Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2
-
@Stargazer said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Winger Some random ratings in that article. I guess player ratings attract clicks, but a sports writer's ratings don't mean more than ours. It's just one person's opinion. I usually ignore those articles.
Of course its just one persons opinion. But this article relates to this game so linked to it if anyone is interested.
-
@nzzp was one contact Moorby went into, was taken high, then 2 others joined the maul, holding him up, all the while the tackler had his arm around Moorby's neck, tackler then realised after several seconds releasing and throwing his arms like, nothing to see...then ref blows whistle, held up, turnover.
Sure we can go over matches and find moments like this, but you want some consistency, its all about protecting the head right, this guy was taken high, then held up with an arm around his throat, nothing malicious, or overly dangerous as it played out, but still well against what WR are trying to achieve, not sure how all the officials missed it.
-
@taniwharugby said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@nzzp was one contact Moorby went into, was taken high, then 2 others joined the maul, holding him up, all the while the tackler had his arm around Moorby's neck, tackler then realised after several seconds releasing and throwing his arms like, nothing to see...then ref blows whistle, held up, turnover.
Sure we can go over matches and find moments like this, but you want some consistency, its all about protecting the head right, this guy was taken high, then held up with an arm around his throat, nothing malicious, or overly dangerous as it played out, but still well against what WR are trying to achieve, not sure how all the officials missed it.
If you look at a screaming and gnashing of teeth over Rieko's over the shoulder tackle and confirmation that it should have been a PT (which I would have no issue about on a basis of consistency) then the refs have to penalise all actions like those you describe. I also noted quite a few innocuous seatbelt tackles that were ignored. Why one interpretation near the tryline and one in general play? If it is due to safety then it applies anywhere doesn't it?
-
-
@bayimports This wouldn't be an issue if Perenara could actually clear the ball properly - this is what happens when you can't actually complete your core roles properly
-
@bayimports lol rugby is so fucking confusing.
-
@mariner4life said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports lol rugby is so fucking confusing.
yep, this is exactly the point of the other thread, everyone rightly gets frustrated when, players, commentators and fans have different views of "what is right"
-
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@mariner4life said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports lol rugby is so fucking confusing.
yep, this is exactly the point of the other thread, everyone rightly gets frustrated when, players, commentators and fans have different views of "what is right"
and, again, a split second timing change, and something moves from "penalty" to "play on"
and yet we delight in sending players to the bin for getting that timing slightly wrong (or, in some cases, having their interpretation or rights different to the ref)
-
@mariner4life back in playing days, if someone got carded, it was cos they were filth, and deserved it, so often got a sarcastic back pat as they trudged off, nowadays there are so many weak reasons for sending people off, and yet some think this is still not enough!
Crazy...
-
@taniwharugby said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@nzzp was one contact Moorby went into, was taken high, then 2 others joined the maul, holding him up, all the while the tackler had his arm around Moorby's neck, tackler then realised after several seconds releasing and throwing his arms like, nothing to see...then ref blows whistle, held up, turnover.
Sure we can go over matches and find moments like this, but you want some consistency, its all about protecting the head right, this guy was taken high, then held up with an arm around his throat, nothing malicious, or overly dangerous as it played out, but still well against what WR are trying to achieve, not sure how all the officials missed it.
I saw that and thought the initial contact was to the head.
It's very very inconsistent
-
@nzzp said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@taniwharugby said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@nzzp was one contact Moorby went into, was taken high, then 2 others joined the maul, holding him up, all the while the tackler had his arm around Moorby's neck, tackler then realised after several seconds releasing and throwing his arms like, nothing to see...then ref blows whistle, held up, turnover.
Sure we can go over matches and find moments like this, but you want some consistency, its all about protecting the head right, this guy was taken high, then held up with an arm around his throat, nothing malicious, or overly dangerous as it played out, but still well against what WR are trying to achieve, not sure how all the officials missed it.
I saw that and thought the initial contact was to the head.
It's very very inconsistent
not a crack at the Irish per se, but, i am astounded that a team that makes a huge amount of effort to make "held up" tackles, with multiple players arriving upright, just never seem to make high contact...
but put a hand on the shoulder? lynching!!
-
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Dickson seemed to have a weird interpretation of this law as he often allowed defenders (both sides) that were alongside the ruck (and ahead of last player) to come forward as soon as the ruck finished. Also ignored the law that says Players must not fall onto, or over, the emerging ball while it is on the ground near to the ruck.The thing is (probably for that other thread), this guy is a tier one ref. I accept refs not seeing things but when a supposedly top ref doesn't apply the most basic and clear laws with zero interpretation required you have to wonder wtf is going on.
-
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Dickson seemed to have a weird interpretation of this law as he often allowed defenders (both sides) that were alongside the ruck (and ahead of last player) to come forward as soon as the ruck finished. Also ignored the law that says Players must not fall onto, or over, the emerging ball while it is on the ground near to the ruck.The thing is (probably for that other thread), this guy is a tier one ref. I accept refs not seeing things but when a supposedly top ref doesn't apply the most basic and clear laws with zero interpretation required you have to wonder wtf is going on.
I'm kind of surprised the TMO didn't get involved as this is a potential yellow for cynical play within your own 22?
-
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Looks like McCloskey is part of the ruck and still on his feet as per the law. How is he offside?
-
@chimoaus said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Dickson seemed to have a weird interpretation of this law as he often allowed defenders (both sides) that were alongside the ruck (and ahead of last player) to come forward as soon as the ruck finished. Also ignored the law that says Players must not fall onto, or over, the emerging ball while it is on the ground near to the ruck.The thing is (probably for that other thread), this guy is a tier one ref. I accept refs not seeing things but when a supposedly top ref doesn't apply the most basic and clear laws with zero interpretation required you have to wonder wtf is going on.
I'm kind of surprised the TMO didn't get involved as this is a potential yellow for cynical play within your own 22?
Having looked again at a bigger clip it may not be as clearcut but is still very likely that he is offside. His right foot is alongside a MAB player. from this side you cannot see the Ireland tackler but he has to be in there and is therefore behind that right foot.
The Ireland explanation that there is no offside once TJ picks up the ball is incorrect. -
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Looks like McCloskey is part of the ruck and still on his feet as per the law. How is he offside?
Has a foot ahead of his own player on the ground. Just as someone not in the ruck has to be beind that player so does he. The offside doesn't go away instantly. He has to step back onside or be put onside first.
Edit: he isn't doing anything penalisable by being offside. It is his actions while in that position that are illegal (just like a retreating player is offside but allowed to be as long as they don't interfere with play)
-
I don't know if Kinsella is right, I don't care enough to find out because that law will probably change again as soon as I learn it. When I last followed the game closely, that would have been a penalty (not that I agreed with that law).
I also, don't agree with Crucial's take above. He looks in the ruck, so offside/last feet is irrelevant. I also don't want to research this. If I am wrong, then that law is an ass.
My high-level (state-of-the-game) take. Why would you want to discourage defensive forwards committing to rucks? Therefore, why on earth would you ever want any laws, that prohibits or discourages what he is doing, or trying to do.
-
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Looks like McCloskey is part of the ruck and still on his feet as per the law. How is he offside?
Has a foot ahead of his own player on the ground. Just as someone not in the ruck has to be beind that player so does he.
Nonsense. He just has to join from behind their offside line.
I get what you're trying to say, but that's for people who aren't part of the ruck. The law is clear on that.