Wallabies v France 3
-
-
@cgrant said in Wallabies v France 3:
While this was a B or C rated French team, the same could nearly apply to the Wallabies.
They were missing JOC and Jordan Petaia, but also Kurtley Beale, Isaac Rodda, R. Arnold, Will Skelton, Samu Kerevi, just to name a few.I think 15 v 14 was the bigger takeaway
-
@mikethesnow said in Wallabies v France 3:
@cgrant said in Wallabies v France 3:
While this was a B or C rated French team, the same could nearly apply to the Wallabies.
They were missing JOC and Jordan Petaia, but also Kurtley Beale, Isaac Rodda, R. Arnold, Will Skelton, Samu Kerevi, just to name a few.I think 15 v 14 was the bigger takeaway
The missing player was a winger. Easy to adjust defensively for that loss and although it may remove some attacking options and firepower, again it's not super difficult unless all plays were 'get the ball to that guy'.
Harder work and more concentration required for sure and kudos to them for dealing with it well.
Certainly dealt with it better than the ABs did in Perth when they just played without a lock for 10 minutes then swapped a loosie for a lock. Would have made much more sense to ditch a wing and played with 8 forwards.
-
Reckon some of you guys watch too much league. (Being Welsh, I'd say that any league is too mich league). The NH is starting to take brain injury seriously, but I'd say the SH - and in particular Oz - is a little behind. NRL seems to allow hits to the head that to my unconcussed mind should be consigned to history, and maybe that influences union watchers too.
My immediate impression was that it was a perfect tackle, but after seeing all the replays I don't think Marika can have too many complaints. Malice and intent are totally irrelevant for head contact, have been for a few years. Thr tackler has to avoid the head, and Marika's tackle involved head contact, which is a straight red unless there is sufficient mitigation to downgrade.
Agree that the French guy might have been hamming it up, but it didn't influence the decision. He did dip, but only a very small amount and just a natural adjustment to brace for the impact. I wasn't sure if the first contact was head, even after all the replays, but if it was shoulder or chest first it was so marginal as to not affect the outcome.
Another ref on another day might have said that was enough mitigation to downgrade to a yellow, but that's your best case outcome. The Wallabies have known that for a few years, and they need to adjust for it. Accidents can happen, they want to play on the edge and it's hard to get it right every time, especially when you're a massive unit like Koroibete travelling at Mach speed. But that's a skill that has to be practiced like any other.
The nonsense from the commentators was disappointing, I thought we might have left behind the "I'm all for player safety, but when it impacts my enjoyment of the game it's gone too far" nonsense when they got rid of Fox Sport, but unfortunately not.
-
@chimoaus @kiwiwomble said in Wallabies v France 3:
@chimoaus said in Wallabies v France 3:
Out of curiosity what is the rule about where the hookers feet should be when throwing into the lineout? It seems most hookers stand in the field of play with just their heels touching the line.
Can’t be in the field of play…always are
Only just read the thread and saw this. Have been through this a couple of times on here.
Apparently the refs (@Damo was one at the time and he clarified it) see that as out of the field of play. If they are on the line they are out. Same as any other player touching the line is out. Just the way it is ruled it seems.
-
@gibbonrib said in Wallabies v France 3:
The nonsense from the commentators was disappointing, I thought we might have left behind the "I'm all for player safety, but when it impacts my enjoyment of the game it's gone too far" nonsense when they got rid of Fox Sport, but unfortunately not.
You make a few good points here. But just on this one for a second - there was a wider context here that non-Aussies may not pick up.
This was a huge game for the code. The series had picked up quite a bit of momentum, it had been shifted to the main FTA channel, and there was a big audience and more anticipation for a rugby game here than there has been for a few years.
There was a lot riding on a Wallaby win, and/or an entertaining game that gets a big TV audience and keeps them.
So to have a red card that could be described maybe as marginal in the 5th minute to the Wallabies best (and arguably most recognisable) player, it just took the wind out of everyone here, myself included. It's not surprising that frustration bubbled over a bit.
-
@barbarian TBH, I think that was one of the most exciting games and best advertisements for the Wallabies and rugby.
-
@gibbonrib said in Wallabies v France 3:
Reckon some of you guys watch too much league. (Being Welsh, I'd say that any league is too mich league). The NH is starting to take brain injury seriously, but I'd say the SH - and in particular Oz - is a little behind. NRL seems to allow hits to the head that to my unconcussed mind should be consigned to history, and maybe that influences union watchers too.
My immediate impression was that it was a perfect tackle, but after seeing all the replays I don't think Marika can have too many complaints. Malice and intent are totally irrelevant for head contact, have been for a few years. Thr tackler has to avoid the head, and Marika's tackle involved head contact, which is a straight red unless there is sufficient mitigation to downgrade.
Agree that the French guy might have been hamming it up, but it didn't influence the decision. He did dip, but only a very small amount and just a natural adjustment to brace for the impact. I wasn't sure if the first contact was head, even after all the replays, but if it was shoulder or chest first it was so marginal as to not affect the outcome.
