Wales v Australia
-
@act-crusader first I've heard that a ref can make Rennie bloody angry.
-
-
@gibbon-rib said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
There's no doubt Wales got just about every 50/50 call, the Tomkins try included.
The worst call, though, was the collapsed maul turnover in about the 55th minute. A clear Wallaby penalty, with a case for a YC and maybe even a PT. And yet he somehow missed our ball carrier being dragged down from behind by a player not bound to the maul. Aggregious.
I was impressed with our heart, and ability to score tries with 14 men. It was a loss on the scoreboard but nowhere else.
Well neither the red card nor the Tompkins try were anything like a 50/50. It went back, and you can't give a knock on for a ball that goes back.
Was the maul the one in the corner near the Welsh try line? Agree that should have been a Wallabies pen
The red card was fine, no issues with that from me.
I think the Tomkins try was a 50/50, in the sense that if that happened in any other game I think it gets blown as a knock on or deliberate knock on and nobody really complains about it.
I liken it to the ball being passed to a player and it cannoning off their chest without touching their arms or hands. In a strict sense it's not a knock on, is it? But you very rarely see a referee play that interpretation.
So while you could say the Tomkins try is clear, I'd argue in reality it's a 50/50 call that fell to Wales.
-
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
@gibbon-rib said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
There's no doubt Wales got just about every 50/50 call, the Tomkins try included.
The worst call, though, was the collapsed maul turnover in about the 55th minute. A clear Wallaby penalty, with a case for a YC and maybe even a PT. And yet he somehow missed our ball carrier being dragged down from behind by a player not bound to the maul. Aggregious.
I was impressed with our heart, and ability to score tries with 14 men. It was a loss on the scoreboard but nowhere else.
Well neither the red card nor the Tompkins try were anything like a 50/50. It went back, and you can't give a knock on for a ball that goes back.
Was the maul the one in the corner near the Welsh try line? Agree that should have been a Wallabies pen
The red card was fine, no issues with that from me.
I think the Tomkins try was a 50/50, in the sense that if that happened in any other game I think it gets blown as a knock on or deliberate knock on and nobody really complains about it.
I liken it to the ball being passed to a player and it cannoning off their chest without touching their arms or hands. In a strict sense it's not a knock on, is it? But you very rarely see a referee play that interpretation.
So while you could say the Tomkins try is clear, I'd argue in reality it's a 50/50 call that fell to Wales.
The moment he dotted down it became a technical check in which he did nothing wrong. The only weird bit was that his action and intent were wrong but the execution fell his way. Went from a YC to a try from a very lucky bounce off the hand. Play the whistle lads and dispute it afterwards. Ref even called out that it went back.
Knock ons off the chest shit me no end. If you are going to be technically correct on that try then you have to do the same on a catch attempt. -
@crucial said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
@gibbon-rib said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
There's no doubt Wales got just about every 50/50 call, the Tomkins try included.
The worst call, though, was the collapsed maul turnover in about the 55th minute. A clear Wallaby penalty, with a case for a YC and maybe even a PT. And yet he somehow missed our ball carrier being dragged down from behind by a player not bound to the maul. Aggregious.
I was impressed with our heart, and ability to score tries with 14 men. It was a loss on the scoreboard but nowhere else.
Well neither the red card nor the Tompkins try were anything like a 50/50. It went back, and you can't give a knock on for a ball that goes back.
Was the maul the one in the corner near the Welsh try line? Agree that should have been a Wallabies pen
The red card was fine, no issues with that from me.
I think the Tomkins try was a 50/50, in the sense that if that happened in any other game I think it gets blown as a knock on or deliberate knock on and nobody really complains about it.
I liken it to the ball being passed to a player and it cannoning off their chest without touching their arms or hands. In a strict sense it's not a knock on, is it? But you very rarely see a referee play that interpretation.
So while you could say the Tomkins try is clear, I'd argue in reality it's a 50/50 call that fell to Wales.
