[2015 RWC] Quarter Final 4: Australia vs. Scotland (18/10/2015)

[jordiev]

It is the ref that needs blamed even without the tmo he saw it on the big screen i honestly hope something like this happens to australia and we will see how all their fans handle it since they seem to be enjoying the high horse

 

[Maverick1987]

I feel sorry for all the Scottish except Kenny Logan .



Logan this is what karma is .....

 

[InsaneAsylum]

Yeah, it's been pretty ridiculous really... people carrying on about "deserved victors" etc without even looking at all the stuff that favoured Scotland, who arguably shouldn't have made the final 8 and wouldn't have without the assistance from WR in rubbing Tuilagi out.

childish and immature. Good to see the kiwis and south african's on board too. I suppose they'd feel a lot better without us in the world cup.

 

[Fard]

He can reach out and place the ball over/on the try line so long as he doesnt promote his body forward (that would be a double movement). What Kuridrani did was perfectly fine.

No such thing as a double movement in Rugby. The player has the opportunity to place the ball in any direction once tackled he can roll it back but not roll it forward. Once he has played the ball in this manor he can't play it again or he or she will be penalized for playin g the ball while on the ground.
I do notice that a lot of commentators get this wrong and call a double movement but no where in the law book is this term used. Or at least while I was a referee for 18 years. Now retired for 8 years.

 

[Fard]

''Interesting that you are so sure Australia, who had already scored 5 tries, would have been unable to make anything out of an attacking scrum near the Scotland 22. The fact is, no-one will know what would have happened if the right call was made!''

How meany of those 5 tries had been made from the Australian scrum? the scrum belonged to Scotland on the night the Australian scrum would likely have collapsed and been awarded straight back to Scotland

I would say that the 5 tries should only have been 4 in the first place , but for another poor ref decision THAT YELLOW CARD allowed a gap for Australia to score through.
so you could argue for 8-10 points(cant remember if it was successfully converted) to come off the Australian score, Scotland tactics worked, they were the better team on the night and all things being equal - deserve a place in the semi .

I see that you have bought up the scrum dominance by Scotland, you may want to look at a replay as the Scotts were turning in causing the long bind by Sio. Or do you really believe that the top preforming prop in the comp come scrum time just turned to crap. Have a look at some of the views from spider cam and it will show a different story. Joubert got this wrong as well.

 

[ABs2011]

No such thing as a double movement in Rugby. The player has the opportunity to place the ball in any direction once tackled he can roll it back but not roll it forward. Once he has played the ball in this manor he can't play it again or he or she will be penalized for playin g the ball while on the ground.
I do notice that a lot of commentators get this wrong and call a double movement but no where in the law book is this term used. Or at least while I was a referee for 18 years. Now retired for 8 years.

Yeah sorry, the term is incorrect, but everyone knows what it essentially means. End of the day, the try was perfectly fine cause he didnt promote his body, he just placed the ball.

 

[RoosTah]

Easy to blame the ref. Personally I believe Joubert should have gone to the TMO even if he wasn't allowed to. The correct call hopefully would have been made and the public relations dilemma would have been less (obviously Australia and their fans would have been aggrieved at the ref for bending the rules but for the sake of getting the right call it would have been difficult to argue against).

However this is all hindsight now.

The ref is not to be blamed. It's the game and the law that needs to be scrutinised. Does that offence warrant a penalty? I certainly don't think so. IMO it should be a free kick instead of penalty. Possibly the ELVs had this offence as a free kick.

Or every penalty in the last 10 mins of a match should be reviewed.

Or have a challenge system.

True, but of course under the ELVs half of the penalties Scotland were gifted by Joubert would have been free kicks too.

 

[RoosTah]

It is the ref that needs blamed even without the tmo he saw it on the big screen i honestly hope something like this happens to australia and we will see how all their fans handle it since they seem to be enjoying the high horse

Probably how the Samoans feel about Scotland now you're all screaming blue murder to be frank. Glass houses champ...

 

[Zed]

n/a

 

[Zed]

It is the ref that needs blamed even without the tmo he saw it on the big screen i honestly hope something like this happens to australia and we will see how all their fans handle it since they seem to be enjoying the high horse

It happened to us a few years ago vs England in the semis. I'm not sure if one of the Wallabies had run over the refs cat or something, but we were pinged the whole game, a lot of unjust penalties. But we were $h_it. We had played $h_it all tournament and didn't deserve to be in the final and that $h_itness cancels out the refs ineptitude. You don't play $h_it, lose and start harping on at the ref. You take it on the chin. Likewise with Scotland, they've been poor for a long time now, came bottom of the 6N, didn't win a game, in the WC, they got thrashed by South Africa and they almost got beaten by a weak Samoan side that South Africa had thrashed. Perhaps if they'd won the 6N, smashed Samoa and South Africa and dominated Australia then they'd have justification for getting upset at the ref... so if you want to blame someone for the loss, blame the Scottish players, the Scottish coach and the Scottish rugby union. They are the only ones responsible for Scotland's poor performances over the last how ever many years.

