Waratahs 2015

[ACT Crusader]

I don't think it's a cover for the Blues loss. The Blues are crap, so them losing was hardly a surprise.

Just because other match officials were present, going to the refs room is basically raising it 'behind closed doors'. He rightly used the post game interview to air his point, that should've been where it happened. The half time break is not the time and the officials room is not the place.

Wrong time, wrong place.

 

[Quick Hands]

"Consult" is also not used in the Code of Conduct.

Again:

"All persons . shall not engage in any conduct or any activity on or off the field that may impair public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of a match."

"Consult" is used in the Laws.

Originally, you guys were saying that Cheika/Peyper had broken a Law but not the Code of Conduct - hence the suspended ban didn't come into consideration. Now you think it's the other way?

If they have not broken a Law or the Code of Conduct, what were they warned for? Not breaking them?!? What did SANZAR's reminder notice to every other coach say - "Just a reminder that we don't want you to contravene or break any Laws or any of the Code in the same way Cheika and Peyper didn't break them" ?!?! - maybe in your mind perhaps.

You're the one who brough up "consult" in post #2269 - I know it's used in the laws, I merely told you what the term meant.

The irrelevant thing is the part of the code of conduct which you keep referring to - the one about impairing public confidence etc. This is not what was either alleged or probably not even investigated.

What was alleged by the Blues was the Cheika approached and spoke to the referee at half time. SANZAR investigated this and found that while a conversation took place, the conversation wasn't in breach of the code of conduct which only referred to intimidating, abusing, etc. They have since added to the code that coaches should not speak to the referee at half time and have sent a letter to all teams advising this.

The only person who seems to have had their confidence impaired in the honest and orderly conduct of the match is you.

 

[Bullrush]

You're the one who brough up "consult" in post #2269 - I know it's used in the laws, I merely told you what the term meant.

The irrelevant thing is the part of the code of conduct which you keep referring to - the one about impairing public confidence etc. This is not what was either alleged or probably not even investigated.

What was alleged by the Blues was the Cheika approached and spoke to the referee at half time. SANZAR investigated this and found that while a conversation took place, the conversation wasn't in breach of the code of conduct which only referred to intimidating, abusing, etc. They have since added to the code that coaches should not speak to the referee at half time and have sent a letter to all teams advising this.

The only person who seems to have had their confidence impaired in the honest and orderly conduct of the match is you.

Where did you get this information?!? Where has it been reported anywhere that the Code has been added to? You can't just make shit up man.

I believe this is from the official SANZAR release:

""Sanzar has issued formal warnings to both Mr Cheika and Mr Peyper and has written to all referees and coaches, reminding them that no discussions should take place between the match officials and coaches during a match."

How do you remind people of something that apparently wasn't there in the first place? Or send someone else a warning about it?!

Again, I call bullshit on you saying that this doesn't impair public confidence in the public image. No-one here has denied the uproar and outrage there would be right here if exactly the same thing happened in a RWC semi if it was the Wallabies on the wrong end.

Bob Dwyer would have a massive article on it in about 45min on the first page denouncing the IRB and everyone involved and you know that's the truth.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

Actually, it is but I read earlier today that this is why the refs let both captains know before the game that they will consult and talk to them. I'd always believed that the captain had a right to talk to the ref but apparently not.

The relationship between captains and referees is a convention of the game and nothing to do with 6A7 which is purely dealing with allowing the referee to be advised by ARs and TMOs. If players or captains are penalised or cited for their interaction with the referee, it is an offence under Law 10 (Foul Play).

 

[Eyes and Ears]

Apparently

"All persons . shall not engage in any conduct or any activity on or off the field that may impair public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of a match."

is part of the Code of Conduct. I can't find a copy of them anywhere so I'm taking that based on the NZ Herald reporting. It could be wrong I'll admit but that's the information I've read.

Any breach of this section of the Code would be subjective. IMO Cheika did not "impair public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of a match"

My suspicion is that this wording is actually related to match fixing.

 

[Bullrush]

Any breach of this section of the Code would be subjective. IMO Cheika did not "impair public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of a match"

My suspicion is that this wording is actually related to match fixing.

You are entitled to that. My suspicion, as I've stated before, is that most of you guys would feel very differently if this happened in the Super Rugby Final last year in favour of the Crusaders or in a RWC Semi or Final against the Wallabies.

 

[A mutterer]

The fact is I have never said that.

But you don't think that gambling interests have any impact on how SANZAR runs the game or sets it up?

actually you did. you specifically raised this. are you now backing down from that?

