• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
allblacksrwcireland
1.8k Posts 93 Posters 138.4k Views
RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2)
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • canefanC Offline
    canefanC Offline
    canefan
    replied to ACT Crusader on last edited by
    #1676

    @ACT-Crusader just one of the many things to hate about Slater

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • voodooV Offline
    voodooV Offline
    voodoo
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #1677

    @Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Rapido said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    That whole Matt Todd yellow discussion is quite interesting law wise. He basically just had a lie down and he wasn't off side. Surely the onus is on the attacking player to avoid him?

    I used to get a bit tired on the field and have a rest all the time, nobody penalised me and gave me a card. If all of the ABs just said "fck this I'm going to sit down" then the oppo just have to go around them, their problem if there are obstacles in the way whether they are making tackles or not? Impeding a ball carrier is kind of the point as long as it isn't dangerous.

    While I think Ownes made a meal of that, I think it is still probably the correct outcome. It's like a cannonball tackle. you can't dive on the ground in front of the player.

    It's harsh in that Todd was putting his broken body on the line and protecting his hurt side, but it is still correct, it just didn't look right.

    BTW. Can just state (repeat) that the scoring against the base of the goal pads is the stupidest rule in any sport, ever.

    Wasn't stupid when there was no padding or padding was small. Now a piece of the try line has been moved forward and is difficult to defend.
    Simple solution is to have pads in line with the try line (i.e. move the posts back.)

    NFL has the solution - posts should be on the dead ball line making the entire tryline post-free

    Will never happen of course, too radical for the kickers now.

    CrucialC RapidoR 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to voodoo on last edited by
    #1678

    @voodoo not sure why people think kickers will have a problem. For conversions you take the ball back to a comfortable angle anyway.
    Cost of replacing goalposts wouldn’t be popular though if going NFL style.
    Just dig the holes 300mm back and leave the laws as they are.

    SnowyS voodooV 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #1679

    @Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    not sure why people think kickers will have a problem

    Because they try and steal a few inches whenever they can, losing a few will upset the precious petals.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • voodooV Offline
    voodooV Offline
    voodoo
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #1680

    @Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @voodoo not sure why people think kickers will have a problem. For conversions you take the ball back to a comfortable angle anyway.
    Cost of replacing goalposts wouldn’t be popular though if going NFL style.
    Just dig the holes 300mm back and leave the laws as they are.

    Just an adjustment for them. I reckon fair bit of muscle memory gets built up over years of kicking from different spots

    But yeah, not a massive deal. I'm also fine with moving the pads back.

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to voodoo on last edited by
    #1681

    @voodoo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @voodoo not sure why people think kickers will have a problem. For conversions you take the ball back to a comfortable angle anyway.
    Cost of replacing goalposts wouldn’t be popular though if going NFL style.
    Just dig the holes 300mm back and leave the laws as they are.

    Just an adjustment for them. I reckon fair bit of muscle memory gets built up over years of kicking from different spots

    But yeah, not a massive deal. I'm also fine with moving the pads back.

    For conversions you simply walk back to where it looks comfortable given the conditions e.g. wind, rain, turf and whether there is a fast chaser for charge downs. It could be different between kicks let alone games. The muscle memory is only in the kicking action and is why many kickers only have one strength of hit and the ball goes way past the goalposts for close kicks.

    voodooV 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • voodooV Offline
    voodooV Offline
    voodoo
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #1682

    @Crucial Again, not a huge deal, but I don't quite agree. Particularly for guys kicking at grounds they are used to playing on. It's the same as saying every basketball hoop is the same when we know that's not the case - players on home soil just know where they are, different court/field markings, the stroke is just often better. I think kickers have places on a known field they prefer to kick from, little visuals in the stands etc that line up, a knowledge of where the winds blow from, little spots that they've made 10 straight from at training etc. Not really about how hard you hit the ball once you strike it.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • RapidoR Offline
    RapidoR Offline
    Rapido
    replied to voodoo on last edited by
    #1683

    @voodoo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Rapido said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    That whole Matt Todd yellow discussion is quite interesting law wise. He basically just had a lie down and he wasn't off side. Surely the onus is on the attacking player to avoid him?