The moment he dotted down it became a technical check in which he did nothing wrong. The only weird bit was that his action and intent were wrong but the execution fell his way. Went from a YC to a try from a very lucky bounce off the hand. Play the whistle lads and dispute it afterwards. Ref even called out that it went back.
Knock ons off the chest shit me no end. If you are going to be technically correct on that try then you have to do the same on a catch attempt.Can you knock on off the chest? Has to be hands and/or arms?
-
@gt12 said in Wales v Australia:
Not like Rennie to have a moan.
He needs someone to blame and the referees, who go unarmed, will do.
Rennie has been given everything he has asked for, plus some - nice five star digs in Queensland, a 2021 squad of 63 or 100 or something - plus visiting old boys; spine coaches, edge coaches, channel, clutch and scone coaches (monitoring the kiddies for nightmares and such) and upright tackling technique coaches - he has a half dozen of them and doesn't it show! His lineout-chucking coach is Polota-Nau by the looks of it.
Warnie himself would note that they "cannot catch, cannot throw" still.
Rennie has been in the chair now for two years - he will be well aware that Australians Knuckles and Ewen McKenzie didn't even last that long. Deans did, but he spent half of his 5½ years battling Lord Two-Fathers' Wallabies.
He's got to find something or someone to divert attention, he's going to need the practice for the next two years.
-
@booboo said in Wales v Australia:
@crucial said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
@gibbon-rib said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
There's no doubt Wales got just about every 50/50 call, the Tomkins try included.
The worst call, though, was the collapsed maul turnover in about the 55th minute. A clear Wallaby penalty, with a case for a YC and maybe even a PT. And yet he somehow missed our ball carrier being dragged down from behind by a player not bound to the maul. Aggregious.
I was impressed with our heart, and ability to score tries with 14 men. It was a loss on the scoreboard but nowhere else.
Well neither the red card nor the Tompkins try were anything like a 50/50. It went back, and you can't give a knock on for a ball that goes back.
Was the maul the one in the corner near the Welsh try line? Agree that should have been a Wallabies pen
The red card was fine, no issues with that from me.
I think the Tomkins try was a 50/50, in the sense that if that happened in any other game I think it gets blown as a knock on or deliberate knock on and nobody really complains about it.
I liken it to the ball being passed to a player and it cannoning off their chest without touching their arms or hands. In a strict sense it's not a knock on, is it? But you very rarely see a referee play that interpretation.
So while you could say the Tomkins try is clear, I'd argue in reality it's a 50/50 call that fell to Wales.
The moment he dotted down it became a technical check in which he did nothing wrong. The only weird bit was that his action and intent were wrong but the execution fell his way. Went from a YC to a try from a very lucky bounce off the hand. Play the whistle lads and dispute it afterwards. Ref even called out that it went back.
Knock ons off the chest shit me no end. If you are going to be technically correct on that try then you have to do the same on a catch attempt.Can you knock on off the chest? Has to be hands and/or arms?
Yup, has to be hands or arms. You do occasionally see what looks like a knock-on not given because the ref decided that it came off the chest, or even head, without touching hands. But it's so hard to tell because it's usually so fast - most often it happens when a back 3 player is trying to catch a bomb.
-
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
@gibbon-rib said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
There's no doubt Wales got just about every 50/50 call, the Tomkins try included.
The worst call, though, was the collapsed maul turnover in about the 55th minute. A clear Wallaby penalty, with a case for a YC and maybe even a PT. And yet he somehow missed our ball carrier being dragged down from behind by a player not bound to the maul. Aggregious.
I was impressed with our heart, and ability to score tries with 14 men. It was a loss on the scoreboard but nowhere else.
Well neither the red card nor the Tompkins try were anything like a 50/50. It went back, and you can't give a knock on for a ball that goes back.
Was the maul the one in the corner near the Welsh try line? Agree that should have been a Wallabies pen
The red card was fine, no issues with that from me.
I think the Tomkins try was a 50/50, in the sense that if that happened in any other game I think it gets blown as a knock on or deliberate knock on and nobody really complains about it.
I liken it to the ball being passed to a player and it cannoning off their chest without touching their arms or hands. In a strict sense it's not a knock on, is it? But you very rarely see a referee play that interpretation.
