British & Irish Lions tour of New Zealand (2017)

[wamberal]

Disagree that Mako's offence was anywhere near a red.


But SBW's was just plain dumb. Surely it was not intentional, because that would mean that he was planning to get a red. You would have to be really thick to plan that.

 

[Quick Hands]

The fact is the act was clearly premeditated as he lined up Watson, cocked the arm and clenched the fist. The act was dangerous and foul play. Fact #2 is its far from his first offence for this. Hence the conclusion is he is either just a brain dead F%$#wit or a dirty player (or both).

Yes, yes, yes and yes.

 

[Micheal]

At first I was mesmerised that Mako's offence was even a penalty. I had initially thought "Wow you can't even clean Beaudan Barrett out anymore without it being an offence".

Having re-watched it I could understand how it may be interpreted to be a penalty but I still don't think its a YC.

SOB will also be unlucky to miss next week.

What a brainfart by SBW though, and what a game!!

Absolutely loving this series.

 

[Brumby Jack]

4 weeks for SBW

 

[Gnostic]

At first I was mesmerised that Mako's offence was even a penalty. I had initially thought "Wow you can't even clean Beaudan Barrett out anymore without it being an offence".



Having rewetted it I could understand how it may be interpreted to be a penalty but I still don't think its a YC.



SOB will also be unlucky to miss next week.



What a brainfart by SBW though, and what a game!!



Absolutely loving this series.

The law says you can't dive on the player on the ground, firstly, secondly Barrett had rolled clear of the ball and was moving further away. third contact with the head. Add up and its a YC, in fact given SBW's previous act I wouldn't have been surprised to have seen a Red.

 

[Dan54]

Funny on other forums and the ABs themselves defending SBW as not a dirty player and it was not a card (the second not from the ABs).

The fact is the act was clearly premeditated as he lined up Watson, cocked the arm and clenched the fist. The act was dangerous and foul play. Fact #2 is its far from his first offence for this. Hence the conclusion is he is either just a brain dead F%$#wit or a dirty player (or both).

Vunipola's "cleanout" generous to even refer to it as that was obviously the square up for the Barret dive and Oscar performance where he, Vunipola, was penalised for brushing past Barrett in the attempt, yet no penalty for the actual late tackle on Farrell. Where's Owens "this is not soccer" when you need it. Just stupid from Vunipola and rightfully carded, and could have been red, but still not in the same ball park as SBW's cheap shot.

One area I have want to see attended to in refereeing all year and last year for that matter is actually getting worse, the offside line appears not to exist in any consistent manner. The Lions were absolutely woeful in that aspect last night, but the ABs tactics of entering the rucks from the sides is almost as bad.

On other forums you have seen and the All Blacks themselves say it was not a red card?. Did you see the postmatch press conference? Shag Hansen was asked if he had a problem with the red card, and he said no, the referee saw SBW make contact with the shoulder to the head and the laws state it is either a red or yellow card, so he has no problem with it. When as ked if he thought SBW was trying to purposely hurt Watson, he said he didn't think so, but he doen't know what SBW was thinking as he went in, nor does he know what Vunipola was thinking when he did his shot. As for saying that BB dived when he was hit late, I think that is idiotic, who in rugby would of stayed on their feet after that contact? And then you say Vunipola was squaring up? So you knew what was in his mind and you obviously really think if it was on purpose it should of been a red. You really need to read what you write before hitting post button sometimes if you don't want to appear to stupid!! I in no way thought Vuipola was trying to do any damage, just more stuffed up what he was trying to do in clearing out at ruck.
I also kind of hope that SOB doesn't cop a ban, apparently he cited him for shot on Naholo, though he has copped it in the head and was concussed I thought SOB got it a little bit wrong when coming into do a cleanout!

 

[Quick Hands]

4 weeks for SBW

Contrary to WR (World Rugby) guidelines if correct.

LE 2 weeks
MR 6 weeks
TE 10+ weeks
A dangerous tackle which results in a strike to the head shall result in at least a mid-range entry point sanction

 

[Brumby Jack]

It was 6 weeks reduced to 4 because of early guilty admission, good record blah blah etc and that kid he gave his RWC medal to gave a character reference....

 

[Kenny Powers]

One thing I would like to ask SBW is he placed tape over a jersey sponsor of the Auckland Blues, because it was involved in money lending. Fair enough if they are his principles he wishes to adhere to.

Just wondering why these principles are not consistently applied to All Black sponsors?

http://www.aig.com/individual/investments/aig-home-loan


Might explain a bit a the behavior post incident - turning his back on the referee and giving the impression he thought he did nothing wrong.

 

[Gnostic]

On other forums you have seen and the All Blacks themselves say it was not a red card?. Did you see the postmatch press conference? Shag Hansen was asked if he had a problem with the red card, and he said no, the referee saw SBW make contact with the shoulder to the head and the laws state it is either a red or yellow card, so he has no problem with it. When as ked if he thought SBW was trying to purposely hurt Watson, he said he didn't think so, but he doen't know what SBW was thinking as he went in, nor does he know what Vunipola was thinking when he did his shot. As for saying that BB dived when he was hit late, I think that is idiotic, who in rugby would of stayed on their feet after that contact? And then you say Vunipola was squaring up? So you knew what was in his mind and you obviously really think if it was on purpose it should of been a red. You really need to read what you write before hitting post button sometimes if you don't want to appear to stupid!! I in no way thought Vuipola was trying to do any damage, just more stuffed up what he was trying to do in clearing out at ruck.

I also kind of hope that SOB doesn't cop a ban, apparently he cited him for shot on Naholo, though he has copped it in the head and was concussed I thought SOB got it a little bit wrong when coming into do a cleanout!

