• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
allblacksaustralia
1.4k Posts 81 Posters 31.3k Views
Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October
    • 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.
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to NTA on last edited by
    #1304

    @NTA said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @Snowy it's messy. You could concede the penalty when the ball is under your second row and your prop loses his bind.

    Remember we're dealing with refs here, and none of them have had a single clue about scrums since Wayne "Gus" Erickson (Aussie ref and ex prop) retired 😉

    Scrums are a lot different to the days Erickson was a player and also reffing.

    And speaking of his reffing, let’s not forget the absolute howler of a try he awarded to France against the ABs in 2000...

    NTAN 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • NTAN Offline
    NTAN Offline
    NTA
    replied to ACT Crusader on last edited by
    #1305

    @ACT-Crusader said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @NTA said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @Snowy it's messy. You could concede the penalty when the ball is under your second row and your prop loses his bind.

    Remember we're dealing with refs here, and none of them have had a single clue about scrums since Wayne "Gus" Erickson (Aussie ref and ex prop) retired 😉

    Scrums are a lot different to the days Erickson was a player and also reffing.

    My theory being any ref who was a prop and transitioned to refereeing would be better placed than someone who never propped

    nzzpN taniwharugbyT 2 Replies Last reply
    2
  • nzzpN Online
    nzzpN Online
    nzzp
    replied to NTA on last edited by
    #1306

    @NTA said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @ACT-Crusader said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @NTA said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @Snowy it's messy. You could concede the penalty when the ball is under your second row and your prop loses his bind.

    Remember we're dealing with refs here, and none of them have had a single clue about scrums since Wayne "Gus" Erickson (Aussie ref and ex prop) retired 😉

    Scrums are a lot different to the days Erickson was a player and also reffing.

    My theory being any ref who was a prop and transitioned to refereeing would be better placed than someone who never propped

    you say that, but have they been on courses to get qualified, and how is their powerpoint game?

    tongue obviously very in cheek.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • taniwharugbyT Offline
    taniwharugbyT Offline
    taniwharugby
    replied to NTA on last edited by
    #1307

    @NTA I learnt alot about the front row through coaching kids, particularly the past 2 seasons being contested...I did get asked to play fornt row once, I declined 🙂

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • No QuarterN Offline
    No QuarterN Offline
    No Quarter
    replied to mariner4life on last edited by No Quarter
    #1308

    @mariner4life said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @Frank said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @mariner4life said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    What a shit game.

    The first half was bad, highlighted by the dogshit first quarter. Errors, shit play, more errors.

    Considering the scoreline we were crap. The wallabies basically gift wrapped our points, especially the first 26. Unforced error after Unforced error. We can't even take credit for forcing the error, we just waited for their kids to fuck up. And they did, a lot. Then missed a tackle.

    When we were forced to play phases and create, we did nothing, for 40 minutes. The wallabies made their front on tackles, and were forced in to box kicks. Or made our own error. It was just shit.

    On a couple of players.
    Goodhue is painfully slow. Gor burned for the Wallabie try, and on a kick chase got burned by everyone
    Seriously, can we not find a better halfback than TJP? His passing is fucking bad. The drop when Smith goes off is massive.

    Glad I didn't go out of my way to watch live.

    Someone woken up on the wrong side of bed this morning?
    Miserable fluffybunny.

    Which bit is wrong?

    Watching AB players score pretty tries against witches hats when handed the ball is nothing new.

    Watching us do fuck all the rest of the game is pretty ordinary

    We were far better a fortnight ago

    I'm not convinced we were that much better a fortnight ago. In my write up from that game I said it felt like we relied on individual brilliance to actually get into the match, the Wallabies were dominating up until Beauden and Clarke produced some magic from broken play.

    You are only as good as what you play in front of you, but this Wallabies team is really weak and their defense can be utterly woeful at times. The first test, where the weather played its part, showed we haven't developed a gameplan for breaking defenses down when the going gets tough.

    ACT CrusaderA 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    wrote on last edited by
    #1309

    FFS budgie smugglers? Having those ride up your crack and constrict your balls- no wonder they were shit!

    Capture.JPG

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    wrote on last edited by
    #1310

    Cole no try, try.

    To me it was clearly a try

    But here's an article on this try / no try.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300147534/all-blacks-vs-australia-why-dane-coles-was-robbed-of-a-try-in-sydney

    But as the All Blacks were running back to halfway Australian TMO Angus Gardner told O’Keeffe to check the grounding on the replays.

    “The ball is in the air, I don't believe the player has control of the ball," Gardner told O'Keeffe, effectively overruling his decision.

    After watching the replays, O'Keeffe agreed and disallowed the try (although you could argue Gardner's intervention left him with little choice).

    There is where the decision gets problematic, on two fronts.

    First, the laws of the game make no mention of the word “control” when it comes to scoring a try, just that the player has contact with ball with their hands, arms, fingers or even chest as it touches the ground.

    Coles appears to do just that.

    Second, and this is where the inconsistency has crept in, when the onfield decision is ‘try' in Super Rugby Aotearoa or Mitre 10 Cup, the referees have needed conclusive proof on the replay to overrule the original decision.

    antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • antipodeanA Offline
    antipodeanA Offline
    antipodean
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #1311

    @Winger I said it was a clear try at the time, but as I had been drinking for a fair few hours with five Wallaby supporters, I wasn't vociferous in my protestations in order to give my mates some hope.

    nzzpN 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • nzzpN Online
    nzzpN Online
    nzzp
    replied to antipodean on last edited by
    #1312

    @antipodean I agree completely. No separation between ball and hand, ball+ground+hand = try.

