CAS Rugby 2023
- Thread starter rod skellet
- Start date
As a neutral and having watched the play, imo :
The Ref ( who is in charge of the game and should know the rules ) blows the penalty and lifts his arm to Cranbrook as the Barker player breaks from the lineout/maul before the Barker player crosses the try line or dives over and grounds the ball.
The problem is, according to the Ref, he has seen a penalty ( correctly or incorrectly ) and the Cranbrook players make no attempt to tackle the Barker player as the penalty should halt play when the ref blows his whistle.
The Barker players approach the ref, the ref seeks advise from the touchy and after consultation, reverses his decision and awards the try.
Regardless if the ref was right/wrong in calling the penalty ( which ref has never made an incorrect call ), he is the boss. Not the
touch judge. Yes he can take advice but reversing the call is huge and causes these debates.
I don't blame the players for protesting the call cause is a big one yet the original penalty should have stood and no try to Barker.
Imagine if the penalty was awarded, there would be no argument or debate as the Ref had made his decision. Add to the fact the controversy about the touch judges relationship with a player, and the whole world blows up.
Ref needed to stand his ground and back his original decision. He is the one to take the blame for reversing it. No Try
The Ref ( who is in charge of the game and should know the rules ) blows the penalty and lifts his arm to Cranbrook as the Barker player breaks from the lineout/maul before the Barker player crosses the try line or dives over and grounds the ball.
The problem is, according to the Ref, he has seen a penalty ( correctly or incorrectly ) and the Cranbrook players make no attempt to tackle the Barker player as the penalty should halt play when the ref blows his whistle.
The Barker players approach the ref, the ref seeks advise from the touchy and after consultation, reverses his decision and awards the try.
Regardless if the ref was right/wrong in calling the penalty ( which ref has never made an incorrect call ), he is the boss. Not the
touch judge. Yes he can take advice but reversing the call is huge and causes these debates.
I don't blame the players for protesting the call cause is a big one yet the original penalty should have stood and no try to Barker.
Imagine if the penalty was awarded, there would be no argument or debate as the Ref had made his decision. Add to the fact the controversy about the touch judges relationship with a player, and the whole world blows up.
Ref needed to stand his ground and back his original decision. He is the one to take the blame for reversing it. No Try
Hankspank
Larry Dwyer (12)
Could not agree more. Refs get a call wrong all the time but the thing is that was their decision at the time. It's not a case of common sense or the vibe, that was the decision and should have stood if it was right or wrong. The penalty being blown stops the play on the spot and the touchy doesn't come into it.
RedOrDead
Charlie Fox (21)
Firstly, let's not pretend the Cranbrook players weren't able to make the tackle because the whistle was blown. That's utter crap. The whistle is blown when the player is in the process of diving. EVERY SINGLE Cranbrook player (except Brook 10) is looking at the ref appealing for a penalty (BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW THE LAWS). Barker player has broken the line and is already in the motion of scoring when the whistle is blown. The whistle had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the players not chasing. They're too busy incorrectly appealing for a penalty. That is their fault and their own stupidity. Learn the laws. Teams should not be rewarded for blatant incompetence. This isn't a thugs game like rugby league, this is a thinking mans game, and the thinking man should be rewarded.
Secondly... A bunch of schoolboys make up that the touchy is the hookers father and we run with that? Really?
Thirdly... "Imagine if the penalty was awarded, there would be no argument or debate as the Ref had made his decision." There would absolutely be debate... From anyone who knows the laws of the game who knows that wasn't a penalty.
RedOrDead
Charlie Fox (21)
The issue is though... It was overturned. So there is no point saying it shouldn't have been. The fact of the matter is it was overturned and the right call was made in the end. I don't understand how so many can be frustrated when the right call was made.
Also how is this a "same old Barker" conspiracy when it everyone agrees the only person in the wrong is the referee?
It's also not a question of whether or not the penalty was wrong... It absolutely was the wrong call. Can't be an obstruction if the ball remains with the jumper.
RedOrDead
Charlie Fox (21)
Fun fact 2:
If Waverley win, it is their 4th premiership in 8 years.
Sadly, the best team Waverley has ever had missed their chance in 2021 due to Covid. So looking at 5 in the past 8 years. With Barker next at 3.
