rugby world cup
Users viewing topic: & 1 Guest
| Cuddles |  | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 09:53 |
 Eat.Cycle.Sleep.Win Member 2, 12511 posts SQ 190, BP 150, DL 280620.0 kgs @ 99kgs UnEq Administrator | IainT said: This French team are probably the poorest side to ever make a RWC final, England 07 were marginally better. Come on, England 07 were significantly better. France 07 were better than the current bunch and England beat them. This is a French team full of talent that is playing shocking rugby. I could easily see them coming 4th again in next years 6 nations. | ||
| IainT | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 10:43 |
normal people, like me. Member 2325, 550 posts | Slight hyperbole on my part, I just remember the utter humiliation of the group game against South Africa. The whole run to the final was hilarious. Regarding consistency - on at least 3 occasions recently the citing committee have cited and banned for 'tip tackles' that received yellow cards. They can only cite and ban where they feel the ref missed something or erred in a decision that should have been a red card. Some of those rulings have specifically stated that the referee was wrong not to give a red card. Yellow would be copping out, and Rolland knows that would harm his chances of reffing the final. Warburton has got three weeks, which would probably be one game (3rd place play off) as he'll be rested anyway when he gets home. Seems fair. | ||
| Cuddles | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 10:47 |
Eat.Cycle.Sleep.Win Member 2, 12511 posts SQ 190, BP 150, DL 280620.0 kgs @ 99kgs UnEq Administrator | I dont disagree with anything that you are saying but if that is going to be the rule then refs need to be told to interpret it that way as they quite clearly currently arent, and as a result i have more sympathy with Warburton than I would have if they were. What examples were they? I thought that a citing officer had ZERO powers over incidences that the ref had dealt with. That was certainly the view of a number of commentators last year who cited that exact rule when players were yellow carded when perhaps deserving more. Has the rule changed? | ||
| Cuddles | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 10:51 |
Eat.Cycle.Sleep.Win Member 2, 12511 posts SQ 190, BP 150, DL 280620.0 kgs @ 99kgs UnEq Administrator | dont worry, just checked and article 17 states that you can be cited even if yellow carded for that incident. I still think a red card was a tad harsh. | ||
| Mallone | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 11:56 |
 Has achieved nothing. Member 1386, 292 posts | Cuddles said:dont worry, just checked and article 17 states that you can be cited even if yellow carded for that incident. I still think a red card was a tad harsh. The best part about all of this shtye is that it is cast in stone by the IRB. This is where Dallaglio and the ITV clowns got it wrong. The clowns suggested that the TMO should rule whether its a red or a yellow. Its nothing to do with intent, its nothing to say that player X is an "angel". A spear tackle is a spear tackle. A spear tackle is a straight red, simple as. http://www.deepsouthrugbyunion.com/images/IRB_Memorandum_re_Da... This is like in footie, people claiming Rooney shouldn't have been banned for his red card. The laws should be interpreted the same whether its Rooney or some pub footballer. | ||
| streak | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 12:44 |
they call him the streak Member 2002, 400 posts SQ 182.5, BP 130, DL 240552.5 kgs @ 100kgs UnEq | At the time I thought the ref got it wrong, but reading that link you could argue that the player "was lifted and dropped without due regard for his safety". He wasn't forced or 'speared' into the ground though. I think the ref reacted to the French players' outrage, as so many refs do in sport. I'd wager that most of the French players would have been happy with a yellow. It'll be interesting to see it this'll translate to more red cards for dangerous tackles in the domestic game. I know that at the low level I play the refs are super switched on to rule changes (ironic because our refs are terrible). Im fully expecting them to red card anybody that accidentally lifts an opponent. It'll be inconsistent though  | ||
| IainT | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 12:53 |
normal people, like me. Member 2325, 550 posts | Yep, it'll be interesting at lower levels. But it has been a directive for a couple of years, and apparently was reinforced just before the RWC as Paddy O'Brien felt that refs were copping out on that and a couple of other things (high tackles etc). Couple of years ago when the ELVs first came in, I played in a game where we had a scrum in our 22. Scrum-half passed to fly-half who booted it up the field and out of play. Ref gave the opposition a lineout where he'd kicked the ball, captain politely questioned it and ref clearly gave a wrong interpretation of the pass back into 22 ELV. He did apologise the next time he reffed us. | ||
