[2018 November Tests] England v South Africa (3/10/18)

[MikeTheNative]

Rugby is a complicated game, if you go through each phase with a freeze frame you will probably find an offence most of the time. There is probably loads of incidents where England should have got a decision. I agree about not mistake to not take scrums though. SA where completely dominant there in the first half and you could see a penalty try and/or a yellow card coming if SA opted for the scrum more.

 

[George Ford]

The less there is said about Farrel's tackle, the better. I think Rassie said it best in his interview after the game, look at it from the 2:24 mark:

Yup, Rassie totally nailed the journalist there

 

[ncurd]

We as English were bemoaning the giving away of penalties but I'd be probably more livid if we were the team kicking to the corner then giving the ball away.

Why not just kick at goal? Seriously unless your more than 7 points ahead I never get the point. Most teams have excellently drilled 5 meter defence I'd love to know the actual strike rate for try's in red zone from a lineout. I'll place a bet its not high. Kicking to the corner is a mugs game and rarely beneficial unless you have a dominant maul.

Its frustrating watching teams go for glory when they still need to get their noses ahead. England kicked everything in range and the result was they won because of it.


Oh yeah because it come up twice....just because the citing commissioner didn't issue a warning doesn't mean it wasn't a penalty just means it wasn't a YC (I actually don't know if they issue warnings for straight up YC's either only when it may met the criteria for RC and it was found to be not that serious).

 

[TRF_heineken]

Oh yeah because it come up twice....just because the citing commissioner didn't issue a warning doesn't mean it wasn't a penalty just means it wasn't a YC (I actually don't know if they issue warnings for straight up YC's either only when it may met the criteria for RC and it was found to be not that serious).

That's okay, we understand, completely legal tackle. Every nation will soon be asking Brian Lima, and the rest of the Pacific island "bad boys", to be their tackling coaches.

 

[spartan32]

The less there is said about Farrel's tackle, the better. I think Rassie said it best in his interview after the game, look at it from the 2:24 mark:



ButI don't want to talk about that, as it shouldn't be a talking point as to an opportunity where we could've won the match, it was far, and close to the corner, and I don't think Pollard or Elton would've slotted it over that far out.

But what did irk me about that incident, is that it was just a the culmination of several bad calls by Mr. Gardner. I thought he was absolutely pathetic in the middle.

• The first four scrums England got, Youngs threw the ball in under the lock's feet.
• Sinkler was scrummaging inwards the whole game, wasn't once penalised for that.
• The several high hits, and neck rolls on players - all went unpunished, not even a consult.
• the last 4 minutes of the game, the England team was constantly offside, and in the lead up to the Farrel incident, there was another high tackle on a South African player which he also missed.

As for the game. I can't believe we lost. Like seriously, we were outclassing the England team in nearly every instance apart from the scorecard. I think our biggest problem was decisionmaking, apart from the handling errors of course. Hey Siya, when you are 8 to 7 in a pack with a very good scrum, why kick for a lineout every time only to overthrow it every time??? Why not scrum them over??? And why keep on going for the lineout, and keep on throwing to the back? Their one jumper is in the bin, THROW TO THE GUY AT THE FU****** FRONT!!!!!

Crooked feeds in the first half fair enough.

Boaring in by Sinklair however is BS. Your fella was more often than not the one dragging him in.

It sure what game you're watching, but I don't recall a bundle of high tackles, or neck rolls.

It's not offside fella, it's called line speed.

This is not a game tha SA can pin of the ref. You underperformed in the first half, piled pressure on yourselves, and then let England get our tails up and start asking questions.

 

[Steeler]

Genuinely surprised people are calling this high - I agree it's a shoulder, but that's never high

That still shows his shoulder is touching the bottom of his neck

 

[Steeler]

It definitely met the threshold for a penalty but that's really not the issue, the issue is that SA only had a 2 point lead after a dominant firs half. That's why we lost, not one ref's call.

it's both imo

that's a good attitude, but lets not leave out the fact it was a blatant incorrect call and the embarrassiing inconsistency continues

 

[TRF_heineken]

it's both imo

that's a good attitude, but lets not leave out the fact it was a blatant incorrect call and the embarrassiing inconsistency continues

No, no, guys, it was completely legal. All good here. Let's move on

 

[ncurd]

That still shows his shoulder is touching the bottom of his neck

Law 9.13 A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.

That said I've seen them not given.

 

[geostar]

The lead up to "that" tackle...offside? High tackle?

 

[SomeOke]

We have to get over this lads. No use crying over spilt milk, the record reflects a loss - we lost. End of story, lets move on and hope to win our next 3.

 

[All Black]

this was a classic case of the psychological effects the homecrowd can have on a referee i reckon, still shocked not even a penalty was given

really disappointed in Angus here, he is one of my favs and often does a great job, but he spat the dummy here and i reckon he bottled it

i notice some england posters saying it was 50/50 and have to completely disagree with that, it was 100% a penalty, little to no attempt to wrap the arms and it was a high leading shoulder, on no planet is that a fair tackle gentleman

Disappointing to read this from a SH poster. Especially a kiwi. We see these types of tackles all the time at all levels and the refs rightfully let it go. It even pops up on 'Smashed Em Bro'.

