RWC QF 4 AUS v SCO (Twickenham) 19th Oct 0200 AEDT

[Dewald Nel]

The second Scottish player touching it isn't accidental. It is fully intentional.

That means it is either a penalty if Joubert doesn't think Phipps touched it or played at it and touched it, or a knock on if Phipps did touch it intentionally meaning there was no offside.

Clearly Joubert didn't think Phipps touched it intentionally so it was offside.

Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk

Yep. And from the replay he surely couldn't have been sure. Would you make that call if you had that evidence? I wouldn't - not many would.

 

[Ash]

You know, you can fuck right off with your generalisations. If you have an issue with one person, direct it, don't paint everyone with the same brush.
You really ought to engage your brain before you post more often.

If someone brings them to my attention I do. I can't read every post on this place. And this guy is a repeat offender.

No offence cyclo, but there's been lots more sniping at Reds fans you've let go. I think that's an over the top reaction when there's been plenty worse, particularly from the guy he was responding too, unless we can expect the same reaction from you when qwerty says something similar the next time about Reds fans?

 

[Cardiffblue]

Fuck I feel sorry for Joubers.

I don't

 

[Braveheart81]

Yep. And from the replay he surely couldn't have been sure. Would you make that call if you had that evidence? I wouldn't - not many would.

If he's sure of the Scottish player knocking it forward and the Scottish player grabbing the ball in an offside position but unsure if Phipps touched it, the information he does know points to a penalty.



Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk

 

[Cardiffblue]

The second Scottish player touching it isn't accidental. It is fully intentional.

That means it is either a penalty if Joubert doesn't think Phipps touched it or played at it and touched it, or a knock on if Phipps did touch it intentionally meaning there was no offside.

Clearly Joubert didn't think Phipps touched it intentionally so it was offside.

Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk

I don't think Joubert made any calculation. He was caught up in the moment and made a call. The wrong call as it happens

 

[Dewald Nel]

If he's sure of the Scottish player knocking it forward and the Scottish player grabbing the ball in an offside position but unsure if Phipps touched it, the information he does know points to a penalty.



Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk

Disagreed.

Anyway, this discussion has probably run its course. We won't agree on it in a month of Sundays.

Thanks for being civil about it, though. I saw some nasty discussions re: world cup on Twitter recently. Which is also the reason I don't have a Twitter account any more.

 

[Cardiffblue]

Yep. And from the replay he surely couldn't have been sure. Would you make that call if you had that evidence? I wouldn't - not many would.

I wouldn't have given a penalt

Lol. Not trying to change what happened. At least many other Aussies admitted that it was lucky. You don't have to agree with them, of course. You, however, seem to be scrambling like a dog with a guilty conscience, trying to get the attention off the subject, which is enough proof for me that you have doubt about what happened. So fair enough.

Either way, it has nothing to do with what Aus did or did not do - it was Joubert's decision and Aus don't deserve any berating for it.

But hopefully Joubert doesn't get another game in the world cup. He doesn't deserve one. That is the general consensus I think. There are at least 2 refs who have been better than him at this tournament, and they should take control of the final 3* matches.

*nobody gives a toss about who the ref is in the 3rd/4th place playoff, do they?

i think he should be made to ref all Glasgow and Edinburgh games for the next year to atone

 

[Forcefield]

It makes you wonder what would have happened if he didn't award and penalty and gave a scrum instead? Slipper seemed to stabilise our scrum. Would we have won a scrum penalty? Would we have been penalised? Would we have gotten the ball out and either scored a try or won a penalty through pressure? Would we have fucked it up? Hard to say.

I find the same deal interesting with the yellow card (which I think was bollocks incidentally). Sure Australia wouldn't have had the same advantage, but would we have scored anyway? It would have completely changed the shape of the game and maybe we wouldn't've fucked up the Foley chip kick or the James Slipper pass that kept Scotland in the game.

 

[TOCC]

Curious that for one of the Scotland tries they had 4 or 5 reserves in the in-goal area celebrating BEFORE he had touched the ball down. Is that kosher?

It isn't kosher but it had no bearing on whether he scored a try or not, if it were a case that there presence could have impeded a defender then different story.. Players use the in goal to warm up given the limited space at some stadiums, it just happens.

 

[Blue]

I don't think Joubert made any calculation. He was caught up in the moment and made a call. The wrong call as it happens

I don't think he was caught up in any moment.

