Wallaby EOYT 2016
-
@KiwiMurph
I can´t understand how the Wallabies selectors could expect the Irish to tire in the second half, when they have been the only side this year to actually match the AB´s for 80 minutes, whereas Wobs have dropped their shit after 60-65 against them(or even earlier).I will back the Wallabies, but logic says the pack with the two hobbits in the back row and the powderpuff twins starting(well Simmons has to with Coleman out) , is just too weak to match the mongrel of the Paddies.
I don´t think Paddy Jackson is that much worse than Sexton is, and at least he has form in staying on the field for the whole match, which Sexton hasn´t done in a while. Ringrose is promising, but this is deep end for the young un` and I reckon if Folau is running at 12, he should find breaks and half breaks between Jackson and Ringrose, support needs to be alert, there won´t be chances to blow in this one. -
-
@mariner4life said in Wallaby EOYT 2016:
Two questions.
-
What was the final score this morning? I had to leave before it finished. Rough old game, kind of fun to watch. Wallabies looked the better side, but just couldn't convert opportunity in to points. It did look like 2 scratch teams going at each other though.
-
What the fuck is with that Wallaby back row for the weekend? You watch the Irish loosies on the rampage against the ABs and you pick Mumm at 6, and Pocock at 8? Fucking hell.
That is one big point of advantage that Ireland will have. They just need to make sure they don't keep giving the ball to the convict backs. With VDF on the bench to bolster things once one of the others tires you'd have to think that going up the guts and around the fringes is the way to play this.
If they think the ABs are tough just think, they haven't met Dean Mumm yet (snigger)
-
-
@Crucial said in Wallaby EOYT 2016:
Who is the poor ref in this game and will he get confused over which bald hooker is whining at him the most?
Tip: An aussie whine sounds like a jet engine winding up and Irish whine like one winding down.
Jerome Garces. So the Irish will fancy their chances at scrum time.
-
@Crucial said in Wallaby EOYT 2016:
Who is the poor ref in this game and will he get confused over which bald hooker is whining at him the most?
Tip: An aussie whine sounds like a jet engine winding up and Irish whine like one winding down.
I think he Best prefers Kiwis being wound up. 😉
-
Now that they don't have a Grand Slam, I hope the Wallabies flog England next week.
-
@Tim said in Wallaby EOYT 2016:
I see that the penalty count was 13-3 against Australia. Sounds familiar ...
The reaction from the coaching on the receiving end isnt though..
-
@Virgil said in Wallaby EOYT 2016:
@Tim said in Wallaby EOYT 2016:
I see that the penalty count was 13-3 against Australia. Sounds familiar ...
The reaction from the coaching on the receiving end isnt though..
How so?
Tell me Krusty has had a meltdown. That'll be fun.
-
Cheika's comments (haven't seen video) as reported by
Michael Cheika seeks meeting with World Rugby referee boss after Ireland loss
Wallabies coach Michael Cheika says he will seek a meeting with World Rugby referees boss Alain Rolland in the wake of his side's 27-24 loss to Ireland which featured a lopsided 13-3 penalty count against the visitors.
Cheika complained about a lack of consistency from referee Jerome Garces in a match where the Wallabies fought back from 17-0 down to claw their way in front, before falling short by three points at Aviva Stadium.
"I thought we played a lot of footy mate in the end, but we got penalised a lot didn't we," Cheika said. "13-3 penalty count and that costs you field position, costs you territory and obviously points as well so you can't win a Test match if you're giving away that many penalties or that big a difference between the two teams. Impossible."
Asked if he was happy with the manner of the decisions, Cheika said: "That's something I'll be dealing with Alain Rolland about afterwards. He's the referees' boss so I'll go through the proper channels as opposed to making it an issue out here and see if we can get something but I doubt it.
"We have to do that [talking about decisions] with the refs mate. They've told us that we can't talk about it in public because they don't want the interpretations being made public. That's the edict they've given us and we can't say anything about it. We'd love to but we're not allowed to. I don't want to get myself in any strife and I think we've made the point clear and we'll go through the proper channels with Alan Rolland and we'll get onto the game."
Both Dean Mumm and Bernard Foley were shown yellow cards. However, it would appear both those decisions were correct given the infringements both players were guilty of.
One of the more controversial moments of the evening came when Irish inside-centre Gary Ringrose was awarded a try in the 34th minute.
The Australians argued fellow second-rower Devin Toner impeded Rory Arnold but the decision stood.
"I didn't really get a look at it," said Cheika of the try which put Ireland up 17-0 after a conversion. "It's all about consistency of the application of the laws. [David] Pocock was taken out about ten metres beyond the maul. That's something that we would have got penalised for against New Zealand a few weeks ago.
"Ireland played well and they deserve to win because they put us under pressure in the first half in particular and we got too far behind. The second half I was very pleased with the performance. That's something we'll learn - you can't come for just one half."
It is not the first time Cheika has hit out at referees this year.
He was furious with Romain Poite following the second Bledisloe Cup match in Wellington after the referee refused to interact with captain Stephen Moore.
While this time around Moore said there were no communication issues between him and French referee Garces, Cheika questioned whether Australia needed to cop things on the chin a bit more.
"We've had a few meetings with Alain Rolland and tried to do it that way," Cheika said. "Maybe we've just got to wear it. We'll discuss it and we'll see what happens. It's about the consistency of what we're doing. That's what will be the discussion. Not about that guy or this guy.
"Everyone's got their own opinion. Everyone saw it out there, and felt it, but we've got to do it through the proper channels to see if we can try to affect some, what we feel, change that's necessary."
-
Haven't seen the game. From the highlights, the "infringement" from Toner was mild, but it had a material effect, knocking Arnold down when he was in a position to make the tackle - if we apply the same parameters of DHP v Savea.
The two yellow cards were by the book, and look satisfactory - Mumm was probably lucky he didn't see red - but I'm told that McMahon was also upended in a similar fashion and Ireland got no cards. I didn't see it, so can't say how true that is.
A 13-3 penalty count against is a sign our discipline is still not consistently good enough. And you know that whenever you draw one of the French refs you need to sort that shit out because they hold a grudge.
Ireland conceded a total of 11 penalties in three games against the ABs and Wallabies this year. So that probably tells another story.
-
-
@NTA was mentioned in one of the other threads about why our pen counts are often lopsided as we will more often than not play through an advantage and not draw the penalty.
They record most other incidents, they should also then record how many times the ref calls a penalty and then calls advantage over given they dont count it on the stats unless play stops, but do with knock ons.
-
-
@NTA yep, regardless of advantage played on or not, they still count the knock on stats, so not sure why they dont with pens.
Could just show it like (12) 4 and (13) 11 with the bracketed one being the penalty conceded, the other being when a penalty was actually awarded.
-
It would help shut up a few people, as well as give the refereeing community some interesting stats to analyse.
I was always of the belief that the AB game plan in Richie's last few years was to infringe hard inside the opposition half, but let advantage go and trust the defence if the opposition retained the ball. More often than not, a 20-30m gain from inside the half is considered "territorial or tactical advantage" and the ref will wave play on.
That's when you hit hard with defence and force a turnover or penalty.
By contrast, that arc about 40m out from the posts was very carefully played so as not to give away easy points.
They have changed the law interpretations now to concentrate more on creating new advantages for subsequent phases. We'll see how that goes.
-
agree it would help with ref analysis (which I expect they must do?) to say well you awarded 26 penalties today, for team a you let advantage go 10 times, but only 3 for the other team