So while you could say the Tomkins try is clear, I'd argue in reality it's a 50/50 call that fell to Wales.
Yeah, I know what you mean. If he'd given a knock on everyone would have accepted it no issues because it just looked like one. If I later saw a replay that showed it went back I'd be mildly annoyed - a "what could have been" kind of annoyed though, not mad at the ref.
But yeah given that we have the replay we can see it was the right call. The ref deserves credit for this one for being just about the only person in the stadium who saw it correctly in real time.
Rennie's not doing himself any favours picking on this decision to whinge about. Pick one of the ones the ref got wrong instead.
-
@booboo said in Wales v Australia:
@crucial said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
@gibbon-rib said in Wales v Australia:
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
There's no doubt Wales got just about every 50/50 call, the Tomkins try included.
The worst call, though, was the collapsed maul turnover in about the 55th minute. A clear Wallaby penalty, with a case for a YC and maybe even a PT. And yet he somehow missed our ball carrier being dragged down from behind by a player not bound to the maul. Aggregious.
I was impressed with our heart, and ability to score tries with 14 men. It was a loss on the scoreboard but nowhere else.
Well neither the red card nor the Tompkins try were anything like a 50/50. It went back, and you can't give a knock on for a ball that goes back.
Was the maul the one in the corner near the Welsh try line? Agree that should have been a Wallabies pen
The red card was fine, no issues with that from me.
I think the Tomkins try was a 50/50, in the sense that if that happened in any other game I think it gets blown as a knock on or deliberate knock on and nobody really complains about it.
I liken it to the ball being passed to a player and it cannoning off their chest without touching their arms or hands. In a strict sense it's not a knock on, is it? But you very rarely see a referee play that interpretation.
So while you could say the Tomkins try is clear, I'd argue in reality it's a 50/50 call that fell to Wales.
The moment he dotted down it became a technical check in which he did nothing wrong. The only weird bit was that his action and intent were wrong but the execution fell his way. Went from a YC to a try from a very lucky bounce off the hand. Play the whistle lads and dispute it afterwards. Ref even called out that it went back.
Knock ons off the chest shit me no end. If you are going to be technically correct on that try then you have to do the same on a catch attempt.Can you knock on off the chest? Has to be hands and/or arms?
They have definitely been called as knock on’s.
Just on that Welsh try, I think it’s pretty harsh to say “play the whistle” when players stopped, even the eventual try scorer stopped momentarily.
Does anyone have this TMO ‘angle’ to watch again, because that didn’t look as definitive as being made out.
When it comes to knock on’s I’m actually a fan of the league way.
-
@act-crusader what's the league way?
-
@gibbon-rib they are far stricter on it. Any loss of control is pretty much a knock on unless it very clearly went backwards.
League do a few things better...
-
@act-crusader said in Wales v Australia:
Does anyone have this TMO ‘angle’ to watch again, because that didn’t look as definitive as being made out.
Starting about 13s into this clip
-
@mick-gold-coast-qld said in Wales v Australia:
@gt12 said in Wales v Australia:
Not like Rennie to have a moan.
He needs someone to blame and the referees, who go unarmed, will do.
Rennie has been given everything he has asked for, plus some - nice five star digs in Queensland, a 2021 squad of 63 or 100 or something - plus visiting old boys; spine coaches, edge coaches, channel, clutch and scone coaches (monitoring the kiddies for nightmares and such) and upright tackling technique coaches - he has a half dozen of them and doesn't it show! His lineout-chucking coach is Polota-Nau by the looks of it.
Warnie himself would note that they "cannot catch, cannot throw" still.
This is an odd post. Rennie's coaching entourage is no bigger than previous coaches - an attack/backs coach (Wisemantl) a defence coach (Taylor) a forwards coach (McKellar) and a set piece coach (du Plessis). That's really about it. I'd suggest that's about standard for international rugby.
And our lineout throwing was great last night, as was our general handling. Actually our lineout has been pretty good all season.