No conspiracy theories, No funny business. He saw the ball come off a Scot and called it.Wrong call, but that's history. It sucks for Scotland. Really does.

 

[Highlander35]

The penalty was disapointing. Not because the decision itself was controversial, but because if the game was to be claimed by Australia, it deserved a magnificent try, or a brilliant turnover, or a hard ground drop goal to finish. As such, it left a mildly bitter taste in my mouth, but it's a call that Joubert has made to the best of his ability, the TMO doesn't have the authority to intervene, and he probably shouldn't on an open play decision, and neither touchy had a better view. I'd want that to be given as a penalty to my team, I can't complain when it's given against.

Can we build a bridge and get over it people. We weren't robbed, Aussies didn't steal it, it was just an underwhelming end to an exciting encounter.

 

[Blue]

Looking at it again why did Strauss turn his back and not go for the ball? That would have had a diifferent outcome. Lots of ifs.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

The penalty was disapointing. Not because the decision itself was controversial, but because if the game was to be claimed by Australia, it deserved a magnificent try, or a brilliant turnover, or a hard ground drop goal to finish. As such, it left a mildly bitter taste in my mouth, but it's a call that Joubert has made to the best of his ability, the TMO doesn't have the authority to intervene, and he probably shouldn't on an open play decision, and neither touchy had a better view. I'd want that to be given as a penalty to my team, I can't complain when it's given against.

I have to confess to having a bit of a hollow feeling after full time last night. Obviously I was relieved that we won, but we should have been gone and I didn't feel like we deserved it somehow. That's elite level sport though and winning ugly or sometimes fortunately is part of the deal.

 

[Bullrush]

Pretty disgraceful to see people talking about 'flukey' tries or 'lucky' tries by Scotland. It's totally dismissive of the good pressure the Scots defence was putting on the Wallabies forcing errors and poor judgement calls.

I'm sure no-one here was calling this try 'flukey' in 2003.

 

[Gnostic]

Yep. And from the replay he surely couldn't have been sure. Would you make that call if you had that evidence? I wouldn't - not many would.

That is just the point, he didn't have the luxury of the replay and the TMO had no jurisdiction. He had to make the call and he did, and IMO it was a reasonable call on the run under the circumstances. Indeed I would say it took a lot of courage to make it under the circumstances.

 

[qwerty51]

What really pisses me off is that everyone has just ignored what happens at 56:15.

AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) kicks a ball into WP Nel. It comes off him and the next person to touch it is Finn Russell who is 5 metres ahead of him. He attempts to pick the ball up. He deliberately touches the ball. Joubert rules this unintentional and awards the scrum to Australia - the resulting scrum Foley is charged down and Scotland score.

Why does no one bring that up but rather the last penalty. It's a clear cut penalty to Australia who would've kicked to touch and thus Scotland would not have scored.

Joubert was poor - BOTH teams. Not robbed.

 

[tragic]

Pretty disgraceful to see people talking about 'flukey' tries or 'lucky' tries by Scotland. It's totally dismissive of the good pressure the Scots defence was putting on the Wallabies forcing errors and poor judgement calls.

I'm sure no-one here was calling this try 'flukey' in 2003.

Nah - I'm pretty sure they were.
Just in different colours.
But I agree with the sentiment.

 

[Bullrush]

What really pisses me off is that everyone has just ignored what happens at 56:15.

AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) kicks a ball into WP Nel. It comes off him and the next person to touch it is Finn Russell who us 10 metres ahead of him. He attempts to pick the ball up. He deliberately touches the ball. Joubert rules this unintentional and awards the scrum to Australia - the resulting scrum Foley is charged down and Scotland score.

Why does no one bring that up but rather the last penalty. It's a clear cut penalty to Australia.

I thought at the time it was an ordinary call and maybe there was something I had missed but this game was not a good one by Joubert.

 

[qwerty51]

I thought at the time it was an ordinary call and maybe there was something I had missed but this game was not a good one by Joubert.

I find it quite unbelievable his call here because unlike the Phipps thing this was so clear yet he ruled unintentional touch???

 

[Bullrush]

I find it quite unbelievable his call here because unlike at the Phipps thing this was so clear yet he ruled unintentional touch???

Have to say that there didn't seem to be much 'unintentional' about the touch at all....LOL