[November Tests 2017 EOYT] Wales vs. New Zealand (25/11/2017)

[Ragey Erasmus]

https://imgur.com/a/ZwJmd

Look through those images. Tell me why at no point does either AB player look in the direction of the ball, why both are looking at the Welsh player right up until the collision, why the 1 moves so far across and is actually running at a completely different angle to the 4? I mean in the 3rd picture the 2 AB players are not running in the same direction at all, they are running to block. I mean ffs in the front on views you can see the 4 is looking in a completely different direction to where the ball is but he CAN see where the 1 and Welsh player are. Even at the point of collision he isn't looking even close to the direction the ball has travelled. Feel free to post a single image of either looking at the ball.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Well played Wales.
Great positive rugby. Tough day without the awesome Jonathan Davies or Liam Williams.
However other players stood up and took it to the AB's.

 

[Immenso]

wow awesome game
tuugafasi and crockett had games to forget.. crockett got owned in a couple of the scrums and tuugafasi got owned around the field.
laulala and hames did well. scrums were a bit iffy at times but on the whole a good performance. played much better than their replacements.
samWhitelock was awesome and captained well. my choice of back up captain.
samCane MOTM
lukeWhitelock and liamSquire were pretty quiet.
SBW and crockett had an all right, above average night
barrett is still the man. busy as always

ok gotta say that everytime i think that naholo is the man and the best wing since before julian got married ioane goes and does something amazing, then naholo then ioane again. masterclass wingers. i will concede that ioane came out of that game with bragging rights and marginally ahead of naholo...but not by much.

dMac is getting better but needs to be a bit more direct, tho cant fault his desire to make a play. he's gotta offload more so he gets given more space.

barnes was on good form. much rather him in a good mood like this. was a funny moment when aaronSmith raced upto stepped over the ruck but decided not to go for the ball and barnes replies "good decision" i fell off the couch laughing.

Stretching it to say Laulala and Hames did well. The scrum was terrible while they were on together, and it improved when Laulala (and Tuipolotu) were replaced. I'm inclined to put it down to Tuipolotu myself, as Laulala has been superb in the scrum this year until this match, and Pat T has form for being a soft as puddling scrummaging TH lock.
I'm surprised this still seems to be an issue for him.

 

[smartcooky]

Do you have a thing for big bold writing? Stop acting like a child. Neither of them look up, I even gave you the exact time and you can slow it down to 0.25 when it is looking directly at them, neither look at the ball! Both players look where the Welsh player is and continue to do so as the close together. The only one being intentionally blind here is you by refusing to accept that your precious All Blacks might just have infringed. The head on view irrefutably shows neither looking at the ball and neither looking ahead as they run. They ARE both looking at where the Welsh player is running.

I've already told you, they DIDN'T run directly at where the ball was, they ran in roughly that direction but first and foremost they ran to close the gap and prevent the Welsh player from getting past them. I haven't refused to answer it, it's just you refuse to see my answer, despite repeatedly writing it, maybe I need to use your trick: THEY DID NOT RUN DIRECTLY TO WHERE THE BALL WAS, THEY WERE PRIMARILY RUNNING TO BLOCK THE WELSH PLAYER, HENCE THE FACT THEY WERE LOOKING BEHIND THEM AND NOT IN FRONT AS THEY RAN.

You are seeing something completely different from what I am seeing. I see two players both running directly to where the ball is landing. Sorry, but that is just how I see it, and IMO, the video bears out that view.

 

[smartcooky]

PS:
I guess you are still not interested in answering my question. Never mind then! Your refusal to answer tells me everything I need to know.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Stretching it to say Laulala and Hames did well. The scrum was terrible while they were on together, and it improved when Laulala (and Tuipolotu) were replaced. I'm inclined to put it down to Tuipolotu myself, as Laulala has been superb in the scrum this year until this match, and Pat T has form for being a soft as puddling scrummaging TH lock.
I'm surprised this still seems to be an issue for him.

That's an interesting call. I can remember many years ago when the same issue was raised about a young Kamo kid, Ian Jones. Renowned as a great line out jumper, his early AB career was where questions were raised about his ability to support his prop.

