Springbokke vs All Blacks : Soccer Stadium , Soweto

[BRIX]

Incidentally, just to make it clear; I agree with Onse Oom. I'd have done the same, and McCaw was right to do it. I'm bagging the ref, not him. Frankly, I don't really give a monkeys about the 3N; I DO care that the refs are fuck-acting around, as that will affect my teams.

Here, Here.

Incidentally though I got to admit both you and MR raise some fine points. I just watched the video again and heard Nigel Owens barking at Richie to 'leave it' meaning he had no rights to the ball. Case closed.

On another note, if an attacking player flops over bodies on the deck without being tackled, and the ball is held up or cannot be presented properly, the ref would award a scrum to the attacking team rather than a penalty - no?

I wanted to add that I think the more contencious call or tipping point of the match was the Dagg forward pass to Mils rather than the binning of McCaw at that point in the Test.

 

[Blue]

Here, Here.

Incidentally though I got to admit both you and MR raise some fine points. I just watched the video again and heard Nigel Owens barking at Richie to 'leave it' meaning he had no rights to the ball. Case closed.

On another note, if an attacking player flops over bodies on the deck without being tackled, and the ball is held up or cannot be presented properly, the ref would award a scrum to the attacking team rather than a penalty - no?

I wanted to add that I think the more contencious call or tipping point of the match was the Dagg forward pass to Mils rather than the binning of McCaw at that point in the Test.

Actually the most contentious one was shown by Kafe on Rugby Club last night. The AB's secured a turnover that least to the Dagg try. There was clearly a hand in the ruck to nick the ball and the ref brought the whistle to his mouth and looked like he was going to blow and then let it go.

I think we should call it shoe-gate and I demand an international enquiry.

 

[MajorlyRagerly]

I remember that scene where he was going to blow! Only think I could think why he didn't, was he thought it must have been stuck, then seen it come out. AS he didn't seem to play any advantage either way.

 

[barbarian]

I remember that scene where he was going to blow! Only think I could think why he didn't, was he thought it must have been stuck, then seen it come out. AS he didn't seem to play any advantage either way.

I think he didn't want the game to be decided by a refereeing decision. It would have been very contentious- yes there was a little AB hand helping it back and they were a little quick to leave their feet, but on the whole it was a pretty clean turnover won through weight of numbers more than any illegalities.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Weight of numbers probably got the ABs that last TO before the Nonu bust and Dagg try. One player I recall went off their feet and should have been penalised but I think the fact that most who drove over remained on their feet halted Owens from pinging. Not the correct call and watching live I fully expected a penalty against the Good Guys.

Maybe put it down for "feel for the game" and rewarding a team going forward. This sort of stuff has nothing to do with consistency of reffing (that's impossible IMO) but calling what was in front of him.

 

[Thomond78]

I think he didn't want the game to be decided by a refereeing decision. It would have been very contentious- yes there was a little AB hand helping it back and they were a little quick to leave their feet, but on the whole it was a pretty clean turnover won through weight of numbers more than any illegalities.

Which is bad refereeing, because it's weak refereeing. If a game has to be decided by it, so be it; most games are, in terms of penalties, etc. You're not there as a decision-maker to run from making tough decisions; on the contrary, it's what you're there to do and what you're paid to do.

It's one of the reasons why I like Garces so much as a ref. He does not give a shit, and will just ref it straight down the line. Which is exactly how it should be done.

 

[cyclopath]

I agree with Thomo. It would be a dangerous precedent to make refereeing decisions based on being "contentious" or not. Of course, I know refs are subjective, and will let lots of minor infringements go every game.
In that actual instance, I think the hand back really made no difference, so the outcome maybe should not have been different. BUT, had he blown a penalty there, there is no way anyone could sensibly argue it was wrong. It was a blatant breach, he seemingly saw it. Who really knows his thought processes at the time.

 

[MrTimms]

Who really knows his thought processes at the time.

Him. That is why it would not be bad to have the refs attend a press conference of some kind after a match. There might have to be some pretty strict protocols on that, so perhaps a press release a day or so after the game, perhaps from all officials, it could cover stuff like the non carding/citing of the myth for the fiangaa hit and give some reasons why.

 

[Gagger]

As an aside - at Advanced Coaching Course being run by McKenzie et al at QLD Reds last night, on the topic of illegalities at the breakdown, attendees were suggested to go have a look at G&GR for further instruction .

 

[Muttonbird]

As an aside - at Advanced Coaching Course being run by McKenzie et al at QLD Reds last night, on the topic of illegalities at the breakdown, attendees were suggested to go have a look at G&GR for further instruction.

On how to get confused?

 

[Thomond78]

Look, lads, Nige is from Llanelli.

And take it from one with more experience of the Turks than you lot, and a considerable sneaking affection for them - the thought processes of those from Llanelli are not lightly to be explored unless you want to end up in therapy yourself.

 

[barbarian]

Jeez Mutton you could have done so much better there. The world was at your feet- you could have made Queenslander jokes, Australian jokes, G&GR jokes. And yet you did that. Almost warrants a ban.

 

[Thomond78]

Jeez Mutton you could have done so much better there. The world was at your feet- you could have made Queenslander jokes, Australian jokes, G&GR jokes. And yet you did that. Almost warrants a ban.

Kiwi looks unbeatable in the run-up, then chokes when the prize is there for the taking.

I wonder where we've heard that one before...?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

As an aside - at Advanced Coaching Course being run by McKenzie et al at QLD Reds last night, on the topic of illegalities at the breakdown, attendees were suggested to go have a look at G&GR for further instruction .

Gaggerland is getting so famous that we may have to start to watch our language.

 

[Muttonbird]

Jeez Mutton you could have done so much better there. The world was at your feet- you could have made Queenslander jokes, Australian jokes, G&GR jokes. And yet you did that. Almost warrants a ban.

Sorry, it's late and I didn't realise it was bait.

I agree it doesn't take much to get banned here but if being unfunny was a reason there'd be fuck-all members left.

 

[DPK]

Sorry, it's late.

I agree it doesn't take much to get banned here but if being unfunny was a reason there'd be fuck-all members left.

Try and find some of Wazimba2k's posts.

 

[Thomond78]

Gaggerland is getting so famous that we may have to start to watch our language.

Go blow it out your arse. And keep that fucking petrel away from my fucking Julius Marlowes, while you're at it.

 

[Muttonbird]

Go blow it out your arse. And keep that fucking petrel away from my fucking Julius Marlowes, while you're at it.

Bit touchy. What's wrong - couldn't get anyone to agree on your ruck/no ruck ruling?

 

[Thomond78]

Bit touchy. What's wrong - couldn't get anyone to agree on your ruck/no ruck ruling?

Whoooooooshhhh...!

 

[MajorlyRagerly]

Which is bad refereeing, because it's weak refereeing. If a game has to be decided by it, so be it; most games are, in terms of penalties, etc. You're not there as a decision-maker to run from making tough decisions; on the contrary, it's what you're there to do and what you're paid to do.

It's one of the reasons why I like Garces so much as a ref. He does not give a shit, and will just ref it straight down the line. Which is exactly how it should be done.

It's only weak refereeing if the assumptions made above are correct - which I highly doubt they are.

I 100% believe he was going to blow as he though it wasn't going to come out - I don't believe he saw the alleged infringment then didn't blow because he didnt wan to be a game decider - that would be very weak refereeing & something surely not tolerated at the very highest level.

I don't think I've seen Garces ref. But if referee's striaght down the line and to the letter of the law - he sounds like one of those god awful NH ref's from the early noughties who blew everything & ruined the game (from my p.o.v - I recognise some people love this shit).