[November Tests 2016 EOYT] Ireland vs. New Zealand (19/11/2016)

[smartcooky]

The Welsh TMO deserves to lose his job btw. By hook or crook Barrett was getting 7 points because Sexton was high trying to get him. But the TMO basically lied to Peyper. He was asked have you seen the ball clearly grounded. He didn't see it grounded. He assumed it was. Thats not his job. He needed conclusive evidence with the question asked of him.

On the contrary, the TMO was excellent in that he spotted what neither of the Irish commentators spotted, the ball being grounded....

While it doesn't look grounded from this angle because Sexton's arm appears to be under the ball.

From this angle, the grounding is clear. (the blue arrow points to green stripe on the ball touching the ground).
Sexton's arm is obviously not under the ball the way it appeared to be from the other angle, its on the other side of the ball.

The view that the TMO used to make the call was this one.

In any case, the whole thing is moot, because a Penalty Try would have been awarded if there was no clear grounding. Sexton's head-high tackle followed by a neck-roll to flip him over was the only reason Barret had trouble getting the ball down in the first place

same on Canes tackle. Made a snap judgement that it was a clash heads when it clearly wasn't. Canes shoulder hit Henshaw. What you make of it is up to you. Henshaw pirouetting exonerates Cane somewhat but the point still stands.

Really?

Looks like a pretty clear and obvious head clash to me. The first point of contact between the players was their heads, and this is what caused Henshaw's injury. Once again the TMO gets the call right!

IMO, this was not even a penalty. Henshaw turned into him, and while Cane has no real chance to wrap, he still tries to wrap anyway. This should be dismissed, but the point will be moot anyway because Cane will miss the France game due to a high ankle sprain.

NOTE: Fekitoa's citing I agree with. He was a bit lucky not to be red-carded.

 

[corny]

You all need to brush up on the laws of the game. Intent has nothing to do with it. The IRB (as they were known at the time) clarified this with regard to head shots a while back. Whether Cane or Fekitoa meant to do the Irish lads is irrelevant.

Also, it wasn't a head clash. Canes shoulder hit Henshaw. If you disagree you need to watch it again.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

On the contrary, the TMO was excellent in that he spotted what neither of the Irish commentators spotted, the ball being grounded....

While it doesn't look grounded from this angle because Sexton's arm appears to be under the ball.

From this angle, the grounding is clear. (the blue arrow points to green stripe on the ball touching the ground).
Sexton's arm is obviously not under the ball the way it appeared to be from the other angle, its on the other side of the ball.

The view that the TMO used to make the call was this one.

In any case, the whole thing is moot, because a Penalty Try would have been awarded if there was no clear grounding. Sexton's head-high tackle followed by a neck-roll to flip him over was the only reason Barret had trouble getting the ball down in the first place



Really?

Looks like a pretty obvious head clash to me. The first point of contact between the players was their heads, and this is what caused Henshaw's injury. Once again the TMO gets the call right!

IMO, this was not even a penalty. Henshaw turned into him, and while Cane has no real chance to wrap, he still tries to wrap anyway. This should be dismissed, but the point will be moot anyway because Cane will miss the France game due to a high ankle sprain.

NOTE: Fekitoa's citing I agree with. He was a bit lucky not to be red-carded.

Shoulder hits the head regardless though, and to me it looks like Cane's shoulder hits first, at the time I thought it was nothing but I'm definitely of the opinion that a card should have been issued now.

 

[smartcooky]

Shoulder hits the head regardless though, and to me it looks like Cane's shoulder hits first, at the time I thought it was nothing but I'm definitely of the opinion that a card should have been issued now.

So, you don't think Cane's right arm would have wrapped if Henshaw hadn't turned towards him?

IMO, that is the argument Cane's lawyer will use!

 

[Makos]

Smith is now injured out out of the final game. Sucks, and its going to hamper his off season as well.

The All Blacks are the best team in the world because the players go out and work harder than any other players in the world. Ben Smith Easily puts in 20-30% more work than most elite fullbacks in the game. Brodie Retalick is like having an extra loose forward on the park. I really think these guys need to be managed better. My concern now is that some of these players are going to suffer a hangover next year. The off season isn't going to be long enough for them to recover and build their base again.

NZRU should seriously look to organize giving Smith and Read time off the beginning of super rugby. Allow them an extra 4 weeks or so.

