RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks
-
Afaik He hasn’t taken it back yet
🤪https://x.com/rugbybits/status/1719666251042017398?s=46&t=CcaaSLoKzW0UYf4UN0FjvA
-
@TeWaio said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
Appropriate that we are now talking about criminality/diversion in the RWC Final thread because WE WUZ ROBBED!!!!
Was going to say the same thing about 2011…
-
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@nostrildamus said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Catogrande said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@akan004 said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
Did the sanctimonious piston wristed gibbon have a go at Frizell again like he does in every video featuring the ABs?
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=sanctimonious+meaning&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari
A bit like publicly stating “we have a no dickheads rule” and then picking a convicted domestic abuser.
You don't mean Shannon do you? Not convicted (charges dropped), and not domestic abuse as far as I know.
Erm. Don’t you mean pled guilty and attended police diversion? Though you’re correct, not domestic abuse, he punched a non-related woman. My bad.
Well this is an honest question but does he have a conviction? I'm obviously no lawyer, but also I don't know distinctions between the UK and NZ on this:
https://www.police.govt.nz/faq/will-a-diversion-show-up-on-my-criminal-record
https://www.justice.govt.nz/criminal-records/clean-slate/Edit: my confusion is, convicted=found guilty of something versus conviction=what appears on a (criminal) record. Perhaps they are the same?
@nostrildamus the diversion thing and the clean slate act are different things.
Diversion is usually aimed at younger offendefs or 1st time offenders and usually minor offences, to avoid a conviction on thier record that might affect thier lives (for younger people) or careers (guess this is how Frizzell got it)
Although if you offend again, the diversion offence will most likely be taken into account.
Clean slate act is where you have had a conviction and haven't been in jail or home detention for it, after 7 years you no longer need to disclose it...unsure how this works when entering other countries though.
-
@nostrildamus the diversion thing and the clean slate act are different things.
Diversion is usually aimed at younger offendefs or 1st time offenders and usually minor offences, to avoid a conviction on thier record that might affect thier lives (for younger people) or careers (guess this is how Frizzell got it)
Although if you offend again, the diversion offence will most likely be taken into account.
Clean slate act is where you have had a conviction and haven't been in jail or home detention for it, after 7 years you no longer need to disclose it...unsure how this works when entering other countries though.
That is how I read it bur feck knows how an international back row forward punching a woman can be considered a "minor" offence. That was the gist of all the angst on here at the time if I recall.
-
@Joans-Town-Jones said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@canefan said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@canefan said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
Looking at the Frizzel "incident" again, Steven Kitsoff smashes him in the side of the head with his arm. Of course, the TMO completely missed this and YCed Frizzel for falling over. What a farken joke.
I felt that it could have easily been ruled a rugby contact incident. No penalties, play on
It should have been. I've not seen an penalty and a YC for something so innocuous before. Ever. I wonder if Ardie went down and squealed like a little bitch and cries foul at every ruck African Jesus may have been shown red and 6 weeks.
I don't know what Foley's qualifications are, but I don't believe he's a test ref. Crazy to be in that position of power
I'd be interested to know how an amateur who doesn't even follow the game, if given a perimeters to work with, how they would apply the laws. Whether SC would have been upgraded, or African Jesus would have been upgraded, or whether SF would have even seen a penalty, or maybe Kitsoff would be sent off.
I hate to say it but we reap what we sow. In the NH, for the last 18 months, both would have been red, I think up until the Curry decision in the WC both would have been red. The wailing and gnashing of teeth about some of the early reds was the reason mitigation became more generous during the tournament. On that basis, the yellow / upgrade to red decisions were consistent with what we’d seen in the previous weeks.
It is not the refs fault. IMO it’s barely even WR’s fault. It’s a reflection of rugby laws being subjective, and the fact we want and need them to be so.
@Dodge said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@canefan said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@canefan said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Joans-Town-Jones said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
Looking at the Frizzel "incident" again, Steven Kitsoff smashes him in the side of the head with his arm. Of course, the TMO completely missed this and YCed Frizzel for falling over. What a farken joke.
I felt that it could have easily been ruled a rugby contact incident. No penalties, play on
It should have been. I've not seen an penalty and a YC for something so innocuous before. Ever. I wonder if Ardie went down and squealed like a little bitch and cries foul at every ruck African Jesus may have been shown red and 6 weeks.
I don't know what Foley's qualifications are, but I don't believe he's a test ref. Crazy to be in that position of power
I'd be interested to know how an amateur who doesn't even follow the game, if given a perimeters to work with, how they would apply the laws. Whether SC would have been upgraded, or African Jesus would have been upgraded, or whether SF would have even seen a penalty, or maybe Kitsoff would be sent off.
I hate to say it but we reap what we sow. In the NH, for the last 18 months, both would have been red, I think up until the Curry decision in the WC both would have been red. The wailing and gnashing of teeth about some of the early reds was the reason mitigation became more generous during the tournament. On that basis, the yellow / upgrade to red decisions were consistent with what we’d seen in the previous weeks.