Don't think it's fair to claim 5, even if it was your most talented Waves team. In a 5 round comp anything can happen. This rings especially true for Waverley after that 2019 Waverley team. Multiple professional rugby league and union players on that team (5 I believe), and they struggled to say the least (think they went 2/5 including that Aloys loss).
There was also a kings team with like 12 Australian Schoolboys in the 90's who didn't win the GPS and lost to Joeys at home with some significant ego clashes (apparently).
Anyways, it's fair to say that often the most talented teams don't go on to win.
4 to Waverley.
3 to Barker.
Knox very unlucky not to grab 1 or 2 over the last 8. Some very very strong Knox teams.
RedorDead
The Cranbrook boys probably could have attempted to make the tackle however,
It doesn't matter whether the Cranbrook boys know the laws or not, they appealed and the Ref blew the whistle as did the Barker boys appealed and the try was awarded. The only person that NEEDS to know the laws is the Ref. The old saying of "playing the whistle" applies. The boys could have/should have/ would have chased but they heard the ref's whistle and stopped. What did you want them to do ? The penalty was blown by the Ref who is in control. He should not be influenced by either Cranbrook or Barker boys or the Touch Judge. Again, don't blame the boys. They aren't "blatantly incompetant" and the one person who should be thinking about the laws who has control of the game is the Ref. I argue that the Barker boy broke from the maul before the whistle was blown but that has nothing to do with the final decision.
Is the touchy the father of the player ? yes or no. If yes, very dumb to appoint him cause it opens this sort of debate. No and all is BS.
If the penalty was awarded as originally done, then the Ref's decision is upheld and not overturned. End debate. The fact it was overturned makes the Ref look incompentant and weak causing debate.
The Cranbrook boys probably could have attempted to make the tackle however,
It doesn't matter whether the Cranbrook boys know the laws or not, they appealed and the Ref blew the whistle as did the Barker boys appealed and the try was awarded. The only person that NEEDS to know the laws is the Ref. The old saying of "playing the whistle" applies. The boys could have/should have/ would have chased but they heard the ref's whistle and stopped. What did you want them to do ? The penalty was blown by the Ref who is in control. He should not be influenced by either Cranbrook or Barker boys or the Touch Judge. Again, don't blame the boys. They aren't "blatantly incompetant" and the one person who should be thinking about the laws who has control of the game is the Ref. I argue that the Barker boy broke from the maul before the whistle was blown but that has nothing to do with the final decision.
Is the touchy the father of the player ? yes or no. If yes, very dumb to appoint him cause it opens this sort of debate. No and all is BS.
If the penalty was awarded as originally done, then the Ref's decision is upheld and not overturned. End debate. The fact it was overturned makes the Ref look incompentant and weak causing debate.
Jumping_jack
Ward Prentice (10)
And if you include all the times Barker should have been stripped of points for breaking By laws.. barker have 1.
Blue cards, Dads as touch judges, microphones, 19 year olds playing and the many more…
Last edited:
RedOrDead
Charlie Fox (21)
The blue card that was cleared by a doctor associated with the ARU.
The "dad" who is a touch judge (which has not once been confirmed and was not in a premiership winning season).
The "microphone" that never existed.
Spreading false propaganda is the lowest of lows.
Now the Narcessian scandal is the only valid criticism, and I don't know enough about it do tell you whether it was/wasn't illegal. But what I can tell you is the Colts program has kids who are't even 16 yet playing against 20 year olds... so the idea of 17 year olds playing against a 19 year old is hardly an issue for me from a safety stand point. If it is against CAS rules there's obviously that. But if it really was against the laws I am not sure how that could possibly happen. Another schools 1stXV coach/parent/player would have complained (validly I might add) to the CAS, the CAS would have looked into it and prevented the kid from playing. Don't know how something like that could have happened. If someone knows the entire backstory on that (including how it was allowed) I would be interested in hearing.
RedOrDead
Charlie Fox (21)
You're right. It does apply. None of the Cranbrook boys except the 10 chased the Barker player who scored. The whistle wasn't blown until the Barker player was in the process of diving for the line. Cranbrook didn't play to the whistle. They didn't attempt to make the tackle in anticipation of an incorrect penalty call. They should be punished for not playing to the whistle.
We've already established, the school does not appoint refs and ass. refs for 1stXV games. Additionally... considering there has been a PLETHORA of false allegations towards Barker regarding cheating (even going as far as to suggest multiple players had earpieces concealed under headgear to communicate with the coach), my advice to you would be to take these allegations with 1/8 a grain of salt.
