TRC Round 1: South Africa v Australia, Sunday 21 July 1:05am AEST

[Derpus]

There was much to indicate coaching problms last night. Far too much. Could be a long year i think.

 

[Gnostic]

That $4M RA spent on the vastly over rated Hooper is perhaps the biggest waste on contracting in Australian Rugby history. He has been practicing being a captain for years now and like his play has got no better at it.

I don't know what position he is supposed to play but when he is on the field Australia do not have 3 loose forwards and the speed of the ball at the breakdown shows in this. His best games at test have always been when paired with Pocock to do most of the back row work. I honestly do not think that the loose forward play can improve whilst he is selected (and at $4M they have to select him) at 7 and he simply does not do the job.

His supporters will point to his "work rate" but I will counter that it is meaningless stats when that work rate has absolutely zero impact or effect. Compare him with Savea or Matera and I think the "work rate" from these two are lower but you certainly notice their impact.

I saw a telling point of his attitude as well in the second half and if I could be bothered I look for it an get the times, Hooper engaged at a ruck just out of the Wallabies defensive 22, did nothing of effect, disengaged and turned his back and halked with his typical hands on hips stance to the rear of the ruck. HE TURNED HIS BACK, the ball was live and was cleared from the ruck while his back was turned, he did not limp away and was not treated for any injury and was unimpeded in continuing the game, essentially he was disinterested. That attitude from the supposed Captain even on one occasion is the leadership the team will follow, as is the idiocy of questioning the referee statement on a contact judged dangerous which took place AFTER the whistle.

 

[Gnostic]

Overall the Wallabies showed little change from last year and we should not forget that this was a second string Bokke side. Consider one different player in the Bokke side would have made a massive difference to the game in their terms, Malcom Marx. As I've said above, without an effective 7 or another forward that can fill that role in the side the Wallabies would have been turned over far more.

After watching the Arg V ABs game, the Fiji V Maori game and 6N unless something drastic changes from the last two years The Wallabies will not win a game in the RC and will not progress from the Pool stages of the RC.

 

[eastman]

That $4M RA spent on the vastly over rated Hooper is perhaps the biggest waste on contracting in Australian Rugby history. He has been practicing being a captain for years now and like his play has got no better at it.

I don't know what position he is supposed to play but when he is on the field Australia do not have 3 loose forwards and the speed of the ball at the breakdown shows in this. His best games at test have always been when paired with Pocock to do most of the back row work. I honestly do not think that the loose forward play can improve whilst he is selected (and at $4M they have to select him) at 7 and he simply does not do the job.

His supporters will point to his "work rate" but I will counter that it is meaningless stats when that work rate has absolutely zero impact or effect. Compare him with Savea or Matera and I think the "work rate" from these two are lower but you certainly notice their impact.

I saw a telling point of his attitude as well in the second half and if I could be bothered I look for it an get the times, Hooper engaged at a ruck just out of the Wallabies defensive 22, did nothing of effect, disengaged and turned his back and halked with his typical hands on hips stance to the rear of the ruck. HE TURNED HIS BACK, the ball was live and was cleared from the ruck while his back was turned, he did not limp away and was not treated for any injury and was unimpeded in continuing the game, essentially he was disinterested. That attitude from the supposed Captain even on one occasion is the leadership the team will follow, as is the idiocy of questioning the referee statement on a contact judged dangerous which took place AFTER the whistle.

And yet his peers keep voting him as one of the best (if not best) player in their team.. He is very effective at what he does- he leads the defensive line and makes about 50 tackles a game, protects our attacking ball and is quite a decent ball runner. Undoubtedly he could go harder on the ball but to say that his workrate is ineffectual is absolutely ridiculous.

Matera is a 6 not a 7- he should be a better ball runner.

 

[eastman]

There's a lot of hyperbole in this forum- we weren't nearly as bad as some people here are saying. We weren't great and nor were we terrible- you couldn't say that SA were the better team but they did make better use of their opportunities.

With a bit of luck (a better bounce of the ball) we could have easily won that game.

I would look to change one of DHP/ Hodge, I don't think you can carry both of them in a back three. So for mine Hodge goes (DHP is a much more natural outside back), with Banks, DHP and LB as the back 3. I'm also curious to see JOC (James O'Connor) in the 23 jersey.

 

[KOB1987]

And yet his peers keep voting him as one of the best (if not best) player in their team.. He is very effective at what he does- he leads the defensive line and makes about 50 tackles a game, protects our attacking ball and is quite a decent ball runner. Undoubtedly he could go harder on the ball but to say that his workrate is ineffectual is absolutely ridiculous.

