• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

England v South Africa

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
265 Posts 47 Posters 12.0k Views
England v South Africa
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Catogrande on last edited by
    #188

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    Judging by the discussions on here and the twitter comments from other players there is enough doubt to suggest the call could have gone either way. I reckon Gardner got it spot on (but of course I would say that). I was, however, very nervous at the time as it could quite easily have gone the other way and if it had there would have been the same level of debate.

    Bias aside. I’m curious about the reason you think AG got the call correct

    CatograndeC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CatograndeC Offline
    CatograndeC Offline
    Catogrande
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #189

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    Judging by the discussions on here and the twitter comments from other players there is enough doubt to suggest the call could have gone either way. I reckon Gardner got it spot on (but of course I would say that). I was, however, very nervous at the time as it could quite easily have gone the other way and if it had there would have been the same level of debate.

    Bias aside. I’m curious about the reason you think AG got the call correct

    Not sure I can quite put the bias aside but I'll try. First off it did look dodgy in real time and I'm not surprised it went to the TMO. The replay showed initial contact with the shoulder, which is to be expected and then the left arm coming round to wrap. The force of the collision bounced both players backwards and the wrap could not be completed. Gardner's call was along the lines of saying Farrell had made enough of an attempt at wrapping. Now that is a subjective call and so each will have their own view on it. I think it was a good call, others don't. A close one either way.

    Slow mo and individual frames can often tell conflicting stories, as a for instance I've seen one where it looks as though Esterhuizen had fended off Farrell with a forearm to the head. Now I don't for one moment feel that he did but in isolation it did not look good.

    CrucialC BonesB 2 Replies Last reply
    1
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Catogrande on last edited by
    #190

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    Judging by the discussions on here and the twitter comments from other players there is enough doubt to suggest the call could have gone either way. I reckon Gardner got it spot on (but of course I would say that). I was, however, very nervous at the time as it could quite easily have gone the other way and if it had there would have been the same level of debate.

    Bias aside. I’m curious about the reason you think AG got the call correct

    Not sure I can quite put the bias aside but I'll try. First off it did look dodgy in real time and I'm not surprised it went to the TMO. The replay showed initial contact with the shoulder, which is to be expected and then the left arm coming round to wrap. The force of the collision bounced both players backwards and the wrap could not be completed. Gardner's call was along the lines of saying Farrell had made enough of an attempt at wrapping. Now that is a subjective call and so each will have their own view on it. I think it was a good call, others don't. A close one either way.

    Slow mo and individual frames can often tell conflicting stories, as a for instance I've seen one where it looks as though Esterhuizen had fended off Farrell with a forearm to the head. Now I don't for one moment feel that he did but in isolation it did not look good.

    Fair explanation.
    Do you think the same call would have been made, say, in the 10th minute?
    I think he would have gone for a penalty without hesitation and everyone would have accepted it.

    CatograndeC 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • CatograndeC Offline
    CatograndeC Offline
    Catogrande
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #191

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    Judging by the discussions on here and the twitter comments from other players there is enough doubt to suggest the call could have gone either way. I reckon Gardner got it spot on (but of course I would say that). I was, however, very nervous at the time as it could quite easily have gone the other way and if it had there would have been the same level of debate.

    Bias aside. I’m curious about the reason you think AG got the call correct

    Not sure I can quite put the bias aside but I'll try. First off it did look dodgy in real time and I'm not surprised it went to the TMO. The replay showed initial contact with the shoulder, which is to be expected and then the left arm coming round to wrap. The force of the collision bounced both players backwards and the wrap could not be completed. Gardner's call was along the lines of saying Farrell had made enough of an attempt at wrapping. Now that is a subjective call and so each will have their own view on it. I think it was a good call, others don't. A close one either way.

    Slow mo and individual frames can often tell conflicting stories, as a for instance I've seen one where it looks as though Esterhuizen had fended off Farrell with a forearm to the head. Now I don't for one moment feel that he did but in isolation it did not look good.

    Fair explanation.
    Do you think the same call would have been made, say, in the 10th minute?
    I think he would have gone for a penalty without hesitation and everyone would have accepted it.

    Who knows? To say he would have called it differently would suggest he bottled the call and I don't think that was the case as there would have been just as much controversy if he'd called it the other way and the Boks had scored.

    God tackle or not though, it was a close call and Farrell should not have put himself in that position.

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Catogrande on last edited by
    #192

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    Judging by the discussions on here and the twitter comments from other players there is enough doubt to suggest the call could have gone either way. I reckon Gardner got it spot on (but of course I would say that). I was, however, very nervous at the time as it could quite easily have gone the other way and if it had there would have been the same level of debate.