In the after match Sumo touched on something that I think is absolutely true. Since Argentina joined the tri nations we have been struggling even more at the end of the season. I think we have always peaked at the 2nd half of the tri nations. Then there is a big release of energy, a drop off in intensity and accuracy and then the last couple of games each season we really struggle. I think the coaches and selectors need to recognize that.

I completely agree with you. The Super Rugby season is ridiculous as well. It's too long and there's so much traveling involved.

I'm sure the All Blacks have more flight miles than any sports team or sports person in the entire world. The traveling we do is staggering and it's exhausting.

Ben Smith needs a big rest, we need to preserve him because there's no one even close to his caliber in the world.

Don't even know why people are complaining about Cane, it was clearly a clash of heads. People just seeing what they want to see I guess. It is annoying.

 

[corny]

So, you don't think Cane's right arm would have wrapped if Henshaw hadn't turned towards him?

IMO, that is the argument Cane's lawyer will use!

Irrelevant. Shoulder made contact with the head.

All i see on your replay of the grounding is a shadow. Inconclusive. Penalty try and yellow card was the correct decision but TMO wasn't worth a **** on the night.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

From this angle, the grounding is clear. (the blue arrow points to green stripe on the ball touching the ground).
Sexton's arm is obviously not under the ball the way it appeared to be from the other angle, its on the other side of the ball.

Time to go to the optometrist maybe?

What you describe didn't happen is exactly what the pic shows. The evidence you provide shows exactly the opposite of what you say it does.
It's as if you are providing evidence to help the prosecution while you are the defense attorney.

Btw, just heard Fekitoa and Cane have been cited (so has Nicolas Sanchez in case anyone is interested).

 

[smartcooky]

Irrelevant. Shoulder made contact with the head.

No, it didn't. Look at that gif I posted.

Cane's shoulder made contact with Henshaw's shoulder
Cane's head made contact with Henshaw's head

All i see on your replay of the grounding is a shadow. Inconclusive. Penalty try and yellow card was the correct decision but TMO wasn't worth a **** on the night.

A shadow? LMAO, A shadow cast by what? Such a shadow would require a SINGLE light source. GO take a look at the floodlights at Aviva some time. They have multiple floodlights. The players cast NO visible shadows because any shadow cast by one light is "fill-lit" by the other lights

That is the green stripe on the ball, clear and obvious

A shadow? pffft!

 

[corny]

No, it didn't. Look at that gif I posted.

Cane's shoulder made contact with Henshaw's shoulder
Cane's head made contact with Henshaw's head



A shadow? LMAO, A shadow cast by what? Such a shadow would require a SINGLE light source. GO take a look at the floodlights at Aviva some time. They have multiple floodlights. The players cast NO visible shadows because any shadow cast by one light is "fill-lit" by the other lights

That is the green stripe on the ball, clear and obvious

A shadow? pffft!

Your gif is from the wrong angle and miles away. Better angle and closer.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=401952&stc=1&d=1479596368

Can't upload the gif but heres the link. Tell me you see daylight between their heads please.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

So, you don't think Cane's right arm would have wrapped if Henshaw hadn't turned towards him?

IMO, that is the argument Cane's lawyer will use!

What? The shoulder hits his head, its plain and obvious there, look at the direction Henshaw's face moves after impact, it goes in towards Cane's head. Wrapping is irrelevant.

Don't even know why people are complaining about Cane, it was clearly a clash of heads. People just seeing what they want to see I guess. It is annoying.

Well there's a lot of debate over it and he's been cited, no clear clash of heads at all.

 

[bazwaz]

Hmm, powerful passionate test match - but for me it was visible again that match officials tend to be in thrall to the ABs and let them get away with things other nations get pinged for.

...um i think NZ were penalised sixteen times to Ireland's four weren't they ?....is'nt that like getting penalised 400% more of the time so that kinda blows that argument out of the water...

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

I think we are aware the TMO used both views on the Barrett try. The point is neither view conclusively shows contact with the ground in the opinion of many people (including me). If it was so abundantly clear from the first view, why did the TMO repeatedly view the second angle? The TMO was asked a clear question and gave a questionable answer. It was the same at the last Italy try that was chalked off. The TMO arguably exceeded their remit by imposing a questionable judgement call on the ref.