I'm fine with your conclusion being the ref never should have overturned the decision (even if we all agree it should never have been a penalty in the first place). But the issue is it was. I don't know how we can be making this a "Barker cheated" thing... when Barker is the only party who is in the right in this scenario.
Jumping_jack
Ward Prentice (10)
Down play it all you want, But coaches were suspended for a week for the microphone incident and Ned Slack Smith was suspended for playing for CAS by rugby AU after playing against Aloysius.
Halfbackenthusiast
Ted Fahey (11)
Congratulations to all. Good to see a number of CAS boys, across 4 schools
RedOrDead
Charlie Fox (21)
Coaches were suspended for talking directly through the trainers radio to players... Against Cranbrook which wasn't a particularly close game... I personally have played in plenty of teams who have done this, and have been allowed to do so. It was a simple misunderstanding of CAS rules as it is allowed in other competitions. It's certainly not sinister. And it certainly didn't give the team some massive competitive advantage... It was blown out of proportion to the enth degree and the fact you are still having a tantrum about it is such an over-reaction. Sound like a British cricket fan.
NSS was incorrectly blue carded (there was no head knock) and was then cleared by a doctor associated with the ARU... And additionally I promise you... Ned Slack-Smith did not change the outcome of the Aloys game... LOL. A bit of common sense please.
james richards
Allen Oxlade (6)
theres no need to get angry lets chill out here
WLF3
Billy Sheehan (19)
Ok let's pretend I am the ref amongst all this banter, covering all the various contentious topics under question,
It is ALL officially over please, it's an insomniacs delight and will change nothing - BORING!!!
All I know this year is that the Waves should take out the title, RoD, 2019 v Aloys won't happen again.
Now the race is on for top placings, Knox, Barker and Trinity are all on level pegging, and it will be interesting to see who comes through in the end.
Will Barker and/or Knox drop their bundle now, and will Trinity be bouyed by their opportunity to have a season probably much better than expected.
Keen to hear other people's views on the finish of this season, is there a final twist?
So to answer this, how about people list their final standings with a brief explanation.
Many thx, very unbiased WLF!
It is ALL officially over please, it's an insomniacs delight and will change nothing - BORING!!!
All I know this year is that the Waves should take out the title, RoD, 2019 v Aloys won't happen again.
Now the race is on for top placings, Knox, Barker and Trinity are all on level pegging, and it will be interesting to see who comes through in the end.
Will Barker and/or Knox drop their bundle now, and will Trinity be bouyed by their opportunity to have a season probably much better than expected.
Keen to hear other people's views on the finish of this season, is there a final twist?
So to answer this, how about people list their final standings with a brief explanation.
Many thx, very unbiased WLF!
Halfbackenthusiast
Ted Fahey (11)
Is there a chance for a finale between trinity and waves WLF!?!?Ok let's pretend I am the ref amongst all this banter, covering all the various contentious topics under question,
It is ALL officially over please, it's an insomniacs delight and will change nothing - BORING!!!
All I know this year is that the Waves should take out the title, RoD, 2019 v Aloys won't happen again.
Now the race is on for top placings, Knox, Barker and Trinity are all on level pegging, and it will be interesting to see who comes through in the end.
Will Barker and/or Knox drop their bundle now, and will Trinity be bouyed by their opportunity to have a season probably much better than expected.
Keen to hear other people's views on the finish of this season, is there a final twist?
So to answer this, how about people list their final standings with a brief explanation.
Many thx, very unbiased WLF!
WLF3
Billy Sheehan (19)
Yep, and I know you want to hear this but it is real.
Trinity have a number of very good players and the last game of the season for the Waves is at Trinity.
The year 12 boys from all schools will want to win their last game for their school and mates, so the emotion will be high in every game.
Not to mention the Barker v Knox local derby.
What team is this?
It's a true/false allegation.
Even if the school does not appoint, it would unbelievably stupid to accept the position, purely as a result of allegations like this.
Halfbackenthusiast
Ted Fahey (11)
I’m a sucker for an underdog story. Rugbys a funny old game and given the surprises we’ve had this season we could well be in for a few more. Waves will be one name on the Henry Plume shield this year but will they be the only one? could trinity pull off one of the great comebacks? and could the 2000 season repeat itself? I definitely don’t think this season is over
Halfbackenthusiast
Ted Fahey (11)
Waratahs u16 academy squad