• 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.

Bledisloe 2 - Wallabies vs All Blacks, Wellington, 27 August 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.
HoldingOn

HoldingOn

Alfred Walker (16)
Scotty said:
I focussed on Pocock for a 5 minute stretch of the game. When we were in defence he was being held back consistently at each ruck by the All Blacks. There was a period of 3-4 rucks where it happened every time. The ABs cheated him out of the game - I can't believe how much restraint he has not to snot one of them.
Click to expand...
Well obviously the ABs think he is effective if they are doing that....
 
KOB1987

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
Rugrat said:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...-suspension-for-eye-gouge-on-brodie-retallick
This eye gouge cost an Argy player nine weeks for attacking the eye area of A kiwi. Kiwi press reporting disappointment in accusations of eye gouge in last nights game by Franks. Will be fun to watch reaction when charged and suspended.
Click to expand...

Georgina Robinson has just tweeted that there are no citings by SANZAR from last night's game nor any incidents referred by either team. So either the Wallabies didn't think there was anything in it or there is a deadline for referrals which hasn't yet been reached.
 
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

Stirling Mortlock (74)
KOB1987 said:
Georgina Robinson has just tweeted that there are no citings by SANZAR from last night's game nor any incidents referred by either team. So either the Wallabies didn't think there was anything in it or there is a deadline for referrals which hasn't yet been reached.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure there's a 12-hour window for the match review official to cite someone & a 24-hour window for the teams to do so. At least that was the case last time it became an issue.

On the alleged gouging, Poite clearly saw what Franks was doing but chose not to penalise him. You'd think that if there was any question in his mind re: possible gouging he'd have gone back & asked Veldsman to have a look, as he did for the Coles "swinging arm" (that looked bad in slo-mo but in real time like probably every second or third ruck entry in any given match) Peyper (?) picked up.
 
Hugh Jarse

Hugh Jarse

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
Could the alleged eye gouging be a trick of the camera angles, like Hooper allegedly throwing sand at the Soap Dodgers in Melbourne?

Looked worthy of further investigation based on the angles they showed during the half time break, but often things are not always what they seem to be.
 
Dan54

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
I not sure whether there was an attempted eye gouge or not, but if Franks made any contact with Douglas' eyes he should go for a big stretch regardless as once your hand is in face you got to make sure they not in position to contact eyes, though I surprised if he did eye gouge that Douglas did nothing to indicate it had happened, I be happy to see another angle and then crucify Franks though;) . Anyway interesting watching the replay at moment to watch all the dirty play by All Blacks and chuckling that noone has mentioned the shoulder charge by Moore (without the ball) in the leadup to Daggs first try, or even Hoopers latish hit with seems to be a bit of a swinging arm on Smith that was late. Personally fellas I don't think either team was overly clean or dirty, just a couple of teams getting stuck in!!
 
KOB1987

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
waiopehu oldboy said:
Pretty sure there's a 12-hour window for the match review official to cite someone & a 24-hour window for the teams to do so. At least that was the case last time it became an issue.

On the alleged gouging, Poite clearly saw what Franks was doing but chose not to penalise him. You'd think that if there was any question in his mind re: possible gouging he'd have gone back & asked Veldsman to have a look, as he did for the Coles "swinging arm" (that looked bad in slo-mo but in real time like probably every second or third ruck entry in any given match) Peyper (?) picked up.
Click to expand...

Here's the article saying that Franks has escaped being cited.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...pended-for-this-eyegouge-20160827-gr2tcp.html

However, the inference in Cheika's words is that there was an expectation the match review officials would be picking it up. So if you are right with the 24 hour window I doubt very much that we have heard the end of it.
 
Rugrat

Rugrat

Darby Loudon (17)
Hugh Jarse said:
Could the alleged eye gouging be a trick of the camera angles, like Hooper allegedly throwing sand at the Soap Dodgers in Melbourne?

