Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I don't read Reason and it's an opinion I have come to on my own accord. Maybe my definition of good passing is different to yours. While technically he may have a good pass, I don't think he is a natural passer in that he creates for others that way. Passing for me is about timing and placement. Take for example the try scored by the ABs at Eden Park down the right blinding. That was an example of fine passing combined with running angles by RM and Goodhue to make space for JB. Looked really easy and didn't get many plaudits, but it was beautifully executed.
He creates plenty but it seems like it's either camp BB or camp RM and we'll see what we want to see.
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Crazy-Horse said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I don't read Reason and it's an opinion I have come to on my own accord. Maybe my definition of good passing is different to yours. While technically he may have a good pass, I don't think he is a natural passer in that he creates for others that way. Passing for me is about timing and placement. Take for example the try scored by the ABs at Eden Park down the right blinding. That was an example of fine passing combined with running angles by RM and Goodhue to make space for JB. Looked really easy and didn't get many plaudits, but it was beautifully executed.
He creates plenty but it seems like it's either camp BB or camp RM and we'll see what we want to see.
I knew as soon as I mention RM that would be thrown up. RM has his faults too. I used to be in the RM.camp, but now I am in neither to be honest. RM has a way to go. Like someone said earlier, it wouldn't make much difference who was at 10.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Crazy-Horse said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I don't read Reason and it's an opinion I have come to on my own accord. Maybe my definition of good passing is different to yours. While technically he may have a good pass, I don't think he is a natural passer in that he creates for others that way. Passing for me is about timing and placement. Take for example the try scored by the ABs at Eden Park down the right blinding. That was an example of fine passing combined with running angles by RM and Goodhue to make space for JB. Looked really easy and didn't get many plaudits, but it was beautifully executed.
He creates plenty but it seems like it's either camp BB or camp RM and we'll see what we want to see.
I knew as soon as I mention RM that would be thrown up. RM has his faults too. I used to be in the RM.camp, but now I am in neither to be honest. RM has a way to go. Like someone said earlier, it wouldn't make much difference who was at 10.
@Crazy-Horse said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Crazy-Horse said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I don't read Reason and it's an opinion I have come to on my own accord. Maybe my definition of good passing is different to yours. While technically he may have a good pass, I don't think he is a natural passer in that he creates for others that way. Passing for me is about timing and placement. Take for example the try scored by the ABs at Eden Park down the right blinding. That was an example of fine passing combined with running angles by RM and Goodhue to make space for JB. Looked really easy and didn't get many plaudits, but it was beautifully executed.
He creates plenty but it seems like it's either camp BB or camp RM and we'll see what we want to see.
I knew as soon as I mention RM that would be thrown up. RM has his faults too. I used to be in the RM.camp, but now I am in neither to be honest. RM has a way to go. Like someone said earlier, it wouldn't make much difference who was at 10.
I don't think there are major flaws with either to be honest and we're lucky to have both. As I said above, the problem is not the cattle.
-
@NTA said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@NTA said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
That's a crap call
Just looked at it again - it is a fucking hollywood, and still isn't a great call. AFG says "could have pulled out".
The issue that makes it look bad is Barrett coming in from the side of the kicker is the problem. Never in a position to charge down and his path was in no way going to look good from end-on.
Genuine question to a qualified ref (you are aren't you?). Is that an actual thing you look for?
I would have thought unless there was an actual charge directly on the player. If he's going for a charge down and there is incidental contact is that really a penalty.
(Nearly had another rant about Angus's first half performance ... But too little too late...)
@booboo said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
Genuine question to a qualified ref (you are aren't you?). Is that an actual thing you look for?
Can't say it was covered in the ref's course in depth - and I'll wang on about this a bit in order to think through it myself
We need to consider intent and context.
- Barrett's intent was to charge down no doubt.
- What does the ref think of his intent?
- Context was 24 minutes into a game with a LOT of niggle going on. Captains already spoken to about bullshit carry on.
- I forget if Coles had done his idiot slap at this point.
I would have thought unless there was an actual charge directly on the player. If he's going for a charge down and there is incidental contact is that really a penalty.
Most (not all) chargedowns occur in a straight line i.e. defender and attacker in motion roughly 180 degrees opposed. We've all seen it when a guy jumps to chargedown and contacts the other player, the ref will make a decision on timing, but often it is let go.
