England V Australia
-
Have seen the highlights package and have no real problem with any of those calls.
You could argue that Robshaw still got hold of Koroibete and couldn't stop the try, but the letter of the law puts Moore in a bad position for that. Also: fucking stupid Moore should have just run a better support line.
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
Bit of a blowout by the looks, but the penalty count and two yellow cards doesn't look good for us. Neither does Cheika reacting to the crowd.
@nta said in England V Australia:
Have seen the highlights package and have no real problem with any of those calls.
You could argue that Robshaw still got hold of Koroibete and couldn't stop the try, but the letter of the law puts Moore in a bad position for that. Also: fucking stupid Moore should have just run a better support line.
And the worst thing was that Moore got in the way so there was no definitive camera angle showing that Koroibete had grounded the ball if the obstruction call was dismissed.
-
Have seen the highlights package and have no real problem with any of those calls.
You could argue that Robshaw still got hold of Koroibete and couldn't stop the try, but the letter of the law puts Moore in a bad position for that. Also: fucking stupid Moore should have just run a better support line.
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
Bit of a blowout by the looks, but the penalty count and two yellow cards doesn't look good for us. Neither does Cheika reacting to the crowd.
@nta said in England V Australia:
Have seen the highlights package and have no real problem with any of those calls.
You could argue that Robshaw still got hold of Koroibete and couldn't stop the try, but the letter of the law puts Moore in a bad position for that. Also: fucking stupid Moore should have just run a better support line.
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
Bit of a blowout by the looks, but the penalty count and two yellow cards doesn't look good for us. Neither does Cheika reacting to the crowd.
No objections whatsoever. You got some last night didn't you...
-
Who's that clown who sits next to clown? Does anyone know? That guy is just as bad as Cheika.
-
@nta said in England V Australia:
Have seen the highlights package and have no real problem with any of those calls.
You could argue that Robshaw still got hold of Koroibete and couldn't stop the try, but the letter of the law puts Moore in a bad position for that. Also: fucking stupid Moore should have just run a better support line.
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
Bit of a blowout by the looks, but the penalty count and two yellow cards doesn't look good for us. Neither does Cheika reacting to the crowd.
No objections whatsoever. You got some last night didn't you...
@rancid-schnitzel Had our club AGM last night and I got President again, so I've got more pressing shit to think about, rugby wise.
Overall, I'm fairly sanguine at the moment about where the Wallabies are headed. The loss to England was expected, and I look forward to England fans spitting chips next time a TMO call is perceived to go against them.
All that said, we need to put Scotland to the fucking sword and at least earn our current ranking.
-
I didn't notice it on live viewing, but watching the highlights, seeing how Kurtley Beale simply gave up on the ball that dribbled close to the touchline was embarassing. He easily had that ball covered had he tried. What a goof.
Bounce was extremely unlucky, of course, but it's a rugby ball, you dickhead! -
Well, i finally got round to watching Cheika's post match presser with Sky and in truth I was pretty disappointed. I was expecting and had been led to believe, that there was going to be rabid frothing at the mouth and a complete implosion. I thought he was OK really.
it's a shame when your biases are proven groundless.
-
Well, i finally got round to watching Cheika's post match presser with Sky and in truth I was pretty disappointed. I was expecting and had been led to believe, that there was going to be rabid frothing at the mouth and a complete implosion. I thought he was OK really.
it's a shame when your biases are proven groundless.
@catogrande I've got to say I'd be pretty irritated by that line of questioning too.
-
@catogrande I've got to say I'd be pretty irritated by that line of questioning too.
@antipodean said in England V Australia:
@catogrande I've got to say I'd be pretty irritated by that line of questioning too.
Yeah, the upshot of all this is that people like me that think Cheika is an idiot most of the time feel sorry for him for the stupidity of the questioning he gets subjected to.
-
Have seen the highlights package and have no real problem with any of those calls.
You could argue that Robshaw still got hold of Koroibete and couldn't stop the try, but the letter of the law puts Moore in a bad position for that. Also: fucking stupid Moore should have just run a better support line.
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
Bit of a blowout by the looks, but the penalty count and two yellow cards doesn't look good for us. Neither does Cheika reacting to the crowd.
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
-
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
@barbarian Cully has written some good articles, a few are a bit odd. His teams of the week annoy me, its like he watches the AB's and Wobblies and whoever they're playing and thats it. On the whole, betterer than Rattue, Jones etc.
-
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
@barbarian said in England V Australia:
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
"He made three huge calls and all went against Australia: Kurtley Beale's yellow card; a ruling that an England kick did not graze a touchline; and an obstruction against Stephen Moore as Marika Koroibete went over for a try that would have changed the match.
In my mind none of the calls were right. "
That's the voice of reason?
-
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
@barbarian said in England V Australia:
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
Funny article. Refs have been carding ABs for a long long time now. Cully talks as if the refs have had some sort of awakening....
-
Have seen the highlights package and have no real problem with any of those calls.
You could argue that Robshaw still got hold of Koroibete and couldn't stop the try, but the letter of the law puts Moore in a bad position for that. Also: fucking stupid Moore should have just run a better support line.
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
Bit of a blowout by the looks, but the penalty count and two yellow cards doesn't look good for us. Neither does Cheika reacting to the crowd.
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
There was a clear example of Launchbury a mile offside in the middle of the field that the AR didn't pick up. That sort of play dictates to what options are open to attackers.
@disgusted-of-tw said in England V Australia:
@barbarian said in England V Australia:
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
"He made three huge calls and all went against Australia: Kurtley Beale's yellow card; a ruling that an England kick did not graze a touchline; and an obstruction against Stephen Moore as Marika Koroibete went over for a try that would have changed the match.