 

[Zapphod]

PS:
I guess you are still not interested in answering my question. Never mind then! Your refusal to answer tells me everything I need to know.

To be fair it would be difficult to come up with an answer to your question in a way that doesn't make every defender between the attacking player and the ball guilty of an illegal action, for example if you look at the few seconds preceding the clip he has focused on clearly the Welsh number 11 is obstructing Naholo by going for the ball himself when obviously he should have jumped out his way as soon as he saw Naholo was also going for it.

I for one am beside myself with rage, how he wasn't red carded is beyond me, I can only assume the citing commissioner will be busy.

 

[dullonien]

PS:
I guess you are still not interested in answering my question. Never mind then! Your refusal to answer tells me everything I need to know.

Sorry Smartcooky, but he's clearly answered your question by stating that he doesn't think both players are running directly towards the ball. Simple maths suggest to me that he's probably correct, otherwise their paths would intersect at the point the ball lands and not 20m back. The fact that they were also looking at Amos over their shoulders suggest they knew what they were doing, even if they thought they were being subtle about it. Considering Halfpenny missed the penalty kick, this incident had zero effect on the game anyway, so best move on...

On the game, I was again happy with the intent with which we tried to play. It bodes well going forwards. We need yo improve our finishing, and our dummy runners aren't quite convincing enough to hold the defense. Owen Williams looks very comfortable in that second playmaking role, which could prove vert important. As much as it pains me to say, Steff Evans really struggled here. He's not the first, or the last winger to struggle defensively v Naholo, but he also struggled to influence the game in attack. In contrast Amos showed up really well.

But for some lineout woes, the pack went very well. Once again Rob Evans was everywhere, he's seriously impressive atm. Navidi was exceptional as well, good on him.

I'm going to end on a moan about Gatlands use of the bench. He must be the worst coach in the world for using his bench effectively. I know he had to make 2 early forced replacements, but NZ made 2 tactical changes on the 50min. mark, and I think Gats was slow to react. The likes of Francis (who prob had his best game for wales, even if his carrying remains ineffective) were out on their feet after a fast and furious game. Tips should have been used with more than 10min remaining! NZ promptly scored 2 try's and the game was over before the replacements had an opportunity to have an impact!

 

[MikeTheNative]

Wales had a lot of ball in the first half just going side to side not really bothering the NZ defence. This is because when playing an expansive game you need somebody that's able to challenge the inside shoulder if the defence comes up too fast and exploit the defence. This is where Russell excels for Scotland, he has an excellent passing game and a good running game that challenges the defence both out wide and on the inside shoulder. Biggar simply will not fit in with this system, he just doesn't offer enough threat with the ball in hand to worry about the defence on the inside so they just drift out wide to the obvious runners. This is where Patchell needs to come in as he has shown he can do this for the Scarlets, he might be off form but this game plan would suit Sam Davies and even Anscombe over Biggar. I honestly think Wales will not get any where with this style if the persist with Biggar at 10. Owen Williams didn't help the situation giving too many passes when he should have straightened up and took on the defence, however I think his performance was a positive and will just get better in the role. Scott Williams has the problem that he is just not Jon Davies with the ball in hand, I think he could do a job at 12 with his distribution skills however didn't seem to offer enough threat of making a break for 13. You see it a lot with the Scarlets so I don't understand why they didn't have Steff Evans come in as first receiver a lot more, he has the passing range and the ability to beat the first defender and possibly create a line break. A lot of negative in the post so let's move on to the positives. Line Out was crap but i think the pack was very good in particular Navidi looked like he has played test rugby regularly for the past few years and with Moriarty's injury problem I can see him starting the 6 nations alongside Tipruic. Shingler was also good and didn't look out of place either. Rob Evans played his hybrid 1/10 position very well but offered a lot of threat carrying making yards as well. Hopefully he can get some consistent game time now and show that he is one of the best looseheads in the world, which I believe he can be. Alun Wyn Jones got a lot of criticism this year of being over the hill and not a top tier lock anymore. This new system has gave him a new lease of life, he has always been a decent ball player and can finally show his passing range and offload ability that he has always been capable of. Both Amos and Evans were promising in attack, got a bit schooled in defence though, but i think they showed their worth, especially with the Wales try from a good Amos break (admittedly from a great pass from Biggar). As for NZ I thought they looked a bit lethargic in the 1st half, I know they are missing a load of players in the pack and it showed, Wales had them beat up front in the 1st half although they were a lot more on parity in 2nd (due to a stronger bench). The two players I would single out for NZ is Sam Cane who's every hit knocked back the Wales carriers and he stopped a number of promising attacks with thundering tackles. Also Rieko Ioane who is so good at 20 it's almost unfair. I think it says it all in a team of Barratt, Sonny Bill and Aron Smith that a 20 year old shone the brightest and looked a threat every time he got the ball. Just how good can this guy get?

