Greyling gets two weeks

[Mank]

Probably. Good to see that the Saffas reminding everyone Bakkies isn't the only thug going around.

SA play hard and rough, and sometimes cross the line. They cop it when they do, and rightly so (though Greyling can count himself lucky it was so light).

 

[DPK]

Yeah I think that's about right Mank. I love the South African brutality in rugby. They excel at bashing opposition sides right to the precipice, but every now and then go over the edge.

Usually they are fairly punished, but the Eztebeth/Greyling sentences are pretty poor.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

That was ordinary stuff from Greyling, but the point is well made about how one would clean out McCaw in that situation. What do you do? McCaw was loitering, was off his feet and interfering with play. How do you legally remove him from the contest?

Nevertheless, whacking him with an elbow or your shoulder in the head isn't the way.

 

[Brisbok]

Part of the problem is that the actions of players like Greyling, Bakkies etc. often result in the punishment of incidents like Etzebeth's being harsher than they otherwise would IMO.

 

[Scotty]

I think the shoulder clean out was accidental.

The elbow on the other hand - very difficult to comprehend how a flying elbow to the head gets two weeks. Also difficult to see how it wasn't a red card at the time!

 

[Dam0]

To be fair to Greyling and Vermuelen they were trying to get Richie away form an illegal position playing the ball off his feet, again. If the Ref isn't going to apply the laws of the game to a certain player, I can understand their frustration taking things into their own hands. although going in with a forearm to the chin probably isn't the best way to do it.

Perhaps you could explain to me what exactly it is that McCaw is doing that is illegal. You must have a different lawbook to me.

 

[Dam0]

That was ordinary stuff from Greyling, but the point is well made about how one would clean out McCaw in that situation. What do you do? McCaw was loitering, was off his feet and interfering with play. How do you legally remove him from the contest?

Nevertheless, whacking him with an elbow or your shoulder in the head isn't the way.

Absolute nonsense. He is sitting on the ground after being cleared out. He is not by any stretch of the imagination "interfering with play".

I have read some tosh on rugby sites lately, but I think your bit takes the cake.

 

[Jiggles]

Perhaps you could explain to me what exactly it is that McCaw is doing that is illegal. You must have a different lawbook to me.

Sitting on his arse with his hands all over the ball for one....

 

[Brisbok]

I think the shoulder clean out was accidental.

The elbow on the other hand - very difficult to comprehend how a flying elbow to the head gets two weeks. Also difficult to see how it wasn't a red card at the time!

Indeed. Very lucky that it wasn't a red card. I don't think the ref saw the incident and the assistant ref probably didn't have the best view. If the Boks had to play with 14 men for the remainder of the game, the scoreline probably would have been a lot different (although I still don't know how the Boks managed to even throw away a losing bonus point from a game they could've won!!)

Hopefully Meyer and de Villiers stay true to what they said after the game and they come down hard on Greyling, since SANZAR decided to make light of it.

 

[Dam0]

Sitting on his arse with his hands all over the ball for one..

His hands are not touching the ball. Try again.

 

[Jiggles]

yeah you're right. Richie is a saint. never does a thing wrong.....

 

[Dam0]

yeah you're right. Richie is a saint. never does a thing wrong...

Don't be such a prat. You are the one who says that he is doing something illegal. I have challenged you to point out anything that is doing that is illegal and you can't do it.

So you resort to the above nonsense comment.

 

[Jiggles]

Don't be such a prat. You are the one who says that he is doing something illegal. I have challenged you to point out anything that is doing that is illegal and you can't do it.

So you resort to the above nonsense comment.

No you're correct. nothing cynical from McCaw in that entire ruck. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Dam0]

No you're correct. nothing cynical from McCaw in that entire ruck. I'll leave it at that.

Fair enough.

(Of course it isn't even a ruck but I guess that is a minor detail)

 

[Waylon]

Mccaw deserved it. he's always off side, coming in the side, lying all over the ball, trapping it at the back of the ruck with his legs, holding the ball on the tackled player on the ground so he doesn't release it

Mccaw is a great player but he's also a farking cheat that gets away with murder

How much can a koala bear?

Hopefully the bokke will give hiom some more in RSA

 

[Dam0]

Mccaw deserved it. he's always off side, coming in the side, lying all over the ball, trapping it at the back of the ruck with his legs, holding the ball on the tackled player on the ground so he doesn't release it

Mccaw is a great player but he's also a farking cheat that gets away with murder

How much can a koala bear?

Hopefully the bokke will give hiom some more in RSA

Is there anything in that breakdown that he has done that is illegal?

Or is this just another McCaw's a cheat whinge?

 

[Jiggles]

Fair enough.

(Of course it isn't even a ruck but I guess that is a minor detail)

Not a ruck? wow. just....

 

[Dam0]

Not a ruck? wow. just..

Law 16:

DEFINITIONS
A ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on
their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground.

The ball is not on the ground and no ruck is formed. We are in Law 15 territory I'm afraid. There is no obligation for a player who is on his feet to let go of the ball. Once a player loses his feet he must obviously not play the ball, but that does not occur here.

 

[Jnor]

Ease up guys, I think all of us agree it was a stupid and dangerous play by Greyling on McCaw who we all recognise pushes the limits of the law. It doesn't justify foul play like that.

The rest is pretty thinly veiled trolling Jiggles, which isn't worth reacting to.

 

[Dam0]

Ease up guys, I think all of us agree it was a stupid and dangerous play by Greyling on McCaw who we all recognise pushes the limits of the law. It doesn't justify foul play like that.

The rest is pretty thinly veiled trolling Jiggles, which isn't worth reacting to.

I'm not trolling anybody. I responded to a post claiming that the perpetrator was somewhat justified because " they were trying to get Richie away form an illegal position playing the ball off his feet, again." I pointed out that McCaw is doing nothing illegal.

I am defending my position vigorously but that is hardly trolling.