 

[Bullrush]

actually you did. you specifically raised this. are you now backing down from that?

No - I can't back down from something I didn't say. Please quote me where I said

"gambling interests should somehow impact on this discussion or on the outcome of sanzar's ruling "


And then answer my question as to whether you think gambling interests have any impact on how SANZAR runs the game.

 

[cyclopath]

You keep chucking conspiracy hand grenades about match fixing / Hansie Cronje / spot betting / the yellow card etc...then stepping back and saying there's no conspiracy. You've made your point (umpteen times) and now it just looks like you're trolling the thread with all these red herrings.
You've made your point quite clearly, and fair enough - move on unless there is something new.
And everyone else, unless there is anything new to add, stop rehashing the same stuff.
I think the issue has been well thrashed.

 

[Bullrush]

You keep chucking conspiracy hand grenades about match fixing / Hansie Cronje / spot betting / the yellow card etc.then stepping back and saying there's no conspiracy. You've made your point (umpteen times) and now it just looks like you're trolling the thread with all these red herrings.
You've made your point quite clearly, and fair enough - move on unless there is something new.
And everyone else, unless there is anything new to add, stop rehashing the same stuff.
I think the issue has been well thrashed.

You guys seem to think that it's impossible for any kind of match-fixing or spot fixing to happen. I brought up Hansie Cronjie because it's an excellent example to show that it CAN happen and it HAS happened with people you least expect it from. I haven't ever said that this game was fixed but who's to say that the next one isn't IF the governing bodies don't come down hard on situations like this where it could happen or give the appearance of it happening.

Again, for all the 'conspiracy theorist' allegations getting thrown at me, not one of you has disputed my repeated comment that if the exact same thing happened in a different game like a RWC Semi or Final or Super Rugby Final, the response here would be totally different. How many times has Bob Dwyer absolutely ripped refs after AB games? If this exact scenario happened in a Bledisloe decider, guarantee there would be some pretty big calls going on for special investigations and inquiries and suspensions or bans etc etc.

Stop branding me as some kind of conspiracy theorist - it's simply an attempt to poison the well.

 

[cyclopath]

You've branded yourself. No help needed.

 

[Bullrush]

You've branded yourself. No help needed.

See - no attempt to actually address the things I've said. Because I'm right and you fucken know it.

 

[ShtinaTina]

@pfitzy is this thread an example of "thrashwanking"?

 

[Bullrush]

Are the Brumbies yet to play the Tahs in Canberra this year?

You guys should down and we'll discuss this in person. You can't debate online properly, come and tell me to my face I'm thrashwanking and see how that goes.

 

[cyclopath]

See - no attempt to actually address the things I've said. Because I'm right and you fucken know it.

If you say so. But no, I don't.

 

[cyclopath]

Are the Brumbies yet to play the Tahs in Canberra this year?

You guys should down and we'll discuss this in person. You can't debate online properly, come and tell me to my face I'm thrashwanking and see how that goes.

Quasi- threatening talk now. Good onya, mate.

 

[Quick Hands]

Where did you get this information?!? Where has it been reported anywhere that the Code has been added to? You can't just make shit up man.

I believe this is from the official SANZAR release:

""Sanzar has issued formal warnings to both Mr Cheika and Mr Peyper and has written to all referees and coaches, reminding them that no discussions should take place between the match officials and coaches during a match."

How do you remind people of something that apparently wasn't there in the first place? Or send someone else a warning about it?!

Again, I call bullshit on you saying that this doesn't impair public confidence in the public image. No-one here has denied the uproar and outrage there would be right here if exactly the same thing happened in a RWC semi if it was the Wallabies on the wrong end.

Bob Dwyer would have a massive article on it in about 45min on the first page denouncing the IRB and everyone involved and you know that's the truth.

Seeing that you like to rely on the NZ Herald, maybe you neglected to read these parts of their last article:

The Herald was told that in this instance, the incident didn't meet the threshold to trigger a judicial hearing as Cheika was neither aggressive nor abusive and nor did he use foul language.
All were reminded not to enter the referee's room at halftime yet Sanzar was adamant in its released statement that it is neither an offence or against the rules to do so.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11430237

 

[Pfitzy]

@pfitzy is this thread an example of "thrashwanking"?

I can't choose between either of these to express my feelings about where this thread is going.

I leave it up to my faithful worshippers to decide ROOMBA CAT VERSUS CIRCULAR ARGUMENT!

 

[Pfitzy]

P.S. You're all fucking up the Waratahs 2015 thread with this shite. Why don't we put it all somewhere else?

 

[cyclopath]

There is no pit deep enough.