• 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 vs Brumbies RD 14 Saturday 18th May

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lindommer

Steve Williams (59)
Staff member
The newTahs juggernaut just keeps on rollin'. Another gutsy, and intelligent, display from these wonderful warriors.

By far the most notable point of this victory was the single-mindedness of the 22 players in blue while they were playing musical chairs, they all sang from the same song-sheet. Count 'em: Crawford before kickoff, Douglas after one minute, TPN in the first half, Horne didn't do much after getting a poke in the eye early on, 9/10/12 started as McKibbin/Foley/Horne and seamlessly changed to Lucas/Foley/Barnes. Every sub slotted into the team without a stutter. It seems most of the Tahs' squad are getting on board Cheika's ship, they're grasping his philosophy and are now playing well with the ball in hand. That's apart from the massive improvement in individual skills; their work at the breakdown is much better after a poor start this year and the Tahs' scrum is proving to be highly effective. How many times have teams shunted the scrum early in a match only to bossed around later in the game? How good is it to watch players run on to a ball passed in front of them? The Brumbies and Reds may lead them on the table (and deservedly so) but the tide's surely running with the Tahs right now.

I won't go into comments about individual players at depth, just a few observations. Foley must've taken my advice from last week and carefully examined his Stormers' performance, his game management was much better this week. Or was it Barnes next to him directing the traffic? Or better passes from Lucas? Never mind, Bernard looked like a bloke in charge when it mattered on Saturday. How good was that pass to Peter Betham? Quade'd be proud of that one. Another player I'd like to single out is Folau. I was sitting up in that corner where he gathered those To'omua grubber kicks late in the second half, and it was pleasing to see Izzy wasn't caught out of position once when the pressure was on. He kicked a few back (nice to see from a fullback) and passed to Barnes for another. The last player I'd like to highlight is Hooper. I've commented elsewhere I reckon Smith's the better player when his team doesn't have the ball (so's Gill) while Hooper's better with ball in hand. And so it was on Saturday night, especially when Michael scored that lovely try while seagulling out on the left wing. If I could be so bold as to give the Oz coaches some advice: Hooper might be the incumbent but, for Gawd's sake, start with Gill.

After contemplating the result of this vital match I can't help thinking Cheika out-coached White. This was a very good Australian win against a limited "Saffer" team; when the Ponies were in front, and when the chips were down, they didn't/couldn't score points through the backs. Does this tell us something about Larkham's place in the Ponies' stable? TBH I think White would be worried after that loss, his charges fired their best shots in the first half and got in front, a la a front-running Saffer side. Field position is everything to them when they should occasionally think otherwise. But they didn't have the wherewithal to withstand the well-thought out Tahs' reply as the match progressed.

newTahs, please put on a good show for me in Melbourne this weekend, 'cos I'll be there.
 

Rob42

John Solomon (38)
One thing that surprised me in this match was how many Tahs lineouts were not contested by the Brumbies. I would have expected them to challenge at every opportunity, and they did steal a few. But then into the 2nd half there were a lot of midfield lineouts that the Brumbies didn't get a jumper up for. A tactic, a mistake, or just that the Tahs caught them out of rhythm?
 

Richo

John Thornett (49)
One thing that surprised me in this match was how many Tahs lineouts were not contested by the Brumbies. I would have expected them to challenge at every opportunity, and they did steal a few. But then into the 2nd half there were a lot of midfield lineouts that the Brumbies didn't get a jumper up for. A tactic, a mistake, or just that the Tahs caught them out of rhythm?

Braveheart81 was sitting next to me and noted that the Brumbies never lined up with Palu at the front. He's not a great jumper, but he's pretty damn reliable when uncontested!

Such an obvious weakness for the Tahs in recent weeks that it's baffling they didn't make it more of a battle, especially after Douglas went down.
 

Ghibli

Ted Thorn (20)
The Brumbies did not play well vs the Tahs, even though they could have pull it off if the last 2 minutes went differently (still wondering how you end up with the feed in a scrum after collapsing the maul). As Laurie Fisher said, move on.
To be honest, a bit taken aback by the amount of vitriol thrown at the Brumbies in quite a number of posts.
Good to know where we stand, I guess.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
The Brumbies did not play well vs the Tahs, even though they could have pull it off if the last 2 minutes went differently (still wondering how you end up with the feed in a scrum after collapsing the maul). As Laurie Fisher said, move on.

Kepu I think it was broke through to the ball carrier legally when the maul started to disintegrate and trapped the ball and player in. As it was a collapsed maul outside the try line, the defensive team gets the scrum feed.
 

Ghibli

Ted Thorn (20)
Kepu I think it was broke through to the ball carrier legally when the maul started to disintegrate and trapped the ball and player in. As it was a collapsed maul outside the try line, the defensive team gets the scrum feed.

Game of fine margins, rugby is.
 

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Staff member
Just one little interesting point of law:

In the 23rd minute Bernard Foley of the Waratahs restarts after a Brumbies' try; the ball sails toward Brumbies' player Henry Speight, who is standing outside the field of play and attempting to effect a kick directly into touch by catching the ball on the full.

My HDTV replay showed that the ball had not passed the plane of touch when it touched Speight's hands.

(a) If Speight caught the ball, it is deemed to be kicked directly into touch, and the usual provisions apply.
(b) If Speight knocked the ball back, it is deemed to be 'play on'.
(c) If the ball was knocked-on it is advantage Waratahs.
(d) If the ball was knocked back and the ball went into touch it is a lineout - Waratahs.

What happened was (d) and the AR signalled that the ball had been kicked directly into touch. He was not standing in line with the touch line, probably in order not to impede a Waratahs' ball chaser, and I am guessing that he was of the opinion that the ball had passed the plane of touch.

It was close, but it had not.

Waratahs' centre Adam Ashley-Cooper screamed to the AR that the ball had been touched — not that this is an important point — some players' knowledge of the laws are as sketchy as that of TV commentators.

Everybody is aware of item (a) but not a lot of people are not aware of item (b). A player can stand in touch and reach out and slap the ball back, and as long as he never held the ball and the ball never crossed the plane of touch, it is play on.

[And by the bye you can be in touch and ground the ball for a try so long as you don't hold the ball.]

If item (b) is correct, and it is, (c) and (d) must follow: the ball is "live".

The AR's call did not affect the game, but the matter should be of interest to rugby fans.
.
 

Pfitzy

George Gregan (70)
I knew my AR training was bugging me about that Lee.

I remember Peter Hewat at doing the same thing to keep the ball in play many years ago while standing outside the touch line

It is interesting to rugby fans, because the touch laws are barking mad and even the best AR can sometimes get it wrong.
 

Lindommer

Steve Williams (59)
Staff member
And yet, another time Foley did something similar and Speight caught the ball with one foot in touch. Out on the full, scrum to the Brumbies back in the middle.
 

Richo

John Thornett (49)
Thanks, Lee. We were wondering about that at the ground since on the replay it looked not to have broken the plane.
 

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Staff member
It is interesting to rugby fans, because the touch laws are barking mad and even the best AR can sometimes get it wrong.

I don't think that the AR got it wrong in law, Nicko; they learn that in Ref 101. He was 2 metres (about) from touch, so as not to impede chaser AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), and I assume that he thought it had passed the plane.

I can understand now why AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was screaming like a stuck pig. He probably had a better view than the touchie did.

It wasn't obvious at the ground and I thought that AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was wrong in appealing. He wasn't.
.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top