Waratahs 2015

[Quick Hands]

So who made the complaint? One of the other match officials or someone from inside Tahs camp?

The Blues are understood to have been suspicious about the massive difference in interpretation and application of the laws they encountered in the second half and shortly after the game they learned of the Cheika incident.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11429676

 

[cyclopath]

For the amount of times I've read here that refs are manipulated or even intimidated by the All Blacks and McCaw, to not see how a coach going into the refs room at half-time to discuss his rulings or interpretations is a blatant breach of rules of the game and a very bad look for the game is a joke.

Both Cheika and Peyper should be punished because regardless of whether that conversation had any bearing on it or not, the penalty count swung massively afterwards with also a very poor call on the yellow card.

Apparently the Blues felt that there was definitely a change in the way Peyper ruled in the 2nd half even before they found out about the little chat.

I'm not saying that there was any match-fixing or anything going on but there were probably some 'ridiculous extrapolation' going on before Hansie Cronjie and Lance Armstrong were found out. In this day and age you simply cannot allow this kind of look for a professional sport to go unchecked and unpunished. And then be surprised one day when you find out about game fixing or game tampering in our sport..

Er, that's kind of what I said. It shouldn't happen. I'm not excusing it. It isn't Watergate, though. From the reports this far, it sounds like a specific question about a scrum ruling was asked and answered. You keep inferring that something else happened, when so far no evidence has been proffered to say it did. You were the one who threw the yellow card into the discussion, which was quite frankly hyperbolic.

 

[Bullrush]

Er, that's kind of what I said. It shouldn't happen. I'm not excusing it. It isn't Watergate, though. From the reports this far, it sounds like a specific question about a scrum ruling was asked and answered. You keep inferring that something else happened, when so far no evidence has been proffered to say it did. You were the one who threw the yellow card into the discussion, which was quite frankly hyperbolic.

Yes - it shouldn't happen, so here is your punishment - tut tut.

I'm not inferring anything, I'm saying what actually happened. After Cheika's chat with Peyper, the penalty count goes 9-1 in his favour including a terrible yellow card to the Blues best player. That is exactly what happened.

And as I said, whether or not Cheika had anything to do with that, to have the impression or the appearance that a coach can have any influence at all on a ref during a match is huge discredit to the game and should not go unpunished. It a very bad look which is why it's not just the Blues who are not happy with what happened.

 

[Quick Hands]

For the amount of times I've read here that refs are manipulated or even intimidated by the All Blacks and McCaw, to not see how a coach going into the refs room at half-time to discuss his rulings or interpretations is a blatant breach of rules of the game and a very bad look for the game is a joke.

Both Cheika and Peyper should be punished because regardless of whether that conversation had any bearing on it or not, the penalty count swung massively afterwards with also a very poor call on the yellow card.

Apparently the Blues felt that there was definitely a change in the way Peyper ruled in the 2nd half even before they found out about the little chat.

I'm not saying that there was any match-fixing or anything going on but there were probably some 'ridiculous extrapolation' going on before Hansie Cronjie and Lance Armstrong were found out. In this day and age you simply cannot allow this kind of look for a professional sport to go unchecked and unpunished. And then be surprised one day when you find out about game fixing or game tampering in our sport..

A short and polite exchange in front of witnesses (who were also SANZAR referees) is going to lead to all this?

 

[Quick Hands]

Yes - it shouldn't happen, so here is your punishment - tut tut.

I'm not inferring anything, I'm saying what actually happened. After Cheika's chat with Peyper, the penalty count goes 9-1 in his favour including a terrible yellow card to the Blues best player. That is exactly what happened.

And as I said, whether or not Cheika had anything to do with that, to have the impression or the appearance that a coach can have any influence at all on a ref during a match is huge discredit to the game and should not go unpunished. It a very bad look which is why it's not just the Blues who are not happy with what happened.

You are inferring that the 2nd half penalty count and the conversation we're related in a cause and effect way.

Where is the evidence of this?

 

[cyclopath]

Yes - it shouldn't happen, so here is your punishment - tut tut.

I'm not inferring anything, I'm saying what actually happened. After Cheika's chat with Peyper, the penalty count goes 9-1 in his favour including a terrible yellow card to the Blues best player. That is exactly what happened.

And as I said, whether or not Cheika had anything to do with that, to have the impression or the appearance that a coach can have any influence at all on a ref during a match is huge discredit to the game and should not go unpunished. It a very bad look which is why it's not just the Blues who are not happy with what happened.

I didn't say there should be no punishment, I said I didn't think there was much in the incident and that the inference that it affected the rest of the game was tenuous, and SANZAR probably reasoned it that way too, for better or worse. Why keep mentioning the yellow card if you don't think it is related? It is an inference in the way you present it. The TMO must have been in on the gig, too, given their role in the yellow card decision.
Were you this outraged when Paddy O'Brien got in the middle of reffing decisions every time Graham Henry got reflux? I thought not.

 

[ACT Crusader]

You are inferring that the 2nd half penalty count and the conversation we're related in a cause and effect way.

Where is the evidence of this?

