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
lacroix says...
wow...new j4a reminds me of that comedy schoolboy who i think called himself 'justice for all' who did those hilarious parodies of someone who was an , ahem, expert on the rugby laws..anyone who questioned his view was hectored and threatened with all sorts of URLs proving his unparalleled grasp of the 'laws'..URLs which naturally never materialised or rather failed to prove the point...funny stuff.
thanks for flying the flag 'new J4a'. for showing up all those who shout down discussion by saying 'you're just ignorant and dont know the laws....give me a time and Law etc'. those guys are nuts , right?
or looked at another way you're just saying that anyone who criticises joubert is insanely biased.almost like joubert's your daddy or something :) LOL. either way , great comedy value.
hint : its possible to criticise a ref's performance just because it was very poor (as noted by numerous observers), not because you think thats why your team lost.
IMHO france lost because despite outplaying england for the first half, they themselves were outplayed and outscored in the second half; PSAs subs were ill timed and ill judged. However, that doesn't change the fact that Joubert was execrable. Again.
now , seriously speaking , england having done perhaps just about enough to deserve their win should build on this and go on to win the slam. i hope so because some of the youngsters in that team have genuine world class potential, and lancaster seems to be doing a better job than any of his counterparts. non performers get sent back to their clubs (by and large ...a few exceptions) and a steady core go on building a stout team spirit which takes them to wins even when they're not getting their way.
Posted 23:45 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@foxrock. please excuse the typos in the previous post....I know how important these things are to those in your part of the country who have to struggle to appear educated.
Posted 22:21 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@all, what a farce. I just reviewed the tape of Tuilagi's try 4 times. the BBC has a replay from above and behind the French goal posts.....AND to my surprise, he is probably NOT OFFSIDE!!!!!!! Review it yourself. My clear recollection was that he was offside...I thought. I went back to see if the ball had been touched by a French player which would have put everybody on side......look at the field markings and the grass cutting pattern....Tuilagi is pretty much level/in line with the kicker.....which maqkes a bit of a joke of all th4e ref whinging.
Posted 22:18 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@Rosbif, interesting, very interesting, there are a few family things we share in common besides Rondebosch, but I am loath to share on this forum (I have not been as polite as you). Maybe we will meet at Bishops in Cape Town one day and share a glass or two of wine.
Posted 19:13 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@foxrock, A tiny bit of information for your inner pedant...sic, short for "sic erat scriptum," is used to indicate a misspelling in the original text not to excuse your own misspelling. Now back to rugby. Do you think that Ireland will make it into the top half of the 6N table? I think it unlikely now that they have been soundly thrashed by Scotland. And do you think that BOD and ROG will still be limping along in 2015? Ireland is so very good at the "all aspiration and no delivery hype"...in all fields of endeavor?
Posted 17:50 26th February 2013
kybone says...
jontheref- Forgot to mention about the 'elbow' on Parra. If this really was an elbow by Farrell that made serious contact with Parra's throat, and not a dive/play acting/feigning of injury to get the refs attention, why have the FFR not brought it to the attention of the citing commissioner? I'll tell you why- because it was a dive and the FFR aren't going to risk further embarrassment by persuing the issue. I just wonder what the likes of Martin Johnson, Brad Thorn, Bakkies Botha, Paul O'Connell etc. think when they see that kind of thing on a rugby field- probably that they'd love to give him something to cry about!
Posted 17:47 26th February 2013
kybone says...
jontheref- And i'll point out, again, that they also missed the blatant trip on Farrell, as you also seem to have. This incident was also a yellow card offence, and was what wound Farrell up in the first place. The Tuilagi try was not a try, agreed, but the conversion was missed and England contrived to give away a pen right from the kick-off. A kick-off that would not have happened if England had not scored the try. So, in essence the England none try ended up being worth 2 points- Englnand won by 10! It's difficult to recall every ruck exchange, but i didn't notice anything particularly unfair about the way Joubert interpreted it, and im not usually one of these who is too precious about their team to admit that they got a good deal from the ref. For me there were 3 big calls that were wrong/missed- the Tuilagi try, the Vunipola hand in the ruck, and the trip on Farrell. Apart from that i don't agree that he was harsh on either team particularly.
Posted 17:38 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@foxrock, Yes you're absolutely right. It's all an IRB conspiracy and of course they would reward Joubert after the RWC. They'd have, right, just to cover their tracks? But luckily we've got smart people like you (who can spell too) who can expose them all. Do you worry about alien abduction too? Maybe Joubert is one of them. But let's not tell anyone, shall we....our little secret, right?
