Do you believe him after what he said regarding the eye gauging incident?
Was Quade playing 10 on defense or hidden away on the wing or fullback?
Was Quade playing 10 on defense or hidden away on the wing or fullback?
Do you believe a meeting took place? What evidence has TGC produced to show that it did? Extraordinary accusations (incl eye-gouging) require at least some substantiation, so far there's been none. I'd also suggest that ARU not referring Franks to the citing officer says they don't have much of a case against him.
Pretty interesting dynamic in all this.No angle issue its there in all its glory. Worse in this photo is Ref sees it warns him and plays on.
Some interesting stats,
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/statscentre.cfm
Wallabies to make the springbok the next team to loose two games in a row.
I can't believe all the kiwi supporters backing Frank's up. Dirty bastards. It's unbelievable.
Sent from my SM-G928I using Tapatalk
cheik and the wallabies have had five games to learn from, get angry about and find motivation. find a way to get the ball tothe lineout jumper and the saffas will be there for the taking, they always play harder againt the ABs but let their intensity down playing in australiaYour kidding aren't you. The Wallabies will be lucky to win against Argentina in Australia. I give them at best a 30% chance against the Bok in Brisbane and no chance at all in SA or Arg.
How, when the stats I saw have them missing over 30 tackles? That means their intensity and effort were better and scrambled better. The structure was still rubbish. Also the ABs dropped the pill lot more.
cheik and the wallabies have had five games to learn from, get angry about and find motivation. find a way to get the ball tothe lineout jumper and the saffas will be there for the taking, they always play harder againt the ABs but let their intensity down playing in australia
Not speaking to our captain is less serious but given the cozy up mid week with Shags in breach of another IRB protocol suggests the basis for his arrogant Gallic dismissiveness is a well documented bias.
.
He also grabs him around the throat. You can't play at someone's head. It's an instant yellow just for putting your hand there. It's definately going to be an off field red. If it isn't , I don't know who's paying off who.If Franks is guilty, then he should be severely punished. That seems to be the vibe from Kiwis. I would be quite happy to support a lifetime ban for a deliberate eye gouge. If he is guilty.
I understand your need to get all morally outraged over it but I think it is a non event. I haven't seen anything yet from the wallabies camp complaining about Franks not being cited, so I suspect they know there is nothing in it, but are content to let it go on as a distraction from their performance. If I see Cheika doing his prune about the failure to cite Franks then I will suspect there may be an issue.
Interestingly the South Africans think he was just trying to block his vision rather than gouge. I am sure that if he had been eye gouged he would have at least put his hands to his eyes, or complained to the ref. Not once does he raise a hand to his supposedly gouged eyes. Nor does he start yelling at the ref.
Did you just answer your own question?
Also did you miss me saying that there are structural issues?
Further did you think the defence was better in the first match?
As if he would admit to itThe meeting never happened. Cheika is lying or badly misinformed.
"Although he did meet with Jaco Peyper in Wellington, who'd refereed the previous Saturday's test in Sydney and was a touch judge at Westpac Stadium.
"It's quite sad that that's come out, because it's not true. Unless you say 'g'day Romain' in the morning [constitutes a clandestine meeting], he stayed here at this hotel," Hansen said on Sunday.
"But I did have a meeting with Jaco Peyper this week, at his request. Crono [All Blacks scrum coach Mike Cron] and I both got asked by him to review some of the stuff that he had seen in our game."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...-refuted-australias-claims-of-secret-meetings
Pretty sure there's a 12-hour window for the match review official to cite someone & a 24-hour window for the teams to do so. At least that was the case last time it became an issue.
On the alleged gouging, Poite clearly saw what Franks was doing but chose not to penalise him. You'd think that if there was any question in his mind re: possible gouging he'd have gone back & asked Veldsman to have a look, as he did for the Coles "swinging arm" (that looked bad in slo-mo but in real time like probably every second or third ruck entry in any given match) Peyper (?) picked up.
Okay, so Quade is being hidden away on defense (wasn't sure)
When you know you will be hidden away, why learn to tackle???
Barrett was pretty bad tackler a few years back, as was Sopoaga.
But knowing they would not be moved to hide their deficiencies forced them to learn to tackle. Perhaps Chieka should do the same with Quade.