    I used to get a bit tired on the field and have a rest all the time, nobody penalised me and gave me a card. If all of the ABs just said "fck this I'm going to sit down" then the oppo just have to go around them, their problem if there are obstacles in the way whether they are making tackles or not? Impeding a ball carrier is kind of the point as long as it isn't dangerous.

    While I think Ownes made a meal of that, I think it is still probably the correct outcome. It's like a cannonball tackle. you can't dive on the ground in front of the player.

    It's harsh in that Todd was putting his broken body on the line and protecting his hurt side, but it is still correct, it just didn't look right.

    BTW. Can just state (repeat) that the scoring against the base of the goal pads is the stupidest rule in any sport, ever.

    Wasn't stupid when there was no padding or padding was small. Now a piece of the try line has been moved forward and is difficult to defend.
    Simple solution is to have pads in line with the try line (i.e. move the posts back.)

    NFL has the solution - posts should be on the dead ball line making the entire tryline post-free

    Will never happen of course, too radical for the kickers now.

    Nah, the engineering costs would likely be huge (for clubs and multipurpose stadiums).

    Because of the deep ingoal area in rugby (compered to NFL) the ballasting required to cantilever the uprights forward from the deadball line to the goal line.

    Just make me people score tries properly. By having to press the ball down behind the tryline. Scrum 5 if their unfortunate enough to hit the posts.

    canefanC ACT CrusaderA 2 Replies Last reply
    3
  • canefanC Offline
    canefanC Offline
    canefan
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #1684

    @Rapido said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @voodoo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Rapido said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    That whole Matt Todd yellow discussion is quite interesting law wise. He basically just had a lie down and he wasn't off side. Surely the onus is on the attacking player to avoid him?

    I used to get a bit tired on the field and have a rest all the time, nobody penalised me and gave me a card. If all of the ABs just said "fck this I'm going to sit down" then the oppo just have to go around them, their problem if there are obstacles in the way whether they are making tackles or not? Impeding a ball carrier is kind of the point as long as it isn't dangerous.

    While I think Ownes made a meal of that, I think it is still probably the correct outcome. It's like a cannonball tackle. you can't dive on the ground in front of the player.

    It's harsh in that Todd was putting his broken body on the line and protecting his hurt side, but it is still correct, it just didn't look right.

    BTW. Can just state (repeat) that the scoring against the base of the goal pads is the stupidest rule in any sport, ever.

    Wasn't stupid when there was no padding or padding was small. Now a piece of the try line has been moved forward and is difficult to defend.
    Simple solution is to have pads in line with the try line (i.e. move the posts back.)

    Just make me people score tries properly. By having to press the ball down behind the tryline. Scrum 5 if their unfortunate enough to hit the posts.

    This. If you don't have enough try line to cross without having to resort to scoring a jammy try against the post you don't deserve to score

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #1685

    @Rapido said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @voodoo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Rapido said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    That whole Matt Todd yellow discussion is quite interesting law wise. He basically just had a lie down and he wasn't off side. Surely the onus is on the attacking player to avoid him?

    I used to get a bit tired on the field and have a rest all the time, nobody penalised me and gave me a card. If all of the ABs just said "fck this I'm going to sit down" then the oppo just have to go around them, their problem if there are obstacles in the way whether they are making tackles or not? Impeding a ball carrier is kind of the point as long as it isn't dangerous.

    While I think Ownes made a meal of that, I think it is still probably the correct outcome. It's like a cannonball tackle. you can't dive on the ground in front of the player.

    It's harsh in that Todd was putting his broken body on the line and protecting his hurt side, but it is still correct, it just didn't look right.

    BTW. Can just state (repeat) that the scoring against the base of the goal pads is the stupidest rule in any sport, ever.

    Wasn't stupid when there was no padding or padding was small. Now a piece of the try line has been moved forward and is difficult to defend.
    Simple solution is to have pads in line with the try line (i.e. move the posts back.)

    NFL has the solution - posts should be on the dead ball line making the entire tryline post-free

    Will never happen of course, too radical for the kickers now.

    Nah, the engineering costs would likely be huge (for clubs and multipurpose stadiums).

    Because of the deep ingoal area in rugby (compered to NFL) the ballasting required to cantilever the uprights forward from the deadball line to the goal line.

