Welcome fellow G&GRs, it’s that time of the week again when we can bask in the glory, or pain, of last week for another half day before we start to refocus on Saturday and dream again of “our” team making us proud and giving us hope for the remainder of the competition.
I must admit I’m loving the competition this year, mainly because for at least another week my Canes are top of the table, but also for the really good games on show and the way some new players are stepping up to challenge the status quo. I love it.
As always, remember this is a fan-run site and any contribution is welcome. So feel free to reach out to me at Karl@greenandgoldrugby.com.au with an article, an idea or opinion piece. And there is also the ‘Submit a Story’ option you can take.
Super Rugby Pacific 2024 TotW – Nathan Williamson
In an attempt to disrupt our own Nutta, Nathan Williamson here on Rugby.com.au puts forward his Australian team of the week.
1. Matt Gibbon (Melbourne Rebels) squeezes out Bell and no mention of Ravai.
2. Matt Faessler (Queensland Reds) going from strength to strength and holding out Uelese. No mention of Vailanu by Nathan.
3. Taniela Tupou (Melbourne Rebels) his scrum work at the end was what put him on the list. No mention of Nonggor.
4. Lukhan Salakaia-Loto (Melbourne Rebels) the first where he agrees with Nutta. Certainly, played well and stepping up.
5. Ryan Smith (Queensland Reds) unsung hero who made 21 tackles with no misses. No mention of Jed Holloway.
6. Liam Wright (Queensland Reds) no surprises there the Reds loosies are killing it.
7. Fraser McReight (Queensland Reds) again no surpr,ises.
8. Rob Valetini (ACT Brumbies) was crucial to the Brumbies win and with 31 metres from 8 carries he pushes out Harry Wilson.
9. Nic White (Western Force) pulled the Brumbies apart with his knowledge of their attack. No mention of Lowrens, or anyone else.
10. Ben Donaldson (Western Force) ran through Lolesio for the Force try and his running game led the way. No mention of Lynagh.
11. Andrew Kellaway (Melbourne Rebels) unlike Nutta, Nathan selects players in the position they played. No surprises on this call.
12. Isaac Henry (Queensland Reds) obviously read my post. No mention of Stewart.
13. Izaia Perese (NSW Waratahs) Good game breaking play. No mention of Flook.
14. Triston Reilly (NSW Waratahs) another where he agrees with Nutta.
15. Jock Campbell (Queensland Reds) Was always going to be different to Nutta because this was a player who wore the 15 jersey.
An interesting list and the differences show how much we all think differently about players. Whether from bias for “our” team, or just viewing it differently. What’s good for me is that there are a lot of new players coming through with both Nutta and others like Nathan. I think this is good for rugby here. Now if we can only be sure Schmidt goes down the same path. `
Five talking points from last weekend
Stuff in NZ has highlighted here their 5 main talking points from last weekend.
Seven to 15 is working for Laidlaw, but six in eight not for Cotter. Despite missing both Jordie Barrett and Brad Shields the Hurricanes were far too good for the Blues. Sitting at the top of the table with 3 wins from 3 games, the former 7s coach Clark Laidlaw is thinking the 15 side game isn’t too hard while Blues coach Vern Cotter will be reviewing the 6-2 bench split after losing 2 backs and where their reserve 9, Taufa Funaki, had to play out of position.
The makeup of the bench is crucial and while I’d still rather see less replacements, if the coach takes the risk of less backs, then he also has to live with the consequences. Early days yet and not getting too carried away but this could be my Canes year.
Reds again prove Chiefs kryptonite. Chiefs fans will be nervous if they come against the Reds again in the playoffs. Again, and after holding out for 23 phases near their own goal line, the Reds provided a gutsy upset win against the high-flying Chiefs.
The Reds have only won three of their last 20 games against NZ teams, but all have been against the Chiefs. Whatever they’re doing, they are doing it right in these games.
Personally, I think the Chiefs main problem is DMac at 10. Against such a good and fast loose trio as the Reds have, he just can’t get his game going. For me he demonstrated quite clearly why the AB selectors have preferred both RM and BB over him and I think Razor will also look elsewhere, regardless of what muppet journalist rave on about.
Crusaders horrible hat-trick. Despite the joy of watching Sevu Reece streaking away for a fantastic try that he excels so much at, the next hour it was all Fiji. Bula Vinaka!
What was interesting is that this was a repeat of last season and is a real blow to the Crusaders who last lost their first 3 games in 1996.
They have never lost 4 in a row, but coming up against the Hurricanes, even at home, this may be a new record for them.
The Crusaders are carrying a lot of injuries, and losing so many senior players in one year is enough to hurt any team. However, even if they do go 0-4 this week, I think it’d be a brave person to back against them still reaching the finals. Then in knockout rugby, as Ireland have found out at every RWC, things are different, and I think they are still a dangerous team.
Hard-nosed Highlanders hang tough. The Highlanders lack the depth that a lot of other NZ teams have and so the injuries to their players has a bigger impact (a bit like the Australian teams wink wink). It therefore says a lot for the team culture that they held two senior players to account for missing a team meeting despite it being called a “genuine accident”. This sort of line in the sand is one that will do them well later in the season and ensure that the players know they are not entitled and have to meet the requirements of the team.
They were extremely lucky with Edmed missing the last kick to give them some reprieve, but they’ve got a decent platform to build on this year.
