Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
Perhaps if he had been the actual ref for the final then I could share a bit more of this sentiment.
RWC Final - New Zealand v South Africa 29/10/23, 0800 NZDT
- Thread starter waiopehu oldboy
- Start date
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
He wasn't?
John S
Chilla Wilson (44)
I think Bullrush apparently thinks the TMO was running the show
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
The reversal of the try due to the knock-on at the lineout was the only glaring error in my view.
It was well beyond the two phases that you can look back (outside of foul play) and I think the try should have stood. Hard to see how they didn't call it at the time. It was clearly accidental offside regardless of whether or not a knock on happened.
Otherwise it was a well refereed game. I think the TMO was fine too. The cards were all warranted.
It was well beyond the two phases that you can look back (outside of foul play) and I think the try should have stood. Hard to see how they didn't call it at the time. It was clearly accidental offside regardless of whether or not a knock on happened.
Otherwise it was a well refereed game. I think the TMO was fine too. The cards were all warranted.
Tomthumb
Colin Windon (37)
Was it? The only issue you seem to have is the amount of phases that went after Ardie Savea knocked the ball on. If that was the other way round I'd have no doubt you'd be supporting the decision
What other calls were wrong? This just feels like sour grapes. It's always someone's else fault, NZ couldn't possibly lose a game of rugby to a better team
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
The first YC is highly debatable, Ardie's non-penalty was clearly the wrong call, the missed forearm to the face by Etzebeth to Cane, the non-call of the head contact to de Groot, Kolisi's non-red card, the 5-phase call back of the try.
And I'm still not blaming the ref for the loss. The ABs could have won it but didn't execute when it was most crucial.
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
When Barnes calls 'no knock-on' twice but gets over-ruled by the TMO even though it was outside the 2 phases to call back a try - who is in control?
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
So what you're suggesting is, Darcy Swain didn't deserve a red card?
waiopehu oldboy
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Imagine what would've happened had Barnes said "knock-on was five phases ago therefore the try stands", people would've been up in arms. Lucky NZ scored so soon after that it really didn't matter. Edit: once Foley chose to highlight it Barnes had no option but to scrub the try so to me that one's on Foley.
To me Barnes made one glaring error namely the Frizzell card where there was no obvious targeting of the lower leg in that he didn't "drop his weight" onto it but merely fell over & landed on it. Foley also to blame here for jumping in.
Other cards were spot on but I strongly disagree with Cane's being upgraded & Kolisi's not which is 100% the bunker not Barnes or Foley. I'll be interested to see what happens at Cane's hearing which I believe will be early next week.
Last edited:
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
They are not even close. Frizell’s body fell on wehis leg while cleaning out a breakdown while Swain deliberately attacked the leg.
I disagree. Either have the two phase rule and apply it or get rid of it. I think it would have been fine for Barnes to say it was more than two phases ago we can't go back that far and stick with the try.
I think the Frizzell card was fine. This has been a focus for World Rugby in the last year or so. His cleanout technique was dangerous and highly likely to cause injury.
Dan54
Tim Horan (67)
No they didn't, whp told you that? They sent in questions on some points they said needed clearing up. I have seen nowhere where they have complained about reffing.
The Red Baron
Chilla Wilson (44)
His cleanout looked very similar to the hip drop tackle that is causing so many issues in league. I would have given him the benefit of the doubt, but his roll at the point of contact suggests it was absolutely intentional.
LeCheese
Peter Johnson (47)
Yep, you can see a clear acceleration and rotation of his shoulders and hips, as well as the forearm and elbow being driven out laterally - regardless if it was an intentional result, it was definitely an intentional movement
Tomthumb
Colin Windon (37)
The first yellow was correct, it was reckless with a high likely hood to cause injury (which it did). Ardie’s call was marginal and I could pinpoint calls like that for both teams, The “missed forearm” only seen in grainy still images instead of videos? I wonder why? What non call of head contact to de groot? Kolisi didn’t deserve a red, initial contact was shoulder to shoulder and the head contact was after, by rule that is a yellow. And Ardie did knock it on, so the right call was made
AB’s lost to a better team on the day. The fact that seems near impossible for many AB’s fans to admit is just tiresome
Dan54
Tim Horan (67)
Once again, I don't know who you hang with mate, but I live in NZ, and this the most I have ever heard people say the best team won. perhpas you need to look at who you mix with?
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
1. I'll give you Frizell YC.
2. Ardie's call wasn't marginal, particularly when you see the replay. It's a great play by Savea and the penalty should have gone the other way.
3. I don't know how to load a video on this site. I'm always told that the "The specified URL cannot be embedded as media." Maybe this link will work.
4. The non-call head contact on de Groot? Not sure if you watched the game but Barnes took a few seconds to explain to Cane why they didn't act on this. Apparently, it was considered a 'glancing contact to the head but the player is bent at the hips, there's no foul play.'
Glancing huh? Cool story bro.
5. Kolisi did not hit Ardie's shoulder and slide up. He hit him high and his head collected Ardie's chin. It was just as dangerous as Sam Cane's deserved red.
6. Ardie did knock it on but what's the point of having the Law book say the TMO can only go back 2 phases then? If the TMO is so keen to check for knock-ons and over-ride the ref on the ground, he could have done the same when Faf de Klerk knocked on from the scrum and Barnes was very adamant it went backwards.
I've repeated a number of times that I don't blame the refs for the result. That doesn't mean I have to agree with all the calls or even think that the game was well-officiated.
I know you hate NZ but don't project that on me. I'm glad it was South Africa over anyone else.
Sword of Justice
Vay Wilson (31)
I'm going to miss Barnes quite a lot. He's easily been the best ref over the last cycle, as exemplified by the rwc final.
Such a good final it was, too. It will always be remembered as a genuinely great match in which the best team won, unlike in 2011 as an example.
Guess that's all there is - may as well close this thread.
Such a good final it was, too. It will always be remembered as a genuinely great match in which the best team won, unlike in 2011 as an example.
Guess that's all there is - may as well close this thread.