Don't you know, perception is evidence. See Beale/Patston/McKenzie saga......

 

[Bullrush]

A short and polite exchange in front of witnesses (who were also SANZAR referees) is going to lead to all this?

Hmmmmm...when has something that is highly unusual to happen and rarely seen ever lead to anything sinister or illegal?

The fifth test of the 1999–2000 South Africa versus England series at Centurion was ruined by rain, entering the final day only 45 overs had been possible with South Africa 155/6. On the final morning as they batted on, news filtered through that the captains had met and were going to "make a game of it". A target of 250 from 70 overs was agreed. When South Africa reached 248/8, Cronje declared; both teams then forfeited an innings leaving England a target of 249 to win the Test, which they did with two wickets left and only five balls remaining. It ended South Africa's 14 game unbeaten streak in Test cricket. It was later learnt Cronje accepted money and a gift from a bookmaker in return for making an early declaration in this Test.

If you cannot see how a coach talking to a ref at half-time, then a big penalty count going in that coach's favour with a highly disputable judgement call thrown in for good measure doesn't at the very least look bad, then you need to read the sports section on the newspaper more.

 

[barbarian]

And as I said, whether or not Cheika had anything to do with that, to have the impression or the appearance that a coach can have any influence at all on a ref during a match is huge discredit to the game and should not go unpunished. It a very bad look which is why it's not just the Blues who are not happy with what happened.

This is just rubbish, and is an unjustified smear on Jaco Peyper.

I don't recall at the time anyone thinking the Blues were unjustly treated in the second half. Sure the Kaino yellow was a bit harsh, but the decision was acceptable within the parameters of the laws. But ultimately the Tahs had territory and possesion, and applied prolonged pressure to the Blues, who in turn gave away penalties. That happens, that's rugby.

All this stuff about impressions and appearances is really irrelevant. That's not the way this story has been reported anywhere outside of Auckland- the focus has been on Cheika and the six month ban looming over him.

The vast majority of people realise that a brief half-time chat is a million miles from match fixing, and bringing up Hansie and co doesn't do you any favours at all. The 'slippery slope' argument is flawed, as always.
.

 

[Bullrush]

I didn't say there should be no punishment, I said I didn't think there was much in the incident and that the inference that it affected the rest of the game was tenuous, and SANZAR probably reasoned it that way too, for better or worse. Why keep mentioning the yellow card if you don't think it is related? It is an inference in the way you present it. The TMO must have been in on the gig, too, given their role in the yellow card decision.
Were you this outraged when Paddy O'Brien got in the middle of reffing decisions every time Graham Henry got reflux? I thought not.

The yellow card was a terrible call that Peyper made and it looks bad! That's how it's related.

When did POB ever get involved in the middle of reffing decisions in the middle of the game being played? When did he ever break IRB Laws in the same way that Cheika and Peyper have here?

 

[Bullrush]

This is just rubbish, and is an unjustified smear on Jaco Peyper.

I don't recall at the time anyone thinking the Blues were unjustly treated in the second half. Sure the Kaino yellow was a bit harsh, but the decision was acceptable within the parameters of the laws. But ultimately the Tahs had territory and possesion, and applied prolonged pressure to the Blues, who in turn gave away penalties. That happens, that's rugby.

All this stuff about impressions and appearances is really irrelevant. That's not the way this story has been reported anywhere outside of Auckland- the focus has been on Cheika and the six month ban looming over him.

The vast majority of people realise that a brief half-time chat is a million miles from match fixing, and bringing up Hansie and co doesn't do you any favours at all. The 'slippery slope' argument is flawed, as always.
.

A bit harsh? It was fucken joke and I said so at the time so don't give me that rubbish about no one thinking they were unjustly treated. I didn't see the game live but I posted about what a shit call it was as soon as I did.

It's not an unjustified smear on Peyper - it's a fact. He broke the Law he's supposed to enforce. I've simply pointed out why that Law is there. Match fixing has happened before and can happen - and it's scenarios like these that make it possible. Everyone thought Cronjie was just being a good sport and making a 'game of it.' The vast majority of people at the time thought a brief chat between captains was a million miles away from match fixing. How'd that fucken slippery slope end up? Was that flawed?

 

[cyclopath]

The yellow card was a terrible call that Peyper made and it looks bad! That's how it's related.

When did POB ever get involved in the middle of reffing decisions in the middle of the game being played? When did he ever break IRB Laws in the same way that Cheika and Peyper have here?

And still you go on about the yellow card. A call made in conjunction with a TMO review. How big is this conspiracy?

 

[barbarian]

BR, the argument is flawed. This is a million miiiiles from Hansie town and you don't help your argument one bit by bringing it up, because you are implying that Cheika will end up like Hansie, essentially rigging games. Which is rubbish.

So you are saying that in the 71st minute, after looking at the tackle, consulting the ARs and the TMO, Peyper was going to just issue a caution....... but then thought back to the brief chat he had with Michael Chieka about scrums at half time, some 40 minutes ago, and thought 'nah fuck it, Cheiks a good bloke- Yellow card!! Up the fucking Tahs'.