 

[ENZED-88]

I think if you just look at recent results, they can be misleading. E.g Scotland run NZ close at home 24 – 16, so one could argue that the teams are fairly evenly matched. But it's at the end of a long season for the ABs, they've flown halfway across the world, playing in wet miserable conditions with a long injury list. So you've got to put that game into perspective. Just looking at previous results you can see the gap is as wide as ever – 49 – 3, 32 – 6, 40 – 0. Wales have had a lot of close games against Australia recently, so again you could argue that Wales has bridged the gap. But almost beating an injury ravaged Wallabies side that is fielding one of its worst teams in recent years (pre – Cheika) gives people the false impression that NH teams are closer than ever to their SH counterparts. The reality is Wales haven't beaten the Wallabies in over 10 years. Those 2 point losses might as well be 20 points. The worst thing that could happen to NH rugby, would be for the various countries rugby organizations to stick their head in the sand and pretend there are no problems with how they're running the sport. The SRU might suggest they're going great guns because they should have beaten Australia, forgetting the fact that finished without a win in the 6N, both the WRU and IRU could also argue that without all their injuries they too could have won their quarter final games and nothing changes.

100% agree with all points in this posts. There's a few threads on this forum and a lot of other NH supporters seem quiet deluded and think the gap is barely there. I don't think much will change until winning becomes the only option cause at the end of the day almost winning is not good enough.

 

[Zed]

100% agree with all points in this posts. There's a few threads on this forum and a lot of other NH supporters seem quiet deluded and think the gap is barely there. I don't think much will change until winning becomes the only option cause at the end of the day almost winning is not good enough.

I think with England they've almost gone backwards in their development. Having two lumps in the centres that don't have pace and limited ball skills, at least with Sam Burgess, and an even slower 10 yet a lightening quick back 3 that will be rarely utilised. It's like they don't understand the game.

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

Exactly the point I am making. Which is why saying "Scotland surely would have won by 2pts" is not true.

But yup, the result now needs to be taken on the chin. No point crying over spilt milk huh!

Actually that's not your point. For all intents, Scotland would have won by 2pts without that penalty given how close it was called to 80mins. We can confidently say this bad call equaled the wrong team winning, and that's all that needs to be known. We can talk about hypotheticals, but that's irrelevant. What's relevant is Scotland's loss can be directly attributed to a bad call.

 

[RoosTah]

Actually that's not your point. For all intents, Scotland would have won by 2pts without that penalty given how close it was called to 80mins. We can confidently say this bad call equaled the wrong team winning, and that's all that needs to be known. We can talk about hypotheticals, but that's irrelevant. What's relevant is Scotland's loss can be directly attributed to a bad call.

Kinda like Samoa, but f##k them, they're from the Islands and don't have a bunch of Newspapers to kick up a fuss

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

Kinda like Samoa, but f##k them, they're from the Islands and don't have a bunch of Newspapers to kick up a fuss

Again, I'm not aware of what happened to Samoa. And, regardless, there's still a world of difference between a bad call in a pool stage and a bad call in a knockout stage.

 

[General Tah]

Actually that's not your point. For all intents, Scotland would have won by 2pts without that penalty given how close it was called to 80mins. We can confidently say this bad call equaled the wrong team winning, and that's all that needs to be known. We can talk about hypotheticals, but that's irrelevant. What's relevant is Scotland's loss can be directly attributed to a bad call.

And the ton of wrong calls that went to scotland through the game are ok because it wasnt in the last minute? Riiiight [emoji57]

 

[General Tah]

Again, I'm not aware of what happened to Samoa. And, regardless, there's still a world of difference between a bad call in a pool stage and a bad call in a knockout stage.

A bad call is a bad call. Wether at the beginning or the end.
In a pool stage or final

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

And the ton of wrong calls that went to scotland through the game are ok because it wasnt in the last minute? Riiiight [emoji57]

As explained previously, totally different.

- - - Updated - - -

A bad call is a bad call. Wether at the beginning or the end.

Nope. Scotland had no chance to regroup after this. Time was up. Huge difference.

 

[General Tah]

As explained previously, totally different.

No it's not

 

[Zed]

What's relevant is Scotland's loss can be directly attributed to a bad call.

Yup you're right, but Scotland going through would have been bad for the World Cup. Just like France beating the ABS was bad for the 99 World Cup. It is cool when weaker teams knock off the bigger teams, but what usually eventuates is that the the weaker team then gets pummeled in their next knock-out game. A NZ Scotland final would have been terrible.