All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3
-
@Crucial I've had a few more views of the O'Brien and Vunipola incidents and to me the O'Brien one is something and nothing, just what used to be called a rugby incident. It's fair that there is a citing as there is contact with the head but I don't see it worthy of a sanction. The two Vunipola incidents are a bit different. Late hit on Barrett for the charge down attempt, result penalty and a warning. Spot on for me. Five minutes later the piss poor clear out when on a warning already, Penalty, YC and ought to get cited and couldn't argue with getting some time off.
But this is the judiciary and no-one is ever quite sure how they work, so anything could happen.
-
@Catogrande said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@Crucial I've had a few more views of the O'Brien and Vunipola incidents and to me the O'Brien one is something and nothing, just what used to be called a rugby incident. It's fair that there is a citing as there is contact with the head but I don't see it worthy of a sanction. The two Vunipola incidents are a bit different. Late hit on Barrett for the charge down attempt, result penalty and a warning. Spot on for me. Five minutes later the piss poor clear out when on a warning already, Penalty, YC and ought to get cited and couldn't argue with getting some time off.
But this is the judiciary and no-one is ever quite sure how they work, so anything could happen.
Yep, I think Mako is more worthy of a trip to the judiciary than SOB. Off the ball, clear of the ruck, went close to taking BB's head off.
But, in saying that, Mako was shit all game, so I don't want to see him banned.
-
@Nepia said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@Catogrande said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@Crucial I've had a few more views of the O'Brien and Vunipola incidents and to me the O'Brien one is something and nothing, just what used to be called a rugby incident. It's fair that there is a citing as there is contact with the head but I don't see it worthy of a sanction. The two Vunipola incidents are a bit different. Late hit on Barrett for the charge down attempt, result penalty and a warning. Spot on for me. Five minutes later the piss poor clear out when on a warning already, Penalty, YC and ought to get cited and couldn't argue with getting some time off.
But this is the judiciary and no-one is ever quite sure how they work, so anything could happen.
Yep, I think Mako is more worthy of a trip to the judiciary than SOB. Off the ball, clear of the ruck, went close to taking BB's head off.
But, in saying that, Mako was shit all game, so I don't want to see him banned.
The issue with this discussion is one of the difference between what most rugby fans believe is the way the rules/interpretations should operate and the way they currently do. I agree that if I were making the rules/mandating the interpretations SOB would not have seen red/been cited. For that matter I'd have not sanctioned SBW with more time: the RC would suffice. However, as I understand the actual position SBW four week ban is consistent and SOB swinging arm which contacted head and resulted in player off is also RC and thus a suspension is the consistent outcome.
-
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
O'Brien cleared. No suspension.
The right result, but really the only one possible after Vunipola wasn't cited. You just simply can't deem it worse than Vunipola's actions.
-
@Billy-Tell that would be a very silly move, IMHO. We looked particularly rudderless after he went off and TJP's defensive cover - or rather lack thereof - for the Murray try was unforgivable.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
O'Brien cleared. No suspension.
The right result, but really the only one possible after Vunipola wasn't cited. You just simply can't deem it worse than Vunipola's actions.
Yeah. Will be interesting to see the ruling as I also can't see how it was also 5 weeks less an action than SBW.
I know you think SBWs one was deliberate but the judiciary didn't. They saw it as reckless not deliberate.
Personally I would say O'Brien's was careless rather than reckless and maybe that is the ruling. I think that means YC rather than RC. That means we have the infield guys saying nothing, The citing guy saying Red and the judiciary say yellow. No wonder players don't know how the dice will roll. -
has anyone else noticed that we seem to have entered some sort of alternate reality where the lions make breaks and score tries while we kick penalties and play warren-ball?
i'm a bit worried about the decider. our forwards have got to be knackered after that 7 man effort, there are major injury problems in the backs, and we aren't playing smart rugby. -
@reprobate said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
has anyone else noticed that we seem to have entered some sort of alternate reality where the lions make breaks and score tries while we kick penalties and play warren-ball?
i'm a bit worried about the decider. our forwards have got to be knackered after that 7 man effort, there are major injury problems in the backs, and we aren't playing smart rugby.Hard to play expansive rugby when the ball is being slowed down and we aren't cleaning out fast enough, and the ref is allowing a liberal OS line. We beat them well in game 1, the rub of the green went against us in dire conditions in Wellington. Hope for drier conditions at Eden Park and normal transmission to be resumed. Just like game 1 we need to dominate the Lions forwards to get front foot ball for the backs
-
There was no way this was accidental. His head was sticking out, O'Brien lined him up with a swinging forearm. I was calling for red as soon as I saw it.
I actually think this won the game. They scored a try immediately after, we didn't have Naholo on attack, and defence was weakened.
-
Test 3 will certainly be interesting from a reffing perspective. My guess is that the ref team (which is the same all the way through) get a roasting in their post match review for poor communication and inconsistency. Hansen will certainly be writing about the amount of offside play in his post game report and seeking clarification on the BBBR penalty and why Itoje was allowed to stand in the line out channel waving his arms.
If that all means that Itoje is pinged off Eden Park and the Lions have to stay onside then we will romp in. -
-
@akan004
Well, I'm not one to moan about unfair. The guys could have won despite this and lots of other shit. All that is normal stuff they must rise above, they are the All Blacks. And they nearly did.
However, I focus on the truth (as much as I can see).
Pull up a clip of the incident.- Naholo's head is sticking clear out, the ball is hidden in his lap
- Sean O'Brien (let's call him SOB haha) braces himself and tenses his right hand. His hand actually is angled up like a karate chop.
- SOB carefully lines up the head with a half movement, then connects. When SOB connects, his whole body is behind the other Lions tackler.
- SOB releases and backs away from the tackle area.
SOB wasn't committed to a tackle and didn't go down. SOB was at all time standing up braced for swinging an arm and minimal contact in the tackle.
I would have accepted a yellow. But it deserved a red, or failing that, citing and 2 week ban.
-
@Crucial said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@Bones said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
O'Brien cleared. No suspension.
The right result, but really the only one possible after Vunipola wasn't cited. You just simply can't deem it worse than Vunipola's actions.
Yeah. Will be interesting to see the ruling as I also can't see how it was also 5 weeks less an action than SBW.
I know you think SBWs one was deliberate but the judiciary didn't. They saw it as reckless not deliberate.
Personally I would say O'Brien's was careless rather than reckless and maybe that is the ruling. I think that means YC rather than RC. That means we have the infield guys saying nothing, The citing guy saying Red and the judiciary say yellow. No wonder players don't know how the dice will roll.Hah, well don't go down the judiciary doesn't agree with me bit - seems they don't agree with you either on O'Brien
-
@Wreck-Diver he overran his line and allowed Murray and the ball to get inside him - holding back had nothing to do with it
Funny guy 
