Tri Nations Game 5 - Springboks vs All Blacks

[Groucho]

Like his infamous defence of Wayne Barnes in 2007?


Agreed.

Infamous? There is an important difference between the head of the International Rugby Board's Referee Board saying a referee is right, and saying he is wrong.

 

[Victorian Reds Fan]

I have seen the highlights and while it was a forward pass the TOM obviously should not have ruled on it under the current rules.

 

[tigerland12]

My look on it would be, that if he did say it was a try, there would be a massive out-cry from the Seith Ifrikans about it. It wasn't a try, and the touch judge or referee should of picked it up anyway.

He got the right call, but the rules that are in place are wrong.

 

[ChargerWA]

My problem with it, is the fact that the TMO deliberatley tried to influence the game in an area he has no jurisdiction. After stating to the ref that the grounding was fine, he tentatively asked "would you like some extra information in regards to the lead up of th grounding" (sic). They way he asked it tentatively showed he knew he shouldn't be asking, and the fact that it positively favoured his own countries team is suspect.

I personally like the fact the TMO can only rule in the end zone. If you let them start making decisions in general play you slow the game down too much and head down the slippery slope of NFL style stop/start games.

 

[antipodean]

Infamous?

Yes, infamous.

There is an important difference between the head of the International Rugby Board's Referee Board saying a referee is right, and saying he is wrong.

Assertion doesn't cut it.

This is an interview worth listening to with Paddy O'Brien about this issue.

 

[Gnostic]

I've said it before regarding POB, and it is the reason these things happen everyone he opens hours gob. POB compromised himself and the IRB would have required his resignation as that cloud over his integrity allows this crap to happen. There is no doubt the TMO and ref stuffed up that is beyond question, but I would suggest the Ref was also watching the big screen at the game and wanted to make the correct decision not one thst only a Lawyer would find ethical.

 

[Mank]

My problem with it, is the fact that the TMO deliberatley tried to influence the game in an area he has no jurisdiction. After stating to the ref that the grounding was fine, he tentatively asked "would you like some extra information in regards to the lead up of th grounding" (sic). They way he asked it tentatively showed he knew he shouldn't be asking, and the fact that it positively favoured his own countries team is suspect.

Are you saying (or implying) that the TMO cheated because of hometown bias?

 

[cyclopath]

I think the TMO bottled it through inexperience. That does not excuse Clancy for taking the info on board and making his decision based upon it. However "correct", from a justice point of view.

 

[Groucho]

Yes, infamous.


Assertion doesn't cut it.

This is an interview worth listening to with Paddy O'Brien about this issue.

You Kiwis live in your own private Idaho.

 

[Blue]

Mate, he and Bismark were extraordinary. In combination with the others, they made the pack look world beaters. If Juan Smith was fit, the Bokke would have probably the best pack going around.

Schalk Burger will be pretty hand coming into the side. They simply have to start him. Brussow/Burger/Spies it is for me.

 

[H...]

I have formed the view that, with a literal and perhaps even purposive reading of the laws, without any extrinsic material that may be available, the TMO did NOT act outside his authority and nor did the ref by acting on his advice.

 

[Brisbok]

My problem with it, is the fact that the TMO deliberatley tried to influence the game in an area he has no jurisdiction. After stating to the ref that the grounding was fine, he tentatively asked "would you like some extra information in regards to the lead up of th grounding" (sic). They way he asked it tentatively showed he knew he shouldn't be asking, and the fact that it positively favoured his own countries team is suspect

I think the fact that the TMO asked the ref if he would like any further information shows that he was leaving the decision in the ref's hands rather than trying to enforce a ruling. At the end of the day the decision was with the ref and he incorrectly acted on the further information.

The TMO was in fact from Namibia and not South Africa. That's the equivalent of saying New Zealand and Australia are the same country.

 

[Scotty]

I'd say he will take the tackle (even if it looks like he doesn't want to be there), it's just that he often does anything to stop the ball dying in the contact. Often his offloads are thrown well and truly into the tackle. Truck it up to crash ball, however, Quade does not do, it's not his game.

