Wallabies vs Ireland - 3rd test - Saturday 23rd June 2018 - Sydney Football Stadium

[Derpus]

It is also a fire/safety trap, it has structural issues that can not be fixed

There are supposedly mystery reports floating around, for unknown reasons not disclosed to the public (presumably reports related to structural integrity and fire safety) recommending demolition. I can only imagine the contents of these reports make the government look even worse than they do now.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Also forward passes. We get rightly called on a pass, then 2 blatant forward passes off the scrum. It's the lack of consistency that frustrates


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The forward pass called against us was far more marginal (ie less obvious) than the two Irish passes a few moments later. Luckily, the ball finished over the sideline, so nothing came of the later two passes, but these were a very good illustration of the inconsistency of the refereeing.

 

[Braveheart81]

Under the current law interpretations, I think Izzy is in for a lengthy spell on the sideline. If the incident being reviewed is the one where O'Mahony went off injured, then Izzy is at fault for grabbing the player in the air around his waist with his left hand. The contact on the player's arm is a furphy imo. It is the contact with the body that propels him away from the lifter, and will likely earn a suspension.

The charge in the disciplinary rules (Regulation 17) is:

10.4(i) Tackling, pushing, pulling, colliding with or otherwise making contact with an Opponent who is jumping for the ball in a lineout or in open play where there is no realistic prospect of the player competing for the ball

It's hard to argue Folau wasn't in a position to compete for the ball so it seems contrary to what the actual charge is.

That said, can it be anything other than a low end charge (4 weeks) with a reduction for a good record and a guilty plea? 1 week seems a likely prospect.

The incident being reviewed isn't the one where O'Mahony went off injured. It's an earlier one.

 

[Derpus]

The charge in the disciplinary rules (Regulation 17) is:

10.4(i) Tackling, pushing, pulling, colliding with or otherwise making contact with an Opponent who is jumping for the ball in a lineout or in open play where there is no realistic prospect of the player competing for the ball

It's hard to argue Folau wasn't in a position to compete for the ball so it seems contrary to what the actual charge is.

That said, can it be anything other than a low end charge (4 weeks) with a reduction for a good record and a guilty plea? 1 week seems a likely prospect.

The incident being reviewed isn't the one where O'Mahony went off injured. It's an earlier one.

It's fucking mindboggling. Do they even read the rules they squirt out of their arse?

And somehow a shoulder charge to a french players head, resulting in a fractured skull following a swinging arm to the head on the same player, is fine and dandy.

I swear there is a new drug out there called 'inconsistency' and they are smoking it by the bucketload.

 

[Braveheart81]

It will be interesting what approach is taken with Folau by Rugby Australia.

It related to the Wallabies but it is the Waratahs who will lose out with any suspension. If he's offered a low end sanction I'd be inclined to plead guilty even if it seems pretty unjust. A low end sanction should get reduced to one game and maximum of two.

 

[dru]

I felt there were chunks of the game where the ref was only policing the Wallabies. I read somewhere this morning that French refs tend to focus on the defending team - and that is probably what I was seeing. We had chunks of the game without possession.

I watched Phipps like a hawk, given much of the chat around him in the lead up. He gets my best Wallaby jersey. Genia might be better, but that was possibly the best game I have seen from Phipps.

As much as I love BPA, Latu has surely broken into the WB front row - not an easy thing to achieve.

Still feel our biggest area for improvement is in the smarts behind the team - back in the coaching box. But the coaching team had little time in prep. Going forward we are surely one of the few (only one?) rugby nations who will proceed to the RWC with a series against #2 and of course the ABs and Springboks.

That is an opportunity to be grabbed with both hands and squeezed for all the juice it is worth. We also may be closer in a pretty much settled 23.

BTW well done Ireland for a predictable but well deserved series win. Not ranked 2 for nothing.

 

[Grant NZ]

Inconsistency argument aside, it's hard to argue this isn't a clear citing.

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2018/06/click-here-if-you-cannot-view-the-clip-above-230.mp4

It's considerably worse than the one he got binned for, he wraps an arm around the Irish player (right under the armpit with considerably more purchase than the card incident) and pulls him through past horizontal while about 7 feet in the air. Regardless of whether he's in a position to compete, I'd be bloody surprised if he doesn't get a suspension for that.

 

[Brumby Runner]

A couple of points.


Firstly, rugby is more popular in the northern hemisphere because the teams, national, provincial, club, whatever all have long histories and traditions in the game. Super Rugby is a made up competition with teams that are virtually new entities in historical terms. Not many of us care all that much who wins and who loses, which is why the speed and openness of the play is so important to us.

Secondly, talking yet again about the adjudicating on Saturday night, the Oz rugby writer pointed out that the TMO virtually directed the Referee that time was up. The referee obeyed orders.


It looked to me as though the Referee was about to call for a lineout. Since when was the TMO the sole judge of time? That used to be the prerogative of the Referee<<<

What would the outcry be like though if the ref played on with the lineout, the Wallabies force a turnover and score a try to win the match, all after time was up on the clock and everyone knew it but the referee? I would venture there would be calls for the TMo to be sacked (perhaps a good thing in itself) for not giving the ref the nod about time being up and the hooter having sounded.

 

[Derpus]

Inconsistency argument aside, it's hard to argue this isn't a clear citing.

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2018/06/click-here-if-you-cannot-view-the-clip-above-230.mp4

It's considerably worse than the one he got binned for, he wraps an arm around the Irish player (right under the armpit with considerably more purchase than the card incident) and pulls him through past horizontal while about 7 feet in the air. Regardless of whether he's in a position to compete, I'd be bloody surprised if he doesn't get a suspension for that.

No it's not. It's really easy if you read the rules.

