Qualifying Final 2: Brumbies v Chiefs. Sat. 19/07
- Thread starter matty_k
- Start date
- Status
ACT Crusader
Jim Lenehan (48)
A few years ago we had some very active TJs calling offsides, dropped binds at scrums etc. but now it seems they are only there to rule into touch, offer a view on grounding of tries and foul play (they go upstairs anyway and the ref makes the final call respectively).
Shame they aren't more active.
Lindo,
I had the benefit of sports ears and could hear the ref/AR conversations better than you could on the TV and there was quite a lot on conversation between and during plays about looking at the binds in scrums and offside calls.
I guess the final call is with the ref and the others are only there to assist.
I had the benefit of sports ears and could hear the ref/AR conversations better than you could on the TV and there was quite a lot on conversation between and during plays about looking at the binds in scrums and offside calls.
I guess the final call is with the ref and the others are only there to assist.
Brumby Runner
David Wilson (68)
By what logic? Was the ball out of the ruck when he moved to clean out Power? If it was, it was a clear case of obstruction because the ruck would have been over as soon as the ball came out. If not, Messam was clearly offside as he would have taken Power out either in front of the back feet of the Chiefs ruck, or by entering a ruck from the (wrong) side if you believe Power was bound and part of the ruck.
No way that was a legitimate try, and if left unchallenged will have dire consequences for all defending teams when rucks are formed close to the tryline. Simply have a hard runner stay to the side of the ruck and then get him to take out the closest defender to the side of the ruck so that the halfback or pick and driver can simply follow him through into the space created over the tryline.
Think anyone who thought it was ok should contemplate their reaction if such an action occurred against their favoured team.
The ball wasn't out of the ruck when Messam cleaned out Power.
The grey area is that Power wasn't properly bound to the ruck (bound meaning to the shoulder). He was clearly holding on to a player at the side of the ruck though.
He either had to be part of the ruck or he was significantly offside given where the ball was. If he didn't want to be part of the ruck he shouldn't have been holding on to a player in the ruck and he should have been back on his tryline crouched down ready to defend as players do.
I would agree with you that Messam didn't properly come through the gate but I'd also argue it's impossible when the player you're trying to clean out is standing at the side of the ruck in what is realistically an offside position rather than in the middle of the ruck where they could be cleaned out.
I think Power was trying to have it a bit both ways. He wanted to fill the void immediately next to the ruck by holding onto the side and being able to stand half a metre in front of the tryline but still be in a position to make a tackle.
I think Messam was fine to clean him out because either Power was part of the ruck or he was offside and shouldn't have been standing there.
The grey area is that Power wasn't properly bound to the ruck (bound meaning to the shoulder). He was clearly holding on to a player at the side of the ruck though.
He either had to be part of the ruck or he was significantly offside given where the ball was. If he didn't want to be part of the ruck he shouldn't have been holding on to a player in the ruck and he should have been back on his tryline crouched down ready to defend as players do.
I would agree with you that Messam didn't properly come through the gate but I'd also argue it's impossible when the player you're trying to clean out is standing at the side of the ruck in what is realistically an offside position rather than in the middle of the ruck where they could be cleaned out.
I think Power was trying to have it a bit both ways. He wanted to fill the void immediately next to the ruck by holding onto the side and being able to stand half a metre in front of the tryline but still be in a position to make a tackle.
I think Messam was fine to clean him out because either Power was part of the ruck or he was offside and shouldn't have been standing there.
Yeah, nah
Ball was in ruck, Power was half arsed loitering (hanging barely on so he had a head start in close defense) He got cleaned out.
If he wasn't bound to the ruck he was consciously off side in the red zone, advantage Chiefs, try, then yellow card after the try was scored.
Brumby Runner
David Wilson (68)
If this view prevails in official circles, then Pandora's box has been opened.
Brumby Runner
David Wilson (68)
It would only be non-controversial if Power was definitely off side and not a member of the ruck. Haven't been able to see the replay and have made my comments on how I saw the episode in real time. Maybe someone can post a short video that might help to put the matter to bed.
Where I do agree with you is that if Leon only had a hand on the ruck, then he was not bound (remember the debate about whether Moore was bound to the ruck or not when Quirk was penalised for holding him). The question then is where Power was standing in relation to the back feet of the ruck and the tryline. Going back to the French test, he only had to have part of one foot behind the back of the ruck to be on side. Also, if he had part of a foot behind the tryline he would be onside.
If he was offside (and I don't recall Joubert indicating advantage), then it is probable that there should have been a penalty to the Chiefs. But the try should not have been awarded because it resulted from a clear breach by Messam, taking out a player off the ball and creating obstruction for TKB to score the try. That is where I see P's box being opened if teams (and here I have to say I really mean NZ teams) see an opportunity to create space on the tryline before a ruck is completed to allow either the halfback or a forward picking and driving to score a try by obstructing the defence whether or not it is onside itself. Could also spread to taking out the pillars at the ruck who are invariably in front of the last feet in the ruck when the halfback is preparing for a box kick.
I do believe that Joubert probably thought he had interfered with Nic White and instinctively awarded the try to avoid his embarrassment. In any case, this was certainly imo an instance where the TMO should have been brought into the discussion.
Tomikin
Simon Poidevin (60)
Hey BR, I see what you are saying, and watched it on tv, and Joubert called it pretty quick and said said he was part of the ruck so it was a cleanout was fine, and White wouldn't have got there which is true.
Commentators said Powers was doing the lazy bind trying to get both ways which he can't have, I can't remember if he was behind the line, but wasn't behind the last feet I don't believe.
I'm ok with the call, Power's was trying to do both he either binds to the ruck so he can stand there or he gets his hand off low and behind the last feet/line.
I think it's a 50/50 call and Im happy to give the attacking team benefit of the doubt.
So this whole time BR has been arguing vehemently based only from what he saw live at the ground? 
It probably helps the rest of our arguments that we got to see plenty of replays and the consensus of the commentary team was that Power was part of the ruck and the clean out was fine.
It probably helps the rest of our arguments that we got to see plenty of replays and the consensus of the commentary team was that Power was part of the ruck and the clean out was fine.
boyo
Mark Ella (57)
Bairdy
Peter Fenwicke (45)
He played for Waikato in the NPC over four years so I'm sure he was pursued by the Chiefs, seeing as he was eligible to play for the All Blacks (having grown up there).
The IRB eligibility rules are the same for all countries, though.
Tomikin
Simon Poidevin (60)
The Brumbies gave Henry his break, when the at time coaches at the Chiefs didn't want him. Once he got his chance his a loyal bloke so there was no heading back. I think he will be a Brumby for life.
I hope not
Brumby Runner
David Wilson (68)
So this whole time BR has been arguing vehemently based only from what he saw live at the ground?
It probably helps the rest of our arguments that we got to see plenty of replays and the consensus of the commentary team was that Power was part of the ruck and the clean out was fine.
BH I've now seen the replay and can attest to the fact that Power's feet (both of them) were behind the tryline when he joined the ruck (as apparently accepted by Joubert). As the ruck progressed, one foot came forward of the tryline but his right foot remained behind it the whole time. He was not offside. IMO then, Messam joined the ruck from the side (indeed from the Brumbies' side) and penalty against the Chiefs would have been the correct call.
Appears my viewing in live time is better than most who have the benefit of plenty of replays.
- Status