Reds v Rebels, Sat May 17 @ 7:40

[Tex]

Also, it was great to see Tommy Kingston take his chance and have a strong match. I think he's still a bench player behind Sau, but he certainly put his name up as next in line. Runs great lines and would be an interesting option at fullback.

 

[ChargerWA]

On the other hand a lot of people seem to be judging Horwill harshly. He has given the Reds many years of excellent captaincy. One bad night does not undo this. To those saying that he should be less likely to make the Wallabies squad as a result is in my view, bizarre.

Your looking at it in isolation. Horwill's captaincy has been average all year, he gets over emotional and it does the opposite of what he is trying to achieve. Plus he is playing average to poor. I can't see a spot in the Wallaby 30 for him, but I expect he will be there on incumbency alone.

 

[tragic]

The Reds lost this game in the 75th minute when Horwill directed Harris to take the penalty kick for goal to tie it up 27-27. To me that reeked of a team trying not to lose, not a team trying to win. At that stage of the game all they needed to do was up the intensity and go for a try. The way the Rebels were defending showed they would give away further penalties defending their line. Thus even if after a period time they were not able to cross the line, there was most probably a good chance of getting a draw in the end from a further penalty as the 80 minute mark approached.

By taking the kick instead, all they did was let the pressure off and bring the ball back to the Red's half, taking the result out of their hands.

They gave up the points on two other occasions during the match and it didn't result in a try. He would have been crucified if they had lost 27-24.
Having said that he probably made all three choices the wrong way around.

 

[swingpass]

so aside from all the heat about the incident.

once again we scrummed well, i believe that in large part the recent improvement has been Neville locking with Jones.
Colby finger had his best game for the rebels by a long way
Leafa still needs to work on his throwing, and the line out overall wasn't as sure as it has been.

we constantly get good reward from our bench, PAE and Cruz played solidly around the park and continued our scrum dominance. McMahon again !
Meehan was great, snappy passing and a couple of snipes.

Hegarty is beginning to feel at home in the 10 shirt, agree Kingston also had his best for the rebels (on his very limited exposure so far). they have to give English more ball, every time he runs he breaks the first couple of tackles and gets go forward.

overall the defence once again was outstanding and perhaps did finally win us a game. the attacking play was much better, the offloads effective,and the support lines great, but it was against a very porous defence.

we still can't kick to save ourselves.

overall a better balanced effort and a deserved win.

ps i think higgers head butted EoD when they first began to scuffle, but it in no way negates the hand in the face stuff. remember the initial penalty was against mcmahon for third man in. what if Walsh had seen everything, then perhaps no pen against McM, YC for Higgs (+ earlier YC = ?RC), RC/YC for E'od, scrum rebels ball to restart. 27-27 in the rebs 22 who knows what would have happened. to speculate all the combinations and permutations that flow from a refereeing decision is pointless.
what ever provoked the hand in the face it was a really stupid thing to do.

 

[Ruggo]

The Reds lost this game in the 75th minute when Horwill directed Harris to take the penalty kick for goal to tie it up 27-27. To me that reeked of a team trying not to lose, not a team trying to win. At that stage of the game all they needed to do was up the intensity and go for a try. The way the Rebels were defending showed they would give away further penalties defending their line. Thus even if after a period time they were not able to cross the line, there was most probably a good chance of getting a draw in the end from a further penalty as the 80 minute mark approached.

By taking the kick instead, all they did was let the pressure off and bring the ball back to the Red's half, taking the result out of their hands.

Yet last year when he was backing the boys and not taking the points everybody was wanting a found of flesh from him.

Internet dribble strikes again.

 

[Dumbledore]

Taking the points was the right move. The Reds hadn't had much trouble moving downfield all night, and Walsh was brutalising the Rebels at the breakdown. There was plenty of time left, going for the corner would have been very, very, low percentage. It didn't work out, but that doesn't mean it was the wrong decision

 

[Train Without a Station]

The criticism of Horwill is appalling. People expect players to fight like the devil for 80 minutes yet be a saint and not exude passion as soon as the full time siren is up.