I'd rather see ref guidance that they make a preliminary judgement of the field and it is only overruled in the event of incontrovertible evidence (as in cricket and NFL). I think that would also accelerate decision making, rather than the current situation where a TMO is often called upon to decide on what is effectively a coin flip and take minutes agonising over an impossible decision with insufficient evidence. We had a TMO decision in Georgia last week that took almost five minutes.

 

[Amiga500]

From this angle, the grounding is clear. (the blue arrow points to green stripe on the ball touching the ground).

Sorry dude, but that is anything but clear to me.

Looks like a pretty clear and obvious head clash to me. The first point of contact between the players was their heads, and this is what caused Henshaw's injury.

:huh: Are we looking at the same gif?

- - - Updated - - -

I'd rather see ref guidance that they make a preliminary judgement of the field and it is only overruled in the event of incontrovertible evidence (as in cricket and NFL).

Yep. Good shout.

The ref and touches should aim to have a decision from any play - not a case of "ah no need, sure we'll just go upstairs" - which assumes the TMO will always have a better view than them.


The question re Barrett's try should have been "any reason I cannot award this".

 

[bazwaz]

Sorry dude, but that is anything but clear to me.

The ref and touches should aim to have a decision from any play - not a case of "ah no need, sure we'll just go upstairs" - which assumes the TMO will always have a better view than them.

The question re Barrett's try should have been "any reason I cannot award this".

If it's any consolation to teary Irish fans i think Beauden Barret has Irish ancestory

 

[corny]

The question re Barrett's try should have been "any reason I cannot award this".

No it shouldn't. Thats only the case if the referee sees the ball grounded at some stage in the play. Barrett outpaced everyone, including the ref, so there was no way Peyper could have seen grounding. He was right in the question he asked.

Because the TMO ****ed up Peyper gets in the neck from the both camps. The Irish will say he didn't ground it and the Kiwis will say he missed the high tackle. End result......sack the TMO.

 

[james5000]

Sexton should have been yellow carded any way

I didn't watch the entire game but a penalty count of 16-4 and Sexton didn't get yellow carded and we got the rub of the green?

I don't know if Barrett got it down but clear as day Canes head hit that bloke first and the shoulder following after because he dropped after impact

 

[Amiga500]

If it's any consolation to teary Irish fans i think Beauden Barret has Irish ancestory

Did you not see my post on the previous page?


You definitely never seen my posts on the previous match thread:

http://www.therugbyforum.com/thread...d-(05-11-2016)?p=823000&viewfull=1#post823000

http://www.therugbyforum.com/thread...d-(05-11-2016)?p=823006&viewfull=1#post823006


If you want to be a condescending idiot, at least make sure you quote an appropriate post & poster.

- - - Updated - - -

Sexton should have been yellow carded any way

Possibly.

I didn't watch the entire game but a penalty count of 16-4 and Sexton didn't get yellow carded and we got the rub of the green?

Does that not make the assumption that both teams made more or less equal transgressions?

I don't know if Barrett got it down but clear as day Canes head hit that bloke first and the shoulder following after because he dropped after impact

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=401952&stc=1&d=1479596368

Seriously?

- - - Updated - - -

No it shouldn't. Thats only the case if the referee sees the ball grounded at some stage in the play.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if the referee suspects a try has been scored, is the question not supposed to be "any reason why I can't"?

Given Barrett's run to the line, I think the entire ground more than "suspected" a try had been scored.

 

[Makos]

Well there's a lot of debate over it and he's been cited, no clear clash of heads at all.

I think you will find he won't receive a ban, because their heads clashed and Henshaw changed directions into Cane.

 

[smartcooky]

Your gif is from the wrong angle and miles away. Better angle and closer.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=401952&stc=1&d=1479596368

Can't upload the gif but heres the link. Tell me you see daylight between their heads please.

Your gif "conveniently" stops before the head clash.... well colour me surprised!

 

[corny]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if the referee suspects a try has been scored, is the question not supposed to be "any reason why I can't"?

He has to have reason to suspect that though. Assuming Barrett has scored is exactly that....an assumption. He didn't see Barrett ground the ball so 'Try, Yes or No' is correct.

- - - Updated - - -

Your gif "conveniently" stops before the head clash.... well colour me surprised!

What hit Henshaws head before it stops? ........Don't worry we'll get there eventually. I know its painful to back down.