RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D)
-
@booboo said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@sparky said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
Some heroes for Wales tonight. Wyn Jones 23 tackles, Navidi 15 tackles and no misses, Gareth Davies made over 110 running metres from half back.
Because everyone loves a corrector ...
..
That's "Jones" or "Alan Wyn" ... mot "Wynn Jones".
His given names are "Alan Wyn".
His surname is "Jones".
I'm helping ...
Umm, yeah, but it's Alun.
-
World Rugby should be concerned that Garces and Poite seem to be a part of many of the more controversial moments in games over the past few years.
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
World Rugby should be concerned that Garces and Poite seem to be a part of many of the more controversial moments in games over the past few years.
Whilst I am on correcting - I thought they were Faeces and Prat?
They are both terrible refs but I don't think the outcome would have been different in this case and it was a great game to watch.
-
@MiketheSnow said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@Crucial said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
Well that game raised another curly scenario for the refs/law makers to deal with.
If a tackler is coming at you upright and your instinct tells you to protect yourself from head injury you should get leeway for instinctively raising your arm.
Apparently you canāt fend with your elbow even to protect your own head and the craziest thing is that if that elbow had connected with the head the RC would have gone to the player protecting himself from poor technique.
Cheika would have also suffered an extreme head injury as he head butted the desk.Hate to say it but clown and Hooper had this one right.
And that's where the interpretation muddies the water.
You saw/say fending with the elbow to protect, others saw/say fending with the elbow to inflict.
Over to the team at SA Rugby magazine š
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
World Rugby should be concerned that Garces and Poite seem to be a part of many of the more controversial moments in games over the past few years.
This is Skeen, though.
-
@NTA he is, but in the middle they could have over-ruled him...
I know it isnt always thier fault, but they are still somehow involved, like controversy follows them....
-
@NTA said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@MiketheSnow said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@Crucial said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
Well that game raised another curly scenario for the refs/law makers to deal with.
If a tackler is coming at you upright and your instinct tells you to protect yourself from head injury you should get leeway for instinctively raising your arm.
Apparently you canāt fend with your elbow even to protect your own head and the craziest thing is that if that elbow had connected with the head the RC would have gone to the player protecting himself from poor technique.
Cheika would have also suffered an extreme head injury as he head butted the desk.Hate to say it but clown and Hooper had this one right.
And that's where the interpretation muddies the water.
You saw/say fending with the elbow to protect, others saw/say fending with the elbow to inflict.
Over to the team at SA Rugby magazine š
I know the blatant hand on Barrettās shoulder wasnāt called a penalty. Farcical.
-
Only just saw footage of the āforearmā. What a fucking joke.
This RWC has already been a disaster with these ridiculous interpretations and itās only going to get worse.
It was entirely predictable though. WR has been trying to kill the game since introducing this crap after the last RWC. The fact Red cards (or at least calls for red) are now common where they used to be reserved for the dirtiest of plays is a huge problem.
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
World Rugby should be concerned that Garces and Poite seem to be a part of many of the more controversial moments in games over the past few years.
One of the more astounding things was that Pocockwomble had to talk to Poite at halftime to clarify the words he was using at the rucks. I know there are language differences but that implies that his communication was inconsistent and ambiguous. For a ref of his experience and standing that is quite incredible.
-
@Crucial said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@taniwharugby said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
World Rugby should be concerned that Garces and Poite seem to be a part of many of the more controversial moments in games over the past few years.
One of the more astounding things was that Pocockwomble had to talk to Poite at halftime to clarify the words he was using at the rucks. I know there are language differences but that implies that his communication was inconsistent and ambiguous. For a ref of his experience and standing that is quite incredible.
Talking/coaching refs are a stupid idea IMO anyway. Very anglocentric. Very mextedy.
-
@NTA said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@MiketheSnow said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@Crucial said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
Well that game raised another curly scenario for the refs/law makers to deal with.
If a tackler is coming at you upright and your instinct tells you to protect yourself from head injury you should get leeway for instinctively raising your arm.
Apparently you canāt fend with your elbow even to protect your own head and the craziest thing is that if that elbow had connected with the head the RC would have gone to the player protecting himself from poor technique.
