CAS Rugby 2023

[Mule]

Season format idea (may well have been touted previously)….

Easter holidays and first ~3 weeks of Term 2: friendlies/trials between any schools regardless of association (up to schools to organise, some great traditional matchups like Knox V Joeys on Gala Day)

~Weeks 4-8 Term 2: CAS, CHS, ISA, CCC, AICES, GPS etc run their (~5 game) inter Association Championships - first past the post wins, with table (of weighted points for each team; eg a win in 1st XV gets 50 points, win in 13DS gets 5 points) giving a ranking for Term 3 NSW Schools Championships Cup/Plate/Bowl

Mid Year Holidays: tours and camps

Term 3: using tables from the Term 2 Association Championships, schools get seeded into 32 school NSW Schools Championships that runs over 6 weeks (home and away rights drawn out of hat each week, losers week 1 go into bowl comp, losers week 2 go into plate comp etc)

Feel we need to do something different…

 

[james richards]

Can someone just either post the video or a link to the video please!! That way we can make our own assumptions based off the video. If not, accept the refs decision and move on. Stop complaining about something that so far has zero evidence (on this page) and move on

Barker v Cranbrook incident <<There is the entire incident you see the penalty being blown before the try is scored (Cranbrook had stopped with no chance at controlling the try due to the ball being dead) The Barker players harass the referee demanding that he speak to the touchie which the touchie seemed angry or agitated in his decision almost. The touchie said it was the "wrong call" which is fine but it should not have been a try because the ball was dead on play and Cranbrook stopped due to the stoppage allowing the try. Another issue is the lineout as it should have been a penalty anyway.

 

[RedOrDead]

Barker v Cranbrook incident <<There is the entire incident you see the penalty being blown before the try is scored (Cranbrook had stopped with no chance at controlling the try due to the ball being dead) The Barker players harass the referee demanding that he speak to the touchie which the touchie seemed angry or agitated in his decision almost. The touchie said it was the "wrong call" which is fine but it should not have been a try because the ball was dead on play and Cranbrook stopped due to the stoppage allowing the try. Another issue is the lineout as it should have been a penalty anyway.

Ref approaches linesmen (linesmen doesn't storm on to field to overturn decision after encouraged by Barker hooker like the forum made out)... asks if the jumper retained ball when maul shape forms (not an actual maul as Cranbrook doesn't join) ... Linesmen says the jumper always has the ball (which is true)... Therefore this is not an obstruction and hence SHOULD BE A TRY.

If you ask me the real issue here is that the Cranbrook 1stXV team don't adequately understand the laws of a maul... Seriously poor at 1stXV level, and should be punished for that.

Also the ball wasn't dead until the whistle was blown... And when the whistle was blown Barker player was in the process of grounding the ball. Common sense prevails.

Also not sure how the line out "should have been a penalty." Was caught on the inside shoulder (can even see that from this poor angle), and that's the only reason I can think of.

 

[james richards]

Ref approaches linesmen (linesmen doesn't storm on to field to overturn decision after encouraged by Barker hooker like the forum made out)... asks if the jumper retained ball when maul shape forms (not an actual maul as Cranbrook doesn't join) ... Linesmen says the jumper always has the ball (which is true)... Therefore this is not an obstruction and hence SHOULD BE A TRY.

If you ask me the real issue here is that the Cranbrook 1stXV team don't adequately understand the laws of a maul... Seriously poor at 1stXV level.

Also the ball wasn't dead until the whistle was blown... And when the whistle was blown Barker player was in the process of grounding the ball. Common sense prevails.

Cranbrook never joined the maul so that in itself is a Cranbrook penalty ... Whistle was blown before the try was scored under no circumstances can that count as a try

Realistically we need an unbias opinion from someone like Snort

 

[Jumping_jack]

Yep ref blows the whistle before the try. It cannot be a try in that context.

