All Blacks v Pumas 1
-
I do not know of any other sport or any other team for that matter that would have allowed the coach to stay on with the record that Foster has in the last couple of years. The rot starts at the top and the whole NZ board should have a look at themselves and there decisions. It is just a good old boys club that needs to cleared out. If they Robinson and Foster do not go then we could be in for a few years of heart ache. I do not care if Foster is s good bloke. If this goes on and he does not resign then he has no shame.
-
Rewatched Q3. Lots I could say, but we turned down two kickable penalties. Both led to nil points. First from highly dubious ‘blocking penalty’.
Game changers, in that if ABs within 3 going on to last 10 they’d never have lost.
That buck stops with Cane. -
-
@pakman said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Dan54 said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Actually thought all 3 front row that came on were pretty average. Mind you they weren't alone.
Rewatch of Q3 suggests they were alright up to 60, apart from one ludicrous pass back from Bower 5m out.
You sick bastard
-
Now 60 - 70. First Whitelock knock across at lineout called forward. Then ref misses clear knock on, then penalised Cane for off ball tackle on Mantera. So that three points should never have happened.
Then ABs hot on attack, with Akira doing lots of carrying. Rieko cuts back into traffic. Puma 12 off feet then back on and jackals. Is that legal? If not shot almost in front. As is ref says fine and then penalises us for sealing off. 🤔 -
Last 10. Just after Cane penalty ref warned him for repeated infringements near the 22. The Pumas had spent almost NO time in our half, and none in 22! Perhaps something he’d heard other refs say.
Lineout maul on halfway splinters. Then goes forward sidewise on two fronts. Frizell joins one front and pinged, which seemed marginal. But sent to bin because of bogus warning.
Then we get down to THEIR 22 for minutes at a time and Pumas offside at almost every breakdown. IMO REAL yellow card time but ref does nothing. Cardiff 2007.
Finally a penalty and straight Taylor throw (poss down our line) called not straight.
Extraordinary refereeing display. -
-
@game_film said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@pakman Great comparison. And still, like Cardiff 07, should have won despite the referee due to poor decision making from the leadership on the field.
Yep we have to take ref out of game. I was surprised at some of the decisions, but we have to find way to somehow get on top of them.
-
@pakman said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Now 60 - 70. First Whitelock knock across at lineout called forward. Then ref misses clear knock on, then penalised Cane for off ball tackle on Mantera. So that three points should never have happened.
Then ABs hot on attack, with Akira doing lots of carrying. Rieko cuts back into traffic. Puma 12 off feet then back on and jackals. Is that legal? If not shot almost in front. As is ref says fine and then penalises us for sealing off. 🤔The Cane penalty annoyed me. I guess with an inexperienced ref like that you were in his hands and needed to be careful but good refs realise when a dummy player is a legit option and committed tackles will happen. You want to pretend you are getting the ball then you can also cop a tackle IMO.
Tackle off the ball is for taking players out early or late and either removing an option or being dirty. -
had to laugh when one of the Argie players had slid down in a tackle, was lying on the ground holding our players foot as he tried to wade on while upright, and the ref told the player on the ground he had to release him.
-
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
had to laugh when one of the Argie players had slid down in a tackle, was lying on the ground holding our players foot as he tried to wade on while upright, and the ref told the player on the ground he had to release him.
That was a clear penalty. The ref saw it. He commented on it. It continued and had an effect on play. Baffling.
-
@pakman said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Rewatched Q3. Lots I could say, but we turned down two kickable penalties. Both led to nil points. First from highly dubious ‘blocking penalty’.
Game changers, in that if ABs within 3 going on to last 10 they’d never have lost.
That buck stops with Cane.At the start of the game we went for a really hard penalty way out on the angle, then the next one looked a bit easier and we kicked to touch. Really mixed tactics from the ABs, which is symptomatic of the wider issues.
-
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
had to laugh when one of the Argie players had slid down in a tackle, was lying on the ground holding our players foot as he tried to wade on while upright, and the ref told the player on the ground he had to release him.
I thought he penalised one of them
-
-
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
had to laugh when one of the Argie players had slid down in a tackle, was lying on the ground holding our players foot as he tried to wade on while upright, and the ref told the player on the ground he had to release him.
That was a clear penalty. The ref saw it. He commented on it. It continued and had an effect on play. Baffling.
Why?
He hadn’t completed the tackle
-
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
had to laugh when one of the Argie players had slid down in a tackle, was lying on the ground holding our players foot as he tried to wade on while upright, and the ref told the player on the ground he had to release him.
That was a clear penalty. The ref saw it. He commented on it. It continued and had an effect on play. Baffling.
Why?
He hadn’t completed the tackle
I get what you are angling at but 'the game is played only by players who are on their feet'.
A player on the ground in the field of play, without the ball is out of the game and must:
Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
Not play the ball.
Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent. -
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
had to laugh when one of the Argie players had slid down in a tackle, was lying on the ground holding our players foot as he tried to wade on while upright, and the ref told the player on the ground he had to release him.
That was a clear penalty. The ref saw it. He commented on it. It continued and had an effect on play. Baffling.
Why?
He hadn’t completed the tackle
I get what you are angling at but 'the game is played only by players who are on their feet'.
A player on the ground in the field of play, without the ball is out of the game and must:
Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
Not play the ball.
Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.He was in the act of tackling
Perfectly legal to hold on to bring the man down
If not, then rugby has a lot more to worry about than head hits