Don't get me wrong, the team has flaws, but I don't think there's anyone in Aussie rugby who wouldn't give Rennie at least a pass mark for 2021.
-
@barbarian said in Wales v Australia:
This is an odd post.
You're making the mistake of engaging the boomer who thinks he's funny.
I've blocked him so he might see this, or not.
He probably thinks we should bring back Alan Jones 🤷♂️
-
Oh dear, hyperbole / poetic licence for the fun of it, not to be read literally and taken terribly seriously - I prefer that to the earnest pursuit here of solutions to flaws that have been evident for years, limited to too little explanation in a forum such as this.
My neighbour over the back was Parramatta / Eastwood / Penrith coach Peter Fenton, an enthusiastic teacher and disciple of rugby. The animated conversations with him were a joy - "Where did you play again? ... loose head, yes, I remember!" and out would come salt shakers, knives and chopsticks to demonstrate where the feet should be to attain optimum stability. He intoned me to watch the game from end on, and why. It was good advice.
I imagine you, barbarian, as a student of the game, would have enjoyed those exchanges just as much.
"Line out throwing"? Read that as my camouflaged wry criticism of the failure of the players - the players - in the fundamental skills that their job demands. If you pretend to the top echelon you do not need an international coach to teach you how to pass equally well from right to left and from left to right. You master that before you apply for the job.
An aspiring first five knows when and how to dribble the ball, put it over the top or to go long. I am reminded Dan Carter's father built goal posts on the vacant block they owned next door, so he practiced and practiced and ...
There are good people there, yes. Scott Wisemantel was ahead of my son at Oakhill, and they were all part of Eastwood during some excellent years.
I am still not sure about Rennie - the Christchurch connection in Club rugby here were not
ebullient (?)enthused by his appointment and I trust their judgement.He has somehow crafted financial support for many fellows to have a go and many of them have been mediocre. I do not listen in when he speaks because I think it is likely standard clichéd marketing talk. I did listen to Deans because he was less cautious, particularly in person, articulate, intelligent and successful. I liked Cheika because of positive reports via family, I admired his rugby pedigree, his drive and his achievements not limited to rugby.
A final thought: It occurred to me today that our circumstances are truly dire in rugby. You will have seen the sudden disappearance of Waratah supporters attending games when the results are poor; and their reluctance to return a couple of years later. That has happened several times over during the 30 year life of Super Rugby.
League is going through a resurgence and, like AFL, it has the resources to fuel that. Rugby does not.
We are about to enter a return to pre-COVID life routines and habits with all manner of as yet unknown marginal changes. In the competition to rebuild supporter and spectator attention rugby does not now have a lot to offer. My affection for the game makes it difficult to admit that.
-
OK, I don't know how to make animated GIFs, but here's a couple of screen grabs which I think show the ball went backwards fairly clearly (as much as a couple of still images can).
Tompkins is standing with his back to the sideline - Wales are attacking to the left of the picture. He reaches out and hits the ball with his left hand, it travels back and lands right by his left foot. (He doesn't move his foot between the two pictures.
This angle is shown at 1:47:00 on the Stan replay
-
@gibbon-rib I don't think the argument should be about whether it went backwards by an inch or not.
In basically EVERY instance this happens, the referee penalises the intent, which here quite clearly was to disrupt the pass through a negative play, that is not in the spirit of the game.
The ball was not clearly knocked back (it was knocked back by an inch or two), but the intent of the player was to disrupt and he took the chance of an extremely negative play which he might have been carded for. Seeing as assumed intent is already a part that is refereed, 99 out of a 100 refs would penalise the Welsh player here.Basically, nobody wants to see a try like this, nobody wants to see plays decided by measuring whether a ball fell downwards at an angle or not. The intent was bad and he got lucky. Yes, play to the whistle and all (fucking idiot Kurtley), but the Welsh player knew himself he fucked up. If that try was chalked off, there would be almost no complaints, as it wouldn't feel wrong. We all know that is not how we play this game.
You would hope 100 out 100 would not penalise.
-
@tordah should players be penalised for negative, disruptive play like tackling opponents too?