In my mind none of the calls were right. "
That's the voice of reason?
Having watched the game, I think the ref did as well as could be expected. Paul Cully is delusional.
Moore's is a clear cut case of obstruction - you don't get to impede defenders.
Beale's is a clear case of last man knocking the ball down. The idea he tried to sell to the ref that his play was positive is negated by watching how far he had to stretch to touch the ball and that he knocked it down.
The ball in touch issue I have some sympathy for, but there's no conclusive evidence and the TMO was laborious in checking. What else could they do?The one I do believe they got utterly wrong was Hooper's YC. The first call against him being offside - there's no way the AR could see that. O'Keefe simply acted on the AR's call, but that wasn't what ruined the Wallabies. IMO their insistence in carrying the ball in the middle of the park while the rain fell rather than trying to plug England into their own 22 showed remarkable tactical naivety.
And if Koroibete just dived on the ball, he'd have slid across the line anyway.
-
@barbarian said in England V Australia:
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
"He made three huge calls and all went against Australia: Kurtley Beale's yellow card; a ruling that an England kick did not graze a touchline; and an obstruction against Stephen Moore as Marika Koroibete went over for a try that would have changed the match.
In my mind none of the calls were right. "
That's the voice of reason?
@disgusted-of-tw the voice of Mark Reason?
-
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
There was a clear example of Launchbury a mile offside in the middle of the field that the AR didn't pick up. That sort of play dictates to what options are open to attackers.
@disgusted-of-tw said in England V Australia:
@barbarian said in England V Australia:
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
"He made three huge calls and all went against Australia: Kurtley Beale's yellow card; a ruling that an England kick did not graze a touchline; and an obstruction against Stephen Moore as Marika Koroibete went over for a try that would have changed the match.
In my mind none of the calls were right. "
That's the voice of reason?
Having watched the game, I think the ref did as well as could be expected. Paul Cully is delusional.
Moore's is a clear cut case of obstruction - you don't get to impede defenders.
Beale's is a clear case of last man knocking the ball down. The idea he tried to sell to the ref that his play was positive is negated by watching how far he had to stretch to touch the ball and that he knocked it down.
The ball in touch issue I have some sympathy for, but there's no conclusive evidence and the TMO was laborious in checking. What else could they do?The one I do believe they got utterly wrong was Hooper's YC. The first call against him being offside - there's no way the AR could see that. O'Keefe simply acted on the AR's call, but that wasn't what ruined the Wallabies. IMO their insistence in carrying the ball in the middle of the park while the rain fell rather than trying to plug England into their own 22 showed remarkable tactical naivety.
And if Koroibete just dived on the ball, he'd have slid across the line anyway.
@antipodean Beale shouldn't have given up so easily in chasing that ball.
-
@antipodean Beale shouldn't have given up so easily in chasing that ball.
@taniwharugby said in England V Australia:
@antipodean Beale shouldn't have given up so easily in chasing that ball.
Agreed. His laziness caused that try. All he had to do was get into a position to cover an awkward bounce.
-
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
There was a clear example of Launchbury a mile offside in the middle of the field that the AR didn't pick up. That sort of play dictates to what options are open to attackers.
@disgusted-of-tw said in England V Australia:
@barbarian said in England V Australia:
@nta said in England V Australia:
I saw a screenshot floating around stating Robshaw "never got onside" but he did.
But at the point of the ball coming out of the ruck he's in our line. It's a clear penalty, as it had a tangible effect on the options Genia could take.
I think Paul Cully is the voice of reason in the Aussie rugby media, and I liked his piece this morning: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/england-get-three-winning-tickets-in-twickenham-lottery-20171118-gzo9ca.html
"He made three huge calls and all went against Australia: Kurtley Beale's yellow card; a ruling that an England kick did not graze a touchline; and an obstruction against Stephen Moore as Marika Koroibete went over for a try that would have changed the match.
In my mind none of the calls were right. "
That's the voice of reason?
Having watched the game, I think the ref did as well as could be expected. Paul Cully is delusional.
Moore's is a clear cut case of obstruction - you don't get to impede defenders.
Beale's is a clear case of last man knocking the ball down. The idea he tried to sell to the ref that his play was positive is negated by watching how far he had to stretch to touch the ball and that he knocked it down.
The ball in touch issue I have some sympathy for, but there's no conclusive evidence and the TMO was laborious in checking. What else could they do?The one I do believe they got utterly wrong was Hooper's YC. The first call against him being offside - there's no way the AR could see that. O'Keefe simply acted on the AR's call, but that wasn't what ruined the Wallabies. IMO their insistence in carrying the ball in the middle of the park while the rain fell rather than trying to plug England into their own 22 showed remarkable tactical naivety.
And if Koroibete just dived on the ball, he'd have slid across the line anyway.
@antipodean said in England V Australia:
The one I do believe they got utterly wrong was Hooper's YC. The first call against him being offside - there's no way the AR could see that. O'Keefe simply acted on the AR's call, but that wasn't what ruined the Wallabies.
IIRC O'Keeffe said there were 4 penalties in quick succession in that play, the last two for offside against Hooper. As Hooper said himself, it was for an accummulation of penalties, and he was the unlucky player.
-
I don't think Hooper was offside, that's the problem.
-
First time I've heard of a ref doing that - a team infringement after multiple advantages accrue.
I'm not disagreeing with it, and I'm not saying it hasn't happened before. But its an interesting approach and is fully supported by the Laws under repeated infringements.