Matera is a 6 not a 7- he should be a better ball runner.

Yep. Notwithstanding that the published stats don't incorporate ruck and maul stats (ForceFan ?) the published metrics do tell a bit of a story. This is just a bit of a quick analysis:

Tackles Comp Carries Run metres Clean breaks Errors

Hooper 10/10 100% 8 38 3 1
Elstadt 7/12 58% 4 1 0 0
Cane 9/13 69% 11 26 0 2
Matera 11/14 79% 6 24 1 0

Sorry about the shit formatting but it's pretty easy to follow

 

[Up the Guts]

frame by frame there might be an argument, but if Tupou keeps smashing vulnerable players (after they've passed, after the whistle, this one is a pinned player nowhere near the ball) he's going to keep getting cards and I don't really have a problem with it. He's been lucky so far but one of them is going to go really bad, which will mean a long suspension, but also probably a major injury for someone.

Eldstadt wasn’t pinned at all nor vulnerable, he shoulder charged Rodda and his grub shot was rightly punished by Tupou in a perfectly executed clean out. Some may argue it was a late shot but if you watch the vision Taniela was already committed to the shot when the whistle was blown. Under the laws he’s contributing to what was an established contest and should be unpunished. If anything SA are lucky not to have one in the bin for a cheap shot to a guy lying on the ground.

 

[Up the Guts]

UTG< I'd agree but we had more ball in the first half than the Saffas, I believe, and he did next to nothing other than get his runners smashed.

And we created more try-scoring opportunities than the Saffas in the first half, we bungled two (DHP and Kerevi) and got unlucky with the bounce of the ball on Hodge’s kick through. We never got to see our best attacking option off the back of the scrum five out as SA’s entire back row were off their feet and were bizarrely awarded a penalty for holding on.

 

[cyclopath]

Already posted that I ate my words after his try bud

That's OK, chief.

 

[Gnostic]

And yet his peers keep voting him as one of the best (if not best) player in their team.. He is very effective at what he does- he leads the defensive line and makes about 50 tackles a game, protects our attacking ball and is quite a decent ball runner. Undoubtedly he could go harder on the ball but to say that his workrate is ineffectual is absolutely ridiculous.



Matera is a 6 not a 7- he should be a better ball runner.

Firstly the same peers have under performed for years. The passive defensive line is his responsibility then? This was mentioned even by the grossly biased Kafer and Kearns as a common factor in the Wallabies losses since last year. ​

Secondly regarding Matera, the Argies like the Saffas and French have used the numbering system with the openside numbered as 6. Matera fills the role of a 7 as we would see it, just with far more impact than Hooper. As for the stats, these days the stats are so fluid it depends who wrote them and what their actual judgement is when recording them. I seriously doubt any stats these days and think they are pretty much worthless as they rarely if ever come with the required discussion about errors and mode of measurement etc.

As for the hyperbole, the same excuses and statements about "but for the bounce of the ball" have been made for years. There comes a time when people have to take responsibility for poor performance in terms of skills, tactics, decision making etc etc. These are not amateurs, they are very highly paid professionals, it is not unreasonable to expect that the same fundamental errors would not be on display year after year. This was a 5 tries to 2 loss against a SA "B" side with the second try coming with the "C" team reserves came on and the game was gone. Even then they managed to give up the Bonus point try through that stellar defence led by your outstanding Captain

 

[Dan54]

Eldstadt wasn’t pinned at all nor vulnerable, he shoulder charged Rodda and his grub shot was rightly punished by Tupou in a perfectly executed clean out. Some may argue it was a late shot but if you watch the vision Taniela was already committed to the shot when the whistle was blown. Under the laws he’s contributing to what was an established contest and should be unpunished. If anything SA are lucky not to have one in the bin for a cheap shot to a guy lying on the ground.

Geez Kearnsie, when you going to post under your own name??

 

[Gnostic]

Eldstadt wasn’t pinned at all nor vulnerable, he shoulder charged Rodda and his grub shot was rightly punished by Tupou in a perfectly executed clean out. Some may argue it was a late shot but if you watch the vision Taniela was already committed to the shot when the whistle was blown. Under the laws he’s contributing to what was an established contest and should be unpunished. If anything SA are lucky not to have one in the bin for a cheap shot to a guy lying on the ground.