It is not the refs fault. IMO it’s barely even WR’s fault. It’s a reflection of rugby laws being subjective, and the fact we want and need them to be so.
Which is what we're talking about African Jesus should have seen red. Or both yellow.
-
While the TMOs are interfering far too much, sometimes you can't say the same about the ARs. How the AR couldn't see Kwagga Smith's hand on the ground in the 79th minute is beyond me. He was literally standing a few metres away. That decision will forever haunt me.
-
While the TMOs are interfering far too much, sometimes you can't say the same about the ARs. How the AR couldn't see Kwagga Smith's hand on the ground in the 79th minute is beyond me. He was literally standing a few metres away. That decision will forever haunt me.
@akan004 said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
While the TMOs are interfering far too much, sometimes you can't say the same about the ARs. How the AR couldn't see Kwagga Smith's hand on the ground in the 79th minute is beyond me. He was literally standing a few metres away. That decision will forever haunt me.
Too busy looking for the glory that is foul play to call up the boring run of the mill infringements
-
@nostrildamus the diversion thing and the clean slate act are different things.
Diversion is usually aimed at younger offendefs or 1st time offenders and usually minor offences, to avoid a conviction on thier record that might affect thier lives (for younger people) or careers (guess this is how Frizzell got it)
Although if you offend again, the diversion offence will most likely be taken into account.
Clean slate act is where you have had a conviction and haven't been in jail or home detention for it, after 7 years you no longer need to disclose it...unsure how this works when entering other countries though.
@taniwharugby said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@nostrildamus the diversion thing and the clean slate act are different things.
Diversion is usually aimed at younger offendefs or 1st time offenders and usually minor offences, to avoid a conviction on thier record that might affect thier lives (for younger people) or careers (guess this is how Frizzell got it)
Although if you offend again, the diversion offence will most likely be taken into account.
Clean slate act is where you have had a conviction and haven't been in jail or home detention for it, after 7 years you no longer need to disclose it...unsure how this works when entering other countries though.
yeah, the only people i had heard using their diversions including when i was at uni we for getting caught taking a piss in public, pinching a street sign or streaking...not for assault and then intimidation
in the end the important thing for me is he plead guilty
-
While the TMOs are interfering far too much, sometimes you can't say the same about the ARs. How the AR couldn't see Kwagga Smith's hand on the ground in the 79th minute is beyond me. He was literally standing a few metres away. That decision will forever haunt me.
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@nostrildamus the diversion thing and the clean slate act are different things.
Diversion is usually aimed at younger offendefs or 1st time offenders and usually minor offences, to avoid a conviction on thier record that might affect thier lives (for younger people) or careers (guess this is how Frizzell got it)
Although if you offend again, the diversion offence will most likely be taken into account.
Clean slate act is where you have had a conviction and haven't been in jail or home detention for it, after 7 years you no longer need to disclose it...unsure how this works when entering other countries though.
yeah, the only people i had heard using their diversions including when i was at uni we for getting caught taking a piss in public, pinching a street sign or streaking...not for assault and then intimidation
in the end the important thing for me is he plead guilty
@Kiwiwomble said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
in the end the important thing for me is he plead guilty
probably need to split this discussion from this thread...plenty of other offences would fit too (shoplifting, drink driving, minor assault etc) but I believe pleading guilty is a key part of getting Diversion, if you plead not guilty then it isnt usually on the table.
-
thats painful to watch with how its edited, i know he's trying to make a point but cutting Mills comment into it everything 15 seconds is just painful
-
thats painful to watch with how its edited, i know he's trying to make a point but cutting Mills comment into it everything 15 seconds is just painful
@Kiwiwomble something with Paddy Gower commenting on rugby has zero credibility, so watch it, I won't.
-
@Kiwiwomble something with Paddy Gower commenting on rugby has zero credibility, so watch it, I won't.
@taniwharugby said in RWC Final: All Blacks v Springboks:
@Kiwiwomble something with Paddy Gower commenting on
rugbyanything because he is a cock has zero credibility, so watch it, I won't.Just tidied up a minor error there
-
Just looking for some spilt milk so I can cry. This thread seems like a good place to start the search.
-
The disallowed try stuff is getting dragged up again.
Stuff understands World Rugby has privately acknowledged to the All Blacks that the ruling out of Aaron Smith’s try in the final was in fact outside the rules, but is refusing to publicly acknowledge that. Discussions have been ongoing in an effort to get World Rugby to publicly clarify that the TMO ruling was a breach of the current rules governing the game.I'm not sure it needs an official clarification like the IRB sometimes issues on confusing or contentious laws. The protocol seems straight forward.. this was just an error.
-
It is straightforward, but errors are made in high pressure situations like a RWC final. Something the officials are not immune too.
Good on Stuff for keeping this is in the news. This has a long way to run. It’s only been a few weeks since the final. Four more years!
