Stormers vs Brumbies @ Newlands.
- Thread starter PaarlBok
- Start date
- Status
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
Brumbies didnt deserve the win, losing Bulter early, then Henry hurt..Bongos an idiot.. We kicked a penalty when we should of gone to the corner. In the end results fair.. Ref/Linemen/TMO gived the Stormers a bonus point.. didnt deserve it..
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Brumby Jack
Steve Williams (59)
No bonus point Tomikin. Only 3 tries to 1.
Brumby Jack
Steve Williams (59)
'BRUMBIES LOSS SELF INFLICTED, AIDED BY A THOUSAND PEYPER CUTS'
Too subtle?
Too subtle?
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Just the right balance of realistic supporter versus outraged Canberran victim.
Brumby Jack
Steve Williams (59)
Has anyone seen the Fox Sports feature where you can allocate 3-2-1's for games?
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
Brumbies were unlucky with a couple of late calls by the Touchie, TMO and Peyper, but the Stormers probably deserved the win, just not the margin. Not only were they strong in defense as always but their attack also put a lot of pressure on the Brumbies.
Some early calls by Peyper were interesting also. Matt To'omua rolling before placing the ball back, penalised. Correct by the laws but how often do we see this happen, or players crawling after going to ground with no action taken by the ref. Moore penalised for off the feet in a Brumbies' ruck. Again correct, but the first time I've seen it officiated this year. Brumbies penalised on their try line for hands on the ground in front of the last feet in a ruck. This is a new law clarification this year as I understand it, but again how many times has it been penalised before? None as far as I am aware.
Scrums were a fairly even, hotly contested affair; Stormers' lineout superior, defensive structures by both teams excellent and rucks were contested by both sides. Very even game until Mann-Rea went off, deservedly so. Score then blew out at the end on the back of some very questionable refereeing decisions.
Some early calls by Peyper were interesting also. Matt To'omua rolling before placing the ball back, penalised. Correct by the laws but how often do we see this happen, or players crawling after going to ground with no action taken by the ref. Moore penalised for off the feet in a Brumbies' ruck. Again correct, but the first time I've seen it officiated this year. Brumbies penalised on their try line for hands on the ground in front of the last feet in a ruck. This is a new law clarification this year as I understand it, but again how many times has it been penalised before? None as far as I am aware.
Scrums were a fairly even, hotly contested affair; Stormers' lineout superior, defensive structures by both teams excellent and rucks were contested by both sides. Very even game until Mann-Rea went off, deservedly so. Score then blew out at the end on the back of some very questionable refereeing decisions.
mst
Peter Johnson (47)
Which team is he playing for?
...and you thought I was saying it in jest!
If you scroll further down the list you will find Marius Jonker?
Micheal
Alan Cameron (40)
I particularly have a problem with this. I was recently having a chat wth a friend who plays at a very high level who was adamant that "you will NEVER get penalised for going off your feet at an offensive ruck", and in most cases, I agree that you shouldn't.
If you go off your feet and dive over the ball to remove the possibility that the opposing team can counter-ruck or contest the ball, fair enough.
But a few times I have seen players penalised for simply leaving their feet (a fair interpretation of the rules). I may be mistaken, but it appears to me that 99.78% of efficient clean outs involve leaving your feet in one way or another. This should never be penalised.
I have another friend whose progressing up the refereeing pathway, and he's told me that (atleast in terms of line outs and not throwing the ball in straight) that he's been advised to not blow the whistle unless the infringement has a material impact upon the game.
I wish more referees would adhere to this. Being a ref means that you're put in charge of ensuring the game is a fair and even contest. It is not an excuse for you to scream to the crowd: "everybody look at me, look how many rules I know!"
Pedrolicus
Dick Tooth (41)
I'm still a little cranky and tired so my bias level is high, so apologies for another post about the refereeing.
The brumbies got 3 penalties against them while in possession of the ball in the first half. That must be a record, while I understand that they were roughly correct, the ref could have called the same thing at nearly every ruck, especially "sealing off".
The red card was fair enough (although I'm sure there was more to it from the stormers prior to the brain snap), my problem is that the video ref was being all passive aggressive with his advice. If he thinks it's a red card, just say so, watching replay after replay and calling for more replays while the crowd got more and more vocal is shit on many levels.
