Bledisloe 1
-
@Dan54 said in Bledisloe 1:
@KiwiMurph said in Bledisloe 1:
ABs have counted game of 3 havles for bans so i have no issue with Aus A games counting.
I am same, he misses the games so that's how it is. Can not see any problem at all really.
I think the issue is not the game level but the seemingly cynical approach of selection for that game.
It was great timing for RA to have the 'loophole' available.
BTW the rules are that there are level groups and in this case the International Representative side and the designated second side are in the same grouping. The game itself isn't part of the equation hence the game of three halves scenario.
But yes, we used the same loophole so cant really complain unless there is evidence that he was only added to the squad after the foul play.
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
@Dan54 said in Bledisloe 1:
@KiwiMurph said in Bledisloe 1:
ABs have counted game of 3 havles for bans so i have no issue with Aus A games counting.
I am same, he misses the games so that's how it is. Can not see any problem at all really.
I think the issue is not the game level but the seemingly cynical approach of selection for that game.
It was great timing for RA to have the 'loophole' available.
BTW the rules are that there are level groups and in this case the International Representative side and the designated second side are in the same grouping. The game itself isn't part of the equation hence the game of three halves scenario.
But yes, we used the same loophole so cant really complain unless there is evidence that he was only added to the squad after the foul play.
And I believe they didn't use games , but actually gave date he was suspended until anyway mate.
-
@His-Bobness said in Bledisloe 1:
In the most contentious and controversial refereeing decision of the year, we have to rely on the aggrieved coach’s second-hand version of what World Rugby has said about Australia’s complaint. If that doesn’t tell you how corrupt and opaque the governance structures (or lack of them) are in rugby union, nothing will. Where is the official WR statement? Is anyone in charge here? Or are they all too busy covering their arses and protecting their expense accounts to comment? Of course Rennie is going to say that. He’s like the kid who comes home from school and tells his parents the teacher has given him the week off from doing homework.
Hi Bob, can you pint me to report(s) where Rennie said this? Ta much
-
@Dan54 said in Bledisloe 1:
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
@Dan54 said in Bledisloe 1:
@KiwiMurph said in Bledisloe 1:
ABs have counted game of 3 havles for bans so i have no issue with Aus A games counting.
I am same, he misses the games so that's how it is. Can not see any problem at all really.
I think the issue is not the game level but the seemingly cynical approach of selection for that game.
It was great timing for RA to have the 'loophole' available.
BTW the rules are that there are level groups and in this case the International Representative side and the designated second side are in the same grouping. The game itself isn't part of the equation hence the game of three halves scenario.
But yes, we used the same loophole so cant really complain unless there is evidence that he was only added to the squad after the foul play.
And I believe they didn't use games , but actually gave date he was suspended until anyway mate.
They do but the process is that they provide a date calculated on eligible games counted.
They are provided with a list of games at the group level that he would be eligible/likely for selection in. eg they wouldn't count the Oz A games if he wasn't in the squad and therefore the date would go well into the EOYT -
I think it's in this one, there's a couple of the roar https://www.theroar.com.au/2022/09/22/mouthing-off-rennie-reveals-riekos-haka-disrespect-meltdown-wanted-newell-cited-over-sio-injury/
-
Wallabies coach says World Rugby backs him on controversial time-wasting call
Dave Rennie said he wrote to the governing body after last weekend's defeat.
-
"We've obviously been in contact with World Rugby around it and they agreed with our concerns," Rennie said.
They could mean so many things. eg we agree that you are concerned about the language barrier contributing to understanding the situation or we agree that a situation has happened which has changed the perception of a great game.
Doesn't mean that we agree you were robbed. -
Rennie must be under huge pressure.
9th in the world and should really be staring down the barrel of another thumping by all rights.
Injuries have hit them hard. And their depth is just bad in general. They've done well to almost win the series against England and still be in the RC right up until the last game.
-
@His-Bobness thanks Bob.
And I agree with @Crucial
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
"We've obviously been in contact with World Rugby around it and they agreed with our concerns," Rennie said.
