Warm Up Match 4: Highlanders v British & Irish Lions (Dunedin)

[smartcooky]

I decided to analyze the whinging Pom's video, dismantle his arguments piece by piece, and show that the referee, Angus Gardner and his TMO and ARs, were correct in every call that this whinging Pom is griping about

Whinge No, 1 at 0:28 (Offside)
He complains that the Lions were not offside at the time that the SH put his hands on the ball. This is wrong on two counts

1. As I have shown earlier, he has drawn the offside line in the wrong place
2. Its NOT when when the SH puts his hands on the ball that determines when the ball is out, its when he LIFTS the ball off the ground.
Angus Gardner 1 - Liam Dickhead 0

Whinge No 2 at 0:44 (Obstruction)
He complained that AWJ was obstructed by Ainley resulting in a try. While he is right, there was obstruction, was pretty obvious that AWJ was nowhere near getting close enough to tackle the player,. This is an issue of materiality. Angus Gardner went to the TMO, and the TMO, after looking at the play from several angles decided that the obstruction was immaterial, and the try would have been scored anyway.
Angus Gardner 2 - Liam Dickhead 0

Whinge No. 3 at 1:09 (Lazy running - offside)
He complains that the pass made by Webb was "stuttered" by the presence of an offside player. This is compete rubbish. The only influence the offside player had was that it caused Webb to make a failed attempt to hit him with the ball to try to con the referee into a penalty. The referee wasn't fooled.
Angus Gardner 3 - Liam Dickhead 0

Whinge No. 4 at 1:29 (Side entry)
He complains that the player who turned the ball over at a tackle (which he incorrectly calls a ruck) did not come through the gate. He is wrong again, If you wind back a few seconds, you will see that Hunt was the tackler, and the tackler doesn't have to go through the gate, he can get to his feet and play the ball from any direction - Law 15.4(c).
Angus Gardner 4 - Liam Dickhead 0

Whinge No 5 at 1:51 - (Scrum collapse)
He complains that the Highlanders LHP "hinges". I saw it differently, I saw Coles pulling down on his bind resulting in the Highlanders LHP folding in and down. No doubt in my mind that Coles was the cause of the scrum going down. IMO, Coles was livid because he didn't get away with what he was trying to do. This was a call that came from the AR on the blind side of the scrum.
Angus Gardner 5 - Liam Dickhead 0

Conclusion: The same as the one I made earlier. This numpty needs to do a referee's course if he want to have any credibility when he pontificates on matters concerning the Laws of the Game.

 

[The Jones Boy]

You're a pretty angry young man, maybe you should start your own thread for this kind of confrontational approach?

I watched this game and it was a cracker.
It takes two good teams to contribute to that and a ref who lets some flow occur.
The Highlanders recorded a famous win with a seriously depleted team.
The Lions came close and didn't quite get there.
It was a well fought contest.
A fine spectacle for the viewers.
Why are you still so angry and keen to spit tacks about it.
This is old news.
Take a deep breath and have a think about your approach.

 

[ncurd]

You're a pretty angry young man, maybe you should start your own thread for this kind of confrontational approach?

He's not young, I try to ignore SC when he has interest in who won the game. I find his informed impartial and usually accurate opinion falls by the wayside and he becomes very one eyed.

 

[The Jones Boy]

He's not young, I try to ignore SC when he has interest in who won the game. I find his informed impartial and usually accurate opinion falls by the wayside and he becomes very one eyed.

It's all relevant, he's a chunk younger than me.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

You're a pretty angry young man, maybe you should start your own thread for this kind of confrontational approach?

I watched this game and it was a cracker.
It takes two good teams to contribute to that and a ref who lets some flow occur.
The Highlanders recorded a famous win with a seriously depleted team.
The Lions came close and didn't quite get there.
It was a well fought contest.
A fine spectacle for the viewers.
Why are you still so angry and keen to spit tacks about it.
This is old news.
Take a deep breath and have a think about your approach.

Hang on, he's just responding to a video someone else posted? Why criticise SC (for a very fair counter) when you could criticise the person that started the argument?

 

[The Jones Boy]

Hang on, he's just responding to a video someone else posted? Why criticise SC (for a very fair counter) when you could criticise the person that started the argument?

Referring to someone as a '********' 5 times in a row seriously detracts from anything you are saying.
It's not a discussion, it's just abuse.

Liam Dickhead 0
Liam Dickhead 0
Liam Dickhead 0
Liam Dickhead 0
Liam Dickhead 0

Conclusion: This numpty ....

Is that alright in your book?

 

[Ground We Won]

Jones Boy you appear lost on what SC was originally addressing. He was defending the ref..

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Referring to someone as a '********' 5 times in a row seriously detracts from anything you are saying.
It's not a discussion, it's just abuse.




Is that alright in your book?

