Wallabies v Lions I
-
Saw an article praising Lions for pawing the ball, but making eye contact with ref as they did so. If he says ‘Leave it 7’ they let go with a flourish.
The correct action is a penalty against red.
Instead we get, ‘Thank you, seven’!
As Kirwan says, the second gained makes a huge difference. Itoje did it for years before he started to get pinged for it. -
-
@Kirwan said in Wallabies v Lions I:
You would clean up the game in a month if the refs stopped coaching and starting penalising.
It also rewards players that know the laws and back themselves to take a risk.
Probably in that month you would lose half your viewers too though. It's a no win, do you blow whistle every time there something slightly out (and against team we support too) or do you say get back on side. Even when I played 40 odd years ago the refs especially the good ones told you to stay onside, or get back etc.
-
@Dan54 said in Wallabies v Lions I:
@Kirwan said in Wallabies v Lions I:
You would clean up the game in a month if the refs stopped coaching and starting penalising.
It also rewards players that know the laws and back themselves to take a risk.
Probably in that month you would lose half your viewers too though. It's a no win, do you blow whistle every time there something slightly out (and against team we support too) or do you say get back on side. Even when I played 40 odd years ago the refs especially the good ones told you to stay onside, or get back etc.
The players would very quickly adapt and there would be more backline action.
So more viewers?!
-
@pakman said in Wallabies v Lions I:
@Dan54 said in Wallabies v Lions I:
@Kirwan said in Wallabies v Lions I:
You would clean up the game in a month if the refs stopped coaching and starting penalising.
It also rewards players that know the laws and back themselves to take a risk.
Probably in that month you would lose half your viewers too though. It's a no win, do you blow whistle every time there something slightly out (and against team we support too) or do you say get back on side. Even when I played 40 odd years ago the refs especially the good ones told you to stay onside, or get back etc.
The players would very quickly adapt and there would be more backline action.
So more viewers?!
I don't believe that would happen, the game would become incredibly boring if players didn't push as hard as they could on all things. Well in my opinion, I not into watching what looks like training runs, I actually enjoy a bit of chaos. But we all like differnt things I know.
-
It's pretty much how the game used to be reffed. It was clear when a player was offside, and the ref just called it. You saw players making sure they were onside, instead of what we have now, which is a line of offside players and only really obviously offside being called.
The defensive line is standing half a yard off side at every ruck, but in a co-ordinated team pattern.
If the ref sees a hand in the ruck, it should be just called. If players knew they wouldn't get away with it, they would stop.
And the outcome would be the finding alternatives, like binding and driving over the ruck. Result? More space for the backs.
-
@Kirwan said in Wallabies v Lions I:
It's pretty much how the game used to be reffed. It was clear when a player was offside, and the ref just called it. You saw players making sure they were onside, instead of what we have now, which is a line of offside players and only really obviously offside being called.
The defensive line is standing half a yard off side at every ruck, but in a co-ordinated team pattern.
If the ref sees a hand in the ruck, it should be just called. If players knew they wouldn't get away with it, they would stop.
And the outcome would be the finding alternatives, like binding and driving over the ruck. Result? More space for the backs.
Exactly. And of course it doesn't have to be a given penalty, it can be advantage and if the player persists after being told then penalty and yellow card.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Wallabies v Lions I:
@Catogrande said in Wallabies v Lions I:
@Dodge said in Wallabies v Lions I:
@MiketheSnow said in Wallabies v Lions I:
Friends who went said it was a great evening with a tremendous atmosphere
Farrell totally vindicated with his selections of Beirne and Curry in the back row
Beirne got MOTM but I would have given it to Curry
Excellent, dominant first half from the Lions and should have kicked on to give the Wallabies a real pasting in the second half
But personnel changes gave the Aussies a sniff and they were like 50 year olds at the Oasis reunion gigs, didn’t need a second invitation to have a go
There is no way on God’s Green Earth that Earl had arms in that tackle
Should have been Penalty (possibly Penalty Try) and YC
12-24 with Earl in the bin from the 60th - 70th minutes is a very different game
Lowe, Keenan, and Freeman the only realistic changes for the second test
With possibly Morgan or Pollock on the bench instead of Earl
If Schmidt has his thinking cap on this week and the Italian ref wants to penalise the Lions offsides and repeated killing of the ball in their own 22 it could be a very interesting second match
Back three all had pretty average games which there’s no real excuse for when your forwards are that dominant.
As for the Earl tackle, surprised he got away with it but wouldn’t necessarily blame BOK, the TMO was categorical that there were arms in the tackle and it was fine, BOK checked on a number of occasions but was shut down.
That was my recollection but on watching again, when BoK goes to the TMO for checking the try, he says firstly that he wants to check for foul play by red in the lead up to the try AND states that he feels that there was an attempt to wrap using both arms. The TMO agreed with that.
And even with slow mo they were both wrong IMHO
I think the discussions between the refs should not be broadcast. It discourages debate and disagreement.
