British and Irish Lions Tour: Referee Chat

[Thingimubob]

Classic Amman Valley River Boy Stuff

Bloody miss watching him play! Managed to see him at the Amman Utd vs Caerphilly Bowl Final a few months ago at least.

 

[duncanb]

Seems obvious from this he didn't need to jump. He chooses to and catches it at head height, if he doesn't jump he could easily catch it by reaching above his head. So by the letter of this stupid law he should be penalised for unnecessarily jumping into a tackle. Either way its moronic, neither of them have any sort of time to be considering all these options and making decisions, they are busy trying to play rugby. Its a shame that with only three and a half minutes left in the game it decided who won.

And I love the hypocrisy of people that have no problem with this game deciding call because it's potentially dangerous and we are all so concerned with player safety but SOB can literally knock another player out with his forearm and see no repercussion because it was an accident. Oh wait, and Sam Cane did it.

Maybe next week Mako should spear tackle Barret and dislocate his shoulder with no repercussion because you know, fairs fair.

 

[duncanb]

Seems obvious from this he didn't need to jump. He chooses to and catches it at head height, if he doesn't jump he could easily catch it by reaching above his head. So by the letter of this stupid law he should be penalised for unnecessarily jumping into a tackle. Either way its moronic, neither of them have any sort of time to be considering all these options and making decisions, they are busy trying to play rugby. Its a shame that with only three and a half minutes left in the game it decided who won.

And I love the hypocrisy of people that have no problem with this game deciding call because it's potentially dangerous and we are all so concerned with player safety but SOB can literally knock another player out with his forearm and see no repercussion because it was an accident. Oh wait, and Sam Cane did it.

Maybe next week Mako should spear tackle Barret and dislocate his shoulder with no repercussion because you know, fairs fair.

 

[duncanb]

And of course jumping into a tackle is not per se against the laws of the game.
However as a referee I penalize if I think it is contrary to good sportsmanship as this is probably the only law I can use.
I do use this when doing junior rugby as it is fairly common with new to game players,but far less in adults rugby.
The only time I tend to see is when someone Jump's over a player on the floor which for me is no pen as they are on floor and so out of the game.
Law 10.4 covers all these issues and surprisingly the law to this incident is simple.
A player must not tackle an opponent whose feet are off the ground.
KS was in no way committing an act not in good sportsmanship.
So whatever you think about the stupid law it was correct.
I think we should just agree to disagree as I assume you will find no law to back your argument.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

That knock on in the World Cup oz v Scotland game. Called incorrectly at the time anyway, but the whole offside from a knock on has to go IMHO, as well. Ref should be empowered to simply give a free kick in such circumstances that a player unintentionally plays a knocked on ball. It's too instinctive half the time. To settle outcomes of World Cup games just not proper, much as the sinckler incident was.

if you unintentionally play the ball in an offside position it is a scrum whether it came from a knock on

 

[The Jones Boy]

Hypocrisy works both ways mate, plenty of NZ fans who have been frothing at the mouth about SOB, but conveniently ignoring the Cane incident once it's been pointed out

As I said, SOB's incident is definitely in the same ball park as Cane's (which I can only assume was missed by the citing officer / deemed worthy of only a yellow) and whether or not the player was knocked out doesn't come into it. Must be some reason why the committee dismissed the citing anyway.

Ok, I'll have a look at it.
Post up the link and I'll have a squiz because I don't know about this, was it from the first test or the second?

 

[Nubiwan]

if you unintentionally play the ball in an offside position it is a scrum whether it came from a knock on

I thought that was the gist of the OZ / Scotland World Cup match ending with an OZ pen, was it not? Scotland deemed to have knocked on, and then a Scottish player in front of him caught it. Result - Penalty! Did I get this wrong? Memory is fuzzy.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

I thought that was the gist of the OZ / Scotland World Cup match ending with an OZ pen, was it not? Scotland deemed to have knocked on, and then a Scottish player in front of him caught it. Result - Penalty! Did I get this wrong? Memory is fuzzy.