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    wrote on last edited by
    #1313

    Try for all money, the talk of control is bollocks, as long as the contact with the ball is not broken (which would be a knock on).

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • mariner4lifeM Offline
    mariner4lifeM Offline
    mariner4life
    wrote on last edited by
    #1314

    i can't see how it wasn't given. I even went and read the laws, and can't see the word "control" mentioned anywhere. Kaf in commentary must have said it 25 times so i just assumed it was the law.

    Would love to have someone who knows what they are talking about confirm it.

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    replied to mariner4life on last edited by
    #1315

    @mariner4life said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    Would love to have someone who knows what they are talking about confirm it.

    I know. It was a try.

    You're welcome

    WingerW 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • antipodeanA Offline
    antipodeanA Offline
    antipodean
    wrote on last edited by
    #1316

    In case I haven't said this before - Angus Gardner is a clown.

    From https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=21
    The ball can be grounded in in-goal:

    • By holding it and touching the ground with it; or
    • By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.
    ACT CrusaderA boobooB 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to Machpants on last edited by
    #1317

    @Machpants said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @mariner4life said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    Would love to have someone who knows what they are talking about confirm it.

    I know. It was a try.

    You're welcome

    I can understand the actual ref getting a bit confused. But not the video ref. And does the head of refs have a word to the fools refs who make these mistakes

    NTAN 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • NTAN Offline
    NTAN Offline
    NTA
    wrote on last edited by NTA
    #1318

    @antipodean said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    In case I haven't said this before - Angus Gardner is a clown.

    AFG also said "double movement" last time out so let's not put too much stock in any words coming out of his mouth.

    From https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=21
    The ball can be grounded in in-goal:

    • By holding it and touching the ground with it; or
    • By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.

    Yes, so they're debating whether he's pressing it down - which most of the time means the ball is on the ground in-goal and they're just literally putting their hand on it (which you can do from touch-in-goal tho not a lot of people understand the difference there).

    Their issue must have been around the fact the ball is still moving and therefore whether he is holding it or not. He isn't by definition, so then is he in constant contact to press it down. The motion of the ball compared to his arm suggests it wasn't but at the same time, there was no clear separation.

    Yet another edge case the Laws don't cover, really.

    MajorRageM antipodeanA 2 Replies Last reply
    1
  • NTAN Offline
    NTAN Offline
    NTA
    wrote on last edited by
    #1319

    @Machpants said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @mariner4life said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    Would love to have someone who knows what they are talking about confirm it.

    I know. It was a try.

    You're welcome

    And yet, it isn't on the scoresheet anywhere, so it isn't a try.

    You're welcome 😉

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • NTAN Offline
    NTAN Offline
    NTA
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #1320

    @Winger said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    I can understand the actual ref getting a bit confused. But not the video ref.

    Why? They're all using the same book of Rugby Laws. They're all standing there having a chat about it.

    The real question is about the directives provided: there was a situation where you needed some pretty good evidence to overturn an onfield decision. Where has THAT gone?

    taniwharugbyT KirwanK 2 Replies Last reply
    4
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to No Quarter on last edited by
    #1321

    @No-Quarter said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @mariner4life said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @Frank said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    @mariner4life said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    What a shit game.

    The first half was bad, highlighted by the dogshit first quarter. Errors, shit play, more errors.

    Considering the scoreline we were crap. The wallabies basically gift wrapped our points, especially the first 26. Unforced error after Unforced error. We can't even take credit for forcing the error, we just waited for their kids to fuck up. And they did, a lot. Then missed a tackle.

    When we were forced to play phases and create, we did nothing, for 40 minutes. The wallabies made their front on tackles, and were forced in to box kicks. Or made our own error. It was just shit.

    On a couple of players.
    Goodhue is painfully slow. Gor burned for the Wallabie try, and on a kick chase got burned by everyone
    Seriously, can we not find a better halfback than TJP? His passing is fucking bad. The drop when Smith goes off is massive.

    Glad I didn't go out of my way to watch live.

    Someone woken up on the wrong side of bed this morning?
    Miserable fluffybunny.

    Which bit is wrong?

    Watching AB players score pretty tries against witches hats when handed the ball is nothing new.

    Watching us do fuck all the rest of the game is pretty ordinary

    We were far better a fortnight ago

    I'm not convinced we were that much better a fortnight ago. In my write up from that game I said it felt like we relied on individual brilliance to actually get into the match, the Wallabies were dominating up until Beauden and Clarke produced some magic from broken play.

    You are only as good as what you play in front of you, but this Wallabies team is really weak and their defense can be utterly woeful at times. The first test, where the weather played its part, showed we haven't developed a gameplan for breaking defenses down when the going gets tough

    Which is a good thing. I’d hate to think we had ‘arrived’ after a few training sessions together under a new coaching set up. Especially when new midfield, new back row, new back 3, rookies etc

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Machpants on last edited by
    #1322

    @Machpants said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    Try for all money, the talk of control is bollocks, as long as the contact with the ball is not broken (which would be a knock on).

    Please forward to:

    J Marshall
    23 Ignorant Street
    La La Land

    1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to antipodean on last edited by
    #1323

    @antipodean said in Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October:

    In case I haven't said this before - Angus Gardner is a clown.

    From https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=21
    The ball can be grounded in in-goal:

    • By holding it and touching the ground with it; or
    • By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.

    I don’t think Coles did either of these things so the call was right.

    The way I saw it is that as soon as he put his right hand on it he either had to press it down (2nd point) or regather it and hold it down (1st point).

    BovidaeB 1 Reply Last reply
    1

Bledisloe Three: Sydney, 31 October
Rugby Matches
allblacksaustralia
  • 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.