[2018 Rugby Championship] Round 5: Argentina v New Zealand (30/09/2018)

[Bean]

10 Pumas, 13 NZ.

 

[All Black]

What was the penalty count. That's usually a fairly good indicator.

Ah you didnt watch the game you see. You had to watch the game to see. As I said before, its what I was seeing.

The ref actually turned a blind eye to some of the Pumas errors and offences. He even went upstairs for a try, the replays showed a 'double-movement knock-on' no try and then he disagreed with the TMO and awarded a try.

It wasn't so much him penalising us, which he thoroughly looked for any opportunity to do so, it was him blatantly not giving us some clear calls.

 

[Bean]

Ah you didnt watch the game you see. You had to watch the game to see. As I said before, its what I was seeing.

The ref actually turned a blind eye to some of the Pumas errors and offences. He even went upstairs for a try, the replays showed a 'double-movement knock-on' no try and then he disagreed with the TMO and awarded a try.

It wasn't so much him penalising us, which he thoroughly looked for any opportunity to do so, it was him blatantly not giving us some clear calls.

This is actually true. The disdain this ref had for the All Blacks was very apparent in the second half for me. I don't normally say this about ref's.

 

[Carlito]

Yea see not much in it . When you see 35 penalty goals given to SA compared to the All Blacks 15 like the ABs 1949 SA tour then you may have a case...

 

[All Black]

This is actually true. The disdain this ref had for the All Blacks was very apparent in the second half for me. I don't normally say this about ref's.

Yeah I know that bagging the ref is never a good thing and you come of looking like a whinge but I have to be honest here.

I just did a bit of homework on ref Raynal (anal) and he reffed our controversial losses to the Lions and the Irish.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...the-show-as-memories-of-wayne-barnes-reignite

 

[All Black]

Yea see not much in it . When you see 35 penalty goals given to SA compared to the All Blacks 15 like the 1949 SA tour then you may have a case...

Yea you definitely did not watch the game. So you obviously you dont know and thats a no brainer.

Dont care about a 1949 game, its not what Im talking about.

 

[Carlito]

1949 Series
Imagine playing a 24 game tour nowadays...a game every three days...The players must've been very hard men back in those days. Not to mention completely shagged.. BloodyLegends

 

[Kiwiwomble]

This is just how others feel when we get the run of the green and we say to get over it, we won inspite of the ref so it's not worth talking about

 

[All Black]

This is just how others feel when we get the run of the green and we say to get over it, we won inspite of the ref so it's not worth talking about

No. These are what forums are for.

I never tell others to get over it. You might but not me. I'd like to discuss it even if it means the forum comes alive with 10 pages of discussions.

"Hello, dont talk about anything, goodbye, I have nothing to talk about".

 

[Diomedes]

just did a bit of homework on ref Raynal (anal) and he reffed our controversial losses to the Lions and the Irish.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...the-show-as-memories-of-wayne-barnes-reignite

As a matter of interest what was controversial about your loss to the Irish?

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Puma's need to sort out their set pieces, which were shocking last night. I thought back 3 for ABs sealed their places from now to RWC. No more Jordie at full back until after RWC. Ardie had a great game at number 8.

Puma's first try was clearly a double movement and couldn't see why the ref gave it even the TMO was basically telling him it was one.

 

[All Black]

As a matter of interest what was controversial about your loss to the Irish?

Irelands first try wasnt even visible to anyone but instead of scrumming it, Raynal awarded a try. There was also things we were penalised for that Raynal did not penalise the Irish for. Im not taking anything away from the Irish so dont go thinking absolutely wrong. My issue is with Raynal. After looking him up, he has a history of controversial calls.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...eport-all-blacks-result-chicago-a7400096.html

 

[smartcooky]

My main issue with Raynal is that he appears "flat" and almost uninterested. As they used to say about J.J. Cale "he's so laid back he's falling over".

Also, I'd like to know how he managed to award the first Pumas try. The player had three goes at planting it, including one where he lost the ball, before he actually grounded it on the line, and then Reynal overrules his TMO. I wish we'd hurry up and go to the system used by the NRL;

1. The referee decides "try" or "no try"
2. The referee tells the Video Ref what he wants looked at (grounding, man in front of kicker, obstruction etc)

Then there is no further discussion, the Video Ref MAKES THE DECISION. If they cannot find sufficient evidence to reverse the referee's call, his decisions stands.

Its the cleanest, simplest and fairest method with the least questions and the least confusion.

 

[All Black]

My main issue with Raynal is that he appears "flat" and almost uninterested. As they used to say about J.J. Cale "he's so laid back he's falling over".

Also, I'd like to know how he managed to award the first Pumas try. The player had three goes at planting it, including one where he lost the ball, before he actually grounded it on the line, and then Reynal overrules his TMO. I wish we'd hurry up and go to the system used by the NRL;

1. The referee decides "try" or "no try"
2. The referee tells the Video Ref what he wants looked at (grounding, man in front of kicker, obstruction etc)

Then there is no further discussion, the Video Ref MAKES THE DECISION. If they cannot find sufficient evidence to reverse the referee's call, his decisions stands.

