Wallabies v Springboks II
-
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Head or head/shoulder of the Bok player direct to the head. Reckless is being polite (imo either dumb or pure frustrated thuggery, I can't read minds) but was hard to see any mitigation. I couldn't believe it wasn't a straight red card.
The Ref knew the game was over and wanted his shower and a beer or two with minimum fuss I think but happy it's been cited. If not it would have been a terrible precedent.
-
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
-
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
@machpants said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
I rewatched ... the Ref didn't go through the decision-tree type process they often talk through with the TMO for clarity. He didn't give a mitigation. After watching the replays he just went "I think we're on a yellow card".
The mental pressure the Refs are under must be immense, I think he'd switched off slightly like players do when the game is won ... mentally I think he bottled the red because he thought he'd finished his job for the day.
No excuse and you'd imagine he was pulled up in the referee's review post-game.
Nigel Owens talked in an interview about having a great game as ref (ABs vs Boks in Joberg 2013) then getting a complete bollocking in the review in his next test match ... he admitted he had a pretty poor game. Apparently he was told another performance like that and he had no chance of getting the RWC final.
So elite refs are under constant scrutiny to perform, just like elite players are.
-
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
@machpants said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
Unless you're Jordie Barrett in which case "you just get it a bit wrong"
-
@machpants said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
Unless you're Jordie Barrett in which case "you just get it a bit wrong"
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@machpants said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
Unless you're Jordie Barrett in which case "you just get it a bit wrong"
I mean, the unco fluffybunny that caused it and would have had his second red card for an air tackle this season set the precedent for having cards wiped. But you go on and pretend it's an AB thing
-
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@machpants said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
Unless you're Jordie Barrett in which case "you just get it a bit wrong"
I mean, the unco fluffybunny that caused it and would have had his second red card for an air tackle this season set the precedent for having cards wiped. But you go on and pretend it's an AB thing
@bones said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@machpants said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
Unless you're Jordie Barrett in which case "you just get it a bit wrong"
I mean, the unco fluffybunny that caused it and would have had his second red card for an air tackle this season set the precedent for having cards wiped. But you go on and pretend it's an AB thing
Nah this was his cleanout against the Force in SRTT where he only got a penalty because the ref said "oh he just got it a bit wrong".
-
@bones said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@machpants said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
And sure, there is the argument that Kerevi was down low and what choice did he have?
No attempt to use the arms. That's a choice. Never trying to bind. Also a choice.
Yep sometimes you can't stop/remove/tackle the player legally, so just don't. That's called getting beaten, it happens in sport.
Unless you're Jordie Barrett in which case "you just get it a bit wrong"
I mean, the unco fluffybunny that caused it and would have had his second red card for an air tackle this season set the precedent for having cards wiped. But you go on and pretend it's an AB thing
Nah this was his cleanout against the Force in SRTT where he only got a penalty because the ref said "oh he just got it a bit wrong".
-
@akan004 said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
Hopefully Wiese is free to play against us. Very average player.
So the refs didn't deem it a red card
But the Citing Commissioner decided it met the threshold
And now, in their infinite wisdom, the Judiciary decided it didn't warrant a red cardBesides, y'know, being a shoulder to the head at a ruck with no attempt to bind.
Anyway, the Boks Coach (I still don't know who he is and want to say "Rassie") left him out of planning as the process was apparently taking too long.
-
@machpants said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
https://www.theroar.com.au/2021/09/22/how-the-springboks-hit-an-english-speed-bump-at-suncorp/
I read that. TBH both teams had to adapt to the calls. If the Boks were fitter, they might have adapted better.
-
It didn't occur to me until I read that article how much the referee's style played into our hands.
It's the same reason we always played well under Wayne Barnes. His style emphasised quick ball at the ruck, and he always erred on the side of the team trying to play attacking, positive rugby.
-
It didn't occur to me until I read that article how much the referee's style played into our hands.
It's the same reason we always played well under Wayne Barnes. His style emphasised quick ball at the ruck, and he always erred on the side of the team trying to play attacking, positive rugby.
@barbarian said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
It didn't occur to me until I read that article how much the referee's style played into our hands.
It's the same reason we always played well under Wayne Barnes. His style emphasised quick ball at the ruck, and he always erred on the side of the team trying to play attacking, positive rugby.
Except for that time at Cardiff Arms Park in 2007 you mean?
-
@barbarian said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
It didn't occur to me until I read that article how much the referee's style played into our hands.
It's the same reason we always played well under Wayne Barnes. His style emphasised quick ball at the ruck, and he always erred on the side of the team trying to play attacking, positive rugby.
Except for that time at Cardiff Arms Park in 2007 you mean?
-
@barbarian said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
It didn't occur to me until I read that article how much the referee's style played into our hands.
It's the same reason we always played well under Wayne Barnes. His style emphasised quick ball at the ruck, and he always erred on the side of the team trying to play attacking, positive rugby.
Except for that time at Cardiff Arms Park in 2007 you mean?
@canefan said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@barbarian said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
It didn't occur to me until I read that article how much the referee's style played into our hands.
It's the same reason we always played well under Wayne Barnes. His style emphasised quick ball at the ruck, and he always erred on the side of the team trying to play attacking, positive rugby.
Except for that time at Cardiff Arms Park in 2007 you mean?
The Wallabies played earlier in the day in France I believe.....
-
@canefan The French were the only team playing rugby that day, clearly. So desperate to make line-breaks they were willing to push the laws to their very limit. I was glad to see that sort of courage rewarded.
@barbarian said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
@canefan The French were the only team playing rugby that day, clearly. So desperate to make line-breaks they were willing to push the laws to their very limit. I was glad to see that sort of courage rewarded.
-
Congrats Aussies. First time in forever that I’ve not even watched the highlights. Hope it feels great.
@smuts said in Wallabies v Springboks II:
Congrats Aussies. First time in forever that I’ve not even watched the highlights. Hope it feels great.
Cheers. Not a great couple of games by your okes but hopefully they'll take it out on the ABs
I don't know much about your coach, but a quick wiki search shows he's Rassie's man, and TBH it smacks a little of nepotism. Hopefully there is a bit of a shakeup and the Boks find their groove. And some fitness training!
One thing on which I agree with Keo: trying to play like someone else is just going to hurt the Boks. Use their strengths by all means, but they've not yet made sure they can execute that to the level required against faster teams.