Pump the brakes mate. You're smarter than this. It was a bit of a fuck up by both Cheika and Peyper, but don't bring fucking Hansie into this, please.
.

 

[ShtinaTina]

And still you go on about the yellow card. A call made in conjunction with a TMO review. How big is this conspiracy?

Pretty sure Frank Underwood & Doug Stamper are involved, Remi is in the mix somewhere there too

 

[Bullrush]

And still you go on about the yellow card. A call made in conjunction with a TMO review. How big is this conspiracy?

I'm not saying it IS a conspiracy, I'm saying it's a pretty easy target for conspiracy given the FACTS of the game. Plus - you don't need EVERYONE in on the show to be a part of any kind of match-fixing or fiddling.

BR, the argument is flawed. This is a million miiiiles from Hansie town and you don't help your argument one bit by bringing it up, because you are implying that Cheika will end up like Hansie, essentially rigging games. Which is rubbish.

So you are saying that in the 71st minute, after looking at the tackle, consulting the ARs and the TMO, Peyper was going to just issue a caution... but then thought back to the brief chat he had with Michael Chieka about scrums at half time, some 40 minutes ago, and thought 'nah fuck it, Cheiks a good bloke- Yellow card!! Up the fucking Tahs'.

Pump the brakes mate. You're smarter than this. It was a bit of a fuck up by both Cheika and Peyper, but don't bring fucking Hansie into this, please.
.

Just repeating that this is a million miles different from hanse Cronjie doesn't actually make it so. I've shown how easily it is actually very similar - a look rugby officials (and fans for that matter) should want to avoid WHICH IS WHY THE LAW IS THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

BTW, a quick look back on the game thread shows that there was at least one person at the time who thought the Blues were getting a rough time of it. And I don't think Ash is a Blues fan at all is he?

Tahs have gotten the rub of the green in a huge way from Peyper.

That binning of Kaino was a farce.

Bentham scores from a lot of good offloads, game Tahs.

Bit disappointed in Peyper, but the Tahs should be happy for his mistakes their way. They've been off their game but still are clearly a class or two above the Blues.

Not to mention a number of comments all condemning the YC on Kaino.

And this is the problem you have with the actions that Cheika and Peyper took. Every questionable decision - and the yellow card was definitely a big one - look hugely suspicious. It is a very bad look for anyone who isn't a Warratahs or maybe a Wallabies fan.

Cyclopath brought up Paddy O'Brien earlier. How many of you were outraged at his actions over Stuart Dickinson and yet appraising his performance was probably part of his job (not the public appraisal obviously and he did publicly apologise to Dickinson for that). Peyper has missed a pretty key part of his job and that to be and LOOK impartial. Cheika has been a coach for a long time now and I just don't believe that he did not know he's not supposed to enter the ref room at half-time.

 

[Bullrush]

@Barbarian - SEE!!!! THIS is where the slippery slope leads!! LOL

I bet this is fucken Cheika and Peypers little money-maker on the side - goes hand-in-hand with the match-fixing....cheating bastards!!

SPAM!!!!

 

[Quick Hands]

A bit harsh? It was fucken joke and I said so at the time so don't give me that rubbish about no one thinking they were unjustly treated. I didn't see the game live but I posted about what a shit call it was as soon as I did.

It's not an unjustified smear on Peyper - it's a fact. He broke the Law he's supposed to enforce. I've simply pointed out why that Law is there. Match fixing has happened before and can happen - and it's scenarios like these that make it possible. Everyone thought Cronjie was just being a good sport and making a 'game of it.' The vast majority of people at the time thought a brief chat between captains was a million miles away from match fixing. How'd that fucken slippery slope end up? Was that flawed?

You keep talking about people "breaking the law", but SANZAR say: nor in the circumstances has there been a breach of the SANZAR Code of Conduct and no further action will be taken.

 

[Bullrush]

You keep talking about people "breaking the law", but SANZAR say: nor in the circumstances has there been a breach of the SANZAR Code of Conduct and no further action will be taken.

Again, all that does is give more claim to the conspiracy theory.

If no law has been broken, why would a warning be given to both Peyper and Cheika and a reminder if the non-existent law to all other Super Rugby coaches?

To pretend that is the truth is simply ridiculous.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11430237

 

[fatprop]

Again, all that does is give more claim to the conspiracy theory.

If no law has been broken, why would a warning be given to both Peyper and Cheika and a reminder if the non-existent law to all other Super Rugby coaches?

To pretend that is the truth is simply ridiculous.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11430237

rubbish, whatever was said has been deemed to be not worth anymore sanction, conspiracy? faark, and using Gregor Paul as the support for your point? mate you can do better than that ...............................

 

[Bullrush]

rubbish, whatever was said has been deemed to be not worth anymore sanction, conspiracy? faark, and using Gregor Paul as the support for your point? mate you can do better than that ...........

You just don't get it do you?

It doesn't matter what was said, going into the ref's room at halftime is a big no-no and looks fucken terrible no matter if you like the reporter giving you the facts or not.

Imagine Hansen going into the refs room at half-time of a RWC semi when the ABs are behind and then going on to win and tell me this is not a bad look.