Do you ref? Do you know the laws of the game, or do you prefer to use "the vibe" like in the movie The Castle"? I'll comment if the Ref made an error at law. There was none here.​

1) The whistle had gone. There was no contest to contribute too.
2) Eldstat was on the side of the ruck when TT made contact and his grub shot as you like to call it was legal as he entered from his gate and his first contact was with the arm not the shoulder and for a "grub shot" it was very ineffectual. TT after the whistle charged a player on the ground and first contact was with the shoulder. Whilst I don't think it was a "shoulder charge" as the whistle had gone Elsdstat was relaxed and vulnerable. It amounts to dangerous or at least reckless play under Law 9 (11)
3) Even if the "grub shot" was being returned in kind by TT he would and should be rightly penalised for retaliation. Law 9 (21)

The key fact is the whistle had gone and even the other wallaby players had started to unbind, the play was over and TT unleashed as he has at other times this season for which he has been penalised and given yellow. What Chieka and Kearns have been whinging about is just completely wrong and just re-enforces the already poor light that they are held in. Next year such cheap shots will come under even more scrutiny.

 

[TSR]

It was a split-second late, not seconds. Tupou was already well in the motion of cleaning out and was launching into the clean. Look at the vision in the link below (sorry - best one I could find). Forget the laws of rugby for a moment and consider the laws of physics. There was no way Tupou could stop & Eldstad is clearly part of the break down. Nor is it Tupou’s fault that Elstad sat up like that - I doubt his reflexes are that quick -but if he did it in response to the whistle was you suggest that is bad luck/poor timing - same as with Tupou.

It is a yellow card because of the timing. Despite him already being in motion, it is still a yellow because the way rugby is reffed there is little regards given for the inability of a player to adjust late. It is no different to when a player gets carded for contact with the head after the ball runner slips. I don’t agree with it when a player has no time to adjust, but it is the way rugby is reffed.

But otherwise it is fine and is consistent with clean outs that happen all the time in professional rugby.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...-overzealous-yellow-card-20190721-p5298j.html

 

[Dctarget]

Just got back from a delightful weekend away in the countryside and read all the comments, think I'll skip watching this game.

So, two easy tries from not defending the blind side? Presumably easy problem to fix.

Our forward pack was bossed? In contact or at the rucks or everywhere? How did our scrums and line outs hold up?

Was our lack of pace on the wing punished like predicted?

Does Beale start now?

 

[Up the Guts]

Do you ref? Do you know the laws of the game, or do you prefer to use "the vibe" like in the movie The Castle"? I'll comment if the Ref made an error at law. There was none here.​

1) The whistle had gone. There was no contest to contribute too.
2) Eldstat was on the side of the ruck when TT made contact and his grub shot as you like to call it was legal as he entered from his gate and his first contact was with the arm not the shoulder and for a "grub shot" it was very ineffectual. TT after the whistle charged a player on the ground and first contact was with the shoulder. Whilst I don't think it was a "shoulder charge" as the whistle had gone Elsdstat was relaxed and vulnerable. It amounts to dangerous or at least reckless play under Law 9 (11)
3) Even if the "grub shot" was being returned in kind by TT he would and should be rightly penalised for retaliation. Law 9 (21)

The key fact is the whistle had gone and even the other wallaby players had started to unbind, the play was over and TT unleashed as he has at other times this season for which he has been penalised and given yellow. What Chieka and Kearns have been whinging about is just completely wrong and just re-enforces the already poor light that they are held in. Next year such cheap shots will come under even more scrutiny.

Yes, the whistle had gone but he’d decided to contribute to the contest before the whistle had blown. It would be a late shot if he had begun winding up after the whistle was blown but he didn’t. There a bodies in motion all over the park when the whistle is blown at any point in time, we’d be seeing dozens of cards every game if we deemed any contact after the whistle as late. And how many times do you see a guy who has just kicked or passed hit hard but it’s deemed not late because the defender is “committed to the tackle”? Absolute madness if we start deeming “late” as any contact post whistle, post pass, post kick etc. Ironically, it was Williams who said Tupou was “committed to the tackle” when he hit CLL after he passed the ball in Canberra.

(2) It was an illegal shot from Eldstat not because he hit Rodda on the arm but because he used no arms, it was a shoulder charge. Tupou hit him in the chest, not the shoulder as you claim, even Williams said this when he was explaining to Hooper why it was a yellow. I don’t understand this stuff about being “relaxed”, Rodda was face down on the ground when Elstadt hit him, how much more unprepared can you get to take a hit? And anyway, there are plenty of examples throughout games where players aren’t braced for contact, e.g. when you receive a hospital pass. There’s nothing in the laws about being relaxed or vulnerable.

