Cheetahs v Reds R14

[lewisr]

Finally saw the first try to Rod... How could that possibly be called obstruction? He was a Lock about 5m away from morohan. There was no way he was going to get to him. On top of that, do none of these TMOs understand the concept of downward pressure? It doesnt matter whether it popped up because of the way he grounded it (if anything this cements the try). I feel like some of the referees need to go back to school. it doesn't matter if they were bias or not, they were just plain wrong and have no understanding of the game.

"if the ball is on the ground in-goal, downward pressure from the hand(s), arm(s) or upper body (waist to neck) is required."

 

[Rassie]

Or a jumped up little prick who just has to inject himself into the game somehow.

He's explanation was and I quote "It was not awarded because it was not clear and obvious. But why put the blame on one guy who was put in the hot seat due to 1 referee and two AR's looking god knows where.

Blind people often have better hearing.
For example, the AR's won't notice multiple counts of foul play but they will cite you if you call them a ****.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Genia, the "World's Best Halfback" was poor, poor and poor. Not average - poor
Even the commentators noticed that. Fuck, he should have been dragged and Lucas have a crack.
Everything went the Cheets way and nothing for the Reds - that's rugby I'm afraid.
Have said before that C F Sautia will make it hard for Taps to regain the spot - boy I was right.
Based on possession in the 22 Reds should have won by 15 but the rugby Gods said otherwise.

 

[Shiggins]

That was some terrible stuff. The cheetahs are my fav SA team and the reds are my second aus team.

The first try to to Davies was a joke. The obstruction is no way in hell an obstruction with players getting back into the line and it looked like Davies grounded the ball fine. However the TMO decides that it was a knock on and an obstruction? Wow

The cheetahs 9 had a great game but in his first try from the charge down he was a good half meter offside.

The cheetahs looked offside in the line outs as well. Going past the reds locks before the ball was out of the line out. Also plenty of deliberate knock downs. That was an obvious game plan. Get close to Those flat passes and knock the ball down and if you get close enough get the intercept. However Craig only awarded 1 penalty for a deliberate knock down. I counted at least 4.

I thought the reds had no luck
At all. All here try's looked good to me apart from the last one which was awarded. Fucking bizarre.

The cheetahs knew what they had to do to win the game and they did it. The score line doesn't reflect the game at all. The reds were by far the better side. The reds had at least 6 line breaks to the cheetahs 3. The reds had 5 players with over 50 running meters while the cheetahs only had 2 and keep in mind that one of those players is the scrum half who ran in a 50 mt try and the other is Adriaan who had 2 intercepts.

If you looked at the stats only you would of thought the reds won by 30-12 but the cheetahs just kept on getting let off by 50/50 calls going there way on their try line.

 

[Bowside]

Taps will get a run at 12 as part of the rotation next week I reckon. He is a good player but the stuff that got him a gold jersey (offload, lift foot kicking and straight running) has been lacking from his game recently.

 

[Shiggins]

Jeez the cheetahs ain't bad though. Remind me of the reds at the end of 2010. Not quite 2011 standard but defiantly close too it

 

[Sully]

He's explanation was and I quote "It was not awarded because it was not clear and obvious. But why put the blame on one guy who was put in the hot seat due to 1 referee and two AR's looking god knows where.

Blind people often have better hearing.
For example, the AR's won't notice multiple counts of foul play but they will cite you if you call them a ****.

Perhaps we should blame the South African Television networks. Oh wait that would be completely crazy!

 

[Shiggins]

Perhaps we should blame the South African Television networks. Oh wait that would be completely crazy!

Some of the replays were shocking. Only showed the Davies no try once and even the commentator Said no dramas. Lol.

They don't like replaying foul play either unless it's the opposition but I notice that all over the world. It's not just a SA thing at all

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

It doesnt matter whether it popped up because of the way he grounded it (if anything this cements the try). I feel like some of the referees need to go back to school. it doesn't matter if they were bias or not, they were just plain wrong and have no understanding of the game.

"if the ball is on the ground in-goal, downward pressure from the hand(s), arm(s) or upper body (waist to neck) is required."

