Wallabies v Lions Game 2 MCG 26 July

[Marbig]

The Aki one is another that isn't a like-for like either. Blue player is in position way before Aki gets there. For the Tizzano one it's way away closer to a "normal" cleanout

View attachment 22845

The Stormers player is definitely there longer than Tizzano, but Tizzano was still there. The argument that the referee uses that both players were at the same time in my opinion is flawed in two parts. 1. Tizzano is clearly there first and Morgan has a responsibility to not fly into a ruck. 2. If foul play can be undone by two players arriving to contact simultaneously, then there should never be red or yellow cards for head clashes in tackles.

 

[PhilClinton]

It seems to me that there is a problem with defining a jump and distinguishing it from a dive. In athletics, historically a jump meant being on your feet when launching and then landing on your feet. The introduction of the Fosbury Flop eventually ended that distinction. If rugby wanted to clarify what constitutes a jump, they could declare it to be a process where the launch is from the feet and the landing is on the feet. Or they could follow the athletics model and declare that any launch into the air is a jump regardless of the act of landing. The latter would at least end the dive over defenders to score a try.

I don't mind that. Defining the act of jumping vs diving may be an easier pathway than trying to work on the intent of the action.

There is always a grey area where a ruling relies on the intent of the player as it is very hard to nail that. For example, in the case from the weekend, it could be ruled that the players intention was to score a try and not to simply jump over a defender. But in the same token it could be ruled that the player intended to jump over the defender to assist them in scoring the try.

 

[BDA]

Re the final call of the game, it seems to me had the ref called the penalty and said there was head contact, I really don't think there would be much controversy or poring over the coles at all. I'm sure the poms would be bemoaning Tizzano's over-the-top reaction to milk the penalty (and fair enough) but I doubt they would be posting screen shots 2 days later trying to claim it wasn't worth of a penalty. Everyone has accepted at this point that if there is even a touch of contact above the shoulders your likely going to be penalised. Even the most die hard supporters wouldnt die on that hill.

 

[John S]

Re the final call of the game, it seems to me had the ref called the penalty and said there was head contact, I really don't think there would be much controversy or poring over the coles at all. I'm sure the poms would be bemoaning Tizzano's over-the-top reaction to milk the penalty (and fair enough) but I doubt they would be posting screen shots 2 days later trying to claim it wasn't worth of a penalty. Everyone has accepted at this point that if there is even a touch of contact above the shoulders your likely going to be penalised. Even the most die hard supporters wouldnt die on that hill.

All the Lions supporters seem to want to die on that hill - even going so far as to get Wayne Barnes to agree that "not all head contact is foul play"

 

[Major Tom]

Yeh I know - it is a hard. Obviously a strict no jumping rule would mostly impact wingers trying to leave their feet when scoring in the corner.

How about -

"A player with ball in hand may only leave their feet when in the motion of scoring a try in the 5m channel next to the touchline, or when both of their feet have crossed the plane to the in-goal area" - that last part is so we can still have sick dives.

He was also latched onto was he not? I'm not sure you're supposed to do that. Technically becomes a lineout yeah?

 

[Tomthumb]

All the Lions supporters seem to want to die on that hill - even going so far as to get Wayne Barnes to agree that "not all head contact is foul play"

They are certainly painting themselves into a corner with this. They better keep consistency when a call like this goes against them

 

[Dctarget]

watching this pre-game stuff from Tim is a nice salve from all the ref chat.

 

[KOB1987]

I think it's just because the dive try was so early in the game that if it hadn't been awarded the whole match would have been different - who's to know what the result would have been. Whereas the Tizzano clear out was in the final minute, so there's a clearer sense that if you cancel that try the result is different (albeit the Wallabies would have still had to kick for touch and navigate a lineout before time would have been up).

I was interested to see if there's ever been a result overturned in professional sport due to a refereeing error and found this interesting case from the NBA. In 2008 the final 51.9 seconds of a game between the Miami Heat and Atlanta Hawks was replayed 3 months after the original game - right before the start of their next scheduled game that season. Shaquille O'Neal had been fouled out of the original game at that time, but it was subsequently discovered to be an error (it was recorded as his 6th foul when it was only his 5th). The league upheld the protest and so they replayed the final minute, though the score ended the same.