Another ref on another day might have said that was enough mitigation to downgrade to a yellow, but that's your best case outcome. The Wallabies have known that for a few years, and they need to adjust for it. Accidents can happen, they want to play on the edge and it's hard to get it right every time, especially when you're a massive unit like Koroibete travelling at Mach speed. But that's a skill that has to be practiced like any other.
The nonsense from the commentators was disappointing, I thought we might have left behind the "I'm all for player safety, but when it impacts my enjoyment of the game it's gone too far" nonsense when they got rid of Fox Sport, but unfortunately not.
The other thing that people miss is the aggravating factor that cancels out the mitigating one.
Yes the ball carrier dipped to brace himself however the tackler was a long way out when that movement started and he is the one that has to take care. He had clear line of sight and the ability to adjust. If he continued to aim high and even drove upward in the tackle then he can't really complain that it 'went wrong'
-
@cgrant said in Wallabies v France 3:
While this was a B or C rated French team, the same could nearly apply to the Wallabies.
They were missing JOC and Jordan Petaia, but also Kurtley Beale, Isaac Rodda, R. Arnold, Will Skelton, Samu Kerevi, just to name a few.Not sure that Beale and Skelton would be in Aussies best 23 (or 24).
-
@nepia said in Wallabies v France 3:
@barbarian TBH, I think that was one of the most exciting games and best advertisements for the Wallabies and rugby.
Yes, in hindsight it all worked out perfectly. But in the 5th minute that seemed very unlikely.
-
@barbarian said in Wallabies v France 3:
@gibbonrib said in Wallabies v France 3:
The nonsense from the commentators was disappointing, I thought we might have left behind the "I'm all for player safety, but when it impacts my enjoyment of the game it's gone too far" nonsense when they got rid of Fox Sport, but unfortunately not.
You make a few good points here. But just on this one for a second - there was a wider context here that non-Aussies may not pick up.
This was a huge game for the code. The series had picked up quite a bit of momentum, it had been shifted to the main FTA channel, and there was a big audience and more anticipation for a rugby game here than there has been for a few years.
There was a lot riding on a Wallaby win, and/or an entertaining game that gets a big TV audience and keeps them.
So to have a red card that could be described maybe as marginal in the 5th minute to the Wallabies best (and arguably most recognisable) player, it just took the wind out of everyone here, myself included. It's not surprising that frustration bubbled over a bit.
Yeah I understand the context - I'm Welsh, but I've been living in Australia for 18 years, so I've been following it closely. I'm really hopeful the big reset will help stabilise rugby here and give it a platform to grow. The relationship with Fox had clearly gotten toxic, so hoping that having FTA on 9, Super AU, change to the classic gold shirts etc. will give it a huge lift.
So the frustration and disappointment is totally understandable. But it was totally misdirected. They could have talked about how Marika got it wrong, or it was just a bit unlucky / a great shame, but instead they all piled onto the officials for basically correctly applying the laws.
It's deeply worrying to me, because they seem to be determined to make exactly the same massive mistakes that Fox did. I'm going to make a huge generalisation here, but Australian rugby fans are far less knowledgeable about the game than, say, the Kiwis or Welsh. So the commentators have a responsibility to help explain stuff. But instead they're choosing to go for the easy outrage option, just like Fox.
Do you remember in the last world cup when Gareth Davies picked off Genia's pass to score an intercept try? It looked to everyone like he was a mile offside, but the ref allowed it. The Aussie commentators all went into absolute meltdown because he didn't even go to the TMO to check. Turns out Davies was absolutely onside, he just read and timed it perfectly. When you see the replay from the right angle it's not even in doubt. But the Aussie TV never showed that angle, even during the HT / post match analysis (and Cheikas presser) they just kept banging on about the outrageous injustice. To this day most Aussie fans think they were robbed. Fox could have taken the moment to educate and highlight a good bit of skill, but preferred the "we were robbed" and "incompetent officials are killing the game" outrage.
I'm just praying that 9 / Stan don't follow that same tack. I'm hopeful they won't, 9 actually want rugby to succeed. For the last few years it felt like Fox were negging rugby at every possible opportunity. (Trying to reduce the value ahead of negotiations? Or maybe they knew they had no future and were just trying to tarnish it for whoever took it over next).
And in the end it all worked out pretty well - an amazing match, an amazing series, and a win for the Wallabies against the odds.
-
@barbarian it would be interesting to know how many viewers switched the rugby off after the card. I didn't watch the game, but as a casual viewer I have been known to 'change channels' when there is a card, red or yellow. The odds are I would have given up watching that game.
-
@crazy-horse If they did, I hope they read the report and are regretting it ...
Do you think they would have been less likely to switch off if the commentators had given a more balanced explanation as to why the red was given?
-
@gibbonrib said in Wallabies v France 3:
@crazy-horse If they did, I hope they read the report and are regretting it ...
Do you think they would have been less likely to switch off if the commentators had given a more balanced explanation as to why the red was given?
Don't know. It wouldn't have made a difference to me because cards have been cheesing me off for years. I flat out do not like them.
