MajorlyRagerly
Trevor Allan (34)
Exactly!!!
Did Joubert feel the pressure?
- Thread starter darkhorse
- Start date
- Status
Exactly!!!
F
François
Guest
Thanks to the one who first shared this in the France vs New Zealand thread. I think it has also a place on this thread as it clearly indicates that yes, Joubert felt tremendous pressure, realizing that the French could actually win the game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XBqetaCfgo&feature=player_embedded#!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XBqetaCfgo&feature=player_embedded#!
Scotty
David Codey (61)
If you don't get caught or punished you will continue to cheat.
Richo
John Thornett (49)
The video evidence is ugly and some of those incidents were what got me hoping the French would take it in the end. But to think that POB (or whoever) appointed Joubert because he's a good ref for the ABs is tin-foil stuff. He's one of the best two refs in the world and was the best ref at the tournament.
Not to mention that NZ have their complaints too -- how would France have done if Rougerie's eye gouge had been picked up?
J
Jay
Guest
The video is like Scarfman's famous one though - completely one sided as they didn't bother to look for any French offences. And of course, some of the conclusions are flat out wrong - for instance the Parra/Read comparison - Read retired and didn't influence play whereas Parra never retired fully then attempted to make a tackle.
C'mon Jay, you can usually do better than that. I gotta hear your take on the Kaino clusterfuck!
I've lost count of the neutrals - many professionals in the game - who thought/think Joubert had a shocker. Williams said it pretty well I thought.
But unless we have a video showing they were even we can't believe it?
I've lost count of the neutrals - many professionals in the game - who thought/think Joubert had a shocker. Williams said it pretty well I thought.
But unless we have a video showing they were even we can't believe it?
J
Jay
Guest
The Kaino one did look like it could have been pinged, yeah. Though it's not as cut and dried as they seem to think. Looks to me like he's initially playing the ball on his feet (though he may have a knee resting on a downed player which would mean he's off his feet). He's told to release and does so (knocking on) then Hore comes from an onside position to claim the loose ball (not offside as Williams seems to think). Joubert may have ruled that Kaino had hands on the ball prior to it becoming a ruck (and if you look, he is over the ball before any French support players arrive on their feet - you can't tell if he's got hands on the ball) which would mean his playing the ball would be legal (if he's supporting his own weight). He'd only then be required to release once he goes off his feet - which he does.
It could be called a penalty, if Joubert rules he didn't have hands on the ball prior to the ruck being formed or that he wasn't supporting his own weight, but it's not anywhere near as clear cut as they seem to think.
And given the French try camefrom a turnover where Rougerie kicks the ball out without being bound to the ruck (and thus offside) the notion that all the calls went against France is simply wrong. The penalty miss in the second half seemed to come after a clear knock on too (McCaw attempts a legal clear out, forcing the French halfback to knock on - not called - and is then penalised for playing the ball off his feet).
J
Jay
Guest
And another thing - the whole 'It's not blaming New Zealand' thing is utter utter bollocks. A large proportion of the rugby watching public and media has got a huge boner for getting stuck in to the AB's for perceived injustices.
Where were these videos 4 years ago? Where were these videos 2 fucking weeks ago when Lawrence was immeasurably worse?
Where were these videos 4 years ago? Where were these videos 2 fucking weeks ago when Lawrence was immeasurably worse?
No4918
John Hipwell (52)
A lot on here acknowledged Lawrence had a shocker. Stop looking at individual events and look at the big picture. Refs are making too many mistakes and it is having an effect on the game. Its not all about the ABs, get over this shit that the whole world hates the ABs, its just the latest example.
Joubert was the best leading in and deserved the final. Doesn't make him immune from a bad day. The AR should be helping a lot more and it might be time to get the TMO greater powers in certain circumstances such as the Rougerie incident. But then you run the risk of slowing the game down to unacceptable levels so its not an easy fix.
Joubert was the best leading in and deserved the final. Doesn't make him immune from a bad day. The AR should be helping a lot more and it might be time to get the TMO greater powers in certain circumstances such as the Rougerie incident. But then you run the risk of slowing the game down to unacceptable levels so its not an easy fix.
J
Jay
Guest
Yeah, a lot of people did. But not on the same scale and outside of SA not with the same level of outrage.
Cardiff is the real litmus test though. In that match, the AB's had a dominance in possession and territory that put France's second half in the final to shame and for all that got significantly less reward from the ref. But the overwhelming reaction from the world's media was "Amazing defence from France, AB's chokers". Now the situation is reversed, though to a lesser degree, and suddenly it's an outrage?
OK so I just watched the video. It doesn't make a particularly compelling case that Joubert had a shocker. The Kaino decision was very poor (I actually think the penalty should have been blown against Conrad Smith for not rolling away). BUT in the last twenty minutes the French were flying off their feet at every ruck. I certainly think the non-decisions largely went both ways, and the video does not particularly convince me otherwise.
As I said before he made a few poor decisions but nothing out of the realm of a normal reffing display and far from the worst performance of the tournament. Eg I would suggest Barnes and his touchies had a far worse game in the Bronze Final as their errors directly lead to one Welsh try and arguably another.
As I said before he made a few poor decisions but nothing out of the realm of a normal reffing display and far from the worst performance of the tournament. Eg I would suggest Barnes and his touchies had a far worse game in the Bronze Final as their errors directly lead to one Welsh try and arguably another.
MajorlyRagerly
Trevor Allan (34)
At one minute into the video, whoever the commentator is hasn't ruled one thing correctly.
Read off side... yes.. pullls back, game doesn't go his way - inconsequential
Parra off side.. yes... game does go his way, the fact he was off side is consequential.
Joubert was spot on.
This is the worst piece of one eyed commentary I have ever seen in my entire life. Ironic them talking about referee only reffing one team, when these 2 utter fuckhead clowns are only seeing what they want to see and commentating on that.
Read off side... yes.. pullls back, game doesn't go his way - inconsequential
Parra off side.. yes... game does go his way, the fact he was off side is consequential.
Joubert was spot on.
This is the worst piece of one eyed commentary I have ever seen in my entire life. Ironic them talking about referee only reffing one team, when these 2 utter fuckhead clowns are only seeing what they want to see and commentating on that.
Joubert seems to work under the rule that as long as you are pushing the odd guy laying on the wrong side is OK
It was the same in the semi
It frustrates me because rugby was best this season when the refs enforced the requiring the defender to clearly release and insisting on players rolling away.
This maybe counter intuitive but I actually the think it helped both France Aus keep close the ABs by slowing the game down and limiting scoring opportunities.
It was the same in the semi
It frustrates me because rugby was best this season when the refs enforced the requiring the defender to clearly release and insisting on players rolling away.
This maybe counter intuitive but I actually the think it helped both France Aus keep close the ABs by slowing the game down and limiting scoring opportunities.
J
Jay
Guest
I agree, they've gone backwards on enforcing the release of the tackled player in internationals all season and it got worse in the RWC. Frustrating when you look at the quality of test match rugby last season compared to this.
L
Linus
Guest
I think I'd agree that he didn't have his best game and the fact that it is a WC final means that he probably felt the pressure. End of discussion about Joubert, he wasn't biased, but he certainly influenced the way the game was played and hence the 8-7 scoreline, but I think then if you take it further than that you start going down the path of what if's and nothing really comes of that.
I think most refs will tend to swallow the whistle towards the end of a final, not just Joubert.
Can we forget the conspiracy theories and focus on what you'd like to see coming out of this?
I would suggest clearing the ruck. Most of the venom is directed at (in this and certainly the QF, and perhaps every AB game
) the lottery of interpretation at the ruck. As Jay concedes above, i don't think the game was helped by this trend in refereeing.
I'm a ref and operate on the principle that it looks like a sequence.
1.Tackler releases, and must clear away.
2.Tackled player places.
If you never rule on the first step, you almost always end up with a "swimming pool" ie players diving in.
P.S.
If you look at the ref's who have less trouble here you see they work hard early to rule on first step. The hardest time to rule on this is when a 2nd player is invovled and on his feet. By rights he is allowed to play the ball, but in most cases he is part of the tackle. And then it all goes to s^&t. Any thoughts?
I think most refs will tend to swallow the whistle towards the end of a final, not just Joubert.
Can we forget the conspiracy theories and focus on what you'd like to see coming out of this?
I would suggest clearing the ruck. Most of the venom is directed at (in this and certainly the QF, and perhaps every AB game
) the lottery of interpretation at the ruck. As Jay concedes above, i don't think the game was helped by this trend in refereeing.I'm a ref and operate on the principle that it looks like a sequence.
1.Tackler releases, and must clear away.
2.Tackled player places.
If you never rule on the first step, you almost always end up with a "swimming pool" ie players diving in.
P.S.
If you look at the ref's who have less trouble here you see they work hard early to rule on first step. The hardest time to rule on this is when a 2nd player is invovled and on his feet. By rights he is allowed to play the ball, but in most cases he is part of the tackle. And then it all goes to s^&t. Any thoughts?
Schadenfreude
John Solomon (38)
Yeah - Sensible and simple.. That's why no-one can understand when the refs can't manage it.
B
Blob
Guest
Re the Cruden vs Parra injury breaks. Parra's injury takes place during the run of play and play has to continue. Cruden's injury also occurs during the run on play and Cruden is initially left where injured on the ground. There is a knock on and the ref calls a scrum. At that point, which is a natural break in the play, the ref calls time for Cruden's injury. The circumstances are therefore different. On injury occurred near a natural stop in play which the gave the ref the opportunity to call time and the other one didn't.
He did the same thing several times during the game including an earlier period when Rougerie beat Richie to touch in goal and the ref signals a drop out. The French 12 is face down on the grass. The ref stops play until the Franch player is back up. Once again it is a natural stop in the play. The ref does not himself stop the play for the injured player. Totally consistent behaviour. But not enough for the conspirophiles.
He did the same thing several times during the game including an earlier period when Rougerie beat Richie to touch in goal and the ref signals a drop out. The French 12 is face down on the grass. The ref stops play until the Franch player is back up. Once again it is a natural stop in the play. The ref does not himself stop the play for the injured player. Totally consistent behaviour. But not enough for the conspirophiles.
Swat
Chilla Wilson (44)
Flawless logic! Fatality
- Status