But hey, that's a clear precedent in global sport. If the clean out is deemed illegal I'm sure the Lions will agree the honourable thing to do is to replay the final minute in Sydney before we kick off game 3

It wasn't overturned per se but many of us will remember the infamous 7 tackle incident in the NSWRL finals involving Manly, Parramatta & Greg Hartley that resulted in the match having to be replayed. I think a rematch and hence a 4th game would be a satisfactory outcome here. Specific to your question though, I would say that WR (World Rugby) do have the power to overturn the result but they wouldn't here because they'd need to be 100% sure that the wrong outcome was delivered, and there was over a minute left to play during which time anything could have happened.

I'm reluctant to use the B word, but when you consider the 3 other incidents in the first match that were ignored by the officials there definitely seems to be a theme emerging, particularly when it comes to potentially match turning events.

 

[Major Tom]

It wasn't overturned per se but many of us will remember the infamous 7 tackle incident in the NSWRL finals involving Manly, Parramatta & Greg Hartley that resulted in the match having to be replayed. I think a rematch and hence a 4th game would be a satisfactory outcome here. Specific to your question though, I would say that WR (World Rugby) (World Rugby) do have the power to overturn the result but they wouldn't here because they'd need to be 100% sure that the wrong outcome was delivered, and there was over a minute left to play during which time anything could have happened.

I'm reluctant to use the B word, but when you consider the 3 other incidents in the first match that were ignored by the officials there definitely seems to be a theme emerging, particularly when it comes to potentially match turning events.

Yeh tackle on JAS in game 1 still has me baffled.

 

[Super Hooper]

lol Australia is the most profitable tour for the Lions they will never abandon the tour

Absolutely but if they add France, the Australian tour would be every 16 years...

 

[Shiggins]

Checked the match stats. Wallabies win almost every part of this and some stats by a long way. Unreal how the lions scored so many trys with stats like that. It shows that they kicked well and scored quite easily when in our 22. Our defence needs a lot of work.

Also what's stopping us having a player stay at the penalty 10m from the mark ? Fin Russell was making a joke of where he took his kicks in this game

 

[KOB1987]

Absolutely but if they add France, the Australian tour would be every 16 years...

So would the other tours. Won't happen - they may add a one off test or a couple of tour matches in France but they aren't going to tour France in the middle of summer.

 

[Strewthcobber]

So would the other tours. Won't happen - they may add a one off test or a couple of tour matches in France but they aren't going to tour France in the middle of summer.

I still reckon the most likely outcome is we lose a couple of early games from the tours, which are replaced by matches against French club teams

 

[Rebel man]

Absolutely but if they add France, the Australian tour would be every 16 years...

That will never happen

 

[notdeadyet]

It wasn't overturned per se but many of us will remember the infamous 7 tackle incident in the NSWRL finals involving Manly, Parramatta & Greg Hartley that resulted in the match having to be replayed. I think a rematch and hence a 4th game would be a satisfactory outcome here. Specific to your question though, I would say that WR (World Rugby) (World Rugby) do have the power to overturn the result but they wouldn't here because they'd need to be 100% sure that the wrong outcome was delivered, and there was over a minute left to play during which time anything could have happened.

I'm reluctant to use the B word, but when you consider the 3 other incidents in the first match that were ignored by the officials there definitely seems to be a theme emerging, particularly when it comes to potentially match turning events.

KOB do you think that Tizzano would have been given the steal if not for morgan's deed. ask in relation to that, "... over a minute left to play ..."
thanks, mark

 

[JRugby2]

KOB do you think that Tizzano would have been given the steal if not for morgan's deed. ask in relation to that, "... over a minute left to play ..."
thanks, mark

Probably not unless you completely remove Genge and Jac from the equation. Assuming the only variable we change is the contact point and everything else stays the same, then in slow mo you see that Tizz isn't actually on the ball yet when he's blown off. He needs to demonstrate a lift.

 

[KOB1987]

KOB do you think that Tizzano would have been given the steal if not for morgan's deed. ask in relation to that, "... over a minute left to play ..."
thanks, mark

That is a very good question. I tend to agree with @JRugby2, if Morgan does a legal cleanout Tizzano probably doesn't get the steal, but we're in sliding doors territory then because it's probably slower clearance, so our wide defenders are no doubt better positioned.

 

[Major Tom]

I agree with JRugby2, but it's impossible to tell - it's highly likely he either steals it or we get awarded a penalty for the carrier not releasing though as he's on his feet and entitled to compete for it.

I think it's safe to suggest he could lift the ball but it's very much impossible with the contact to his head and neck.
Apart from him potentially coming in from the side, he attacks this ruck perfectly. Supporting body weight, no hands past the ball.
It's similar but not the same to a penalty try i.e. "would it have occurred had the foul play not occurred".