 

[RedOrDead]

Cranbrook never joined the maul so that in itself is a Cranbrook penalty ... Whistle was blown before the try was scored under no circumstances can that count as a try

No. Cranbrook never joined the maul BUT ball was never passed back. Therefore, an obstruction never occurred. Play on.

Hopefully the Cranbrook boys learnt something from all this.

 

[james richards]

No. Cranbrook never joined the maul BUT ball was never passed back. Therefore, an obstruction never occurred. Play on.

Hopefully the Cranbrook boys learnt something from all this.

Obstruction has nothing to do with not joining the mall completely different situation. EITHER way I reiterate my statement that the whistle was blown before the try.

 

[RedOrDead]

The next argument people will make is "ref blows whistle before ball is grounded."

However...

Common sense prevails. No Cranbrook boy had a chance to stopping the try as the ball was in the process of being grounded when whistle blew. Sometimes common sense is the most important law in the rule book (IMO anyways).

Additionally, if your opinion is that Cranbrook should have won because both their pack and the ref don't understand the laws of the game... I reckon that's a pretty poor argument.

 

[RedOrDead]

Obstruction has nothing to do with not joining the mall completely different situation. EITHER way I reiterate my statement that the whistle was blown before the try.

If you could stop a maul AND earn a penalty by merely not joining it... Guess what... Come line-out time no team would ever join a maul, and the rolling maul would be a dead tactic. If the ball never moves backwards in the maul and remains in the jumpers hand, the ball can progress up the field.

Try.

Law Discussion: Maul tactics

The maul from a line-out was a great South African weapon. They developed it first and used it most profitably. Until November, that is.

rugby365.com

 

[james richards]

If you could stop a maul AND earn a penalty by merely not joining it... Guess what... Come line-out time no team would ever join a maul, and the rolling maul would be a neat tactic. If the ball never moves backwards in the maul and remains in the jumpers hand, the ball can progress up the field.

Try.

Law Discussion: Maul tactics

The maul from a line-out was a great South African weapon. They developed it first and used it most profitably. Until November, that is.

rugby365.com

Something we can both agree on is that this topic needs an unbias opinion from someone like Snort currently it is a barker v cranbrook back and forth and we need an unbias opinion as a final answer we have both put out our arguments lets leave it for an unbias party to chip in.

 

[Halfbackenthusiast]

Appears as though the whistle is blow whilst Thomas is in the process of grounding the ball (he’s already over the line and diving). This isn’t a infringement some people would remember Trinity scored a try in identical fashion against barker last year, barker have attempted to do a similar play in games but have passed the ball backwards and correctly been penalised. This however does not constitute a penalty as the player who caught the ball scored

 

[FoleyBealeFolau]

Barker v Cranbrook incident <<There is the entire incident you see the penalty being blown before the try is scored (Cranbrook had stopped with no chance at controlling the try due to the ball being dead) The Barker players harass the referee demanding that he speak to the touchie which the touchie seemed angry or agitated in his decision almost. The touchie said it was the "wrong call" which is fine but it should not have been a try because the ball was dead on play and Cranbrook stopped due to the stoppage allowing the try. Another issue is the lineout as it should have been a penalty anyway.

As you can see the barker number 2 at 0:18 going over to his father and asking him to change the call. comedic how that is allowed at the 1st XV Level.

 

[Famed_Star]

Appears as though the whistle is blow whilst Thomas is in the process of grounding the ball (he’s already over the line and diving). This isn’t a infringement some people would remember Trinity scored a try in identical fashion against barker last year, barker have attempted to do a similar play in games but have passed the ball backwards and correctly been penalised. This however does not constitute a penalty as the player who caught the ball scored

No.

the ref can Cleary be seen several seconds before the try is scored with his arm in the air.

The fact a try was allowed to be scored under those circumstances is a farce.

Looking at the call, it is not a penalty at all. Ball didn’t move from front Barkers hands. But it should have been a scrum reset because the ref had already called time off before a try was scored.