In a tight game with something like 6 losses on the trot he took definite points when on offer, something any captain does and now he's trying not too lose?

And now he's playing average to poor? People were saying at half time last week he was back to his best. Pull your fucking heads in you peanuts. You may not have gave a fuck about your school boy 7th grade team which you likely played in but to criticise a bloke for passion in the jersey is unwarranted and ludicrous.

 

[Tex]

No. He's the club captain and a former captain of the Wallabies, he leads by example and could have carried himself better. There's a difference between passion and petulance, and in my eyes there was more of the latter on display in that press conference.

That said, it must be bloody tough to close up the emotions when a close match is decided that way. He would have been better off giving a no comment.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Obviously we can't all just immediate switch off our emotions like yourself Tex

 

[Dumbledore]

It might be shit, but it's part of the gig these days. Referees have a hard enough time of it without team captains sinking the boot in on live television. I feel for Horwill to an extent, but he has to know that you can't be getting around like that

 

[Quick Hands]

From a neutral point of view I thought the Rebels clearly outplayed the Reds. But.. the score was just too close. I expected the game to finish as a draw until the TMO callback and you have to ask why, if the teams were that close on the scoreboard do I and many others on the thread think the Reds were totally outplayed. Either we are all watching with blue tinted glasses and the teams were even or there has to be a reason for the score being so close.

I haven't got an answer to my own question other than maybe they got the rub of the green from Walsh. But I think its a very important question to answer from both teams point of view. If the Rebels were dominant why weren't they up on the scoreboard? If the Reds were crap, how come they got so close?

The Rebels have a habit of giving away really soft dumb penalties at crucial times. By this I mean that the penalties are so obvious that the referee doesn't even have to think to give the penalty.

I wouldn't say the Reds were crap, but I think the Rebels were better on the night and deserved to win.

 

[Quick Hands]

Obviously we can't all just immediate switch off our emotions like yourself Tex

If you want to accept the dollars as a professional sportsman and the honour of being captain then you have to.

I was at a school game yesterday and the ref made a bad call which led to a player yelling something at the ref. The coach immediately pulled the player off, gave him the rounds of the kitchen, kept him off for the rest of the match and marched him over to the ref at the end of the game to apologise.

There's a right way and a wrong way to deal with disappointment and giving to the ref is the wrong way.

 

[Highlander35]

I thought that Lucas, Harris and Tapuai actually stepped up really well for the reds when Cooper went off. It was certainly the best game I saw the first 2 play this season.

Sent from my LG-P713 using Tapatalk

 

[swingpass]

If the Rebels were dominant why weren't they up on the scoreboard? If the Reds were crap, how come they got so close?

this has been a consistent problem for the Rebels all year, in at least three games they lost by close margins (highlanders, chiefs and sharks +/- canes game) they dominated the game for prolonged periods but couldn't score, then gave up penalties, or easy turnovers. they did much the same last night, except that the reds didn't / couldn't take as much advantage of the mistakes as other teams have done. the inexperience shows through with panic and over enthusiasm and inaccurate execution, last night the offloads stuck against a team with poor defence and so the tries came. i don't think the reds were awful, probably just one of those games where despite the subjective assessment from the sidelines, it was actually close. in the end i think the rebels were the deserved winners, but once again could have thrown away a winnable game with simple errors and untimely penalties. if they can eliminate those they will be a good team and enjoyable to watch.