 

[Steeler]

Disappointing to read this from a SH poster. Especially a kiwi. We see these types of tackles all the time at all levels and the refs rightfully let it go. It even pops up on 'Smashed Em Bro'.

rules were changed in 2016 after the all blacks vs ireland test mate, so are we following them or not? doesnt matter what happens at grassroots rugby, this is test match rugby, the pinnicle of the sport and results matter, this was a match winning/losing moment

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Oh yeah because it come up twice....just because the citing commissioner didn't issue a warning doesn't mean it wasn't a penalty just means it wasn't a YC (I actually don't know if they issue warnings for straight up YC's either only when it may met the criteria for RC and it was found to be not that serious).

Yes, they can issue an off field yellow card. But no further action.


http://www.worldrugby.org/wr-resour...English/pubData/source/files/Regulation17.pdf

17.9.3

Citing Commissioners shall be entitled to issue a Citing Commissioner Warning to a Player who has in his opinion committed an act(s) of Foul Play which falls just short of warranting that the Player concerned be Ordered Off in circumstances where the act of Foul Play was not subject to a Temporary Suspension or Ordering Off.



But, these incidents maybe restricted to incidents not caught by the match officials. Gardner and the TMO reviewed it. Maybe Cookey can confirm?

 

[TRF_heineken]

We have to get over this lads. No use crying over spilt milk, the record reflects a loss - we lost. End of story, lets move on and hope to win our next 3.

Yup. It's legal, so why the outrage. This was a legitimate tackle, deemed by the referee, his touch judges, the TMO and the Citing commissioner.

Bismarck Du Plessis tackle is not a legitimate tackle on Dan Carter.
Butch James tackles were all not legitimate tackles.

Everyone in rugby are being judged equally.

Move on guys, move on...

 

[MikeTheNative]

I think it's a bit misleading to say the sitting commissioner thought it was a legal tackle. Farrell was not cited that just means that the commissioner thought it does not warrant a yellow card, it does not suggest either him thinking it was legal or penalty only.

 

[ncurd]

But, these incidents maybe restricted to incidents not caught by the match officials. Gardner and the TMO reviewed it. Maybe Cookey can confirm?

I'm just not entirely sure if they bother every time it might just be a yellow. As far as I'm aware a caution would have zero consequences in the terms of the AI's.

However the reason you gave is probably the one where the citing commissioner decided not to act. I can't think of an incident where a citing commissioner has overruled a decision which was reviewed in the game. Its bad politics for the sport to do so otherwise unless it was a massive mistake.

 

[Which Tyler]

Maybe I'm looking with tinted glasses but Ester appears to be leading with his forearm, pretty sure I've seen players punished for this in the prem all season, Looks like a damn good hit to me not a 50 50, I genuinely think if it was the other way I wouldn't see it differently. What good would Ford be in a match that physical, he would have been dragged across the pitch, it doesnt matter what Faz does some people will always favour Ford over him even when he doesn't have the game management and physically Faz does, if you want a 10 with more of a running threat and plays close to the line Ford isn't even the best we have on offer they guy is soooo inconsistent it's crazy.

re you aware that literally nobody who advocates Ford>Farrell agrees that Faz has the better game-management. Quite honestly, very, very few non-Saracens fans think that part, let alone Ford fans.
Equally, no-one argues that Ford is more physical than Farrell, though plenty point out that he's far more reliable in the tackle, and from there you pays your money and you take your choice.

What Ford is likely to have done in that specific game against South Africa, would be to not panic in the first half, to deliver the occasional pass that isn't a pull back to someone stood 5m behind the gainline, and even once in a while, to deliver the ball to where the recipient would be at the time the ball arrived rather than where they were at the release of the ball.

We may have given away ground a little more easily (thank gods we managed to dominate territory in that first half then), but with fewer SA line-outs, and we'd probably have scored more points...

 

[Reiser99]

I think it's a bit misleading to say the sitting commissioner thought it was a legal tackle. Farrell was not cited that just means that the commissioner thought it does not warrant a yellow card, it does not suggest either him thinking it was legal or penalty only.

Yeah, therefore the issue is finished. While people don't have to like the decision, there is nothing that can change it now. I still remember when Mike Phillips took a quick lineout against Ireland when it was clearly a different ball handed to him by someone, therefore touched and not able to be taken quickly. I still think he knew what he was doing and it was blatant cheating, but the touch judge said it was the same ball and the try stood. I don't like the decision, but that's the decision that was made and to keep bringing it up will not change it.

As people have said. S.A should have taken their chances and built up a huge lead. We were barely hanging on and while there were some good defensive moments, the majority of S.A attacks ended because of their mistake, not our good defending.

 

[Which Tyler]

this was a classic case of the psychological effects the homecrowd can have on a referee i reckon, still shocked not even a penalty was given

really disappointed in Angus here, he is one of my favs and often does a great job, but he spat the dummy here and i reckon he bottled it

i notice some england posters saying it was 50/50 and have to completely disagree with that, it was 100% a penalty, little to no attempt to wrap the arms and it was a high leading shoulder, on no planet is that a fair tackle gentleman

You cam tell he's hitting above the shoulder, by the way you can see Ester's shoulder (that's the bit in green) above Faz's shoulder (that's the bit in white).

The fact the that bit in green is higher than the bit in white is definitive proof that the bit in white is higher than the bit in green.

IT WAS NOT A HIGH TACKLE.

It was, however, a shoulder charge. I'd have given a penalty, but we've all seen them carded, and we've all seen them allowed to play on.