Same old Barker - imagine not being humble enough to admit how bad a call it is that we have Barker people on here justifying a ludicrous call.

 

[RedOrDead]

Something we can both agree on is that this topic needs an unbias opinion from someone like Snort currently it is a barker v cranbrook back and forth and we need an unbias opinion as a final answer we have both put out our arguments lets leave it for an unbias party to chip in.

Whether or not it was a penalty or not isn't really up for debate. The law says the penalty call was incorrect, and should have been a try.

What could be argued is that the whistle was blown before grounding and hence even though it should have been a try, it can't be a try anyway. However, as I have stated, from an objective rugby fan standpoint common sense should prevail. No Cranbrook boy had a chance to stopping the try as the ball was in the process of being grounded when whistle blew.

What is most important though IMO is no cheating occurred. Hopefully the whinging will cease.

 

[RedOrDead]

As you can see the barker number 2 at 0:18 going over to his father and asking him to change the call. comedic how that is allowed at the 1st XV Level.

No. Touchie was talking to the ref from the sideline. Hence why there are FOUR Barker boys pointing at the touchy (touchie has 4 kids in the 1st XV? Wow talented bunch). Also Number 2 doesn't get within 10 metres of his 'father' (which is probably a BS claim, no one has confirmed it lol).

 

[RedOrDead]

Looking at the call, it is not a penalty at all. Ball didn’t move from front Barkers hands. But it should have been a scrum reset because the ref had already called time off before a try was scored.

So let me get this right.... Your argument is "despite the fact whistle is blown when Barker is in process of diving for a try... And no Cranbrook player has any chance of stopping the try... I think it shouldn't be a try because both the ref and the Cranbrook team are clueless, and Barker should be punished for being the only people on the field (apart from the touchy) who understand the laws of the game."

That's your argument? Really?

Thank god for common sense. Try.

Additionally... If you believe it should have been a scrum reset from 5 metres out... You're probably looking at a try anyway. The better team won. Move on.

 

[Halfbackenthusiast]

No.

the ref can Cleary be seen several seconds before the try is scored with his arm in the air.

The fact a try was allowed to be scored under those circumstances is a farce.

Looking at the call, it is not a penalty at all. Ball didn’t move from front Barkers hands. But it should have been a scrum reset because the ref had already called time off before a try was scored.

Same old Barker - imagine not being humble enough to admit how bad a call it is that we have Barker people on here justifying a ludicrous call.

it wasn’t several seconds that video has been slowed down as often happens with highlights

 

[RedOrDead]

it wasn’t several seconds that video has been slowed down as often happens with highlights

I don't think it is slowed down. But the ball is grounded literally within 1 second of the whistle being blown with the closest Cranbrook player nowhere near the ball. It's common sense really.

 

[Halfbackenthusiast]

I don't think it is slowed down. But the ball is grounded literally within 1 second of the whistle being blown with the closest Cranbrook player nowhere near the ball. It's common sense really.

You can see it begin to slow down just before Thomas leaves the mall

 

[Mule]

Season format idea (may well have been touted previously)….

Easter holidays and first ~3 weeks of Term 2: friendlies/trials between any schools regardless of association (up to schools to organise, some great traditional matchups like Knox V Joeys on Gala Day)

~Weeks 4-8 Term 2: CAS, CHS, ISA, CCC, AICES, GPS etc run their (~5 game) inter Association Championships - first past the post wins, with table (of weighted points for each team; eg a win in 1st XV gets 50 points, win in 13DS gets 5 points) giving a ranking for Term 3 NSW Schools Championships Cup/Plate/Bowl

Mid Year Holidays: tours and camps

Term 3: using tables from the Term 2 Association Championships, schools get seeded into 32 school NSW Schools Championships that runs over 6 weeks (home and away rights drawn out of hat each week, losers week 1 go into bowl comp, losers week 2 go into plate comp etc)

Feel we need to do something different…

attempted change of topic well & truly charged down....... but does play continue or is this attempted phase of play dead? ;-)