Sometimes it shits me to tears, and other times it's brilliant. Live by the Quade, die by the Quade...

I recall at least 3 times in the first 60 where Cooper was tackled with the ball vs the Boks. He might be improving in this area.

 

[Scotty]

I think the fact that the TMO asked the ref if he would like any further information shows that he was leaving the decision in the ref's hands rather than trying to enforce a ruling. At the end of the day the decision was with the ref and he incorrectly acted on the further information.

The TMO was in fact from Namibia and not South Africa. That's the equivalent of saying New Zealand and Australia are the same country.

The TMO should never have offered more information. Once he did, the ref would have been pillared for not accepting it and then acting on it.

 

[whatty]

[bold]It was wrong,[/bold] and thank gawd it did not influence the result.

This was obviously easy for the TMO to asses as a reason to NOT award a try.

Only problem is how far do you retreat in looking for a obvious reason not to. Possibly the NRL has the answer on this one.


Also heaven forbid anyone post on TSF that the correct "outcome" as to the try or not was awarded!!

I can see the spittle all over the posted replies to that suggestion.

 

[Victorian Reds Fan]

Schalk Burger will be pretty hand coming into the side. They simply have to start him. Brussow/Burger/Spies it is for me.

That is just scary. Burger is probably my favourite non-Wallaby player.

 

[tranquility]

Burger is a weapon, however if I were a Bokke supporter I would consider him more of a 7. While he obviously offers the brutality and ball carrying to play 6, he is not tall enough as a line-out option. However Spies is not a bad target so it might even out. However, with everyone fit - I would play Smith, Burger, Brussow. Although Spies looks to be playing himself into some pretty mean form.

 

[Blue]

Burger is a weapon, however if I were a Bokke supporter I would consider him more of a 7. While he obviously offers the brutality and ball carrying to play 6, he is not tall enough as a line-out option. However Spies is not a bad target so it might even out. However, with everyone fit - I would play Smith, Burger, Brussow. Although Spies looks to be playing himself into some pretty mean form.

Schalk has taken a lot of lineout ball for the Stormers and SA. No he is not a primary target but a pretty handy one. Not worried about that. Spies took most of the ball last night.

At the Stomers, Schalk has been playing alongside Francois Louw who is an out and out openside. Worked for them.

 

[PaarlBok]

Schalk has taken a lot of lineout ball for the Stormers and SA. No he is not a primary target but a pretty handy one. Not worried about that. Spies took most of the ball last night.

At the Stomers, Schalk has been playing alongside Francois Louw who is an out and out openside. Worked for them.

Schalks biggest asset is his work rate specially on defense. Brussouw will make a killing with Battleship playing from him. Spies look like hitting form just at the right time. With those two he can play his natural game. Brussouw was vokken massive yesterday, now holding the proud record of 4-0 wins against the All Blacks and surely a proud record for him. He'll be our most important player in this world cup.

 

[PaarlBok]

I can understand how you feel, MR, me with a NZ grandmother 'n' all, MAJOR AB supporter she was. I'm not aboriginal, and if you're not Maori we're both immigrants. On one side many generations in Oz for me but immigrants nonetheless. As young nations we must accept immigrants and hope and pray they embrace their new country with all their hearts. Which is why it pisses me off mightily to see NZers living here supporting the ABs, part of me feels if you don't love this country bugger off back to where you came from. Is Australia nothing more than a meal ticket and a safe haven for these fly-by-nighters?

Which is why I admire Deans' position enormously. There's no doubt he gave up a lot when he accepted the Wallabies' coaching spot, especially with the Deans/Canterbury and the Deans/ABs histories. But he's made his bed and he's lying on it, good on you Robbie. May there be more new arrivals like you.

Did you saw yesterday how pathetic that culurs singing the Maori version of NZ anthem, wish I could heard them without their teeth. Today not a single All Black supporter in Paarl, only Bok jerseys around , as expected as usual. Like Snor say, they are back "kas toe"