This one was a little different - sorry to be "that guy" and do the screen shot with arrows n shit, but it helps explain what I'm getting at. The video is below with the incident about 2 minutes in if you want to see it in motion.
So, the promised arrows: black is JB's motion chasing from outside in, and orange is AFG's line of sight. You'll note AFG has a clear view between Sam Cane and (I think) Joe Moody, so no loss of vision there. Kick is going downfield pretty much parallel to the side line - and that is about as wide as he'll kick because we're outside the 22.
If you watch the video, AFG has eyes on the kicker and watches the whole incident, so couldn't really say he was guessing when he made his decision.
As a ref what you're seeing is a guy with a fairly low chance of effecting a charge down from that position, being well outside the likely angle - so is his intent really for charge down?
If no, then from that angle, he has come across the line of a kicker and then clattered into him, clumsily, without trying to effect a tackle. If it was an attempt at a tackle, his timing is terrible and he hasn't used his arms. You've already spoken to captains and you've had multiple incidents off the ball in just over a quarter of a game.
I'll say this in AFG's defence: he's in the middle around a bunch of blokes trying to put the hurt on each other, hearing and seeing other bullshit we are not aware of.
What could have mitigated this? Maybe if Barrett took the time to wrap Sanchez and not take him to ground. I think they actually clashed heads which won't help. Barrett is kind of in no-man's land because he's trying to effect a chargedown so pulls his arms away from contact, while the ref sees a guy doing a dumb thing.
On balance, I think most refs would be inclined toward penalty. As an armchair ref, I'd say "Fucking Sanchez pulling a Hollywood again" and play on, but have a word on the run.
-
@booboo said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
Genuine question to a qualified ref (you are aren't you?). Is that an actual thing you look for?
Can't say it was covered in the ref's course in depth - and I'll wang on about this a bit in order to think through it myself
We need to consider intent and context.
- Barrett's intent was to charge down no doubt.
- What does the ref think of his intent?
- Context was 24 minutes into a game with a LOT of niggle going on. Captains already spoken to about bullshit carry on.
- I forget if Coles had done his idiot slap at this point.
I would have thought unless there was an actual charge directly on the player. If he's going for a charge down and there is incidental contact is that really a penalty.
Most (not all) chargedowns occur in a straight line i.e. defender and attacker in motion roughly 180 degrees opposed. We've all seen it when a guy jumps to chargedown and contacts the other player, the ref will make a decision on timing, but often it is let go.
This one was a little different - sorry to be "that guy" and do the screen shot with arrows n shit, but it helps explain what I'm getting at. The video is below with the incident about 2 minutes in if you want to see it in motion.
So, the promised arrows: black is JB's motion chasing from outside in, and orange is AFG's line of sight. You'll note AFG has a clear view between Sam Cane and (I think) Joe Moody, so no loss of vision there. Kick is going downfield pretty much parallel to the side line - and that is about as wide as he'll kick because we're outside the 22.
If you watch the video, AFG has eyes on the kicker and watches the whole incident, so couldn't really say he was guessing when he made his decision.
As a ref what you're seeing is a guy with a fairly low chance of effecting a charge down from that position, being well outside the likely angle - so is his intent really for charge down?
If no, then from that angle, he has come across the line of a kicker and then clattered into him, clumsily, without trying to effect a tackle. If it was an attempt at a tackle, his timing is terrible and he hasn't used his arms. You've already spoken to captains and you've had multiple incidents off the ball in just over a quarter of a game.
I'll say this in AFG's defence: he's in the middle around a bunch of blokes trying to put the hurt on each other, hearing and seeing other bullshit we are not aware of.
What could have mitigated this? Maybe if Barrett took the time to wrap Sanchez and not take him to ground. I think they actually clashed heads which won't help. Barrett is kind of in no-man's land because he's trying to effect a chargedown so pulls his arms away from contact, while the ref sees a guy doing a dumb thing.
On balance, I think most refs would be inclined toward penalty. As an armchair ref, I'd say "Fucking Sanchez pulling a Hollywood again" and play on, but have a word on the run.
@NTA eh? Why is he unlikely to effect a charge down? You're reading it far different than I do. Barrett lands just in front of where the kick was taken and pretty much stops, the motion of both players leads to the collision. If the kick goes lower then there's every chance of a charge down - would the argie have been penalised for a no arms tackle in that instance? I'm pretty sure Gardiner never mentioned late either, only no arms.