 

[Gnostic]

This is what annoyed me.
Walsh had decided on a penalty to Reds and it wasn't until a replay was shown that the TMO picked up the Ed O offence so he intervened and went back to have a look at it. On the set of replays that ensued, I agree there was no indication of a head butt from higgers.
After Ed had been sent and Woodward was lining up his kick, a different replay was shown. This time it was plainly clear to see that Higgers gave Ed a very deliberate head butt. The fact that the TMO didn't intervention again but did for the other offence is what annoys me. It would've have no bearing on the game mind you but it's just frustrating when stuff like that happens.
Hopefully it will get picked up by the match reviewer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My final word on the matter. If I was adjudicating on this I would be taking the view of headbuts as with punches not connecting that are debatable in action are best left to the judiciary. However where an allegation of gross foul play is made by either a player or seen by any official it MUST be investigated then and there. It is why the technology was included in the rules.

Just think to the game previous to this and Deysel. He will dispute that he intended to connect with the face/throat with his boot just ad Ed O will dispute the attack/intent attack eyes. The intent doesn't really matter, the action has occurred and even if the intent was different the action was dangerous and amounts to dangerous foul play regardless of intent. In both instances it was a clear red card and had to be attended to as soon as it came to the attention of the officials regardless of field position or what had occurred after the incident.

 

[Grand Master Flash]

this has been a consistent problem for the Rebels all year, in at least three games they lost by close margins (highlanders, chiefs and sharks +/- canes game) they dominated the game for prolonged periods but couldn't score, then gave up penalties, or easy turnovers. they did much the same last night, except that the reds didn't / couldn't take as much advantage of the mistakes as other teams have done. the inexperience shows through with panic and over enthusiasm and inaccurate execution, last night the offloads stuck against a team with poor defence and so the tries came. i don't think the reds were awful, probably just one of those games where despite the subjective assessment from the sidelines, it was actually close. in the end i think the rebels were the deserved winners, but once again could have thrown away a winnable game with simple errors and untimely penalties. if they can eliminate those they will be a good team and enjoyable to watch.

Unfortunately one of the biggest culprits this year has been the captain, 1 minute to go the reds dont kick 10 meters, who goes up and has a go at the ball and knocks on, who head butts a player when in good field position, I love higgers as a player and he was a great captain last year but this year he is playing dumb and with a bunch of kids around him should be taking a leaf out of last years book and playing smart hard rugby. TT needs to have a word im thinking as it cant be helping the team to have the captain on the sidelines for being a tool or making very poor decisions under pressure. GO REBELS!!

 

[Scrubber2050]

I suppose I was disappointed at James's RANT - frustration at that game and frustration all year long. IMO he has not been playing to the level's he has set for himself. Why ?? Fucked if I know and he probably doesn't know either.

 

[ACT Crusader]

The criticism of Horwill is appalling. People expect players to fight like the devil for 80 minutes yet be a saint and not exude passion as soon as the full time siren is up.

In a tight game with something like 6 losses on the trot he took definite points when on offer, something any captain does and now he's trying not too lose?

And now he's playing average to poor? People were saying at half time last week he was back to his best. Pull your fucking heads in you peanuts. You may not have gave a fuck about your school boy 7th grade team which you likely played in but to criticise a bloke for passion in the jersey is unwarranted and ludicrous.

You can be passionate about the game and still carry yourself with a bit of class. I thought Horwill showed a real lack of it after that game.

 

[Train Without a Station]

So after 10 seasons, one comment makes him completely lacking of class?

I agree that players should hold themselves in high esteem but you have to be realistic. For fucks sake Graham Henry since the 2007 RWC has said at the time he thought the match was fixed. Do people say he lacks class? Of course not, it was one retrospective comment at a tough time.

If there was a pattern of this sort of thing I could totally understand

 

[Quick Hands]

So after 10 seasons, one comment makes him completely lacking of class?

I agree that players should hold themselves in high esteem but you have to be realistic. For fucks sake Graham Henry since the 2007 RWC has said at the time he thought the match was fixed. Do people say he lacks class? Of course not, it was one retrospective comment at a tough time.

If there was a pattern of this sort of thing I could totally understand

No, one comment means that he should be criticised for the one comment.