| Shaun | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 13:23 |
Member 1668, 1499 posts SQ 186, BP 102, DL 211499.0 kgs @ 93kgs UnEq | IainT said:Slight hyperbole on my part, I just remember the utter humiliation of the group game against South Africa. The whole run to the final was hilarious. I agree with this. I anticipate this final to be very one sided, an absolute walk over for New Zealand, and as such probably won't get out of bed early to watch it. But it is what it is I suppose. | ||
| Martin1956 | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 13:43 |
 Old Age Presser Member 75, 7743 posts SQ 0, BP 200, DL 200400.0 kgs @ 105kgs Eq | EDCLARKE said:I predict Australia will turn the kiwi's over in the semi's and Wales will spank France. Oh, Ed, Ed, Ed, Ed, Ed, Ed, Ed... | ||
| Carl | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 13:52 |
 Loves rugby league ... Member 13, 14460 posts SQ 230, BP 180.5, DL 262.5673.0 kgs @ 128kgs UnEq Administrator | Ed you can join me in s**t rwc prediction corner lol | ||
| Martin1956 | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 14:06 |
Old Age Presser Member 75, 7743 posts SQ 0, BP 200, DL 200400.0 kgs @ 105kgs Eq | This is more a general comment on Rugby Union than about the RWC specifically. It strikes me that the purpose of rugby is to score tries, but that games are frequently decided by penalties kicked from way out following often minor, technical infringements. Would it be better if games were decided by tries scored, with kicked points only counting if the try count was a draw? Maybe the scoring priority would be tries/converted tries/total points (ie the team that scores the most tries wins; if the same number of tries, then the number of converted tries; if the same number of converted tries, then the number of kicked points). OR, maybe more indirect free kicks and shots at goal only used for serious infringements. Thoughts... | ||
| Rick | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 14:38 |
 I am a bench-only guy Member 3, 10035 posts SQ 185, BP 175, DL 235595.0 kgs @ 140kgs UnEq Administrator | Martin1956 said:It strikes me that the purpose of rugby is to score tries A surprisingly common misconception. Indeed, the reason a try is so named is (I believe) that originally it simply gave one on an unmolested attempt (try) at kicking the goal. Rugby fans want it to be about tries, but in that case we need a more League-like points distribution and a change in the way penalties work (eg yardage rather than kicks, etc). One obvious possibility would be to allow a kick at goal or a scrum 20 metres in. | ||
| Mallone | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 14:59 |
Has achieved nothing. Member 1386, 292 posts | if you want to see lots of running and easy tries look at sevens rugby or rugby league. 15-a-side rugby union is more entertaining IMO than sevens or rugby league. Look at how hard it is to score tries in the 15-man game internationally, yet the All Blacks have scored plenty. Here is Habana's try, you could find plenty of good tries from the RWC. The All Blacks eighthman scored a couple of tries that way. What you should be asking of Martin, is the difference between Northern hemisphere and Southern hemisphere rugby. | ||
| Martin1956 | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 15:21 |
Old Age Presser Member 75, 7743 posts SQ 0, BP 200, DL 200400.0 kgs @ 105kgs Eq | Mallone, you seem to have misunderstood my point. I'm not particularly wanting more tries, and I far prefer 15 a side to 7 a side. My point is that tries should count for more and kicks count for less. Rick, I bow to your historical knowledge, but in the modern game the try has become widely accepted as the principal method of scoring. I just find it incongruous that a team that scores 3 unconverted tries (maybe all great flowing moves that culminate in a try in the corner) can be beaten by a team that scores no tries but knocks over 6 penalties from around the 10 metre line for offences as trivial as accidental offside. I expect all the 'purists' to pile in on me, but thinking outside the box is an interesting hobby | ||
| IainT | | ... | 16-10-2011 @ 15:27 |
normal people, like me. Member 2325, 550 posts | Not piling in Martin, but the penalty exists to penalise foul play. A team with a reliable try-stopping defence could foul in defence all day if there was no kicking penalty to stop them doing it. | ||