Savea senior a record holder. In a low key game with about 400 spectators Julian Savea became the all time Super Rugby try scorer when he scored his 61st try. Unwanted by the Canes and now playing at inside centre Savea certainly deserves this record. He’s being chased by both Sevu Reece on 50 and TJ Perenara on 58 so who knows where this record could get to.
Why being consistent looks inconsistent
This is an opinion item based on my experiences as a player, coach and referee. It is quite likely that some, or even all of this, may be different to yours, but that is actually part of the item and certainly part of the game of rugby we love so much. We all know what they say about opinions, so I won’t mention it here.
One of the most common calls from people watching a game of rugby, or multiple games of rugby is a request for more consistency in the way a referee adjudicates the game. Looking in from the outside it appears that at times a referee will apply the law differently to the same sort of incident in a game, and even more frustratingly, a different referee will apply the law different to another referee. Of course, when it’s our team that’s having the ruling against them, this frustration is even stronger. I will attempt to explain why I think this occurs and why it’s not the issue many believe it is.
Now, as we all know, rugby is a hugely complex game with a lot happening at every phase of the game. A scrum for example has 39 separate laws and many of these have 4 or 5 sub laws and variations meaning there are well over 100 laws just for the scrum. This means a few things: firstly, no one is able to watch for every law transgression at every scrum. You’d need about 5 referees at each scrum and even then, they wouldn’t see some. Secondly, most of the players, supporters, commentators and sports journalists don’t, and will never, know or understand all of these laws. Thirdly, a referee will take notice of those laws that are most appropriate for the scrum at that time. A defensive scrum 5 metres out from the goal line where the attacking team have had dominance all game will be looked at differently from the same scrum where the defending team has had dominance all game. If it’s an attacking scrum – so attacker feeding the scrum – it’ll be looked at differently again. In addition, a scrum in the midfield will be looked at differently from that, again with different variables depending on which team is dominant, who has the feed and where the game is at. The referee will have to look at the scrum differently in each situation, understand what both teams are trying to do and then apply the laws in the fairest way possible to keep the contest as fair as possible. A fair contest doesn’t mean one team is not able to be more dominant than another, what it means is that the laws are applied in a way that allows both teams to contest the ball fairly at the same time. Of course, one team will do better and so they’ll win the ball. Next time the other team may do better, and they will get the ball. It’s the laws guiding the contest that has to be fair.
In a game where so much is happening so often and where things change so fast a referee will need to make a split-second decision on an incident. At this time, they’ll need to understand what has happened, why it may’ve happened, what laws to apply and then decide on the correct adjudication. (Law 6.5.a says it is correct.) What allows them to do this is the picture they see at that time. (This is why a referee will often say “That’s not the picture I saw” when a player is disputing a call.) The picture a referee sees is based mainly on two things; the experience of the referee and the position the referee is viewing the incident from. What distinguishes a good referee is mainly around getting into the right place at the right time to view the right thing and make the right call for that incident at that time in the game.
In addition to all of this, a game of rugby is generally adjudicated with two separate applications of the law at the same time. Firstly, there is the technical aspect of the law. This is pretty clear and is essentially as the laws are written. The offside line is at the back of the ruck, any player in front of that is offside and subject to adjudication. However, there is also the tactical aspect of the game in progress. This is very much not clear and depends on each referee. The tactical application of the law looks at the material impact of the situation and decides whether the transgression needs to be adjudicated. Just looking at the scrum with its 100+ laws, this is absolutely necessary to prevent a boring stop/start game where there is a set piece every 20 seconds and where the game has no flow. This is why a 7 may be offside at two different rucks, but only pulled up at one. In the one where he wasn’t pulled up, the referee would have decided that he did not materially impact the game and so let it go.
The tactical application of the laws is absolutely subjective based on the experience of the referee, what picture he sees, what his bias is, and how he wants the game to be played. As an ex-player who started playing at 6 and finished at about 47, starting of as a skinny but tall lock and moving to No 8, 6 and then 7, I like to see a fast game where the contest occurs fairly and where big tackles are ok. For example, I saw Finau’s hit on Lynagh as being late and a penalty, but it would not have registered to me as a yellow because while it was late I saw it as legal and the fact that it was a big hit and hurt Lynagh is not for me a reason to go to yellow. Obviously, others see it differently.
On top of all this and adding to the look of inconsistency, is the inconsistent play by the players. Now while a ruck or maul looks similar to every other ruck or maul, this is absolutely not the case. Every contest in the game is different, even if the players involved are the same. So, to expect a referee to make the same call at a contest where the variables are different is just a dream.
Adding to this inconsistency is the fact that each referee applies the law slightly different based on their own experiences and their bias. This is something that has always been the case and for me the issue is more about players and coaches not adapting to the different referee bias than a referee being crap. I know when I played, we always spent the first 10 minutes or so pushing the boundary of the law at every contest until we learnt what the particular referee on the day would allow and what he wouldn’t. Once we had the baseline, we then played to that. I think the ability to do this has been lost a bit as players and coaches rely too much on computer generated data and just maybe it’s something that needs to come back.
Anyway, the message here is that the only thing in rugby that is consistent, is the inconsistency of it. I think that the people who consistently moan about the inconsistency of rugby are those who don’t actually understand the game as much as they think. My message is “go to Bunnings, buy some wood, build a bridge and get over it, because it ain’t changing”.