 

[smartcooky]

To be fair it would be difficult to come up with an answer to your question in a way that doesn't make every defender between the attacking player and the ball guilty of an illegal action, for example if you look at the few seconds preceding the clip he has focused on clearly the Welsh number 11 is obstructing Naholo by going for the ball himself when obviously he should have jumped out his way as soon as he saw Naholo was also going for it.

LOL. Yeah, that's my point I guess.

For mine, it is so blindingly obvious that all three players are running towards where the ball is going to land, that I honestly can't see how anyone can look at the footage and not see it.

... I see three players (two NZ players and one Welsh player) all heading for where the ball is landing, i.e. all converging toward the same point. The players in front do not have to get out of the way of the player behind. Both NZ players were already together well before the Welsh player got there as evidenced by the fact that Welsh player actually changed his line. In fact he could have easily have gone around the NZ player on his left, but instead, he stepped to the right to run into the player on his right (I guess to try to con the officials into giving a penalty, and they were sucked in by it).

 

[MikeTheNative]

I find odd that the NZ prop has the turning circle of an oil tanker. Can you not see him running across towards the corner flag? The only reason he ends up relatively straight is because he runs into the lock. Look at the body positions of the two NZ players as they collide, the lock is running straight as he is going to the ball but the prop is focused on shepherding Evans across so is angled towards the corner and not the ball. He probably would have got away with it if he hadn't run into his team mate and they completely block off Evans together though.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Wow, seriously the level of pig headed dishonesty from you is staggering. Let's break this down:

1) At NO POINT do either of the AB players look at the ball once it is kicked. Now unless you wish to propose they have some extra sense, that means they don't know where the ball is or where it is going.

2) At the point of contact the AB 4 is gazing off to the right. Both you gif and my screenshots show the area he is looking at is completely empty. From kick to contact the 4 NEVER looks left (as we look at it) even though the ball is flying to the left. The entire time he is looking right AWAY from the ball and towards the Welsh player. He is also running right even though the ball is going to his left.

3) The AB 1 apparently has the turning circle of a small car. I know for a fact that from a standing start you can turn around and run without sweeping out to the left like the 1 did. After the kick he also never looks at the ball and is clearly looking at the Welsh player right up until the collision. When they collide he is looking at the floor. Neither player is looking at the ball when they converge meaning that their running lines are determined by the one thing they both can see, the Welsh player!

4) At one point the 2 AB players are running almost perpendicular to each other. Also if you look at the directions they are running when they collide, if you drew a line of their paths the 4 would run to the right of where the ball lands and the 1 would run to the left, as I said earlier, NEITHER IS RUNNING AT THE BALL!.

Grow up, this was a clear blocking and your excuses and condescending attitude are frankly pathetic.

 

[smartcooky]

Wow, seriously the level of pig headed dishonesty from you is staggering.

Wind your head in and cut out the ad-hominem attacks. Call me a liar again and I'll report the post therein.

I am NOT being dishonest al all. I am stating what I truly and honestly see when I look at the video.

1. There is no Law of the Game that determines where players must look
2. There is no Law of the Game that determines how quickly a player must turn around.
3. There is no Law of the Game that requires one player to get out of the way of another player,

The Welsh player could easily have passed Hames on his left side and beaten both players to the ball. Instead, he CHOSE to step to his right and run into the back of them.....now I wonder why he did that?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Wind your head in and cut out the ad-hominem attacks. Call me a liar again and I'll report the post therein.

I am NOT being dishonest al all. I am stating what I truly and honestly see when I look at the video.