Catching it is an intentional action. If it would have just hit his leg it would have been accidental offsides.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Honestly, I don't think the thought of whether he needed to jump or not came into Sinckler's head, probably just did it on instinct. Fault here is definitely with the rules rather than either player, so no-one really should've been penalise imo.

I think the jumping into tackles rules definitely more refers to stuff like this rather than what Sinckler did (ironically I don't think Shane got penalized for this):



Hypocrisy works both ways mate, plenty of NZ fans who have been frothing at the mouth about SOB, but conveniently ignoring the Cane incident once it's been pointed out

As I said, SOB's incident is definitely in the same ball park as Cane's (which I can only assume was missed by the citing officer / deemed worthy of only a yellow) and whether or not the player was knocked out doesn't come into it. Must be some reason why the committee dismissed the citing anyway.

I've heard the Cane incident referenced a couple of times but don't know exactly what we're talking about. Do you have a video, @Thingimubob?

 

[Reiser99]

I thought that was the gist of the OZ / Scotland World Cup match ending with an OZ pen, was it not? Scotland deemed to have knocked on, and then a Scottish player in front of him caught it. Result - Penalty! Did I get this wrong? Memory is fuzzy.

The issue was also that it didn't come off a Scottish hand. However for me one thing Joubert was unfairly criticised for was not going to the TMO. Please correct if wrong, but I thought they could only go upstairs for foul play or the act of scoring a try/checking the ball has gone over the post. On the other hand, the way he scarpered down the tunnel after was atrocious.

However as for offside...I guess it is blanket rule to avoid confusion. I understand about the idea of a free kick, but for me one issue with rules is that often follow a pattern of having more and more rules for unique circumstances until there are too many to remember or too many that they confuse the issue and so you go back to basic rules that cover all situations regardless. I think one thing that puts non-rugby fans off is the complex set of rules and so for me this feels unecessary. Yes it may be harsh, but the player is in an offside position, same as if there was a ruck or the ball was kicked and they have to know not to interfere. For example if it was changed to a free kick, a player knocks on, the opposition has a chance for a quick counter attack and so a player dives on the ball offside. The opposition have lost their chance and while they may get territory, they either kick possession back to the team that infringed, or start again against a full defensive line. Players just have to be more disciplined personally.

While I'm talking about free kicks, I think the scrum should be changed so that if both teams are stable and neither collapses or moves back after about 5 seconds then the ref is only allowed to give a free kick. The scrum is a way of restarting the game and needs to speed up. This way unless a team infringes immediately or is forced back straight away, teams have less incentive to keep the ball in the scrum and try to milk a penalty. Last week the Lions were forced to use, when the AB's were allowed to keep it in and got a penalty eventually. If they could only have got a free kick, then there would have been far less incentive to keep the ball in and the game would restart quicker.

 

[Reiser99]

Can't see the lions players getting cited.

I mean it was no different to what Sam Cane did on Jonathon Davies last weekend.
https://twitter.com/mike_cantillon/status/879710203901607936

Tigs posted this for the Sam Cane incident for TRF Mr Fish. For me definitely should have been looked at because he's used force intentionally with a forearm to the head. I'd say penalty and probably yellow due to intent.

 

[Reiser99]

I've heard the Cane incident referenced a couple of times but don't know exactly what we're talking about. Do you have a video, @Thingimubob?

See above for Tig's link to Same Cane incident.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Tigs posted this for the Sam Cane incident for TRF Mr Fish. For me definitely should have been looked at because he's used force intentionally with a forearm to the head. I'd say penalty and probably yellow due to intent.

Ah yes, hadn't seen this!

Agree, should have been a yellow, no complaints there.