Posted 16:33 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@jontheref?, Think about the logic of what you just said....I should review the whole game and magically determine where you think there is a problem? Not a very sensible suggestion is it? As for @75 Fritz tackles Asdhton," he doesn't release....no clear daylight (you will have heard that phrase before no doubt?)...AND IS TOLD BY THE REF TO LET IT GO. He doesn't and is penalized. No problem there that I can see. Now I am not claiming that it was a perfect display of reffing....missed the offside for the try (although I am waiting to hear more on that....did the ball going forward touch a French player?), missed the YC against French 8 for tripping, and was unsighted for the Vunipola incident where there seems to be a comms problem (unheard of in Wales of course). But your "elbow in the throat" error, your ignorance of materiality on the accidental offside, your suggested YC for throwing the ball away etc etc....are all just a load of bollocks and bring into serious question the standard of reffing in Wales, don't you think?
Posted 16:26 26th February 2013
foxrock says...
@new_j4a Your statement that "The RWC...was in FACT an almost perfectly refereed game" illustrates, to pretty much everyone who saw that game, how seriously your pontifications on refereeing deserve to be taken.
Good luck - or, perhaps, luk (sic) to you - with the remedial spelling classes.
PS An example of good refereeing was Jérôme Garces' officiating of Ireland's home defeat to England. Look and learn
Posted 15:32 26th February 2013
jontheref says...
new_j4a
I'm answering in part for lacroix, hope he doesn't mind.
At the sdtart of the thread I posted about some of the inconsistencies I had seen as a neutral, about the poor performance of the officials.
Here is one of them.
"75 Fritz tackles Asdhton, releases, gets up, goes back for the ball, penalised for not releasing, when it was truly his PK for Ashton holding. "
If you need the minute for everything else, I suggest you watch the game.
Joubert was inconsistent in how he allowed England more latitude at the breakdown than France.
If you did not see the England try, and the farce missed by the officials, and the farce of the Vunipola non PK and probably yellow card, go back and watch again!
As I said in my originalpost, mistakes happen, but so many certainly appears good luck.
As a fan I would accept it, but be uncomfortable about it.
France did not help themselves with the bizarre changes of players, so maybe England deserved it.Anyway, they are the only team that can win the Grand Slam, so a good play to be.
But please, do not try to defend the indefensible, the officials had a bad day.
Posted 14:05 26th February 2013
Rosbif says...
@new_j4a. Not sure there are any books out there, just a lot of oral history, not least in my family, especially amongst the grandparents after a few glasses hehehe :-)
Not wanting to be too personal (this is not a confessional after all) but my own life is a kind of strange experiment in rugby between the two nations. I have French parents and grandparents. Some OK rugby stock hidden in there. But I was brought up in the UK and attended one of those schools (Whitgift) that defines itself by how the first XV plays. Then onto Wasps and Oxford where I had the chance to play alongside David Kirk and Dallaglio and many other fine players, mostly Anglo-Saxon shall we say. But, despite having had broadly the same rugby schooling, because of my (French) name, I was always considered the maverick, the loose cannon, the guy who would try something on the field that wasn't out of the training manual, the guy who would argue with the ref etc etc.... Funny how the cliche endures.
PSA is in a slightly similar situation. He is by far the most Anglicised of any French coach ever (only Villepreux comes close perhaps?), yet he is still regarded by the English as the scorer of that crazy try in 1991. So, to the French, he is a pragmatic Anglophile who is trying to impose a strict game plan on his team. But to the English he is a crazy risk-taker, full of flair. Can he be both?
(By the way, that's why my screen name is Rosbif. That's what my French cousins call me, even though I'm French damn it!!!!)
Posted 13:51 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@Rosbif, that is frankly disgusting treatment. I never knew this. Is there a book on the history that I can read? Your account goes a long way to explaining the feeling of being hard done by.....
Posted 11:25 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@foxrock, here's yet another "Barnes, yet again, demonstrated that he's a woeful referee and utterly out of his depth at this level"
Are there ANY referees that meet your very high standards? Should I go back and research Ireland's very few wins to find their names or will you give them to us when you explain how much of your vast knowledge of the "rules" eh, I mean Laws came from watching Matty Williams and other conspiracy theorists?