The ball wasn't on the ground and he wasn't holding it in the air. So under the law it was a knock on. I think there should be lee-way so that a player who brings the ball down with control can score a try, but Davies grounding wouldn't be a good example of "control" anyway.

If these refs are so bad you should take a whistle down to your local club next week and show everyone how it's done. I'm sure you'll be reffing super15 in no time.

 

[fatprop]

The Reds seemed to lose all shape in this game, they looked all over the shop with no plan

 

[maxdacat]

If S Finger intentionally obstructed he must have eyes in the back of his head.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

The Cheetahs are the 2013 danger side. Teams that have underestimated them or their attack have been on the losing side of the ledger this year. They are a classy and unpredictable side with plenty of attacking options and a reasonable defence. They will be the more dangerous team to the Reds on this tour.

50/50 call but if the Reds do not roll out their A game, with Big Kev's generalship in the engine room, they could lose and miss any BP's.

No A game. No BP. More like a C game.

Many players in red looked tired, and key players will need to be awake next week or we will see a repeat.

 

[Beer Baron]

There was no change in game plan. The cheetahs showed from the start they had no intention of committing to the ruck (or anywhere near the ruck) but the reds kept swinging it wide to the waiting defenders.

Hats off to the ref on the attempted trip - "If that had of connected you would be off"

 

[Braveheart81]

If S Finger intentionally obstructed he must have eyes in the back of his head.

I think the problem comes because he is moving when the runner gets close to the defensive line.

If he was standing entirely still I think it would be fine. He's not though and it looks like he is trying to shepherd one of the defenders out of the way.

 

[maxdacat]

I think the problem comes because he is moving when the runner gets close to the defensive line.

If he was standing entirely still I think it would be fine. He's not though and it looks like he is trying to shepherd one of the defenders out of the way.

I understand that's what it looked like, however his back was turned to the Cheetah's player. The saffa commentators also said there was no doubt RD grounded the ball. There seems to be a complete farce sometimes with basic communication with the Video ref.....how many times is that now that the mikes haven't worked?

 

[Scoey]

Both Reds players were running a support line and didn't change direction. They were entitled to do what they did and the Cheetahs players just ran into them. No obstruction. I also was disgusted that the TMO could rule on a knock on from a front on view but when looking at the forward pass he kept changing views until he found one that made it look forward to disallow another try. Disgraceful.

 

[Dan54]

I understand that's what it looked like, however his back was turned to the Cheetah's player. The saffa commentators also said there was no doubt RD grounded the ball. There seems to be a complete farce sometimes with basic communication with the Video ref...how many times is that now that the mikes haven't worked?

So Max,if the Saffa commentators say something to we take it as a fact??? I really thought S Finger obstructed,and on purpose, whole body language gave me that impression, and don't tell me you have to be watching someone to move into their line, or there will almost never be obstruction. Hey I maybe incorrect, just how it looked to me.

 

[Braveheart81]

Both Reds players were running a support line and didn't change direction. They were entitled to do what they did and the Cheetahs players just ran into them. No obstruction.

I disagree. If Saia isn't intentionally trying to obstruct then he is doing a terrible job of looking innocent. He has one arm held up which seemingly looks like he is either directing Morahan where to run or holding his arm up to help block the defender. He then moves into the path of the defender (who probably wasn't going to get there anyway but it isn't his fault that his chance to make a tackle has been denied).

Ant's is loss blatant (until you get the slow motion replay) but certainly makes a bigger impact in denying Oosthuizen a chance to attempt a tackle. He remains pretty much still until the defender is very close and Morahan is approaching and then starts moving to block his path.

I would think that this will be called obstruction whenever it is reviewed by the TMO.

 

[Scoey]

Saia was never going to block another player with an outstretched arm. That's ridiculous. Both players were entitled to run the lines they did. The Cheetahs players saw them there, probably knew they weren't going to make the tackle so ran into the Fingers and I gotta say looking at it again, they had plenty if time to run around them and didn't. It may have even been a tactic?

 

[Brisbok]

Definitely a tactic IMO. I can picture Naka Drotske sitting down for his pre-game chat, telling his players to focus on tackling or running into support players rather than the ball carrier in the hope of possibly picking up a few cheap penalties.