 

[K974]

According to our Irish friends we must learn to embrace it, for the good of the game. That way we'll pack out 50,000 seaters every weekend, easy.

That's not the point, the point was that you rely on a out dated stero type when dismissing the quality of European rugby and that super rugby is still up on a pedestal . It's not times are a changing and fast.

secondly as a fan of Australian rugby (obviously other than when playing ireland ) , is that super is a jokeshop of a Comp

The reds didn't have a home game for 6 weeks , yes 6 weeks , in that time half the games were on at 2am and you expect to build public interest with a format like that , get kids to turn to union instead of league .

I suggest you tune in to some champions cup next year and come back and let us know what you think

 

[Brumby Runner]

I have been involved in this sort of issue, if it is as bad as this, somebody's head needs to roll. In a situation like this even a small unexpected event can cause a panic, the effects cascade and people get crushed, and there can be serious casualties.


Only one game here. One in New Zealand, and one in Japan.


If we pick the right squad, have no injury problems, Foley kicks his goals, we defend out of our skins, and dominate the tight play, maybe. It would also be a great help if Retallick and Read are still out.

And Ardie Savea.

The Wallabies will be competitive if they can reproduce the defensive effort of test 1 v the Irish. However, we just cannot unlock the opposition defenses often enough to score sufficient points to challenge the ABs. The ABs will put on at least 20 - 30 points in most games depite the opposition defenses.

 

[Derpus]

That's not the point, the point was that you rely on a out dated stero type when dismissing the quality of European rugby and that super rugby is still up on a pedestal . It's not times are a changing and fast.

secondly as a fan of Australian rugby (obviously other than when playing ireland ) , is that super is a jokeshop of a Comp

The reds didn't have a home game for 6 weeks , yes 6 weeks , in that time half the games were on at 2am and you expect to build public interest with a format like that , get kids to turn to union instead of league .

I suggest you tune in to some champions cup next year and come back and let us know what you think

M8 you are really shite at picking up sarcasm over text hey.

I get it man, you import all the best talent and the European Cup is much more watchable than it used to be.

This has NOTHING to do with the woes in Australian rugby, other than it contributes to the player drain. Stop harping on about the Champions Cup in the match thread.

 

[Grant NZ]

No it's not. It's really easy if you read the rules.

Well good luck with that. I don't think arguing that just cause he can jump high he's allowed to tackle players in the air is gonna work though.

 

[Derpus]

Well good luck with that. I don't think arguing that just cause he can jump high he's allowed to tackle players in the air is gonna work though.

'tackle'

 

[Strewthcobber]

10.4(i) Tackling, pushing, pulling, colliding with or otherwise making contact with an Opponent who is jumping for the ball in a lineout or in open play where there is no realistic prospect of the player competing for the ball

That's the key phrase isn't it? Given that he in fact won the ball back for his team.

Get the Senior Council involved and he'll get off (much like Horwill against the lions)

 

[fatprop]

There are supposedly mystery reports floating around, for unknown reasons not disclosed to the public (presumably reports related to structural integrity and fire safety) recommending demolition. I can only imagine the contents of these reports make the government look even worse than they do now.

I understand there is a fire order on the joint as well

It is a metaphor for the 80s, it was designed to be pretty, not functional

Things like safe wide exits, decent facilities ie toilets, a roof that would keep you dry (and provide shade) were ignored

Who would have thought that a roof big enough that it drained onto the field and sufficient toilets were such "crazy" concepts

 

[Brumby Runner]

He's been cited for the 9th minute challenge which resulted in POM landing on his head.

The first kickoff wasn't great either, but POM landed on his back then too. Izzy was pretty lucky they diidn't go forensic on the two earlier challanges

I understand the citing might be for a combination of the two challenges. Had the first resulted in a YC, then the second would have been a red. My take on the second incident hasn't changed. I think, both taken into account, Izzy will sit on the sidelines for between 2 and 4 weeks.

 

[Strewthcobber]

That's the key phrase isn't it? Given that he in fact won the ball back for his team.

Get the Senior Council involved and he'll get off (much like Horwill against the lions)

To quote myself - certainly dangerous, albeit made worse by the lifter pivot point

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[dru]

Inconsistency argument aside, it's hard to argue this isn't a clear citing.

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2018/06/click-here-if-you-cannot-view-the-clip-above-230.mp4

It's considerably worse than the one he got binned for, he wraps an arm around the Irish player (right under the armpit with considerably more purchase than the card incident) and pulls him through past horizontal while about 7 feet in the air. Regardless of whether he's in a position to compete, I'd be bloody surprised if he doesn't get a suspension for that.

Love kiwis trolling for Aus bights on a game thread not involving NZ.

We will see how the judiciary views it. FWIW, for me, Izzy wins the contest for the ball, the lifter over-reaches trying to beat Izzy and loses control. Izzy puts his hands out as an automatic reaction to try and help. But it's not enough to stop the lifter from dropping the bloke on his head. Lifter deserves a RC.

I dont doubt though Izzy will be suspended.

 

[Grant NZ]

'tackle'

Yep.

Look, I can see your argument. The regs are badly worded and it does seem, if you apply the letter of the law, that you shouldn't be charged under that reg if you're in a position to challenge. But the one he's been charged for isn't a challenge gone wrong, it's Folau wrapping an arm around a guy and pulling him down from 7 feet in the air. And, I suspect the judiciary will go with the Mabo ruling on this one and rule that the vibe of the laws are that tackling a guy in the air like that is a suspension.

I may be wrong of course, you'd go broke betting on the judiciary and your accusations of inconsistency are well founded. But I suspect the end result will be them looking at the incident and saying 'it's a bad look' and giving him a couple of weeks off.