Looked worthy of further investigation based on the angles they showed during the half time break, but often things are not always what they seem to be.
Click to expand...
No angle issue its there in all its glory. Worse in this photo is Ref sees it warns him and plays on.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    30.9 KB · Views: 243
Enzedder

Enzedder

Frank Nicholson (4)
I see that SANZAAR has advised no citings from the game to nothing in the Franks "gouge".

I see already noted. I wonder if the guy on the receiving end advised Oz management that there was nothing in it?

If so, kudos to him as if he had said he was, it would have gone to the judiciary
 
HoldingOn

HoldingOn

Alfred Walker (16)
Dan54 said:
I not sure whether there was an attempted eye gouge or not, but if Franks made any contact with Douglas' eyes he should go for a big stretch regardless as once your hand is in face you got to make sure they not in position to contact eyes, though I surprised if he did eye gouge that Douglas did nothing to indicate it had happened, I be happy to see another angle and then crucify Franks though;) . Anyway interesting watching the replay at moment to watch all the dirty play by All Blacks and chuckling that noone has mentioned the shoulder charge by Moore (without the ball) in the leadup to Daggs first try, or even Hoopers latish hit with seems to be a bit of a swinging arm on Smith that was late. Personally fellas I don't think either team was overly clean or dirty, just a couple of teams getting stuck in!!
Click to expand...
Poite penalised the shit out of us during the game but conveniently missed all your foul play- we are trying to even things up a little
 
KOB1987

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
Cheika's sticking with the Cooper/Foley axis by the sounds of it.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/w...rss&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

The article says that To'omua is unlikely for the Saffers clash in Brisvegas in a fortnight so it would make sense. Even if To'omua is available, given his concussion risk and that he's outta here I'd be doing it anyway. Bring TK back at 13 and give Hodge and/or Kerevi some time at 12 when the circumstances allow for it.
 
Gillys_ghost

Gillys_ghost

Dave Cowper (27)
i dont know why Cheika would stick with the Cooper Foley combo after last night. they didnt seem to complement each other at all. in fact i think Foley was a big problem last night since he was at first reciever so much it limited how often Quade got the ball , his kicking was poor again and he missed 5 tackles. i dont necessarily blame Foley for any of that since he was out of position and clearly told to be the kicker and first reciever despite having better options available. and the defence as a whole was poor so picking on just foley is unfair. regardless Cooper cemented his spot for another test at least but Foley should not be with him. If To'omua wont be available put Hodge or Kerevi at inside and Kuridrani should come back to tighten the defence in the midfield.
 
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

Stirling Mortlock (74)
KOB1987 said:
Here's the article saying that Franks has escaped being cited.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...pended-for-this-eyegouge-20160827-gr2tcp.html

However, the inference in Cheika's words is that there was an expectation the match review officials would be picking it up. So if you are right with the 24 hour window I doubt very much that we have heard the end of it.
Click to expand...

Just checked & World Rugby reg. 17.10.1 says the unions have 12 hours to refer an incident to the citing officer who then decides whether to proceed or not. If ARU haven't referred it by now, that's probably the end of it. Unless WR (World Rugby) tell their CO to re-visit it, of course.

Has anyone seen a recent pic of Douglas? If he was gouged you'd expect to see scratches around the eyes, probably one or both would be bloodshot if there was actual contact. And just to be clear, if it could be shown that Franks did gouge then I'd want him to cop at least six months.
 
gel

gel

Ken Catchpole (46)
The ARU need to stop complaining to world rugby after they get dicked in a match. Our players need to stop shouting at referees during the match. Our captains need to stop approaching the referee altogether.

We have a name for ourselves now and just as we have be ridiculously over dominant at scrum time in order to dispel umpteen years of our own ineptness in that area, we also need to be silent when in the field.

It's up to is to stop being wingers and fix it ourselves. Then the referees might start looking at the stupid shit that other teams are getting away with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top