Cheika would have also suffered an extreme head injury as he head butted the desk.Hate to say it but clown and Hooper had this one right.
And that's where the interpretation muddies the water.
You saw/say fending with the elbow to protect, others saw/say fending with the elbow to inflict.
Over to the team at SA Rugby magazine š
And we all know their point wasn't to suggest that neither should be a penalty.
-
@Crucial said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@MiketheSnow said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@Crucial said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
Well that game raised another curly scenario for the refs/law makers to deal with.
If a tackler is coming at you upright and your instinct tells you to protect yourself from head injury you should get leeway for instinctively raising your arm.
Apparently you canāt fend with your elbow even to protect your own head and the craziest thing is that if that elbow had connected with the head the RC would have gone to the player protecting himself from poor technique.
Cheika would have also suffered an extreme head injury as he head butted the desk.Hate to say it but clown and Hooper had this one right.
And that's where the interpretation muddies the water.
You saw/say fending with the elbow to protect, others saw/say fending with the elbow to inflict.
Agree that you can interpret what happened two ways but when you look at the full circumstance it was the so called ātacklerā that created the situation by steaming in upright and creating risk of a head clash. Looked like instinctive protection because of that.
If he had been lining up a decent tackle then the elbow would definitely have been out of order.I disagree with that. Standing up straight in the tackle and looking to wrap the ball and the player is a perfectly legitimate technique...
The issue here is that he's pretty much the 1st person in the history of the game that's been pinged for leading into the tackle with his forearm.. it's always just been ignored previously, and it seems like it's a bit of a gray area.
-
-
@WillieTheWaiter Bismarck du Plessis was YCd for leading with the elbow/forearm on Messam wasnt he?
-
@MrDenmore Sorry, but that's complete bs.
WR is - for good reason - concerned about the short and long term effects of contact with the head/neck area. Whether they have responded in the right way, is debatable, but this has absolutely nothing to do with lawyers wanting to make money.
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@WillieTheWaiter Bismarck du Plessis was YCd for leading with the elbow/forearm on Messam wasnt he?
not sure. Obviously the fact i'm generally drunk during AB matches would impact my memory of that!
Whenever I was playing rugby there was always 'a guy' that would steam into contact leading with the forearm.. it is farking dangerous and i've always been surprised it's never been under the microscope a bit more. Focus always on the tackler. But if they do look into it where does it end.. I mean dropping hte shoulder into contact when carrying has always been fine.. can of bloody worms!
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@WillieTheWaiter Bismarck du Plessis was YCd for leading with the elbow/forearm on Messam wasnt he?
That incident is different from the one yesterday. Raising the forearm up before contact and away from your own body as a shield above someone's shoulder line has always been penalised.
World Rugby now need to come out and clearly state that it shouldn't have been subject to sanction.
-
@WillieTheWaiter said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
rugby there was always 'a guy' that would steam into contact leading with the forearm.. it is farking dangerous and i've always been surprised it's never been under the microscope a bit more. Focus always on the tackler. But if they do look into it where does it end.. I mean dropping hte shoulder into contact when carrying has always been fine.. can of bloody worms!
It was the game where he then hit DC slightly high and late and got a 2nd YC
@antipodean I am only going from memory on the BDP one.
-
@WillieTheWaiter said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
The issue here is that he's pretty much the 1st person in the history of the game that's been pinged for leading into the tackle with his forearm..
Not strictly true - one of our guys got done for it in 2007.
Edit: Lane Cove v Rouse Hill. Think it was ex-Gisborne player Tom Solomon running over Covies' fullback š¤ might have been 2008
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC: Australia v Wales (Pool D):
@NTA he is, but in the middle they could have over-ruled him...
I know it isnt always thier fault, but they are still somehow involved, like controversy follows them....
Firstly, I'd like to take some time to point out I'm blaming a Kiwi
Secondly, I have a hazy memory of Skeen being involved in something stupid from the TMO's desk before.
And Thirdly, French refs are here to stay, because the rest of the world can't seem to get their guys a seat at the table.
Allow me to demonstrate why:
