Cheats

[Sully]

I don't want to add to the discussions of the video evidence for fear of unintentional trolling as it is hard to not be biased. What I do want to discuss is the view of some that it is ok for a player/team to test the referee's to see what they can get away with.

If a law is broken, it is broken weather the offender is penalised or not. To practise breaking a law is unsportsman like in my opinion. The referee has a very hard job to do and players/teams should not be adding to the difficulties by exploiting thier weakness. If I knew the Wob's were doing it, I would not feel great about a win. The object of sport is to exploit the weakness of the opposing player/team, not the officiator's.

I played in my teens for a club run by our Kiwi brothers. They had a different view. It was every thing is legal until you get caught. Then you modify your game to stop being penalised. If you play against a team with that attitude with your fair play attitude you will almost always lose.

 

[Stickybeak]

O'Connor was offside before McCaw detached. It's not hard at all in this case - it's a 5m scrum and he has to be back 5m. Therefore he's gotta be behind the goal-line - that's both feet behind the goal line - which he's not from about the time the ball is fed. He takes an extra step when McCaw disengages, but he was already offside well before that.

I don't deny the AB's cheat. They're rugby players, therefore they cheat.

There is no useful purpose served by debating the point further as its irrelevant to the central question answered by the video.

 

[Stickybeak]

I played in my teens for a club run by our Kiwi brothers. They had a different view. It was every thing is legal until you get caught. Then you modify your game to stop being penalised. If you play against a team with that attitude with your fair play attitude you will almost always lose.

If you could get field position while they tried to work out what the ref would allow and what he wouldn't you could have a handy lead by halftime

 

[Jay]

There is no useful purpose served by debating the point further as its irrelevant to the central question answered by the video.

Perhaps not, but the example is indicative of the fact that you can probably find instances of both team's cheating in almost every highlight package.

As rugby in Australia tends to be popular with fairly well educated types, I imagine there's a fair few lawyers on GaGR. Whenever I hear a comment like Matfield's, I'm reminded of the equitable principle of 'clean hands'. Essentially, that a person can't ask for legal remedies in respect of a dispute if they themselves have acted contrary to the spirit of that law in the same dispute.

 

[Muttonbird]

The GaGR jury is not interested in what the defence has to say in this case.

 

[Scarfman]

Anyway, I think everyone has had a chance to say what they think. No-one involved in this thread seems to have changed their mind at all, but you never know, maybe people reading were swayed one way or the other. Shall we move on?

 

[cyclopath]

Yes. We shall. Thread closed as it has surpassed any purpose.