I think if someone is going to make a big public thing about a referee being terrible then it's their obligation to have a clue what they're talking about - and this guy clearly doesn't.

So I don't have too many complaints.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

He's not young, I try to ignore SC when he has interest in who won the game. I find his informed impartial and usually accurate opinion falls by the wayside and he becomes very one eyed.

This.

 

[The Jones Boy]

The ref did a fine job, he doesn't need to be defended.
Secondly when you couch the defence of the ref in personal agenda where the rhetoric contains an uncomfortable quotient of antagonistic hyperbole, sarcastic invective and confrontational profanity, there will never be a healthy discussion at the end of it.
Cooky needs to lift his game and think about the bigger picture.
We can have a healthy discussion with supporters of both teams enjoying banter and a giggle and a few sneaky jabs and ripostes, or you can go down the Cooky mode of communication which only results in a wider separation of the two initial parties and a negative outcome.

 

[Ground We Won]

What are you talking about mate? Smartcooky was addressing an article attacking the referee from Mavericks post and SC was pointing out that the criticism was incorrect. Then it appears you thought SC was attacking the ref..

Go back and read over the article and thread, bloody hell..

 

[The Jones Boy]

Nobody has to read anything, look at the how the language is couched, it's aggressive and one eyed, rude and altogether unpleasant.
It's not clever, it's just a septic attack.
Nobodys going to take that kind of approach seriously.
Fighting fire with fire creates ... hmmmm... fire.
If he was more collected and calm then other parties would look at his well reasoned and logical argument in a different light.
He's unnecessarily condescending rude and nobody likes rude.
So whats the point in simply adding to a fight?
No one on the other side of the argument is going to take his points seriously.
Read the posters above.
He's turned them off straight away.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

I don't think I've ever seen SC draw attention to an instance where a referee ruled incorrectly in favour of a team he is broadly supportive of.

And as the Jones Boy says, what's at all helpful or constructive about using labelling language others as 'whingeing poms' - you're not just attacking an individual you're suggesting something about a lot of people, and all it will do is get peoples backs up. It's also incredibly short-sighted bearing in mind the level of 'whingeing' about the referee / lions in general after the Crusaders game from certain posters on here.

 

[MikeTheNative]

Whinge No. 4 at 1:29 (Side entry)
He complains that the player who turned the ball over at a tackle (which he incorrectly calls a ruck) did not come through the gate. He is wrong again, If you wind back a few seconds, you will see that Hunt was the tackler, and the tackler doesn't have to go through the gate, he can get to his feet and play the ball from any direction - Law 15.4(c).
Angus Gardner 4 - Liam Dickhead 0

I disagree about the Webb one but that's a matter of opinion so whatever but I do have a question about the above though. Doesn't the Highlanders 12 competing for the ball and getting cleared out by the lions make it a ruck? So the tackler then has to retreat behind the back foot and go through the gate before competing as it's after this.

 

[Skylinerd1]

Referring to someone as a '********' 5 times in a row seriously detracts from anything you are saying.
It's not a discussion, it's just abuse.

Is this forum based in the UK by any chance? Its only way it could possibly foster such whingy, whimpy arguments over nothing.

 

[Ground We Won]

His vitriol is warranted when endless incorrect jargon is posted here and guys like you jump on his sack when he's factually correct and most of you are not and give no evidence just type sanctimonious posts, then complain when he displays his frustrations having to deal with posters who don't know exactly what they're talking about trying to argue with the facts.

 

[valley commando]

The ref did a fine job, he doesn't need to be defended.
Secondly when you couch the defence of the ref in personal agenda where the rhetoric contains an uncomfortable quotient of antagonistic hyperbole, sarcastic invective and confrontational profanity, there will never be a healthy discussion at the end of it.
Cooky needs to lift his game and think about the bigger picture.
We can have a healthy discussion with supporters of both teams enjoying banter and a giggle and a few sneaky jabs and ripostes, or you can go down the Cooky mode of communication which only results in a wider separation of the two initial parties and a negative outcome.

The ref was shite, like a lot of SH refs he has know idea what is happening at scrum time.

 

[smartcooky]

For those who don't like the way "the language was couched", read my signature and then go take a go take a running jump.

I don't give a rats bum what you think. Put me on ignore and don't bother me with your self-righteous, overbeaing drivel....

 

[smartcooky]

His vitriol is warranted when endless incorrect jargon is posted here and guys like you jump on his sack when he's factually correct and most of you are not and give no evidence just type sanctimonious posts, then complain when he displays his frustrations having to deal with posters who don't know exactly what they're talking about trying to argue with the facts.

THIS IN SPADES!!

 

[The Jones Boy]

Think of it as a chance to grow as a person cooky.
Feel the love and the warmth of friendship gently encouragingyou to having a softer approach for your logical discourse toward a favourable denouement for all parties, and a harmonious forum.