Posted 08:57 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@foxrock, here's another of your pontifications "foxrock says...Romain Poite delivered what is highly likely to be the worst refereeing performance of 2013. He gave both teams, though especially Ireland, much to be unhappy about. Wake up IRB and do something about the increasingly woeful standard of refereeing."
Have you thought about putting your VAST knowledge of the game to good use by actually trying to ref? Or maybe the IRB needs to employ you to monitor reffing standards from your couch?
Posted 08:52 26th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@foxrock who say "foxrock says...Yet again a potentially good game is ruined by a poor referee whose grasp of the rules is tenuous" Once you get educated in the Laws of Rugby, you will understand why they are not called rules. And again "foxrock says...Yet another dreadful refereeing performance - which, again, clearly influenced match proceedings throughout - and yet another refereeing black mark for the IRB" What exactly are your qualifications for making these judgements, other than being a Matty Williams trained Irish barfly? Apologies in advance for any spelling errors that offend your inner pedant.
Posted 08:46 26th February 2013
Rosbif says...
@new_j4a, I'm totally with you on. Calling for "Latin" refs is wrong/insulting on every level. A clear backward step. Very disturbing. It is a throwback to the old days. And by that, I mean 100+ years ago. If you get a chance, take a look at the ESPN program that aired last week: "These Dear Enemies". It will put you in a better mood, I promise. Lots of good interviews with ex-players from France and England, re-living the old times, with smiles and nostalgia.
But it also gives an interesting summary of the history of rugby between the nations. From 1845 to 1914, English rugby was entirely dominant. The French felt themselves to be make-weights, or mere "students" of the game. English manuals and almanacs of the time say that while the French might try to play rugby they would never truly grasp the core values of the sport and would always lack the required discipline!! (Not dissimilar to the tone taken in colonising Africa and bringing Christianity to the natives - but let's not go there). Then between the Wars, there was a clear shift in the sport as the French emerged as potential rivals. But fears (justified, in the end) of professionalism, serious issues with referees, lack of fair play etc finally resulted in a "divorce" in 1931, with the English refusing to play France anymore at test level. Right up to 1960s, French rugby had to undergo a kind of apprenticeship or rehabilitation in the eyes of the English governing body, trying to win it over, to show it had the maturity to compete again at test level. Then France finally won the 1968 Grand Slam. But every step has been slow. When France were finally invited to have a representative on the IRB, that person had a non-speaking and non-voting role for many years. Same with French refs. So you can see where some of the "paranoia" comes from I guess...
Anyhow, go well, catch you later :-)
Posted 08:44 26th February 2013
foxrock says...
@new_j4a Your intemperate, and gratuitously insulting, responses to the many people finding fault (again) with Joubert's refereeing tells much about you. While your statement that "The RWC...was in FACT an almost perfectly refereed game" tells all about your knowledge of the game.
Suggest you follow your own advice to "take some classes, learn, then come back educated" at least to the point that when you sneer again you can actually spell it correctly.
Posted 22:31 25th February 2013
new_j4a says...
@Rosbif, Your comment " people in France are now talking openly about the FFR asking that all test matches versus Anglo-Saxon nations be refereed by fellow Latins" has been bothering me all day. It has me even more worried than our collective bad sportsmanship that causes us ALL to bad mouth refs and destroy a crucial part of our sport that we claim to love (I suspect that many love our team and winning more than we love our sport... rugby) Do you French, Italian, Argentinians really think of yourselves day to day as "Latins" and the rest of us as presumably "Anglo Saxons," "Celts (?)," ....New Zealanders????...PI/Anglo/Saxon/Celts???? Oz??? South Africa???? I hope not!!!! This would start to approach the madness we experienced in South Africa and Europe in the last century! Yes, if I get in a fight, I might say "bloody frog" or make some totally inappropriate comment.....but day to day? I hope we are just all rugby players and rugby lovers who banter and bash each other about on the field for the young....verbally for the old and less talented.....but in the end this is rugby and you are not Latin and the "bloody POMs" are not Anglo Saxon...I mean, look at the English Team....many of them are from the SH and I hear Claasens claims to feel quite French these days....all rugby players/lovers.....and as such, it is NOT RIGHT to destroy people like Craig Joubert who is a fine ref who occasionally makes a mistake...when poor losers finally destroy the Craig Jouberts of the world, there will be no rugby anymore.
Posted 18:37 25th February 2013
carpelone says...
Kybone.
Yes, I know. Sort of.
Posted 17:47 25th February 2013