Its the cleanest, simplest and fairest method with the least questions and the least confusion.

The TMO denied Raynal once before when we played the Lions and he was about to award the Lions a try against us despite a clear knock on. That time he actually went with the TMO.

 

[smartcooky]

I just did a bit of homework on ref Raynal (anal) and he reffed our controversial losses to the Lions and the Irish.

The TMO denied Raynal once before when we played the Lions and he was about to award the Lions a try against us despite a clear knock on. That time he actually went with the TMO.

Reynal didn't referee any of the Lions tests. The three referees were Angus Gardner, Pascal Gauzere and Romain Poite.

Raynal refereed the mid-week match v Crusaders

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

I can't comment on this match because I haven't watched it but Raynal is probably my favourite ref, and if not him it's Gauzere. I think he's the most consistent and applies the laws at the breakdown effectively without bias to the attacking or defending team. He generally allows the tmo come to him and is hesitant to go back 10+ phases unless the game requires it. If he had an off day it's fair to criticise but going through his career and cherry picking games to make him seem incompetent as some are doing in here is a disservice to a world class official. The examples of non contentious games being offered shows what a good ref he is imo.

Irelands first try wasnt even visible to anyone but instead of scrumming it, Raynal awarded a try. There was also things we were penalised for that Raynal did not penalise the Irish for. Im not taking anything away from the Irish so dont go thinking absolutely wrong. My issue is with Raynal. After looking him up, he has a history of controversial calls.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...eport-all-blacks-result-chicago-a7400096.html

He also awarded a try where Ben Smith was in touch that day because it wasn't clear and obvious from the camera angles. He thought the tries were scored on the pitch but couldn't be sure and asked if there's any reason not to award them, that's objectively good refereeing.

 

[All Black]

I can't comment on this match because I haven't watched it but Raynal is probably my favourite ref, and if not him it's Gauzere. I think he's the most consistent and applies the laws at the breakdown effectively without bias to the attacking or defending team. He generally allows the tmo come to him and is hesitant to go back 10+ phases unless the game requires it. If he had an off day it's fair to criticise but going through his career and cherry picking games to make him seem incompetent as some are doing in here is a disservice to a world class official. The examples of non contentious games being offered shows what a good ref he is imo.


He also awarded a try where Ben Smith was in touch that day because it wasn't clear and obvious from the camera angles. He thought the tries were scored on the pitch but couldn't be sure and asked if there's any reason not to award them, that's objectively good refereeing.

He missed a few other calls in that game. You should never award a try you can't see IMO. Thats poor refereeing. Imagine if we beat Ireland in the RWC because Raynal awarded a try no one could see. Like I said before, I googled him and he has a history of controversial calls. Theres a few articles that come up with 'controversial Raynal'.

Anyway in this last game, he honestly missed a lot and they were clear too. He often checked for potential All Black offences but never went to the TMO for potential Puma offences. You just gotta watch the game and you'd come back telling me 'you were right'.

 

[All Black]

Reynal didn't referee any of the Lions tests. The three referees were Angus Gardner, Pascal Gauzere and Romain Poite.

Raynal refereed the mid-week match v Crusaders

I stand corrected. Cheers.

 

[Carlito]

10 Pumas, 13 NZ.

The NZ Herald has the penalty count at 11 Pumas , 12 NZ but whatever there is very little in it. No sign of any major conspiracy against the ABs as is being suggested that i can see .
I find it amusing that some sad people can't just enjoy the win , What benefit is there in getting all bitter and twisted after such a good win i don't know.

 

[petite]

what a sport rugby! it allows both teams Bragg about the ref but for opposite reasons every fb page is full of kiwis bragging about the ref and Argentines doing the same thing.

mayor ofences for kiwi's. in social media
the Doble movement on cubelli's try.
some obstruction in a Sanchez run
off sides/hands on the ruck overlooked.
high tackles and even dirty play.

for the arg.
Doble high tackle no arms on Sanchez.
clumsily hitting bonfellis head, looses ball
clumsily hitting delguy' s head, a try came after this play. both players off the field due to those hits.
cinical penalties every time pumas aproached ab in goal
knock on by penerara on AB try
.
IMO.
for kiwis
no doble move by cubelli's. to me it looked more like he almost knock s on the ball then regains control and grounds.
obstruction: 50/50 interpretation. insignificant play anyway.
the constant off side being overlooked again it's nothing special to me some good some don't. 0 bias.
high tackles and dirty play. just nonsense..
for arg
doble high tackle on Sanchez just penalty sounds too soft.
the knee to head contacts. to me not intentional depends on interpretation.
very difficult to judge but not intentional may olso lead to yellows. overall stick to the ref here.
about the AB committing penalties in the Last 5 yards being cheats.. nonsense those are the result of preasure and everybody does the same.
about the knock on its complicated. looks like it was but in the rep the ball looks like going backwards it was 50/50 call.
so to me it's clear he wasn't biased at all an the all blacks won as usual. there where no game changing calls.