-
@canefan true, but you don't think something is slightly lacking with him this year?
@Crazy-Horse said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@canefan true, but you don't think something is slightly lacking with him this year?
Achilles. Was strapped at RWC.
-
@NTA eh? Why is he unlikely to effect a charge down? You're reading it far different than I do. Barrett lands just in front of where the kick was taken and pretty much stops, the motion of both players leads to the collision. If the kick goes lower then there's every chance of a charge down - would the argie have been penalised for a no arms tackle in that instance? I'm pretty sure Gardiner never mentioned late either, only no arms.
@Bones said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
If the kick goes lower then there's every chance of a charge down -
Sure.
IF the kick goes lower.
IF it goes at a wider angle toward the sideline.
IF they were closer together when the kick went up.
Etc@Bones said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
I'm pretty sure Gardiner never mentioned late either
It wasn't in the audio from memory.
-
@NTA eh? Why is he unlikely to effect a charge down? You're reading it far different than I do. Barrett lands just in front of where the kick was taken and pretty much stops, the motion of both players leads to the collision. If the kick goes lower then there's every chance of a charge down - would the argie have been penalised for a no arms tackle in that instance? I'm pretty sure Gardiner never mentioned late either, only no arms.
@Bones said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
Why is he unlikely to effect a charge down?
On this: watch the video and see how far apart they are to start with. Essentially for Jordie to be in a good position, the assumption had to be Sanchez is kicking out out on the full.
-
@Bones said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
Why is he unlikely to effect a charge down?
On this: watch the video and see how far apart they are to start with. Essentially for Jordie to be in a good position, the assumption had to be Sanchez is kicking out out on the full.
-
@Bones said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
Why is he unlikely to effect a charge down?
On this: watch the video and see how far apart they are to start with. Essentially for Jordie to be in a good position, the assumption had to be Sanchez is kicking out out on the full.
-
@Bones in the video it is more apparent how far apart they are at the commencement of proceedings
@NTA said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@Bones in the video it is more apparent how far apart they are at the commencement of proceedings
Right, so he was that far away, and yet managed to collide with the bloke, he must have been motoring eh! Except he was able to come to almost a complete stop when he landed, go figure. He was so far away, neither player took a complete step and yet they collided by leaning forward. What was he thinking?
-
@NTA eh? Why is he unlikely to effect a charge down? You're reading it far different than I do. Barrett lands just in front of where the kick was taken and pretty much stops, the motion of both players leads to the collision. If the kick goes lower then there's every chance of a charge down - would the argie have been penalised for a no arms tackle in that instance? I'm pretty sure Gardiner never mentioned late either, only no arms.
@Bones said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
Why is he unlikely to effect a charge down?
I'm more of the opinion of why is that even relevant. The act of attempting a charge down makes it unlikely to occur because the kicker can react to it. You can see in the video that the kicker moves to his right to avoid Jordie being in a position to charge it down.
Attempting charge downs is generally more about the pressure it puts on the kicker than the likelihood of then being successful.
-
@NTA I should say, I'd have no problem with the call if he was going to be consistent. I don't think his calls had any great bearing on the result, but what I don't like is how he got completely suckered by the Argies.
If he was going to penalise JB and Coles for their "infringements", why wasn't the same yardstick applied to the Argies? ALB got absolutely clattered in a high tackle off the ball and had to go for an HIA. If he hadn't been, he was about to run off the shoulder of a guy making a half break. Angus? "They ran into each other". Yeah good one. Why weren't the Argies being penalised for their slapping, etc?
-
:man_facepalming:
@booboo - for reference, this is the absolute last time I try to explain someone else's refereeing decision on this forum. I hope you found my efforts somewhat enlightening. As I said, I probably wouldn't penalise that decision (in isolation at least), but I think a lot of refs in that situation would (EDIT) given the context of the game.
For the rest of you lining up to have a shot: maybe go have a lie down and a glass of chardonnay because I think your period is coming on. I'm sure you have ex-husbands to bitch about once you're finished with AFG and my little post above.
