• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Waratahs v Blues, Saturday 28 March, Round 7 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
cyclopath said:
How so? I thought it was a pretty willing scrum contest - both packs got the upper hand at times, a few where neither could even hook it. If you take out the crooked feeds on both sides, which apparently is no longer under scrutiny this year, it was better than plenty of games.
Click to expand...

Particularly in the first half there seemed be a lot of scrums going down (Blues prop elbow pointing at the ground), some boring in, some not pushing square all of which IMO would have seen the Wallabies penalised.

The 5 minutes before halftime has again confirmed my view that teams should not get a scrum option from a penalty.

It was also the first time I have ever heard a referee call "use it" at a scrum. I hadn't even realised it was part of the laws. IMO this needs to happen at all scrums (except attacking 5m scrums) to stop the second shove in search of a penalty tactic that many teams employ.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Inside Shoulder said:
It worse than ever: I'll bet that will be the defining "crack down" at the RWC
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. Such an easy law to enforce and such a deterrent to lose a scrum feed, but WR (World Rugby) seem uninterested in doing much about it. Maybe they're worried that it will turn scrums into a contest.;)
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
Quick Hands said:
Particularly in the first half there seemed be a lot of scrums going down (Blues prop elbow pointing at the ground), some boring in, some not pushing square all of which IMO would have seen the Wallabies penalised.

The 5 minutes before halftime has again confirmed my view that teams should not get a scrum option from a penalty.

It was also the first time I have ever heard a referee call "use it" at a scrum. I hadn't even realised it was part of the laws. IMO this needs to happen at all scrums (except attacking 5m scrums) to stop the second shove in search of a penalty tactic that many teams employ.
Click to expand...
Apparently, it isn't. It's just a thing which has developed with some refs. Mauls, yes.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Waratahs started very well, over the gain line with relative ease and on the board for an early try. What followed wasn't pretty; too many pushed passes and silly penalties. The Blues defended very well and it took the Waratahs too long to adjust to the defensive pressure and get their attacking discipline in order.

Happy with the win though.:)
 
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

Stirling Mortlock (74)
^^^^^^^^^^^^ "DURING THE MATCH 6.A.4 THE DUTIES OF THE REFEREE IN THE PLAYING ENCLOSURE (a) The referee is the sole judge of fact and of Law during a match. The referee must apply fairly all the Laws of the Game in every match."
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
Quick Hands said:
So Peyper just made it up?:confused: I actually agree with it and want it used at every scrum, I'm just intrigued that some refs can just decide to do it.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not saying that per se - I have seen a few refs (not just him) call "Use it" from a scrum, but apparently, it is not actually part of the laws that the team must "use it" if the scrum is still up, as it was in that case.
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
waiopehu oldboy said:
^^^^^^^^^^^^ "DURING THE MATCH 6.A.4 THE DUTIES OF THE REFEREE IN THE PLAYING ENCLOSURE (a) The referee is the sole judge of fact and of Law during a match. The referee must apply fairly all the Laws of the Game in every match."
Click to expand...
I don't think that is meant to be a Carte Blanche to apply rulings that are not in the laws. If it was, they could dispense with all laws and let the ref just make up their own set each game! ;) I wasn't bitching about it, and in fact I commented on Twitter that it was dumb to not use it when asked 3 times, and I assumed it was a fair call as I had heard it before. A ref pointed out to me it is not actually in the laws.
 
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

Stirling Mortlock (74)
^^^^^^^^ so a bit like the ref last week who specifically asked the TMO to check for a "double movement" in Jordan Taufua's first try. Seem to recall the TMO stating "no double movement" when reporting back, too. FWIW I'm with QH on this one, unless you're >5m from the line there should be no second shoving.
 
Hugh Jarse

Hugh Jarse

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
The penalty applied for not "using it" at that scrum was a scrum feed to the Blues, IIRC. Awarding another scrum is hardly a way to increase the amount of time the ball is in play.
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
waiopehu oldboy said:
^^^^^^^^ so a bit like the ref last week who specifically asked the TMO to check for a "double movement" in Jordan Taufua's first try. Seem to recall the TMO stating "no double movement" when reporting back, too. FWIW I'm with QH on this one, unless you're >5m from the line there should be no second shoving.
Click to expand...
To be honest, the "double movement" term is really just arguing etymology. The law as enforced relates to playing the ball immediately, and not propelling oneself further once brought to ground other than reaching out to place the ball. Quite a few people use the term, but that is what they are talking about, albeit with the wrong "term". This is applying a law that doesn't seemingly exist, so I have been told. Unless anyone can find it in the laws?
As a counterpoint, imagine trying to convince anyone from the NH that second-shoving should be removed from scrums? :eek:
And Hugh is right, it hardly adds to play to set another scrum, when the team with the previous feed has not lost the previous one at all! ;)
 
Grant NZ

Grant NZ

Bill Watson (15)
cyclopath said:
To be honest, the "double movement" term is really just arguing etymology. The law as enforced relates to playing the ball immediately, and not propelling oneself further once brought to ground other than reaching out to place the ball. Quite a few people use the term, but that is what they are talking about, albeit with the wrong "term". This is applying a law that doesn't seemingly exist, so I have been told. Unless anyone can find it in the laws?
As a counterpoint, imagine trying to convince anyone from the NH that second-shoving should be removed from scrums? :eek:
And Hugh is right, it hardly adds to play to set another scrum, when the team with the previous feed has not lost the previous one at all! ;)
Click to expand...


Yeah, 'double movement' isn't actually mentioned in the laws. But neither is 'forward pass', 'lazy running', 'truck and trailer', 'squeeze ball' or dozens of other explanations refs give for a penalty. It sums up what actually occurred rather than the ref using boring legalese jargon.
 
Lindommer

Lindommer

Steve Williams (59)
Staff member
The definitions in Law 20 state, "The purpose of the scrum is to restart play quickly, safely and fairly, after a minor infringement or stoppage." Refs worldwide seem to've historically ignored the quickly bit. Sub-sections 20.4 (e) and (f) have something to say about stationary scrums, there's nothing in there about "use it or lose it". Peyper's a mystifying referee at times, I've always thought he's got no feel for the game as well as coming up with some quite bewildering decisions. Such as this one.
 
P

Pete King

Phil Hardcastle (33)
Probably most pleasing for tahs fans was the return to form of phipps. I believe he was a big key last year and he was back to his best last night. Kepu is having a strong season, Kearns is rarely on the money but he was probably on the money when he said the tags were doing it so easy in the first 10 that they took the foot off the pedal in terms of intensity and aggression.

edit : Oh and Big Will had BIG game
 
Bullrush

Bullrush

John Hipwell (52)
Just seen the yellow card on Kaino....what a fucking joke - what the fuck is the game becoming when you can't make good fucking hits without danger of going for 10 - fucking pussy call and just shit shit shit call...ref needs to harden the fuck up
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
Bullrush said:
Just seen the yellow card on Kaino..what a fucking joke - what the fuck is the game becoming when you can't make good fucking hits without danger of going for 10 - fucking pussy call and just shit shit shit call.ref needs to harden the fuck up
Click to expand...
It was a very harsh call, I agree. Refs blinded by the blood, which was clearly from an accidental head clash. Questionable that it was even high and penalty-worthy as Dennis ducked at the time too.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
So I went to the match last night with about 10 work colleagues many of whom weren't rugby union fans, firstly the crowd was disappointing which created a lacklustre atmosphere compared to the Brumbies match last week, and then the game wasn't much to write home about, I enjoyed it but it definitely didn't convert the other non rugby fans that we brought along.. The error rate was just to high creating a stop/start match..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top