They could mean so many things. eg we agree that you are concerned about the language barrier contributing to understanding the situation or we agree that a situation has happened which has changed the perception of a great game.
Doesn't mean that we agree you were robbed.Or they just agreed that Aussies concerns were Aussies concerns.
-
Tupaea suffered a ruptured medial cruciate ligament (MCL) and a partial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear in his left knee after Swain entered a ruck and made firm contact with the All Black’s outstretched left leg.Just a bit of firm contact, entering the ruck, nothing to see here (whistles)...
-
@His-Bobness said in Bledisloe 1:
Wallabies coach says World Rugby backs him on controversial time-wasting call
Dave Rennie said he wrote to the governing body after last weekend's defeat.
Well after the judiciary said Newell should be cited stuff, think I will wait to see the actaul letter/email from WR.
-
It's a pity that SANZAAR only publishes media releases with the summary of the Judicial Committee's decision (unlike World Rugby). Unless I see any proof of it, I don't believe for a minute that the Judicial Committee (or the Foul Play Committee earlier) have actually said that they think Newell should have been cited.
Also remember, saying he should have been cited doesn't mean that they think the citing would have been upheld. All it could have meant is that it would have been good for the Judicial Committee to have a closer look at that incident (in a proper procedure with Newell being actually represented, unlike now, when it's just been Rugby Australia and Swain's lawyer giving their side of the story).
Without proof, I also don't believe that World Rugby backed Rugby Australia in their view that the Wallabies shouldn't have been penalised for time-wasting.
Coaches or organisation can say so many things. They may be true, they may be lies, they may be misinterpretations of what was said/written; they may just be wishful thinking. One thing's for sure: they provide plenty of click-bait for the media.
-
If Rennie has made shit up its hard to see why. He's not actually under the kind of pressure you'd expect a coach of a bad team to be. Not even the media hacks are calling for his head. Strange one.
I agree that it's incredibly unlikely the judiciary would say any of the things Rennie reckons they did.
-
@Derpus said in Bledisloe 1:
If Rennie has made shit up its hard to see why. He's not actually under the kind of pressure you'd expect a coach of a bad team to be. Not even the media hacks are calling for his head. Strange one.
I agree that it's incredibly unlikely the judiciary would say any of the things Rennie reckons they did.
I don’t think he’s outright lying but certainly “interpreting” some comments to continue a feeling within the team that they need to redress some wrongs.
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
@Derpus said in Bledisloe 1:
If Rennie has made shit up its hard to see why. He's not actually under the kind of pressure you'd expect a coach of a bad team to be. Not even the media hacks are calling for his head. Strange one.
I agree that it's incredibly unlikely the judiciary would say any of the things Rennie reckons they did.
I don’t think he’s outright lying but certainly “interpreting” some comments to continue a feeling within the team that they need to redress some wrongs.
Yeah I suspect the we were hard done by stuff is an attempt get his team up , not ask for sympathy
-
@Crucial said in Bledisloe 1:
@Derpus said in Bledisloe 1:
If Rennie has made shit up its hard to see why. He's not actually under the kind of pressure you'd expect a coach of a bad team to be. Not even the media hacks are calling for his head. Strange one.
I agree that it's incredibly unlikely the judiciary would say any of the things Rennie reckons they did.
I don’t think he’s outright lying but certainly “interpreting” some comments to continue a feeling within the team that they need to redress some wrongs.
Michael Cheika says hi.
-
@His-Bobness said in Bledisloe 1:
In the most contentious and controversial refereeing decision of the year, we have to rely on the aggrieved coach’s second-hand version of what World Rugby has said about Australia’s complaint. If that doesn’t tell you how corrupt and opaque the governance structures (or lack of them) are in rugby union, nothing will. Where is the official WR statement? Is anyone in charge here? Or are they all too busy covering their arses and protecting their expense accounts to comment? Of course Rennie is going to say that. He’s like the kid who comes home from school and tells his parents the teacher has given him the week off from doing homework.
Fucking hell why didn't I think of that when I was kid
Wallabies player cops huge ban after ‘highly reckless’ tackle injured NZ rival