    Bias aside. I’m curious about the reason you think AG got the call correct

    Not sure I can quite put the bias aside but I'll try. First off it did look dodgy in real time and I'm not surprised it went to the TMO. The replay showed initial contact with the shoulder, which is to be expected and then the left arm coming round to wrap. The force of the collision bounced both players backwards and the wrap could not be completed. Gardner's call was along the lines of saying Farrell had made enough of an attempt at wrapping. Now that is a subjective call and so each will have their own view on it. I think it was a good call, others don't. A close one either way.

    Slow mo and individual frames can often tell conflicting stories, as a for instance I've seen one where it looks as though Esterhuizen had fended off Farrell with a forearm to the head. Now I don't for one moment feel that he did but in isolation it did not look good.

    Fair explanation.
    Do you think the same call would have been made, say, in the 10th minute?
    I think he would have gone for a penalty without hesitation and everyone would have accepted it.

    Who knows? To say he would have called it differently would suggest he bottled the call and I don't think that was the case as there would have been just as much controversy if he'd called it the other way and the Boks had scored.

    God tackle or not though, it was a close call and Farrell should not have put himself in that position.

    I'm not so certain that the levels of controversy would be so high.
    Many pundits are influenced by the commentators calls (as so called experts) that's why we get so irritated with Justin Marshall when he gets it wrong.
    Even the English comms instantly prepared the audience for a penalty there and said OF was very lucky.
    I think fans would have turned on OF for creating the situation far more than AG for a penalty call.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • TordahT Offline
    TordahT Offline
    Tordah
    wrote on last edited by
    #193

    Regarding the Farrell tackle:

    Me personally, I would be fine with no penalty, but considering the way tackles have been refereed in recent times I think it should have been one. England lucky. I am one hundred percent certain, if that exact same tackle would have been made by an All Black in that situation, we wouldn't hear the end of it about referees favouring the ABs.

    1 Reply Last reply
    6
  • mofitzy_M Offline
    mofitzy_M Offline
    mofitzy_
    wrote on last edited by mofitzy_
    #194

    We've all seen similar tackles penalised so regardless of our personal opinions, I hope there is some clarification. As Erasmus said, "If that’s in the laws then we should adapt and start tackling like that".

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • sparkyS Offline
    sparkyS Offline
    sparky
    wrote on last edited by
    #195

    Ugliest thing about this game was seeing Faf De Klerk watch from a corporate box. Sale Shark didn't have a game this weekend. They should have released one of the best players in the world to play international Rugby for his chosen country yesterday.

    CatograndeC 1 Reply Last reply
    5
  • CatograndeC Offline
    CatograndeC Offline
    Catogrande
    replied to sparky on last edited by
    #196

    @sparky said in England v South Africa:

    Ugliest thing about this game was seeing Faf De Klerk watch from a corporate box. Sale Shark didn't have a game this weekend. They should have released one of the best players in the world to play international Rugby for his chosen country yesterday.

    Whilst I wholeheartedly agree, Sale would likely be fined heavily by EPR.

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Catogrande on last edited by
    #197

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @sparky said in England v South Africa:

    Ugliest thing about this game was seeing Faf De Klerk watch from a corporate box. Sale Shark didn't have a game this weekend. They should have released one of the best players in the world to play international Rugby for his chosen country yesterday.

    Whilst I wholeheartedly agree, Sale would likely be fined heavily by EPR.

    Fined for what?
    Genuine question

    CatograndeC 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • BonesB Online
    BonesB Online
    Bones
    replied to Catogrande on last edited by
    #198

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    Judging by the discussions on here and the twitter comments from other players there is enough doubt to suggest the call could have gone either way. I reckon Gardner got it spot on (but of course I would say that). I was, however, very nervous at the time as it could quite easily have gone the other way and if it had there would have been the same level of debate.

    Bias aside. I’m curious about the reason you think AG got the call correct

    Not sure I can quite put the bias aside but I'll try. First off it did look dodgy in real time and I'm not surprised it went to the TMO. The replay showed initial contact with the shoulder, which is to be expected and then the left arm coming round to wrap. The force of the collision bounced both players backwards and the wrap could not be completed. Gardner's call was along the lines of saying Farrell had made enough of an attempt at wrapping. Now that is a subjective call and so each will have their own view on it. I think it was a good call, others don't. A close one either way.

    Slow mo and individual frames can often tell conflicting stories, as a for instance I've seen one where it looks as though Esterhuizen had fended off Farrell with a forearm to the head. Now I don't for one moment feel that he did but in isolation it did not look good.

    I think that shoulder charge was about as close as I've seen to what SBW did against the lions, just OF was lucky enough to not hit on the top of the head. There was no wrapping of the arms because it was a shoulder charge, not because he bounced off to quick.

