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.
-
@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
-
@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.
-
@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.
-
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.
That should be stricken from the records.
Did I just win a game for the Abs? I'm claiming it anyway. -
@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.
-
@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.
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...
-
@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.
-
@MajorRage said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
Did enjoy this ....
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.
-
@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.
-
@Billy-Tell The best part if you look at the comments is how many people had no idea Barnes was completely taking the piss ...
-
@voodoo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
I don't know how some of you guys manage to comment during the game, you must be better typists than me (not saying much), I'd miss half the action if I tried.
Tell me about it! I was away all weekend and have just spent the last 90 mins reading through this thread, starting from posts on Friday afternoon.
It is always much more fun after a win.
Now for the other QFs...
-
Murry Kinsella's article on Ireland's terribie start:
Analysis: Ireland's abysmal opening quarter sets tone for All Blacks hammering
Needing to be cool and clinical, Ireland instead delivered their most un-Schmidt like showing.
BTW, I watched the match again last night. Gee, Ireland had an awful day at the office.
-
@Rapido which was in part due to the pace and style we were playing, put them under all sorts of pressure...similar to us in Dublin last year.
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Rapido which was in part due to the pace and style we were playing, put them under all sorts of pressure...similar to us in Dublin last year.
Yes, but only in part.
3 missed PKs to touch, Stockdale catching a kick and then stepping into touch, O'Mahoney penalty reversal, several loose carries. A lot of terrible.
Reading something like the article I linked above also focuses on their poor lines and fumbled passes when opportunities were created, which as an NZ fan is something I would not notice .
-
Some observations:
- Starting scrums even, replacement front-row still a concern. Ofa T getting penalised in one scrum when he got lifted. Not sure if that was v Furlong or Porter (but a few Irish analysts don't yet rate Porter's THP scrummaging - so if the later, that would be a concern).
- NZ maul defence was great.
- NZ even ran a perfect driving maul of their own.
- Ruck speed was great, setting up for forwards go-forward.
- Our own linespeed in defence was good.
- Lineouts pretty good, We lost one throw when O'Mahoney got in front of Savea at the front. They showed a replay and throw was perfectly fine, just well read by P'OM.
- lineout stats 7/8 from our throw, Irish 15/15 on their throw. So we'ren't very efective attacking their lineout. I recall once Retallick forced Ryan into a sloppy tap which I think they knocked on - otherwise their lineout was unchallenged by us.
- Penalty count a concern. 13-6 to Ireland (13-7 really as we scored try under penalty advantage). A refreshing aspect of the RWC coverage from the host broadcaster is they don't try to forensically investigate every penalty so can't comment on the accuracy of all of them. Some a bit tough (A Savea maul collapse offence when Irish went down but ruled that Savea drove him down, Ta'avao phantom neck roll, tackles off the ball on dummy runner or latcher).
-
Hopefully nothing in it ,
Nigel Yaldin reporting read was missing at training this morning
Laws of the Game | World Rugby Laws