 

[The Jones Boy]

I didn't see anything wrong with it. Davies was reaching out with his arm like he was going to get up to mischief with the ball and Davies is off his feet on the wrong side of the ruck.
Cane belted him back across the ruck.
I'd have done the same thing.
Both arms are used by Cane and he comes from the hindmost feet.
If there was a coser clearer view I might well have a different opinion but from that angle and distance it looks fine to me.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

I didn't see anything wrong with it. Davies was reaching out with his arm like he was going to get up to mischief with the ball and Davies is off his feet on the wrong side of the ruck.
Cane belted him back across the ruck.
I'd have done the same thing.
Both arms are used by Cane and he comes from the hindmost feet.
If there was a coser clearer view I might well have a different opinion but from that angle and distance it looks fine to me.

You couldn't make that **** up Jones boy. I Hope you're joking. Yes, nothing wrong here, as long as he comes from the hindmost feet and uses his arms. WTF???!!! Apart from you missed out Cane using his right elbow/forearm to smash it into Davies head to clear him from the ruck. If he was using his arms properly and clearing JD2 out he would have got his arms underneath Davies to lift him and clear him.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Get me a closer look and I might well change my mind but on that viewing it looks regulation to me.
Nothing as dangerous as the clear loose swinging forearm from SOB that was blatantly obvious on camera and whalloped Naholo on the noggin'.

 

[Thingimubob]

I didn't see anything wrong with it. Davies was reaching out with his arm like he was going to get up to mischief with the ball and Davies is off his feet on the wrong side of the ruck.
Cane belted him back across the ruck.
I'd have done the same thing.
Both arms are used by Cane and he comes from the hindmost feet.
If there was a coser clearer view I might well have a different opinion but from that angle and distance it looks fine to me.

Um no. Davies' arm is nowhere near where the ball actually is, nor is he reaching for it... He actually clearly pulls his arm well away before Cane even gets to him anyway!

Cane then pretty obviously drives his elbow into his face, so it's clearly not "regulation"...

 

[The Jones Boy]

Looks fine to me, get a better closer angle or there's nothing to see here.
Davies is clearly thinking about getting up to mischief, he is laying all over the ruck, on the wrong side.
If you want to get cleaned out this is like writing a gilt edged invitation to an opposition flanker or no.8
Both arms are used by Cane and Davies is driven back.
I am still prepared to change my perspective but you would need to get a clearer closer view.

Um no. Davies' arm is nowhere near where the ball actually is, nor is he reaching for it... He actually clearly pulls his arm well away before Cane even gets to him anyway!
.

Lol
So he's nowhere near the ball... then he's pulling his arm away from the ball.
Come on, which one is it.?
It can't be both.
Davies knows what he was doing thats why he doesn't complain when he gets belted back across the ruck.

Once again this is nowhere near as clean cut as the swinging arm SOB used on Naholo.
If this is the only footage then I am not at all surprised that this didn't make the citing officer interested.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Get me a closer look and I might well change my mind but on that viewing it looks regulation to me.
Nothing as dangerous as the clear loose swinging forearm from SOB that was blatantly obvious on camera and whalloped Naholo on the noggin'.

The difference is SOB was cited and the Judicial panel had all the camera angles to view and cleared him. This Cane incident is one camera angle, but you're willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one camera angle, but condemn SOB for his when there were several angles for his. How can you say striking Davies on the head with his elbow is regulation clearing out? At least SOB could be said to be unsighted and going for the ball. Cane has no excuse in this instance.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Cane hasn't done anything wrong.

If you showed me that footage with Cane laying all over the ruck, clearly on the wrong side and clearly looking at interfering with the ball before he sees Davies approaching, and then Davies comes in from the hindmost feet and belts him using both arms and drives him back across the ruck.
I'd tell you straight.
Nothing to see here. Cane was up to mischief and got cleaned out.
Regulation clear out.
No swinging arm, no cheap shot. Both arms used.
This is not tiddlywinks.
This is rugby.
On this evidence I completely agree with the administrators, that there was nothing to warrant a citing.

Get a closer look from a better angle and I may well change my mind, but on this evidence, the citing commissioner was never going to be interested, and he wasn't.
At least they had a good look at SOB before clearing him.
On this it wasn't worth even looking at.