Genia's Yellow

Have a few questions about this incident:

1. Who agrees that it should have been a yellow card?

2. If we yellow card this, do we then expect every cynical act to be shown a yellow (eg lying on the wrong side of the ruck, playing the ball on the ground, coming in from the side)

3. Anyone think that the laws of the game are a bit off in this instance. I have never understood why players are allowed to pass off the ground - they should only be allowed to place it, and if they are allowed to pass off the ground the tackler should be able to try an stop them.

Fair decision

Cynical knock down whilst laying down in the ruck when allblacks hot on attack and likely to score

That is what yellow cards are for

If all referees did this, we would see more tries instead of penalty goal shoot outs which are as boring as bat sh1t and enough to make you want to watch League or play chess or even sit down to some equestrian...or watch paint dry or the lawn grow.

My only wish is that referees stamp this sh1t out and be consistent. Mccaw should have been binned as well for his repeated infringements and handling the ball on the deck and not releasing the tackled player etc etc etc

fair yellow. lets see more of it

That was the most obvious yellow ever, in fact it would be a perfect example of what to show refs/players as to what constitutes a yellow.

It was deliberate whilst he was lying on the ground.

Unquestionably a yellow. He hadn't released the tackled player and played the ball effectively on the ground, all while the AB's were hard on attack. The replay was pretty damning. As far as consistency goes, I agree. You want every cynical infringement dealt with severely, as it stops the flow of the game if they aren't punished.

Definite yellow. What an idiot Phil learns is

I think it's pretty clear that Deans made him do it.

He conceded two penalties. Same number as Sharpe, Hore and no more than Moore. Of course the referee can only act on what he sees, and he only saw two. There were a couple close together and I think one more within that time frame (when Kafer might have mentioned there should be a warning) should have been a yellow, for anyone from the AB's. Don't forget that 13 other players conceded penalties as well, likewise almost every player gets away with something in the game. Don't be fooled because Phil Kearns has a whinge ONLY when McCaw infringes.

Also;
1. Yellow.
2. No, that is just in the course of the play and it's quite easy to distinguish a penalty from a 'professional foul'.
3. As long as they pass before the tackler or anyone else forms a ruck over them (tackler on feet ready to take ball, not necessarily a ruck). Simple.

Of course it was a yellow card, and that's why Owens carded him. As a few have said above, don't be fooled by that buffoon Kearns -- his playing days of hating the All Blacks clearly fuels his prejudice. I mean, what else would you expect from a paid "professional" who makes statements like "All Auckland rugby players are cheats."?

Again, it depends on the circumstance -- here the All Blacks were clearly hot on attack and likely to score a try, hence why Genia was forced to infringe. If he doesn't infringe, it's likely 7 points. So he did, the ref clearly saw it, ruled on it immediately and thankfully for Genia the Wallabies only conceded 3 points (which btw, was a mighty effort by the Wallabies to defend during that period -- I take my hate off to them).

We conceded 6 whilst Genia was off.

A yellow.

I stand corrected -- three for the penalty itself and then three more for an offside at the 38min mark.

Mccaw infinges in every ruck....coming in the side, stopping the ball in the ruck with his hands or his feet from an offside position, when he's on the ground he's got his hands all over the ball to stop a player releasing it or to pull it back the allblacks side or sticking his leg where it shouldn't be to trap the ball or slow down a fast clearance......he's a farking cheat. He should have been yellow carded and red carded.

I accept genia should have been binned.

So should McCaw

There was one ruck in the first half where Crockett was tackled, a ruck formed over him, the abs pushed over the ball and then he passed it off the ground to the half back. That is just taking the piss!

Looking at the replay there was players all around and I don't think it was 'likely' that the abs were going to score. They were also still around 40m from the line.

The point I am trying to make is if they weren't likely to score and it was given a yellow because it was a cynical type of act, the shouldn't we be seeing a lot more yellow cards?

Throw a few yellows out for repeated ruck infringements (and it is pretty difficult to argue that a lot of these aren't done on purpose) and we would see a much better game.

No doubt it was a yellow but the issue i have with the situation was in the lead up. One of the all black was tacked and for about the first and only time the wobs counter rucked and cleared the blacks back. The tacklef player who had placed the ball was still on the ground picked the ball up and passed it out the nect tackle that was madevwas genias. It should have been a pen to the wobs for playing the ball on the ground.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk 2

1. Yellow Card.
2. Depends on circumstances, but in Red Zone, most probably
3. Never been a fan of passing off the deck. Place the ball - reluctantly yes, but passing is too much of an advantage to the team with the ball.

None of this would be a problem if rucking was still allowed. Rucking blokes off the ball used to be the best way to get quick pill at the break down.

Well you know as well as I do Waylon you are just trolling, if he did infringe every ruck he would get penalised every ruck, or perhaps you are more knowledgeable than refs.
Anyway, 1 Thought was a yellow, was so cynical had to be something more than penalty.
2 Should generally be for cynical in red zone
3 I still don't like passing of ground, think it all in this mad desire to turn every game into a running one.