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

[Yoshimitsu]

The TMO could deal with this type of incident without any interruption to the game if nothing is wrong, i.e. if the referee hasn't made a mistake.

I posted about this in another thread which I cannot find now, and at rugbyrefs, which I can find. This what I said there...

[TEXTAREA]The TMO keeps eyes the game as usual, and as soon as a the referee awards a PK, the TMO starts to review the play.

1. If the non-offending team opt not to kick at goal, the TMO stops looking.

2. If the non-offending team do opt to kick at goal, and the TMO finds nothing, he says nothing.

3. If the non-offending team do opt to kick at goal and the TMO finds something he wants to look at again, he calls "check-check" to the referee, and the referee calls time off. The TMO reviews the play and relays his decision to the referee, who will either continue as before, or cancel the penalty decision and give the correct one.

The game is then stopped anyway while the tee is brought on and the kicker prepares to kick, so why not utilise the time to look. [/TEXTAREA]

Doing it this way means the game is only held up if the referee makes an incorrect decision, and the TMO spots it.

My argument for restricting it only to penalties where the non-penalised team opts for poles is simple. If an incorrect penalty is given and the non-penalised team takes a scrum or kicks for touch, at least the wrongly-penalised team has chance to defend whatever happens next. However, if the referee commits a howler right in front of the posts 40m out, the wrongly-penalised team cannot defend the shot at goal.

I see this more as an extension to the AR system. Currently, either AR can call in at any time on this stuff, so why not accept that the TMO, an extra pair of eyes, can also call in? Change his name to the VAR, Video Assistant Referee since that would more accurately describe his role.

Hmmm this is designed to address the particular scenario and it does that, but I don't believe it avoids others. Taken to stupid absurdity say Aus had been trailing by 4 instead of 2? The same things happens, but Aus have to kick for the corner to gain the points required. They set the maul and score the try. You've stated that you think its defensible, based on Scotland's performance it pretty much wasn't!

A wrong decision that confers advantage is a wrong decision regardless of the outcome.

For me I'm entirely happy with a situation where a human referee on the pitch carries primacy regardless of the "wrongness" of any decision. That's where World Rugby have screwed this for me. Once a decision has been made by a referee to the best of their ability it is "right". Joubert is not a cheat. He's not called it wrong on purpose. He's a man doing a difficult job. That's how sport is. In my view it is literally impossible to ref a RU game correctly. Are you really going to look at where McCaw starts at every breakdown? Are you really going to look each time a Welsh players flaps about on the floor pretending to get out of the way? Are you going to check to see if Stuart Hogg is actually being fouled or acting like a massive Jessie? Are you going to check if Owen Farrell has bothered to use his arms in every tackle? The cumulative effects of minor infractions is massive. The best play at or over the line pretty much all the time. Rugby Union ain't black and white. It's like 10,000 shades of grey, but without any shagging. Well mostly.

 

[RoosTah]

Last time Scotland Played NZ Scotland lost by 8 points and were in the lead at 70minutes, last time Australia played NZ Australia lost by 14 points on the face of that, We'd have a better chance than you!

That's rather cute. Here's another stat: the last time Australia BEAT the All Blacks was 3 months ago. The last time Scotland beat the All Blacks was ... Never. Yes never. Scotland have never ever beaten New Zealand in over 100 years of test rugby.

What were you saying about on the face of it having better chances?

 

[InsaneAsylum]

That's rather cute. Here's another stat: the last time Australia BEAT the All Blacks was 3 months ago. The last time Scotland beat the All Blacks was ... Never. Yes never. Scotland have never ever beaten New Zealand in over 100 years of test rugby.

What were you saying about on the face of it having better chances?

Sorry but I can't believe these Scots are still going on about this

Australia has lost 1 match this year against NZ at home. They have beaten NZ, SA and ARG. They have won the last 5 games in a row, the are the current Rugby Championship Champions and are genuine contenders for the World Cup. Scotland on the other hand are unfortunately not a realistic chance, finished last in the 6 Nations, hammered by SA in the pool game.

How the hell the Scots feel they deserve to be in a semi final over Australia I don't know. Start by winning the 6 nations and I will accept Scotland are a realistic chance to win the RWC.

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

Australia are about to have their first real test this tournament. Let's see how things stack up when tested.