-
:man_facepalming:
@booboo - for reference, this is the absolute last time I try to explain someone else's refereeing decision on this forum. I hope you found my efforts somewhat enlightening. As I said, I probably wouldn't penalise that decision (in isolation at least), but I think a lot of refs in that situation would (EDIT) given the context of the game.
For the rest of you lining up to have a shot: maybe go have a lie down and a glass of chardonnay because I think your period is coming on. I'm sure you have ex-husbands to bitch about once you're finished with AFG and my little post above.
@NTA said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
:man_facepalming:
@booboo - for reference, this is the absolute last time I try to explain someone else's refereeing decision on this forum. I hope you found my efforts somewhat enlightening. As I said, I probably wouldn't penalise that decision (in isolation at least), but I think a lot of refs in that situation would.
For the rest of you lining up to have a shot: maybe go have a lie down and a glass of chardonnay because I think your period is coming on. I'm sure you have ex-husbands to bitch about once you're finished with AFG and my little post above.
Are you complaining about having a discussion on a discussion forum?
-
:man_facepalming:
@booboo - for reference, this is the absolute last time I try to explain someone else's refereeing decision on this forum. I hope you found my efforts somewhat enlightening. As I said, I probably wouldn't penalise that decision (in isolation at least), but I think a lot of refs in that situation would (EDIT) given the context of the game.
For the rest of you lining up to have a shot: maybe go have a lie down and a glass of chardonnay because I think your period is coming on. I'm sure you have ex-husbands to bitch about once you're finished with AFG and my little post above.
-
@NTA said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
:man_facepalming:
@booboo - for reference, this is the absolute last time I try to explain someone else's refereeing decision on this forum. I hope you found my efforts somewhat enlightening. As I said, I probably wouldn't penalise that decision (in isolation at least), but I think a lot of refs in that situation would.
For the rest of you lining up to have a shot: maybe go have a lie down and a glass of chardonnay because I think your period is coming on. I'm sure you have ex-husbands to bitch about once you're finished with AFG and my little post above.
Are you complaining about having a discussion on a discussion forum?
@Kirwan said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@NTA said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
:man_facepalming:
@booboo - for reference, this is the absolute last time I try to explain someone else's refereeing decision on this forum. I hope you found my efforts somewhat enlightening. As I said, I probably wouldn't penalise that decision (in isolation at least), but I think a lot of refs in that situation would.
For the rest of you lining up to have a shot: maybe go have a lie down and a glass of chardonnay because I think your period is coming on. I'm sure you have ex-husbands to bitch about once you're finished with AFG and my little post above.
Are you complaining about having a discussion on a discussion forum?
I'm weary of explaining context to children. EDIT: actually that is probably an insult to children.
@Bones said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@NTA fucken cry!
Said the lead sook having a piss and moan about one decision four days on. I'd expect that from Wallabies fans or even Irish fans on here - if there were any in this little east islands circle jerk - but not The Custodians Of The Game.
Go do a ref's course if you haven't already and get yourself certified if you want to do something about it. Otherwise: STFU and get on with your loser team.
-
@Kirwan said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@NTA said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
:man_facepalming:
@booboo - for reference, this is the absolute last time I try to explain someone else's refereeing decision on this forum. I hope you found my efforts somewhat enlightening. As I said, I probably wouldn't penalise that decision (in isolation at least), but I think a lot of refs in that situation would.
For the rest of you lining up to have a shot: maybe go have a lie down and a glass of chardonnay because I think your period is coming on. I'm sure you have ex-husbands to bitch about once you're finished with AFG and my little post above.
Are you complaining about having a discussion on a discussion forum?
I'm weary of explaining context to children. EDIT: actually that is probably an insult to children.
@Bones said in Argentina One: Parramatta, 14 November:
@NTA fucken cry!
Said the lead sook having a piss and moan about one decision four days on. I'd expect that from Wallabies fans or even Irish fans on here - if there were any in this little east islands circle jerk - but not The Custodians Of The Game.
Go do a ref's course if you haven't already and get yourself certified if you want to do something about it. Otherwise: STFU and get on with your loser team.
-
On the subject of Angus, quite apart from the Jordie penalty, which was marginal, there were two mistaken scrum penalties, one of which led to 3 points, the slap reversal and the Whitelock maul penalty at end and which also led to 3 points. That's quite a few dodgy calls.
Notwithstanding that, had Abs taken their opportunites, none of that would have mattered.
