Bledisloe One: Wellington, October 11
-
https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/ja6hsj/the_holy_post/
Might make a pilgrimaqe down to Te Papa.
-
On Rieko's grounding, and me saying his lax grounding technique has been bugging me for a few years.
I think, he botched a grounding few years ago away, v Argentina away, but got away with it. But warning, my memory is atrocious of anything about post circa-1996 ... this nugget of info could be 100% wrong. anyone else ? Maybe it was a time he grounded it like that in the wet?, or he grounded it like that when a cover defender was getting darn close ... I can't remember specifics.
For the record I think his grounding was technically just ok on Sunday. Don't agree with the decision on that occasion.
-
@Rapido said in Bledisloe One: Wellington, October 11:
On Rieko's grounding, and me saying his lax grounding technique has been bugging me for a few years.
I think, he botched a grounding few years ago away, v Argentina away, but got away with it. But warning, my memory is atrocious of anything about post circa-1996 ... this nugget of info could be 100% wrong. anyone else ?
For the record I think his grounding was technically just ok on Sunday. Don't agree with the decision on that occasion.
Technically just OK?
It either was or wasn't.
TMO protocols are clear. An on-field call of try means clear evidence is needed to overturn. Has anyone seen a clear picture of separation with finger and ball?
I know it was possible that there was. Can even understand a call of likely. But possible and likely aren't criteria. Clear evidence is. -
@Crucial i think he lost it and no try, but no, i havent seen a perfectly clear pic of separation between finger tip and ball
this is proabably as clear as ive seen, his hand would have too be pretty long (longer than his other one) to still be touching it...but its still far from clear
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe One: Wellington, October 11:
@Rapido said in Bledisloe One: Wellington, October 11:
On Rieko's grounding, and me saying his lax grounding technique has been bugging me for a few years.
I think, he botched a grounding few years ago away, v Argentina away, but got away with it. But warning, my memory is atrocious of anything about post circa-1996 ... this nugget of info could be 100% wrong. anyone else ?
For the record I think his grounding was technically just ok on Sunday. Don't agree with the decision on that occasion.
Technically just OK?
It either was or wasn't.
TMO protocols are clear. An on-field call of try means clear evidence is needed to overturn. Has anyone seen a clear picture of separation with finger and ball?
I know it was possible that there was. Can even understand a call of likely. But possible and likely aren't criteria. Clear evidence is.It's just ok in that if he was an inch taller, or he was placing it at one of those points on a field with one of those cricket style lift a hatch irrigation tap parts of the ground that are in a dip .... or he was standing a bloody footstool ..... - the ball would have seperated from his hand before touching the ground.
But he wasn't, and it didn't.
I've only watched it on the screen above the bar queues in the concourse (and on a laptop since). With no commentary to hear the TMO conversation. But I saw no separation. I was genuinely surprised when the decision was
made.I don't think the TMO was making that decision on separation, I think he had a different opinion of in-control.
How can the ball be grounded in in-goal?:
- A. by holding the ball and touching the ground with it,
- B. by pressing down on it with hand/s, arm/s, or front of the body from waist to neck.
From: https://www.rugbytoolbox.co.nz/referees/law-questions-and-answers/law-21-in-goal
A. is for a player carrying the ball to the line
B. is for a player chasing a kick or diving on a loose ball.SO, I think I have a different opinion of in control than the TMO, and I suspect out another TMO in there they would have had a different opinion also.
Just my thoughts on trying to mind read someone else's thoughts of which I heard none.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Bledisloe One: Wellington, October 11:
@Crucial i think he lost it and no try, but no, i havent seen a perfectly clear pic of separation between finger tip and ball
this is proabably as clear as ive seen, his hand would have too be pretty long (longer than his other one) to still be touching it...but its still far from clear
He's already squashed that mutha-f@cking ball into a 2 inch deep hole.
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe One: Wellington, October 11:
TMO protocols are clear. An on-field call of try means clear evidence is needed to overturn.
My exact thinking at the time - not enough evidence.
A bit of inconsistency on the field when you've got an instant to make a call can happen.
When you've got a couple of minutes, WTF? And also: where are the superslowmo UHD cameras after all these years?
-
@Rapido It seemed like a hometown TMO trying too hard to not be biased - and balanced out the the non hometown touchies mistake, but not really as it doesn't work like that ....
I'm still not certain that DMac actually stripped that ruck ball and that play had a huge influence on the end result.
But there were lost of decisions like that either way in this match.
-
im still firmly in the camp of Reiko being mostly to blame, why risk dropping it...just dot it down like a normal person
-
@Nepia said in Bledisloe One: Wellington, October 11:
@Rapido It seemed like a hometown TMO trying too hard to not be biased - and balanced out the the non hometown touchies mistake, but not really as it doesn't work like that ....
I'm still not certain that DMac actually stripped that ruck ball and that play had a huge influence on the end result.
But there were lost of decisions like that either way in this match.
Yeah, I'm not that fussed TBH.
Just don't think super slo-mo should be used like that, but I suppose something in real time made them want to check, so onus on Rieko to ground it like a pro. -
-
Rieko's risky grounding v Argentina 2018 that's in my memory bank:
No question a legit try, I said previously I thought he got away with one, but my memory was doddy ... well, it's both goodish but dodgy. Good enough to track down a youtube video, but dodgy to questoin legitimacy of his try.
<iframe src='//gifs.com/embed/riekogif-P7vmvl' frameborder='0' scrolling='no' width='640px' height='360px' style='-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden;-webkit-transform: scale(1);' ></iframe>
Below will take you to a gif:
gifs.com/gif/riekogif-P7vmvl -
@Rapido in real time the ball bounces up so that raises doubt about the grounding. This one was less of any issue because he’s holding the ball and touching it on the ground. The problem with the one on Sunday is he’s clearly not holding the ball whilst grounding it.
His first try in that Argies test was perfect. Keep doing it like that young fella.
-
got curious and looked up his tries....he does this stupid touchdown every other time, this one annoyed me, ive never played in the backs but even i know you carry on the opposite side to the defence let alone the one handed...no reason for it
-
Gif of the one on the weekend:
and gif of the slo-mo they used for decision:
gifs.com/gif/rieko3-zvGPZ7Weirdly, real time looked worse than super slo-mo actually, IMO, despite saying earlier they shouldn't use super slo-mo for these sorts of decisions ...
-
@Kiwiwomble its not a defence, but those one handed around the post tries are very common now. If you don't need to do it force it safely
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Bledisloe One: Wellington, October 11:
got curious and looked up his tries....he does this stupid touchdown every other time, this one annoyed me, ive never played in the backs but even i know you carry on the opposite side to the defence let alone the one handed...no reason for it
Woah. Saf 30,NZ 13 !!!!! WhenTF was this? What happened? Did we come back?
