Refereeing decisions
- Thread starter boyo
- Start date
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
With Steve Walsh.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
Lol IS, of course he could come to dinner at my place, like I always said so could his father, but they would probably need to get someone to taste their food
.Naa he doesn't worry me, he is like Stephen Jones and his father John Reason, they both just moan at SH rugby to get people to read them, and Mark lives in NZ now , so the only way he will get anybody to notice him is this kind of stuff. If you read it he really doesn't understand the game at all, so being controversial is trying to cover it.
I surprised noone posted Jim Tucker's write up about All blacks last week about how grateful you should be that ABs are around
Dam0
Dave Cowper (27)
Yeah I tend to agree with much of what Dan54 says. The guy is entitled to his opinion. His overarching point that there is a lack of critical analysis from NZ rugby media is not incorrect. There does tend to be a lack of analysis about the All Blacks when they are winning, which then all explodes into a heap when they lose, with wails of "How could this happen?"
I would take issue with some of his points, and I think he purposefully writes as provocatively as he can to get nibbles. I also think the NZ reaction to some his stuff does display a lack of maturity at times, though there is an element of 'the boy who cried wolf' as well - he writes so much stuff that is totally outrageous and simply incorrect that when one of his articles is OK no-one takes him seriously.
As for this article, it's a bit ho-hum really. Nonu was rubbish, Dagg was only marginally better - some of his option taking was appalling, Taylor was OK for a fill-in but no better than that and the public should be pretty unhappy with the performance as a whole. His stuff about McCaw and about referees being intimidated is pretty fanciful but whatever.
I would take issue with some of his points, and I think he purposefully writes as provocatively as he can to get nibbles. I also think the NZ reaction to some his stuff does display a lack of maturity at times, though there is an element of 'the boy who cried wolf' as well - he writes so much stuff that is totally outrageous and simply incorrect that when one of his articles is OK no-one takes him seriously.
As for this article, it's a bit ho-hum really. Nonu was rubbish, Dagg was only marginally better - some of his option taking was appalling, Taylor was OK for a fill-in but no better than that and the public should be pretty unhappy with the performance as a whole. His stuff about McCaw and about referees being intimidated is pretty fanciful but whatever.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Dan54 and Dam0
This post will self destruct in 15 seconds.
It matters little whether any journalist in NZ is running a truly critical ruler over the performance of the AB's from week to week because I am confident (a) that the coaches are and (b) that the coaches have far more idea than most of the media.
This post will self destruct in 15 seconds.
It matters little whether any journalist in NZ is running a truly critical ruler over the performance of the AB's from week to week because I am confident (a) that the coaches are and (b) that the coaches have far more idea than most of the media.
Dam0
Dave Cowper (27)
That is true, of course.
Still, the NZ rugby media is a bit sycophantic for my liking, until they lose a big game - and then they go into full borne meltdown and throw all objectivity out the window. It might be nice to smooth over both the peaks and the valleys.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Geez, youre a hard marker: best in the world, daylight second and you think the media is too soft.
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
He thinks so, too.
Sidbarret
Fred Wood (13)
Moving on, here is a "interesting" call from the Lions/WP CC game this weekend.
http://www.sarugbymag.co.za/blog/details/province-pay-the-penalty
Interesting call. De Allende came in from the "wrong side", going off his feet to stop the attacker from placing the ball. Had it happened anywhere else on the pitch, I would agree, penalty. But, the attacker was in the process of placing the ball (though still in the field of play), seem wrong that the defender has to allow the attacker to place the ball over the line.
Any resident refs have an opinion?
http://www.sarugbymag.co.za/blog/details/province-pay-the-penalty
Interesting call. De Allende came in from the "wrong side", going off his feet to stop the attacker from placing the ball. Had it happened anywhere else on the pitch, I would agree, penalty. But, the attacker was in the process of placing the ball (though still in the field of play), seem wrong that the defender has to allow the attacker to place the ball over the line.
Any resident refs have an opinion?
Bloody tough call. I'm not a ref but here's what I think.
It was a tackle not a ruck.
He had released the ball.
The penalised player was off his feet.
A try was not being scored because the tackled player had released the ball and could not play it until he regained his feet so definitely not a penalty try.
The second tackler, for want of a better description, player played the ball while off his feet. Penalty.