    Just make me people score tries properly. By having to press the ball down behind the tryline. Scrum 5 if their unfortunate enough to hit the posts.

    A simpler less costly exercise is to have the club intern mark our the try line a few inches forward and amend the dimension of the field length a few inches each end.

    SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to ACT Crusader on last edited by
    #1686

    @ACT-Crusader That works for me. A rugby field can be from 96 to 100m, so just draw the line across in front of the post pads at most grounds.

    They should do something about it though and Nige has highlighted it. Pretty silly law as it is.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    wrote on last edited by
    #1687

    I know the narrow field in Chicago has been discussed, but I just learnt that we didn't actually lose.

    A rugby field must be a minimum of 68m, Soldier field was 73 yards apparently (66.7512m) and not therefor legitimate according to world rugby.

    World Rugby Passport - Laws of the Game

    That should be stricken from the records.
    Did I just win a game for the Abs? I'm claiming it anyway.

    ACT CrusaderA 1 Reply Last reply
    11
  • westcoastieW Offline
    westcoastieW Offline
    westcoastie
    replied to chimoaus on last edited by
    #1688

    @chimoaus I think our famed fitness advantage also left when the likes of McCaw, Carter, Nonu etc did. The thing with the fitness is being able to build on it, year after year. Which the AB's best had done with a large core. We don't have that advantage we once did. If anything the Irish probably should have had some of the best fitness going around. England have had a pretty stable group for a long while now.

    ACT CrusaderA 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to Snowy on last edited by
    #1689

    @Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    I know the narrow field in Chicago has been discussed, but I just learnt that we didn't actually lose.

    A rugby field must be a minimum of 68m, Soldier field was 73 yards apparently (66.7512m) and not therefor legitimate according to world rugby.

    World Rugby Passport - Laws of the Game

    That should be stricken from the records.
    Did I just win a game for the Abs? I'm claiming it anyway.

    We would’ve won if it actually happened...

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to westcoastie on last edited by
    #1690

    @westcoastie said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    @chimoaus I think our famed fitness advantage also left when the likes of McCaw, Carter, Nonu etc did. The thing with the fitness is being able to build on it, year after year. Which the AB's best had done with a large core. We don't have that advantage we once did. If anything the Irish probably should have had some of the best fitness going around. England have had a pretty stable group for a long while now.

    Not sure it actually left when you look at the fact we have Whitelock, Retallick, Read consistently playing 80 minutes of rugby at a high intensity. Then with Barrett, ALB providing a high level for a full game.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • MokeyM Offline
    MokeyM Offline
    Mokey
    wrote on last edited by
    #1691

    Just watched the extended highlights, and one thing that really pissed me off was the Irish dirty play when an AB scored. Farking sliding knees, elbows and knees to the back, tackles round the neck. Really shitty.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • MajorRageM Offline
    MajorRageM Offline
    MajorRage
    wrote on last edited by MajorRage
    #1692

    Did enjoy this ....

    C7C7B0A3-4360-42CB-8704-1EFA05FA4234.png

    Billy TellB 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • Billy TellB Offline
    Billy TellB Offline
    Billy Tell
    replied to MajorRage on last edited by Billy Tell
    #1693

    @MajorRage said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    Did enjoy this ....

    C7C7B0A3-4360-42CB-8704-1EFA05FA4234.png

    Yip it was the turning point...Ireland right in the game at the point...

    (I think it is a penalty TBH)

    The correct answer of course is because NZ controls world rugby and that the haka had psyched out Owens.

    MajorRageM J 2 Replies Last reply
    2
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    wrote on last edited by
    #1694

    Is that when BBBR somehow managed to free the ball from a tackle with two Irish lying on top and holding on tight?

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • MiketheSnowM Offline
    MiketheSnowM Offline
    MiketheSnow
    replied to chimoaus on last edited by
    #1695

    @chimoaus said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):

    An honest question but you often hear people say the ABs are fitter, and sides slow the game down when playing us.

    How in the professional era with fitness coaches and state of the art gyms, nutritionists etc can any side be that much fitter than another?

    The choice of the best athletes from a small pool is a better choice than good athletes from a large pool.

    kiwiinmelbK 1 Reply Last reply
    1

RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2)
Rugby Matches
allblacksrwcireland
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.