You really need to read what was posted if you don't want to appear illiterate or at best poor of comprehension. Go back and read it you know the bit about the second part NOT BEING BY THE ABs (FFS). Get it now.

SBW has form and the lead up showed clear premeditation to do what he did. The outcome and precise contact with the head I doubt would be his actual intent, but that is irrelevant, as the shoulder charge has been outlawed far a specific reason, the same reason as it has been in league. To do it he is seeking some kind of hurt the degree is what is in question. Either that or the bloke is just a F%$#%wit as I have previously said and unable to comprehend the reason for the laws.

Put together the Farrell late tackle at a kick, which did not receive a sanction then the dive by Barrett as Vunipola barely touches him with a genuine charge attempt followed almost immediately by Vunipola diving in faster on Barrett than a groupie at an ACDC concert and you have a pretty clear square up and a picture of what one could reasonably make assumptions of was going on with Vunipola.

You did realise that the Vunipola charge down that Barrett's Oscars moment generated a penalty for was not the one he got yellow carded at don't you? Comprehension.

 

[Gnostic]

It was 6 weeks reduced to 4 because of early guilty admission, good record blah blah etc and that kid he gave his RWC medal to gave a character reference..

Having a conviction or yellow for previous offences is a good record.

Then why should Rugby Judiciaries be any more competent than civil ones.

 

[Wolfram]

SBW fronts the judiciary in Wellington at 5pm today.

Anyone else curious about why Ayoub tried to re-engage with Garces after both the SBW & Vunipola cards? SBW's was clearly Red so I'm not sure what he thought he could add to that decision, but the Vunipola one I found intriguing.

I guess he interpretated the angles of the Vunipola case, that he potentially made contact with the head of BB deserving a red card, at least that was my impression.

 

[Strewthcobber]

One area I have want to see attended to in refereeing all year and last year for that matter is actually getting worse, the offside line appears not to exist in any consistent manner. The Lions were absolutely woeful in that aspect last night, but the ABs tactics of entering the rucks from the sides is almost as bad.

Is it that teams and refs and much more aware of the non-engagement so no ruck, so no offside line, these days?


Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

 

[Quick Hands]

One thing I would like to ask SBW is he placed tape over a jersey sponsor of the Auckland Blues, because it was involved in money lending. Fair enough if they are his principles he wishes to adhere to.

Just wondering why these principles are not consistently applied to All Black sponsors?

http://www.aig.com/individual/investments/aig-home-loan


Might explain a bit a the behavior post incident - turning his back on the referee and giving the impression he thought he did nothing wrong.

Geven his stand on the bank sponsorship, I wonder whether or not SBW keeps his money in a bank?

 

[Brumby Jack]

Sean O'Brien cleared

 

[Quick Hands]

Why not, I'm fine with that.

The Tasmania RU has already sent me a not very flattering 'Request for Clarification of an Incorrect Analogy'.

The Thyalcine Research Unit is always on the look out for sightings


http://www.thylacineresearchunit.org/

 

[formerflanker]

Are teams allowed to replace a red carded player? From

Waiopehu Oldboy's review:​

Somewhat surprisingly the All Blacks chose to bring on midfield back Ngani Laumape in Williams’ place, taking flanker Jerome Kaino off and playing the rest of the match with just seven forwards and centre Anton Liernert-Brown packing down in several scrums.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

Are teams allowed to replace a red carded player? From

Waiopehu Oldboy's review:​

Somewhat surprisingly the All Blacks chose to bring on midfield back Ngani Laumape in Williams’ place, taking flanker Jerome Kaino off and playing the rest of the match with just seven forwards and centre Anton Liernert-Brown packing down in several scrums.

They replaced Kaino with Laumape. It bloody nearly paid off too.

 

[Dan54]

You really need to read what was posted if you don't want to appear illiterate or at best poor of comprehension. Go back and read it you know the bit about the second part NOT BEING BY THE ABs (FFS). Get it now.

SBW has form and the lead up showed clear premeditation to do what he did. The outcome and precise contact with the head I doubt would be his actual intent, but that is irrelevant, as the shoulder charge has been outlawed far a specific reason, the same reason as it has been in league. To do it he is seeking some kind of hurt the degree is what is in question. Either that or the bloke is just a F%$#%wit as I have previously said and unable to comprehend the reason for the laws.

Put together the Farrell late tackle at a kick, which did not receive a sanction then the dive by Barrett as Vunipola barely touches him with a genuine charge attempt followed almost immediately by Vunipola diving in faster on Barrett than a groupie at an ACDC concert and you have a pretty clear square up and a picture of what one could reasonably make assumptions of was going on with Vunipola.

You did realise that the Vunipola charge down that Barrett's Oscars moment generated a penalty for was not the one he got yellow carded at don't you? Comprehension.

I know you didn't say the All blacks said it on a forum, was wondering where you heard the ABs say it wasn't a red card at all.

So lets get this right, you are saying that Vunipola attacked Barretts head illegally on purpose because he went to the ground when he was late tackled?? I actually never got the impression that Vunipola was that kind of dirty player, but still you obviously know him better than me.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Dan, are you deliberately misreading all of the posts trying to describe the circumstances of Vunipola's YC or do you really think there was only one incident involving both Vunipola and Barrett?

To make it clear (I hope), there is no suggestion at all that Vunipola attacked Barrett's head in the late tackle, or that Barrett going to ground after the late hit was in any way involved in Vunipola's YC. The YC offence happened at a later ruck/tackle when Barrett was on the ground trying to move away from the tackle area and Vunipola dived shoulder first to connect with Barrett's head. It was not a late tackle - forget all about any reference to a late tackle. It was for a dangerous dive on a player on the ground, and a deserved YC.