How did I go?
It was a tackle not a ruck.
He had released the ball.
The penalised player was off his feet.
A try was not being scored because the tackled player had released the ball and could not play it until he regained his feet so definitely not a penalty try.
The second tackler, for want of a better description, player played the ball while off his feet. Penalty.
How did I go?
Hawko
Tony Shaw (54)
Not a ref but I think the ruling that you have to come through the gate and not from the side before you can attempt to prevent the placement of the ball over the tryline needs a rethink. He was not attempting a tackle, he was attempting to prevent the ball reaching the ground over the tryline.
Imagine how many penalty tries would be awarded from pick and go's or mauls when players who are not coming through the gate but who already are bound to the tackle/ruck and are trying to prevent the ball being grounded.
Sidbarret
Fred Wood (13)
Close... whether Boshoff (the Lions winger) loss the ball or not is a factual question, I am more interested in the law.
As I said, anywhere else on the pitch, penalty, but it just look wrong if it is in the act of scoring. No matter how many times I watch it, blue 12's actions don't 'look wrong".
Interesting side note, blue twelve was called for, essentially, being offside, but he had both his feet in the in goal, so couldn't be offside.
It is what it is
John Solomon (38)
The referee's judgment needs to come into it, just like it does evertime he makes a decision on field.
In the referee's opinion would a try have been most probably scored if the defending player hadn't acted unlawfully (come in from an offside position)?
Answer Yes, so penalty try for mine.
Also if a defender head highs an attacker in mid-field a penalty would be awarded BUT if a defender head highs an attacker who was in the act of scoring a try and that player didn't score, then a penalty try could easily result.
It is tough to watch a player about to score a try and be helpless. That's why the rugby league guys brought in the right to strip the ball off an attacker if they were in the act of scoring a try.
Probably the closest we have in rugby is a defending No 8 diving through his own back pedalling scrum and forcing the ball to stop a pushover scrum or a defender going back into their own in-goal to force the ball.
In the referee's opinion would a try have been most probably scored if the defending player hadn't acted unlawfully (come in from an offside position)?
Answer Yes, so penalty try for mine.
Also if a defender head highs an attacker in mid-field a penalty would be awarded BUT if a defender head highs an attacker who was in the act of scoring a try and that player didn't score, then a penalty try could easily result.
It is tough to watch a player about to score a try and be helpless. That's why the rugby league guys brought in the right to strip the ball off an attacker if they were in the act of scoring a try.
Probably the closest we have in rugby is a defending No 8 diving through his own back pedalling scrum and forcing the ball to stop a pushover scrum or a defender going back into their own in-goal to force the ball.
Bruwheresmycar
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
If the tackled player can score a momentum try, the defenders should have a right to stop it.
However, the laws here are not well prepared for this scenario. Technically a non-tackling defender off their feet playing at the ball should be penalized, penalty try is the correct call for a blatant infringement here. However, I wouldn't worry about tackle entry when the ball carrier is sliding fast towards the goal line.
Those close ones, like BOD above should be benefit of the doubt to the defender.
However, the laws here are not well prepared for this scenario. Technically a non-tackling defender off their feet playing at the ball should be penalized, penalty try is the correct call for a blatant infringement here. However, I wouldn't worry about tackle entry when the ball carrier is sliding fast towards the goal line.
Those close ones, like BOD above should be benefit of the doubt to the defender.
I think it's a tough decision but the right one given that the defender went off their feet.
The defender only has to get part of one foot into the in goal to be considered to have both feet in goal (Law 22.9 (a)) so I don't think they need to come through the gate as such once they are in goal. They just have to stay on their feet to be able to play the ball.
The defender only has to get part of one foot into the in goal to be considered to have both feet in goal (Law 22.9 (a)) so I don't think they need to come through the gate as such once they are in goal. They just have to stay on their feet to be able to play the ball.
Baldric
Jim Clark (26)
So what would happen if a player was tackled. Both the tackled player and tackler slide into the in-goal area. The tackler while holding the tackled player rolls onto his back and prevents the tackled player from grounding the ball.
That is almost always given as ball held up in goal and a scrum is awarded. But why is it not a penalty try for the tackler not releasing?
That is almost always given as ball held up in goal and a scrum is awarded. But why is it not a penalty try for the tackler not releasing?