1. There is no Law of the Game that determines where players must look
2. There is no Law of the Game that determines how quickly a player must turn around.
3. There is no Law of the Game that requires one player to get out of the way of another player,

The Welsh player could easily have passed Hames on his left side and beaten both players to the ball. Instead, he CHOSE to step to his right and run into the back of them.....now I wonder why he did that?

Pot, kettle. You're the one who started off the condescending nonsense and by all means feel free to report, calling someone a liar is not against forum rules. If you're saying what you see then maybe you should take off those black tinted specs.

1) When it comes to determining the intent it shows they had no intent of going for the ball

2) But there IS a law about a player changing their path to block, which the 1 does.

3) But there IS a law about running across the path of another player to block them.

Again, neither AB player ever looked at the ball, both looked at the Welsh player the whole time. Both conveniently closed the gap at the exact moment the Welsh player reached them, both were running crossing lines with neither going directly to the ball, therefore that is obstructing play.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

When I first saw it I thought it was harsh but its pretty clear obstruction form the prop from that gif you posted Smartcooky. Evans bends his run to avoid the prop and still manages to collide with him before the other New Zealander. The prop is clearly not running towards the ball, and only goes towards the ball after Evans collides with him, with the 10 metre line on the pitch showing he's running not far off a perpendicularly to the touch line and not towards his own goal line which would be closer to what was needed to chase the ball, he might be getting done for his own lack of athleticism but that can't be a determining factor just as intent can't be. I think the other NZer did nothing wrong though. I know if it was given against Ireland I'd be calling it harsh but its a more than acceptable decision and probably the right one.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

...I have to say i thought it was one of the most obvious cases of obstruction I've seen....I don't think Hames has any idea where the ball went, never looks up as far as i can tell, only at the runner

 

[The Jones Boy]

Cooky's right, they don't have to get out of the way and the Welsh bloke was a way behind them when they came together to form a small wall.
They knew hwat they were doing and it's not illegal.
Call it what you want,, gamesmanship, if you make that illegal you have to start to legislate for utter nonsense.
Calling for a card for that is mind bogglingly stupid.
Just hold your tongue lest you be forever thought of as an ignoramus.
The Welsh player is obligated to run around them and they know it.
Try a better kick.
Try to be a faster sprinter.
Don't try and run through a couple of fatties who know they don't have to give way and try to milk a penalty or a card.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Or you know, enforce the rules against obstructing runners...? I've already clearly shown from overhead and front on camera that neither NZ players was looking at the ball or running towards it and both run opposing angles to close the gap the Welsh player was running in to and thus obstructing him. I mean do I really need to get the overhead view and trace on the path of the 2 NZ players vs where the ball actually is? I've already shown neither looked at the ball at any points so how on Earth do you propose they knew where to run if the never saw the ball in flight? Both the Aussies and Kiwis have been employing this cute little tactic to try to "accidentally on purpose" get in the way of kick chases.

 

[Derpus]

Or you know, enforce the rules against obstructing runners...? I've already clearly shown from overhead and front on camera that neither NZ players was looking at the ball or running towards it and both run opposing angles to close the gap the Welsh player was running in to and thus obstructing him. I mean do I really need to get the overhead view and trace on the path of the 2 NZ players vs where the ball actually is? I've already shown neither looked at the ball at any points so how on Earth do you propose they knew where to run if the never saw the ball in flight? Both the Aussies and Kiwis have been employing this cute little tactic to try to "accidentally on purpose" get in the way of kick chases.

They have to 'change their line'. Where they were running or why is irrelevant. If they intentionally change their line to step in front of a player its obstruction. It's a lot more common in Super rugby than test rugby. It goes from barely enforced through to yellow card if it's particularly egregious and the player blocked goes flying.

The gif above, one AB turns and runs backwards without changing his line to step in front of the kicker, legal. The other turns and runs across the chaser which would be a problem if it wasn't in the direction of the ball. He's allowed to chase a chip through. No obstruction.

You could argue he doesn't know the ball is as he's not looking at the ball. Possible. Good luck seeing that as a referee in full flow though and it's pretty marginal.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

if you were to draw a line from where the NZ prop started running and where he would have ended up based on his new line, he'd end up missing the ball by a couple of metres and ended up running off towards the corner flag.