• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Waratahs V Force - Superugby Rd 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
2. Maybe it is a generalization, and I am infact writing to the upper outlier of passionate Waratah supporters however the sentiment about winning rugby is a sentiment that I have picked up on this board. Ie; that expansive rugby is entertaining, but is not sustainable in the context of winning rugby.
3. Well no, not just the one but four times. 1992, 1994, 1995 and 2011.

In 1992, 94 and 95 if I recall correctly, the Reds played forward oriented, northern hemisphere-type football. They did not play expansively. When this criticism was raised, they just told everyone to go shove it, they were playing their game and if the rest of Australia didn't like it they could go and take a running jump. I seem to recall Knuckles Connolly was the coach at that time.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
But to be fair on the Tahs fans... They at least don't claim titles before the competition existed...
 

suckerforred

Chilla Wilson (44)
But to be fair on the Tahs fans... They at least don't claim titles before the competition existed...

Excuse me?????? I know 1994 & 1995 were certainly 'Super Rugby' competitions, memory struggles with 1992, so what are you claiming didn't exist?
 

suckerforred

Chilla Wilson (44)
Not in my opinion. It should be looked at in comparison with Kade Poki's tackle on AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper). In that case the referee and AR, both from NZ and the citing commissioner, also from NZ, saw no offence whatsoever. Now, strangely, dangerous lifting tackles are all the rage. I hope all three NZ officials get the same 5 week suspension that Digby got but I won't be holding my breath.

So are you saying that both this tackle and Polki's was fine and didn't need any more sanction then was dealt out oin the game?
 

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
So are you saying that both this tackle and Polki's was fine and didn't need any more sanction then was dealt out oin the game?

No, quite the reverse. I was, I think, the first poster to raise Poki's spear tackle and question why it was not properly dealt with. At the time the general consensus was that I was over-reacting. One week later and Digby's got five weeks for the virtually identical offence. And a fire-storm has started. Both tackles should have had red or yellow cards (depending on what the refs actually saw) and white cards for follow-up. Both deserved time off. As it is Poki didn't even get penalised and Digby got five weeks.

My reading of what happened is some high-ups in the judiciary saw what had happened with Poki and were aghast. Given that Bryce Lawrence is a New Zealand protected species nothing was said publicly but the private word went out that lifting tackles were to be punished severely from here on in. In the Tahs match a lifting tackle was penalised but because it was not past the horizontal it was only a penalty. I am sure that this also happened in another early match. And then Digby did his thing.....

Just to prove Link is not perfect, the crackdown was obvious befrore the Sharks/Reds game. There should have been a warning in the sheds pre-game to be especially careful not to offend.

The Sanzar judicial system was substantially revamped this year in order to bring some consistency. That has dramatically failed and we are only four rounds in.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Excuse me?????? I know 1994 & 1995 were certainly 'Super Rugby' competitions, memory struggles with 1992, so what are you claiming didn't exist?

Officially, according to SANZAR, the ARU, NZRU and SARU Super Rugby's inception was in 1996.

Officially.

Yes, Queensland won a Super 10 or whatever, but those results do not count towards a tally in regards to the current competition as those competitions are not affiliated with Super Rugby.

That is all.
 
T

tranquility

Guest
Yes, Queensland won a Super 10 or whatever

Your right, I suppose it wasn't a major provincial tournament or anything. Jeez, have a little esteem for the past.
Without getting too parochial, and withstanding your SARU officialdom regarding 1996, the QRU is one of the most successful provincial sides in the world. That era that you are striking through the mud as erroneous is probably the proudest period in the clubs history.

However, this is the wrong thread to be discussing this and I have run out of breath on the matter(s) anyway.
 

suckerforred

Chilla Wilson (44)
No, quite the reverse. I was, I think, the first poster to raise Poki's spear tackle and question why it was not properly dealt with. At the time the general consensus was that I was over-reacting. One week later and Digby's got five weeks for the virtually identical offence. And a fire-storm has started. Both tackles should have had red or yellow cards (depending on what the refs actually saw) and white cards for follow-up. Both deserved time off. As it is Poki didn't even get penalised and Digby got five weeks.

My reading of what happened is some high-ups in the judiciary saw what had happened with Poki and were aghast. Given that Bryce Lawrence is a New Zealand protected species nothing was said publicly but the private word went out that lifting tackles were to be punished severely from here on in. In the Tahs match a lifting tackle was penalised but because it was not past the horizontal it was only a penalty. I am sure that this also happened in another early match. And then Digby did his thing.....

Just to prove Link is not perfect, the crackdown was obvious befrore the Sharks/Reds game. There should have been a warning in the sheds pre-game to be especially careful not to offend.

The Sanzar judicial system was substantially revamped this year in order to bring some consistency. That has dramatically failed and we are only four rounds in.

Agree totally with you Hawko. I have a question - Why didn't the high-ups do something? Surely the judiciary system allows for a player to be cited by the intellegent review board of the judiciary if they feel that there is a case to answer? Putting aside the fact that it was Byrce. Ref's can miss things so it shouldn't matter which ref was calling the game, if something was missed and is then picked up by a review it should be delt with, particularly in regards to dangerous play.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom