Did Joubert feel the pressure?
- Thread starter darkhorse
- Start date
- Status
Scotty
David Codey (61)
Joubert did have a shocker in the sense that he swallowed the whistle at the ruck area. He was scared to blow it, but he should have tried to stamped it out early, then let play flow more.
However it did not favour the All Blacks. In fact, despite France playing more 'rugby' if Joubert had opened up the game I am sure we would have seen the ABs also play more rugby and I suspect they could easily have won by more.
Scarfman
Knitter of the Scarf
I agree with comments that say Joubert is a good ref, and it's right to ridicule the idea that he was biased.
It's also fair to say that the commentators in the video were trying to make a point. They've picked examples to make their point, just as I did.
But some of the defences from Jay and MR here defy belief. Hard to believe they're looking at the same video. Honestly, defending the Kaino example just makes you look silly.
It's also fair to say that the commentators in the video were trying to make a point. They've picked examples to make their point, just as I did.
But some of the defences from Jay and MR here defy belief. Hard to believe they're looking at the same video. Honestly, defending the Kaino example just makes you look silly.
MajorlyRagerly
Trevor Allan (34)
For what it's worth, the Kaino decison is a shithouse one alright & we were lucky he didn't get pinged. But I'll happily take it.
But it's about the only thing they got right.
But it's about the only thing they got right.
J
Jay
Guest
Picking examples to make your point is fine, but if you ignore evidence that doesn't support it, you're essentially lying.
And I'd like to hear your analysis of the Kaino example.
Here's mine.
- He's a tackle assist and doesn't really release the tackled player - sure. It could be a penalty, but that's barely been enforced the whole tournament. For whatever reason the interpretation has gone away from the 2010 interpretation, which is a literal step backwards IMO. But it's consistent with how that's been reffed most of the year, let alone the RWC.
- He enters the tackle correctly and gets there before it's a ruck (a step before the first French player arrives on their feet). While acknowledging my point above, he is initially on his feet and has the right to attempt to play the ball. From the first angle of the replay, it's impossible to tell if he has his hands on the ball when he gets his hands on the ball, but at the start of the second angle, he has the ball in his hands.
- He is arguably supporting his own weight. He's not bracing himself on his hands but he may be resting his knee on a tackled player. Certainly he's supporting his own weight as much as Pocock or any other 7 often is. Compare the Dusatoir example they give earlier, for instance.
- On the second angle, he has the ball in his hands by the time the camera cuts. He may or may not be on his feet at this point (with reference to my above point). He then clearly goes to ground and either deliberately releases the ball or drops it accidentally. Whichever occurs, the ball goes forward.
Now, IF he has his hands on the ball before that French support player arrives and IF he's supporting his own weight, he's allowed to keep playing the ball until he goes off his feet.
On the first IF, it's impossible to tell and on the second IF it's arguable.
Bear in mind, I'm not actually saying it's the right call. I'm laying out a possible explanation for why Joubert didn't ping it - if he rules Kaino had hands on the ball and was on his feet, there's no reason to ping him in his mind.
If you're gonna act as if I'm deluded, I'd like to hear your analysis - but based on the number of basic errors in your well known youtube video, I don't think you've got the right to be giving anyone crap about analysing the breakdown or understanding of the laws of the game.
Toddy
Chris McKivat (8)
On that that replay I reckon it's a definite penalty against Kaino. I'm not going to give a play by play as I can't be arsed.
However, I disagree with the Read and Parra example. Read could have been penalised but I don't believe the two situations were comparable. And they definitely don't show any inconstancy in the ref's calling of the game.
I also reckon when one of the commentators mentioned the penalty count being "at least 2 - 1" in favour of the All Blacks really nailed his colours to the mast as this was not close to being true.
Finally, they never showed the incident when the French player kicked the ball from the ruck before the intercept. It's debatable whether the French player was correct in doing so and it lead to the French try.
There was no balance to the video so all you can do is laugh and call bullsh*t.
However, I disagree with the Read and Parra example. Read could have been penalised but I don't believe the two situations were comparable. And they definitely don't show any inconstancy in the ref's calling of the game.
I also reckon when one of the commentators mentioned the penalty count being "at least 2 - 1" in favour of the All Blacks really nailed his colours to the mast as this was not close to being true.
Finally, they never showed the incident when the French player kicked the ball from the ruck before the intercept. It's debatable whether the French player was correct in doing so and it lead to the French try.
There was no balance to the video so all you can do is laugh and call bullsh*t.
J
Jay
Guest
Honestly, if he had given a penalty against Kaino I wouldn't be complaining (I'd have been gutted if they got the kick obv, but I wouldn't be questioning the call), I just don't think it's anywhere near as disgraceful and shameful as those two seem to think it is. And it's entirely possible Joubert didn't make the call I theorised above, but simply bottled it.
The key difference in the Read/Parra examples is that Parra never actually gets onside before advancing again.
The key difference in the Read/Parra examples is that Parra never actually gets onside before advancing again.
B
Blob
Guest
Just to summarise then, on the basis of that video, which doesn't survey any French play at all, Joubert was biased because he missed one penalty against Kaino. That's a fairly weak case.
Scarfman
Knitter of the Scarf
Jay - there are no "basic errors" in my YouTube video. Only Kiwis trying to defend it. I've never had a non-Kiwi argue with any of the findings. Your analysis of the Kaino incident demonstrates that you look at these things with wishful thinking only. You are off the scale, and I'm not going to take this any further with you.
J
Jay
Guest
There are tons of basic errors - just from memory, you say Franks and Mealamu enter a ruck from the wrong side, when there's no ruck when Franks arrives and Mealamu goes around the back and enters it correctly, unlike John Smit who you completely fail to notice (or mention). In that one sequence you manage to not know what constitutes a ruck, mistakenly accuse a player of doing something he doesn't do and fail to notice one of the opposition doing something that doesn't gel with your hypothesis.
And it's quite revealing that you're unable to actually put up when someone asks you to provide more than rhetoric on this matter
B
BRIX
Guest
The only members that Kiwis get a long with on G&GR are the ones that agree with them.
J
Jay
Guest
I have no problem with anyone on this forum.
MajorlyRagerly
Trevor Allan (34)
Guess we don't get along then, because I don't agree with you on this one.
FrankLind
Colin Windon (37)
We win because we are better at rugby.
dermo
Larry Dwyer (12)
Can you post a link of the video?
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
I think this thread is going the way of the "The Haka" thread, and "Rougerie Eye gouge" thread.
Contributors are welcome to wang on as much as they want for as long as they want however it looks like this "discussion" is only going to result in an endless downwards spiral of ever decreasing circles (if there is such a thing). For one I believe that we have reached the culminating point on this thread and I will not be following this thread any more.
Good luck, and see you later, to those who want to keep this thread going.
Contributors are welcome to wang on as much as they want for as long as they want however it looks like this "discussion" is only going to result in an endless downwards spiral of ever decreasing circles (if there is such a thing). For one I believe that we have reached the culminating point on this thread and I will not be following this thread any more.
Good luck, and see you later, to those who want to keep this thread going.
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
If I compare Craig Joubert to Hitler can we close the thread?
J
Jay
Guest
Nah, Gagger's already told me off for prolonging these threads so it's best to heed Mr Jarse on this one.
- Status