 

[InsaneAsylum]

Australia are about to have their first real test this tournament. Let's see how things stack up when tested.

Quit with the trolling. If you don't think England was a tough enough opponent, then Wales gave us a good Challenge.

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

Yes, but they shouldn't have been. Not saying it wasn't a tough match, just for a championship hopeful team, none of those matches should have been hard.

 

[Cliffyboy]

Quit with the trolling. If you don't think England was a tough enough opponent, then Wales gave us a good Challenge.

Well said by you. I like the New Zealanders and, like most of us, admire the amazing All Blacks for being such a consistently formidable force produced from a nation of around just five million, but an arrogant comment like that one deserves censure and reflects badly upon the writer.

 

[InsaneAsylum]

Well said by you. I like the New Zealanders and, like most of us, admire the amazing All Blacks for being such a consistently formidable force produced from a nation of around just five million, but an arrogant comment like that one deserves censure and reflects badly upon the writer.

What's worse is that they think Pavlova was invented in NZ, when it was clearly invented in Australia.

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

Hah, and I bet you think Phar Lap was an Australian horse too!

I think I've been a little misunderstood here. What I mean to say is, this is the first genuine, genuine test against a very good side. Beating England, Wales and Scotland is all very good, but struggling past them hasn't been indicative of a team that can win the RWC. This game however is different; beating an on-form Pumas side is massive challenge for any team and pulling this off would definitely mean The Wallabies are in contention for the ***le.

 

[Cliffyboy]

What's worse is that they think Pavlova was invented in NZ, when it was clearly invented in Australia.

That's so true. Talk about having your cake and eating it.

 

[Yobbo]

Quit with the trolling. If you don't think England was a tough enough opponent, then Wales gave us a good Challenge.

England did not put up a decent challenge and Wales couldn't even score when Oz were down to 13.

The Argies really are going to produce the first decent opponent for Oz.

 

[RoosTah]

Just for the record all of the remaining nations did all play eachother only a couple months ago

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

Yes, and they did very well. But this is the RWC, and so far they've either been holding back considerably or are about to be eaten alive by Pumas.

 

[InsaneAsylum]

Yes, and they did very well. But this is the RWC, and so far they've either been holding back considerably or are about to be eaten alive by Pumas.

We'll know in a few days. To be fair I can't separate both games. It could go either way, that's how evenly matched these 4 teams are.

Although you will probably tell me that NZ are still just messing around with the other teams ans haven't really been trying.

 

[Sonic Kiwi]

What's worse is that they think Pavlova was invented in NZ, when it was clearly invented in Australia.

That's a catorgoric lie.... we used to feed Pharlap on Pavlova

At the end of the day, who cares if Oz thrash us at the Olympics, soccer, usually league etc etc???, but for the love of humanity please don't take our Pavlova from us!!!! You're killing the dream.

How dare you????

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

We'll know in a few days. To be fair I can't separate both games. It could go either way, that's how evenly matched these 4 teams are.

Although you will probably tell me that NZ are still just messing around with the other teams ans haven't really been trying.

I agree. Too close to call. No, NZ have not been mucking around. They were against Namibia, Georgia though.

 

[Sonic Kiwi]

And And And, with that nasty underarm bowl.......you guys were just scared that our last batsman was going to hit a sux like he'd been doing from previous seasons 'thrashing' the Ozzies as per usual.

So there, take that

 

[Cliffyboy]

That's a catorgoric lie.... we used to feed Pharlap on Pavlova

At the end of the day, who cares if Oz thrash us at the Olympics, soccer, usually league etc etc???, but for the love of humanity please don't take our Pavlova from us!!!! You're killing the dream.

How dare you????

With all due respect, that's a trifle over the top, isn't it?

 

[Sonic Kiwi]

With all due respect, that's a trifle over the top, isn't it?

It was my tongue firmly planted in my cheek.
My second team if not the AB's to win is actually OZ especially after the Deans/McKenzie fiasco giving Cheika the reigns. Cheika or Eddie Jones should be Coach of the year.

As for underarm bowl BS, we were never going to win and it gives us delusional Kiwis to complain about BS knowing that OZ are better at sport in general than NZ eg Olympics to name a few yet many

 

[KeyboardWorrier]

They were pretty well going to win that Cricket match...