(3) You’re grasping at straws here, the retaliation law doesn’t cover clean outs that are legal.

 

[Up the Guts]

It was a split-second late, not seconds. Tupou was already well in the motion of cleaning out and was launching into the clean. Look at the vision in the link below (sorry - best one I could find). Forget the laws of rugby for a moment and consider the laws of physics. There was no way Tupou could stop & Eldstad is clearly part of the break down. Nor is it Tupou’s fault that Elstad sat up like that - I doubt his reflexes are that quick -but if he did it in response to the whistle was you suggest that is bad luck/poor timing - same as with Tupou.

It is a yellow card because of the timing. Despite him already being in motion, it is still a yellow because the way rugby is reffed there is little regards given for the inability of a player to adjust late. It is no different to when a player gets carded for contact with the head after the ball runner slips. I don’t agree with it when a player has no time to adjust, but it is the way rugby is reffed.

But otherwise it is fine and is consistent with clean outs that happen all the time in professional rugby.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...-overzealous-yellow-card-20190721-p5298j.html

Agree with all that TSR except your last bit on it’s a YC because it’s the way rugby is reffed. Ball carriers get tackled all the time after they have kicked or passed and it’s not penalised because the player has already committed to the tackle. I’m sure if you go through the footage you can find dozens of instances in which Williams blows his whistle and Wallaby and South African players alike tackle, cleanout, bump into each other etc.

Also, that article from the Herald says the timing is legal.

 

[TSR]

I know what you are saying UTG. Personally I didn’t think it was a yellow for the reason you’ve outlined.

However, I guess my point is that people do get yellow carded without regard for how realistically they can adjust their inertia.

Generally I think that World Rugby is very much in the right to focus on player welfare. However it does make it hard when the ref doesn’t make a realistic allowance for the players ability to adjust.

Edit : sorry - and I didn’t read the article. I just posted it because it had clear footage of the contact which shows Tupou in clear vision already launching when the whistle goes.

 

[Gnostic]

Yes, the whistle had gone but he’d decided to contribute to the contest before the whistle had blown. It would be a late shot if he had begun winding up after the whistle was blown but he didn’t. There a bodies in motion all over the park when the whistle is blown at any point in time, we’d be seeing dozens of cards every game if we deemed any contact after the whistle as late. And how many times do you see a guy who has just kicked or passed hit hard but it’s deemed not late because the defender is “committed to the tackle”? Absolute madness if we start deeming “late” as any contact post whistle, post pass, post kick etc. Ironically, it was Williams who said Tupou was “committed to the tackle” when he hit CLL after he passed the ball. Even as a Wallabies supporter I saw this was late and knew it would be yellow as soon as TT did what he did. If it was all about physics then he could have pulled out and contact would most definitely still have been made but certainly not in the manner it was, and therein lies the key.



(2) It was an illegal shot from Elstadt not because he hit Rodda on the arm but because he used no arms, it was a shoulder charge. Tupou hit him in the chest, not the shoulder as you claim, even Williams said this when he was explaining to Hooper why it was a yellow. I don’t understand this stuff about being “relaxed”, Rodda was face down on the ground when Elstadt hit him, how much more unprepared can you get to take a hit? And anyway, there are plenty of examples throughout games where players aren’t braced for contact, e.g. when you receive a hospital pass. There’s nothing in the laws about being relaxed or vulnerable. Eldstat bound with the arms it was not a shoulder charge and neither was TT's. Eldstat entered though the gate on his side - TT did not.



(3) You’re grasping at straws here, the retaliation law doesn’t cover clean outs that are legal The implication your post is that TTs action is one of retribution because of a perceived illegality by Eldstat. If that was not what you were implying to somehow reduce TT's culpability then Eldstat's actions prior to TT's have no bearing on the decision of the YC.

 

[TSR]

Well - I disagree he had time to pull out or adjust. We’ll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Up the Guts]

if your only evidence it was late was “I’m a Wallabies supporter and thought it was late therefore it must be,” then I’m not sure we can really have a productive, evidence based discussion and we’ll have to call it there. I’ve maintained that TT’s action was not illegal throughout, I don’t see how you could possibly infer that I was arguing TT should have his culpability reduced when I’ve consistently said he has nothing to be culpable for. But you are correct, I do think TT’s action was one of retribution, I don’t think it’s retaliation because, in my eyes, it was legal and legal actions aren’t penalised for retaliation. I also find it strange you’d raise retaliation when you maintain that Eldstat’s actions were legal yet retaliation is always penalised in a scenario in which player A has infringed and player B has reacted to it.