ABs v Scotland
-
@crucial said in ABs v Scotland:
Having now woken with a head full of expired single malt I will try and add a little to the conversation.
I had some refs ears things (kindly donated by the gent of scots ancestry next to me) and the Naholo decision was interesting. At first they were heading for a card but on the last replay as the ref was confirming the card decision they seemed to switch to a private channel as the ears went quiet. Then they explained the mitigating circumstances. I suspect that to speed up the decision the TMO said YC is a bit rough on the player considering he was unsighted by a lazy runner.
The impression I got from the conversation was that the TMO was going to convince the ref it was a red card as he asked the ref "was he sure?" when the ref said he was thinking yellow. But in fact the TMO was actually going in the other direction of a penalty only.
-
I still don't get the call though. He pushed the Scot out the way and then jumped into the player catching the ball. According to my understanding of the law and interpretation by refs, he's responsible for the result, which was a dangerous fall where the catching player ending up flat on his back and hit his head. It just looks like a standard yellow to me, and I can't see how him pushing another player out of the way contributes to making him less responsible - he was never in a position to compete.
Edit: Will add video below if I can
-
@gt12 said in ABs v Scotland:
I still don't get the call though. He pushed the Scot out the way and then jumped into the player catching the ball.
I'm not sure he jumped. I commend the ref for taking into account the actions of the teammate who deliberately obstructed Naholo. Had Naholo taken the fullback out higher from the ground, then I'd expect the yellow card would still have come. As it was, the Scot fell no worse than being monstered in a tackle.
At some point refs need to address the materiality of the action and outcome.
-
OK, rather than jumped perhaps crashed? Either way, he wasn't going to be able to compete, and I don't see why he gets a pass for that.
I'm happy with the result if that's the way all situations were reffed (player barely off the ground, not really different to a hard tackle) but that's not my understanding of the law or interpretations.
-
On another day with another ref Naholo may have got a YC but the fact that he needed to check his running line to avoid the blocker meant Hogg collided with him as he moved to his left. Naholo never left the ground. I thought it was a common sense decision based on the circumstances.
-
@mick-gold-coast-qld said in ABs v Scotland:
*"@pakman said in ABs v Scotland:
@crucial The Fern's traditions must be respected!"*
Too right mate, they'll still be speaking, in hushed tones, 25 years from now about the day when Jegga had breakfast with Jerome Kaino, Joe Moody, Damian Mackenzie and Liam Squire. I still remember it clearly, as if it were only a season ago.
By then a respectful period will have passed for some of the detail to be revealed and they'll likely have Jegga do little cameos in local pubs - you know, bring him out to sit at the bar with a blanket over his knees, and yarn about it to the 6 or 7 Saturday night patrons.
You could talk about it for hours, really, much like discussing when Tony Woodcock came around from the front, took the ball just as the line out split and thundered through the gap from a good - I dunno -
403010 yards out to score that try in 2011.I expect it would go something like this:
Question from the riveted audience: "Breakfast with Jerome Kaino, Joe ...?"
with his eyes sparkling just above the edge of the table, climbing up Jerome's back, peering through Joe's beard - until the restaurateur twigged to his problem. He's brought out a couple of phone books, put 'em on a chair and lifted Damian up to sit with the big fellas. He just played with his food after that, egg all over the shop, spilling his poppa juice, dropping his dummy ..."
Jegga: "... Moody, Damian McK ..."
Q: "You're bloody joking ... fully awesome bru"
J: "Yeah, nah, nah, yeah"
Q: "How good was that?"
J: "Fully awesome bru"
Q: "Yeah, nah, nah, yeah ... how was Liam Squire, like, you know ..."
J: "He was a bit quiet."
Q: "What did he say to you?"
J: "You can call me Liam, squire."
Q: "Oh."
J: "Early on Damian was like, you know, hyperactive. He was fair dinkum popping up everywhere, like Dickie Knee on Hey Hey it's Saturday
Q: "Jerome ... how was ..."
J: "He seemed really blissed out, like he had enjoyed a first class root all night long really ..."
Q: "What did you all have to eat?"
J: "Well, as a matter of fact they left their docket on the table so I scanned it in 'cos I knew dedicated supporters of the game would need to know. [Jegga to the barman: Switch on that projector now, there's a good man] I'll take you through the entire menu, course by course."I imagine they will name it "The day when Jegga had breakfast with Jerome Kaino, Joe Moody, Damian Mackenzie and Liam Squire" Series 2018, 2020, 2022 and so on.
Posts like this prove that some ferners have a lot of extra time on their hands.