    CatograndeC 1 Reply Last reply
    5
  • CatograndeC Offline
    CatograndeC Offline
    Catogrande
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #199

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @sparky said in England v South Africa:

    Ugliest thing about this game was seeing Faf De Klerk watch from a corporate box. Sale Shark didn't have a game this weekend. They should have released one of the best players in the world to play international Rugby for his chosen country yesterday.

    Whilst I wholeheartedly agree, Sale would likely be fined heavily by EPR.

    Fined for what?
    Genuine question

    Releasing non-England players out of the International window.

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CatograndeC Offline
    CatograndeC Offline
    Catogrande
    replied to Bones on last edited by
    #200

    @bones said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    Judging by the discussions on here and the twitter comments from other players there is enough doubt to suggest the call could have gone either way. I reckon Gardner got it spot on (but of course I would say that). I was, however, very nervous at the time as it could quite easily have gone the other way and if it had there would have been the same level of debate.

    Bias aside. I’m curious about the reason you think AG got the call correct

    Not sure I can quite put the bias aside but I'll try. First off it did look dodgy in real time and I'm not surprised it went to the TMO. The replay showed initial contact with the shoulder, which is to be expected and then the left arm coming round to wrap. The force of the collision bounced both players backwards and the wrap could not be completed. Gardner's call was along the lines of saying Farrell had made enough of an attempt at wrapping. Now that is a subjective call and so each will have their own view on it. I think it was a good call, others don't. A close one either way.

    Slow mo and individual frames can often tell conflicting stories, as a for instance I've seen one where it looks as though Esterhuizen had fended off Farrell with a forearm to the head. Now I don't for one moment feel that he did but in isolation it did not look good.

    I think that shoulder charge was about as close as I've seen to what SBW did against the lions, just OF was lucky enough to not hit on the top of the head. There was no wrapping of the arms because it was a shoulder charge, not because he bounced off to quick.

    Like I said "Now that is a subjective call and so each will have their own view on it."

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Catogrande on last edited by
    #201

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @sparky said in England v South Africa:

    Ugliest thing about this game was seeing Faf De Klerk watch from a corporate box. Sale Shark didn't have a game this weekend. They should have released one of the best players in the world to play international Rugby for his chosen country yesterday.

    Whilst I wholeheartedly agree, Sale would likely be fined heavily by EPR.

    Fined for what?
    Genuine question

    Releasing non-England players out of the International window.

    Are you seriously saying that EPR clubs have a deal with the RFU that they will release England players but if any non England players are released there will be heavy fines?

    M CatograndeC M 3 Replies Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Margin_Walker
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #202

    @crucial

    The RFU pay a decent wedge to the clubs for access to players and release outside of test windows if applicable. Releasing players for free outside of test windows to other unions would probably harm their negotiating position.

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CatograndeC Offline
    CatograndeC Offline
    Catogrande
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #203

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial said in England v South Africa:

    @catogrande said in England v South Africa:

    @sparky said in England v South Africa:

    Ugliest thing about this game was seeing Faf De Klerk watch from a corporate box. Sale Shark didn't have a game this weekend. They should have released one of the best players in the world to play international Rugby for his chosen country yesterday.

    Whilst I wholeheartedly agree, Sale would likely be fined heavily by EPR.

    Fined for what?
    Genuine question

    Releasing non-England players out of the International window.

    Are you seriously saying that EPR clubs have a deal with the RFU that they will release England players but if any non England players are released there will be heavy fines?

    What I do know is that both Northampton and Bath got fined for releasing Welsh players outside the window. £60K in each case.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Margin_Walker on last edited by
    #204

    @margin_walker said in England v South Africa:

    @crucial

    The RFU pay a decent wedge to the clubs for access to players and release outside of test windows if applicable. Releasing players for free outside of test windows to other unions would probably harm their negotiating position.

    I understand that. It’s the threat of a large fine part I don’t get.

    That deliberately stops other teams from even trying to get their players.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    wrote on last edited by
    #205

    MiketheSnowM 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #206

    @crucial yes the RFU pay premier rugby money, a lot, to get access to the England elite squad outside of the international windows for games and training time. Premier rugby have signed an agreement to not release foreign players, Northampton got fined 60k£ for releasing George North for some Wales matches.

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • MiketheSnowM Offline
    MiketheSnowM Offline
    MiketheSnow
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by MiketheSnow
    #207

    @stargazer said in England v South Africa:

    Joke.

    Be very interesting to see the ruling on the first similar tackle next week.

    And good Farrell won't be the excuse next week.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1

England v South Africa
Sports Talk
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.