Then shortly after a stormers player carries a ball into touch inside the brumbies 22 and they give the throw in to the stormers and act like they can't possibly look at it, laughable after the pant load of same angle/slo-mo replays they looked at just prior.
The dropped ball try was just mind boggling, only two people in the world thought that was a try.
The stormers deserve the win, but they also deserved to win it without home field calls.
The brumbies got 3 penalties against them while in possession of the ball in the first half. That must be a record, while I understand that they were roughly correct, the ref could have called the same thing at nearly every ruck, especially "sealing off".
The red card was fair enough (although I'm sure there was more to it from the stormers prior to the brain snap), my problem is that the video ref was being all passive aggressive with his advice. If he thinks it's a red card, just say so, watching replay after replay and calling for more replays while the crowd got more and more vocal is shit on many levels.
Then shortly after a stormers player carries a ball into touch inside the brumbies 22 and they give the throw in to the stormers and act like they can't possibly look at it, laughable after the pant load of same angle/slo-mo replays they looked at just prior.
The dropped ball try was just mind boggling, only two people in the world thought that was a try.
The stormers deserve the win, but they also deserved to win it without home field calls.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
I'm glad I didn't stay up for that one, I'd still be awake breaking things.........
Brumbies simply didn't play good enough, but that was an absolute clusterfuck by Peyper and his assistants...........
Peyper was definitely the top ref in Super Rugby last year, but that was some serious amateur hour shit going on.
Brumbies simply didn't play good enough, but that was an absolute clusterfuck by Peyper and his assistants...........
Peyper was definitely the top ref in Super Rugby last year, but that was some serious amateur hour shit going on.
mst
Peter Johnson (47)
swingpass
Peter Sullivan (51)
yes it
was it Marius as TMO who also gave the disgraceful decision last weekend in the Sharks Stormers game - "deliberate kick the ball out of that hands in attempting to score" - yellow card, when all that happened was the player placed the ball on the defenders leg and lost it.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
There definitely needs to be questions made of Jonker's ability/integrity..........
I've watched that Mann-Rea incident dozens of times now looking for this so called 'elbow.'
It's pretty clear that he hits him with his fist......... so I don't know what motivated him to come up with this elbow decision?
As for the knock-on try, I'm not sure what else to say except to quote the fucking law book..........
I've watched that Mann-Rea incident dozens of times now looking for this so called 'elbow.'
It's pretty clear that he hits him with his fist......... so I don't know what motivated him to come up with this elbow decision?
As for the knock-on try, I'm not sure what else to say except to quote the fucking law book..........
G
galumay
Guest
Not a fan of the Bush Donkeys so I didnt feel the outrage over the refereeing, the decision to award the try was interesting, his words were that there was "no clear seperation from the arm and the ball", so award the try, in the past I suspect the ruling would have been "inconclusive grounding", no try.
The change has come about as I understand it, from a direction to give benefit of the doubt to attacking team with tries. We have seen quite a few this season that would appear to confirm this is the application of new intent.
The RC/YC debate is marginal, obviously Peyper saw it as a YC for the punches but Jonkers believed the elbow was used and therefore warranted a RC, given there was only 15 minutes to go the impact of whether it was YC or RC was marginal anyway. I didnt think the footage we saw confirmed the elbow was used - rather the opposite but there may be angles we didnt see.
Overall I was very surprised that the Bush Donkey's attack was so effectively nullified - 11 points would be a concern for them.
The change has come about as I understand it, from a direction to give benefit of the doubt to attacking team with tries. We have seen quite a few this season that would appear to confirm this is the application of new intent.
The RC/YC debate is marginal, obviously Peyper saw it as a YC for the punches but Jonkers believed the elbow was used and therefore warranted a RC, given there was only 15 minutes to go the impact of whether it was YC or RC was marginal anyway. I didnt think the footage we saw confirmed the elbow was used - rather the opposite but there may be angles we didnt see.
Overall I was very surprised that the Bush Donkey's attack was so effectively nullified - 11 points would be a concern for them.
- Status