-
@mick-gold-coast-qld Mehrts was there too you know. He’s been in a good paddock judging by the size of him
-
@jegga said in ABs v Scotland:
@mick-gold-coast-qld Mehrts was there too you know. He’s been in a good paddock judging by the size of him
Loves a drink I hear
-
@bovidae said in ABs v Scotland:
On another day with another ref Naholo may have got a YC but the fact that he needed to check his running line to avoid the blocker meant Hogg collided with him as he moved to his left. Naholo never left the ground. I thought it was a common sense decision based on the circumstances.
common sense and consistency in onfield decisions are .... not what I expect any more
-
@gunner said in ABs v Scotland:
Oh and where were the endless replays and yc for the Scot who deliberately batted the ball out towards the end of the first half?
So did anyone else notice this, or was I seeing things? Surprised there has been no chat about it on here.
To me the guy clearly and deliberately batted the ball into touch.
There wasn't even one replay at the time, so maybe the hometown producer saw it too and didn't want any attention drawn to it?
-
@gunner said in ABs v Scotland:
@gunner said in ABs v Scotland:
Oh and where were the endless replays and yc for the Scot who deliberately batted the ball out towards the end of the first half?
So did anyone else notice this, or was I seeing things? Surprised there has been no chat about it on here.
To me the guy clearly and deliberately batted the ball into touch.
There wasn't even one replay at the time, so maybe the hometown producer saw it too and didn't want any attention drawn to it?
Yes I noticed it and wondered if it would be spotted - but Justin didn't mention it and therefore it didn't happen.
-
-
@hydro11 looked more like he was swatting a fly, so that mitigates him hitting the ball.
As I said elsewhere, Crockett being pinged for playing the 9 without the ball was wrong, regardless of what the 9 is allowed to do, his hands were on the ball so therefore not played without the ball.
This is an area they need to clear up, touching it and taking your hands away seems to be quite a popular thing in the NH at moment.
-
@taniwharugby Yep there are a number of these types of things. At the end of the day Crockett should have the experience to know there is a chance he could get pinged if he takes out the halfback, the intelligent choice would have been to just leave the 9 alone. You will often see players look to the ref before challenging a ball that comes out the back of a ruck even though it is legal.
-
@mick-gold-coast-qld said in ABs v Scotland:
Rolled gold rubbish, talisker, you are making it up.
The term is as old as "Pom" and maybe older, it has been around as long as "Kiwi" and "Mick" (for Catholics) and "Frog".
Do keep updating your records, though, on raaaacist, hurty terminology. It must be a fascinating obsession to be sure, it will keep you indoors and at a good distance from normal society.I've been wondering whether or not to bother replying, but it was niggling at me, so I'll give it a go.
The antiquity of an epithet doesn't make it valid, there are some very old words that are now illegal and using them in a place of work would get you sacked. So I refute that point completely.
Second, it's not about being over sensitive or being a "snowflake", it's about being a grown man in the 21st century and acting like it.
Words carry all sorts of baggage with them, it's not for those punching down to "mansplain" to someone that they shouldn't take offence at a lazy slur.I don't know if you are aware of a newspaper called the Daily Mail, but it's basically a daily newsletter for the Anglo-centric, borderline racist, homophobic culturally stunted wingnuts who hark back to some mythical time from the 1950s where everything was better (I won't go too far into this, but it's a myth, that time never existed).
Anyway, that paper is often found waling about political correctness and why can't I be an ignorant fuckwit any more?
Any defence of stereotypes and slurs can be found in places like the Daily Mail, it's 70 years out of date.I'll conclude by saying that we in Scotland have our own problems regarding bigotry between two sections of the community, but we don't have an epithet for English people (don't let anyone tell you Sassenach is an insult, no one has used that for decades and it means Saxon, there are variants of the same word in Welsh, Irish, Cornish and Breton).
The dismissive one-word put down works one way, that's why I and most Scots reject it. There might have been one or some, but I don't know of any Scot who would refer to "us Jocks", that alone should be enough to act like an adult and accept it as a thing of the past. -
@hydro11 I don't think Read is a patch on the captain McCaw became.
I was impressed with Sam Whitelock this year.
-
@talisker to be fair, what is deemed racist / offensive in modern, overtly PC, lets take offense to anything we can, Britain does differ somewhat to what is deemed acceptable in New Zealand / Australia.
Poms, Paki's are 2 things I regularly used in NZ which I found were not deemed offensive at all in NZ, which had different meanings over here. I've not heard that Jock was in that category, and if so, then I'll be sure to not use it in conversation here.
But lets be clear, that this place is rather light heartened, and shouldn't really be taken seriously. I mean, have you read some of the points of view and thoughts .... ?
