All Blacks vs Wales Test #2

Tordah

the whole penalising jumpers disaster is even worse when you consider that basically the Springboks whole gameplan in 2009/10 consisted of chasers just jumping into the catchers, pretending they were going for the ball.
Still liked that better than the way it's refereed now.
 
 
This situation:
High kick by team B goes up, fullback team A gets to the position where it's probably going to land, stands there, ready to catch. Winger team B races to where it's going to land, jumps up, tumbles over the outstretched arm of fullback team A, lands on his head and dies (as Liam Williams apparentl did, that play-acting fluffybunny). They're going to red card fullback A for standing there, arms outstretched because fullback B jumped?

antipodean

I've said it a number of times, the current application of the law means you want to be higher than the other player. Otherwise you're placing yourself at the mercy of the dimwits who can't tell a forward pass, or when you lose 10m in territory and hand over possession that they shouldn't then call out "advantage over".

canefan

I don't think Naholo had any chance of catching the ball, he was miles away from it. But the contact was clumsy as opposed to malicious. The shoulder check on the other hand was definitely intentional

kiwiinmelb

I reckon he was catching it if Williams wasnt there 
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.worldrugbyvids.com/index.php/2016/06/19/wiliams-naholo-collision/'>http://www.worldrugbyvids.com/index.php/2016/06/19/wiliams-naholo-collision/</a>

Catogrande

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="kiwiinmelb" data-cid="590003" data-time="1466409543">
<div>
I reckon he was catching it if Williams wasnt there 
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.worldrugbyvids.com/index.php/2016/06/19/wiliams-naholo-collision/'>http://www.worldrugbyvids.com/index.php/2016/06/19/wiliams-naholo-collision/</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
That's a bit like saying "he would have kicked the ball if X player's head wasn't there". Williams was there. He was there first and had actually caught the ball. Reckless from Naholo and lucky not to see yellow under the current interpretations - which, i admit are a mess.

Bones

That's hilarious. I reckon Barrett is a 100% goalkicker, it's just the posts don't move when he kicks it.
 
Plus, Wayne Barnes probably gets a pass for the AWJ try, not a forward pass as if the guy who passed it had kicked it....voila! Not a forward pass. :)

gollum

Have we discussed the AB centre defencve, Cause Nonu gave a cracking example of what we are missing on the weekend -

kiwiinmelb

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Catogrande" data-cid="590005" data-time="1466410478">
<div>
That's a bit like saying "he would have kicked the ball if X player's head wasn't there". Williams was there. He was there first and had actually caught the ball. Reckless from Naholo and lucky not to see yellow under the current interpretations - which, i admit are a mess.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 I was replying to canefan who said he was miles from it and had no chance of catching it

canefan

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="kiwiinmelb" data-cid="590014" data-time="1466413517">
I was replying to canefan who said he was miles from it and had no chance of catching it </blockquote>He didn't have a chance to catch it, Williams was there in position and Naholo was late. I don't see why it matters if he could have caught it if Williams wasn't there because he was

kiwiinmelb

I guess it depends what we are debating , my point was I dont think it was intentional , 
 
He was running an angle that he thought he could catch it , if his eyes were on the ball only , he probably didnt see Williams untill it was too late , 
 
When williams caught it , his feet had already left the ground in his own attempt to catch it , 
 
Im not sure at what point he pulls out if he is looking at the ball only

gollum

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="canefan" data-cid="590018" data-time="1466414895">
<div>
He didn't have a chance to catch it, Williams was there in position and Naholo was late. I don't see why it matters if he could have caught it if Williams wasn't there because he was
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I agree, it doesn't.
 
Most guys now are taught to jump no matter what, so they jump even when they are far too late & have zero chance of actually contesting, its cynical & dangerous & should be pinged. The application is usually "did he have any chance of contesting? No? Penalty. In doing so did he put the other player at risk of serious injury (ie he landed on his head)? Yes? Yellow card."
 
If you listen to the ref mike that exactly the process he goes through (that may have been tough on NZ commentary with Marshall shouting "whoom-PA!" over the top & Nisbo saying "well, whats happened there? That doesn't look good, I wonder what the outcome of this will be" as the ref explains it all.)
 
Genuine 50/50's are not usually penalised, Naholo's was not a 50/50, he was late, had no chance & just auto-jumped because that what they get told in practice. The one later on was an actual 50/50.
 
In contrast Ben Smith regularly sees he won't get there in time to contest, checks his run makes the tackle the second the guy hits the deck & rolls him. McCaw used to do the same.

Bones

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="kiwiinmelb" data-cid="590023" data-time="1466416139">I guess it depends what we are debating , my point was I dont think it was intentional , 
He was running an angle that he thought he could catch it , if his eyes were on the ball only , he probably didnt see Williams untill it was too late , 
When williams caught it , his feet had already left the ground in his own attempt to catch it , 
Im not sure at what point he pulls out if he is looking at the ball only</blockquote>
That's just it though. It's reckless to only have eyes on the ball (which sounds dubious to me anyway - do we think our top players don't have peripheral vision and train that aspect).

kiwiinmelb

ok ill accept defeat and move on

Catogrande

You get forgiven purely on the quality of your avatar

Bones

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Catogrande" data-cid="590034" data-time="1466418246">
<div>
You get forgiven purely on the quality of your avatar
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Until she turns around and it's yours.

Catogrande

You leave Fridge Raider out of this.

booboo

Sorry ... back on topic ... do we ban jumping for the ball in the air?

Tim

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="booboo" data-cid="590046" data-time="1466421160">
<div>
Sorry ... back on topic ... do we ban jumping for the ball in the air?
</div>
</blockquote>
 
How do they deal with this in Aussie Rules?

canefan

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="booboo" data-cid="590046" data-time="1466421160">
<div>
Sorry ... back on topic ... do we ban jumping for the ball in the air?
</div>
</blockquote>
I can't find video of the challenge, but IIRC Naholo didn't even manage to grab a piece of the ball. You've at least got to get some of it IMHO to make it a bonafide 50/50

Catogrande

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="booboo" data-cid="590046" data-time="1466421160">
<div>
Sorry ... back on topic ... do we ban jumping for the ball in the air?
</div>
</blockquote>
 
That's a difficult one isn't it? I sort of think the laws as they are are probably as near to what we want as is possible but the interpretation of them is such a grey area. Someone above mentioned how good Ben Smith's judgement seems to be in respect of when to contest and when to wait and tackle as the jumper lands. You'd think that all professional players would have a degree of the same good judgement. If that was the case we'd see far fewer occurrences like the Williams/Naholo one. It really would then just be down to the times when there is a proper contest.
 
So. Short answer is I don't know.

The Silver Fern

All Blacks vs Wales Test #2