1. 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.

RWC 2011 - Quarter final 3 : Springbokke v. Wallabies CLOSED

Discussion in 'Rugby Matches' started by PaarlBok, Sep 30, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 71 of 71

  1. potjiekos Chris McKivat (8)

    Likes Received:
    21
    @ Lee . Interesting analogy there mate...

    It was NEVER my intention to equate every infringement ever committed by either team, nor was I attempting to villify any one team or an individual player. I was merely trying to highlight the inefficiencies of Sir Lawrence of Bryce, as an international referee.. thought you could identify that??

    Since you've opened up the door, I might as well oblige..

    I am on record here as saying that I deplore foul (dangerous) play in rugby, in all its forms especially when transgressed by one of the boks. Such conduct is contrary to the spirit of the game and can never be condoned. In this regard, I concede that Schalks 'excessive raking' may be construed as dangerous play for several reasons, none more important than the potential damage that may be caused to Pocock's eyes or even worse .his spinal column.

    Semantics, I tell you! It's quite evident that the 'eye-gouging / excessive raking' debacle, boils down to perspective...

    In my laymans perspective, I understand 'eye-gouging' to amount to the forceful application of one's hand (eg.fingers, knuckles, palm) to the eyeball or eye-socket of another, with the EXPRESS INTENTION to cause extreme pain and disorientation. The victim of an eye-gouge would almost always require immediate on-field medical attention and / or would be substituted for further evaluation.

    The assertion by a rugby pundit such as yourself, (I would like to think that you are!)..that Schalk gouged the eye(s) of Sir David, especially when taking the aforementioned into account, completely boggles the mind..

    ..the 'once-an-eye-gouger-always-an-eye-gouger' tag attributed to Schalk IMHO, is also not a fair tag, especially since he's not only matured as a senior member of the boks over the years, he's also made great strides to clean up his act and play within the rules of the game.

    In the spirit of branding players based on past infractions, I could easily call Dan Vickerman a brutish lout due to his propensity to KNEE defenseless players in the head, but I wont 'cause its just not right..
    potjiekos, Oct 15, 2011
    #1401

  2. Boomer Sydney Middleton (9)

    Likes Received:
    43
    You really are up for a stoush, aren't you?

    You lost. Deal.
    Boomer, Oct 15, 2011
    #1402

  3. Inside Shoulder Mark Ella (57)

    Likes Received:
    1,947
    "he's also made great strides to clean up his act and play within the rules of the game": they're laws, but he was off his feet and did not retire behind the hind most foot prior to rejoining. He was not entitled to do anything after he lost his feet.
    Inside Shoulder, Oct 15, 2011
    #1403

  4. potjiekos Chris McKivat (8)

    Likes Received:
    21
    Fair point..
    potjiekos, Oct 15, 2011
    #1404

  5. Godfrey Ron Walden (29)

    Likes Received:
    452
    Can you see how the term "excessive raking", which you appear to have invented, is just a euphemism? It implies that raking the face across the eyes is ok, Schalk just did it too much. How much raking could he have done for it to not be "excessive". For mine, I could care less whether he was successful at actually getting Pocock's eyes out. As Lee said, Schalk doesn't get the benefit of the doubt - the evidence is strong AND he's got form. Hell, this isn't even the first time he's tried this on Pocock. There's a YouTube video floating around that shows Pocock smashing Burger out of a ruck and Schalk responding exactly as he did here.
    Godfrey, Oct 15, 2011
    #1405

  6. Inside Shoulder Mark Ella (57)

    Likes Received:
    1,947
    My goodness look what's washed up (floating around - get it?):
    [video=youtube;3nV-6bg0pRo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nV-6bg0pRo[/video]

    And there's even a touch of biased commenting apropos another thread....biased because, yes Pocock was slowing the ball down, but that's not, per se, illegal: he was on his feet and there were no players in contact over the ball so it could not be a ruck. he therefore had the right to handle the ball and there is simply no way that either Sharpe or Fat Cat came in from the side.
    Inside Shoulder, Oct 15, 2011
    #1406

  7. Hugh Jarse Andrew Slack (58)

    Likes Received:
    2,485
    The eyes should be sacrosanct. Is it my imagination, or was ther a Welsh club player (Quinnell) recently blinded in one eye from an eye gouge?
    Hugh Jarse, Oct 15, 2011
    #1407

  8. Budgie Herbert Moran (7)

    Likes Received:
    8
    Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Quinnell
    .
    Budgie, Oct 15, 2011
    #1408

  9. Cardiffblue Cyril Towers (30)

    Likes Received:
    104
    Aye, one of the Quinnells 'gainst Cross Keys
    Cardiffblue, Oct 15, 2011
    #1409

  10. Sully Mark Loane (55)

    Likes Received:
    2,439
    his is just getting rediculous!

    Noakes is apparently a well respected scientist. It doesn't say how Lawrence benefited from "fixing" the match. Maybe he didn't want to be an international referee anymore?

    It seems that after every match the IRB should prove it wasn't fixed! Brilliant idea!
    Sully, Oct 15, 2011
    #1410

  11. Blue John Hipwell (52)

    Likes Received:
    1,842
    Either you're joking, delusional or both.

    Quade kneed Richie in the head.

    May or may not. Please.
    Blue, Oct 15, 2011
    #1411

  12. Lee Grant Simon Poidevin (60)

    Likes Received:
    2,261
    Exactly right - as mentioned...

    Whether he raked or gouged - he was offside and also performed an action off his feet.
    Lee Grant, Oct 15, 2011
    #1412

  13. Blue John Hipwell (52)

    Likes Received:
    1,842
    Choke slam. Outrage.
    Blue, Oct 15, 2011
    #1413

  14. Lindommer Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    937
    "Match-fixing"? Really. This thread's becoming silly, Sully. Could one of the mods put it to sleep.
    Lindommer, Oct 15, 2011
    #1414

  15. Lee Grant Simon Poidevin (60)

    Likes Received:
    2,261
    Right again:
    As I said on that other thread, which I think is the one you are referring to:

    When you lay the egg you have to do it literally immediately. There was an instruction to enforce it like that a few years ago. The rationale behind it was that the body of the player going to ground stopped the defenders from getting at the ball when he shoved it in the tunnel between his legs.

    Everybody does it; some people like BdP that time get away with it, some don't. That's not the point though. The point is that comments from folks who say that Pocock was infringing before Schalk did his eye gouging/face raking are incorrect as the ruck was not formed until F.Louw arrived at which time Pocock was entitled to keep his hands on the ball behind BdP's arse.
    Lee Grant, Oct 15, 2011
    #1415

  16. cyclopath David Codey (61)

    Likes Received:
    4,345
    Euthanased.
    Enough is enough, and there have been too few useful contributions for a while now.
    cyclopath, Oct 15, 2011
    #1416

  17. Lee Grant Simon Poidevin (60)

    Likes Received:
    2,261
    Silliness has never stopped a thread before.
    Lee Grant, Oct 15, 2011
    #1417
Page 71 of 71
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page