6N) and rewarded Craig Joubert. A second important difference is that BL has publicly admitted wilting under Oz pressure and apologized for his poor performance. By the way I think BL was shoddily treated by a bunch of Saffa ref bashers even though I agree he had a bad day at the office. Also, I think that the IRB should have supported him through rehab....we can't afford to lose refs of that caliber even if they do screw up once in a while.
Does that address your point? (In the event that your point is that PR/Ross Hastie agree with you ref bashers, think again. That is not what the article says (i.e. "if you are French"). I think that Ross is doing a little Richard Anderson like stirring and i must say that I was a bit disappointed to see it given how gullible and totally ignorant readers like yourself tgend to be. (I left the last spelling mistake in as I know how important it is to give you a reason to feel superior, no matter how small)
Posted 09:54 27th February 2013
foxrock says...
@ new_j4a No need to keep apologising for your continued spellings mistakes. Having now formed a view as to your general, as well as rugby, intelligence due allowances are being made. However, to avoid looking a fool in future apologies, you might wish to know, that you should NOT write, "...my humble apologies for offended your inner pedant AGAIN". 'Offending' is correct. You might also try to grasp the prevailing tenor here and, in future, to be less offensive.
Posted 09:29 27th February 2013
foxrock says...
Planet Rugby (Who's hot...and who's not!) "Craig Joubert (if you're French): South Africa's top ref is to France what Bryce Lawrence is to South Africa or Wayne Barnes is to New Zealand as many French fans still hold a grudge in the wake of the infamous final 20 minutes of the 2011 World Cup final. He's no more popular after this weekend's loss to England. "I won't comment on the rucks nor the decision to award (Tuilagi's) try. We know Joubert," said Saint-André. Ouch."
Posted 08:36 27th February 2013
new_j4a says...
Oh, and @foxrock, precis should have been precise....my humble apologies for offended your inner pedant AGAIN!
Posted 07:33 27th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@lacroix, you can criticize Joubert, of course, but you have to be precis and correct or I will correct you and expose you as the kind of poor sportsman that doesn't understand rugby and lacks the necessary culture to participate in it.
As it turned out, I was correct about the RWC. The IRB rewarded Joubert for his almost flawless performance and it is only children like you (mental age) who disagree and see a big conspiracy from the IRB.
As to my relationship with Joubert, I am (just) old enough to be his father, not the other way around. I have learned a lot from him and other top refs via ref websites which you say never materialized. Here is a starting point again for you: www.sareferees.com. I am sure they have similar in France (or one day may eventually have). You should start to learn the game. Then you wont make so many childish mistaken claims and you will be a better sportsman......(in English, this doesn't mean that you'll be better at sport. It means that you'll be less of a whinging, ref bashing, ignorant poor loser....I just thought that you'd want to know that and it's not the sort of thing you can look up in a thesaurus (like the word execrable when you want to look intelligent) The culture of rugby isn't so easily acquired, especially by someone like you.
Posted 07:29 27th February 2013
ArmchairGeneral says...
I thought the Ref was very sneaky the way he made Farrell and Flood kick well but didn't help Parra so much. Also was it noted one of the early England knock ons that reversed the momentum was actually off the leg and followed by a French knock-on? I think England would have won by more but can't complain.
Posted 00:03 27th February 2013