Wallabies v Lions II
-
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
The most egregious refereeing was allowing Sheehan to dive over tacklers to score a try.
Strangely the Aus comms were ok with that one. Said diving for a try was OK.
...???
@booboo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
The most egregious refereeing was allowing Sheehan to dive over tacklers to score a try.
Strangely the Aus comms were ok with that one. Said diving for a try was OK.
...???
I think they were repeating the ref's assertion
-
@booboo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
The most egregious refereeing was allowing Sheehan to dive over tacklers to score a try.
Strangely the Aus comms were ok with that one. Said diving for a try was OK.
...???
As always in rugby it's not black and white.
Here is what World Rugby clarified a couple of years ago
In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@booboo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
The most egregious refereeing was allowing Sheehan to dive over tacklers to score a try.
Strangely the Aus comms were ok with that one. Said diving for a try was OK.
...???
As always in rugby it's not black and white.
Here is what World Rugby clarified a couple of years ago
In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.I don't think the refs got that one right. In that context - a quick tap with a wall of defenders in front of you - diving like that to "score a try" is not really a reasonable action despite being close to the line. The intention of it was first and foremost to jump/hurdle multiple potential head on tacklers which is outlawed for safety reasons.
-
@NTA said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@Bones said in Wallabies v Lions II:
One that happens at every ruck multiple times.
And we have mauls that are illegal all the time, but only the ones leading up to tries are cross-examined for obstruction. :man_shrugging:
Whatever. It's gone now. We gave up an 18 point lead and it'll be another barren year as we get pumped by everyone in TRC.
The sky isn't falling; it has fallen. I'm far enough inside the tent to see that we're never getting out of this hole because nobody in Australian rugby really wants meaningful change.
Micro example: I had to referee a game yesterday, because the association didn't have refs available for our game.
Meanwhile, 18 schools games had referees in the Saturday afternoon timeslot. Which sounds great until you realise:
A. they could play midweek because they're fucking SCHOOLS, and
B. schools don't give a flying fuck about any other part of the rugby landscape; they just care about putting names of Waratahs/Wallabies up in gold leaf on an honour board and pumping obscene amounts of money into beating their old rivals.All a bit doom and gloom mate. Let’s put it is this way - if Valentini had been able to play a full 80 - heck, even 70 - last night, I reckon we wouldn’t be talking about the ref, we’d be getting pumped for a decider in 6 days time at Homebush
@voodoo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
All a bit doom and gloom mate. Let’s put it is this way - if Valentini had been able to play a full 80 - heck, even 70 - last night, I reckon we wouldn’t be talking about the ref, we’d be getting pumped for a decider in 6 days time at Homebush
But we're not, are we? Valetini was critical to our chances, and that's one issue (depth) among many.
We gave up control of the game and an 18 point lead. Some dumb fuck penalties like Wilson's clean out past the ruck. Not being able to make simple one on one tackles.
Yeah we've cleaned up our ruck work but they took years and a change in coach.
The systems are fucked. They've been wrecked by successive mismanagement over the last 2 decades.
The grassroots game is dying in the arse. A lot of people like me are sick of trying to push the barrow, while watching the absolute fuckery being perpetrated by the corporates with no feel for the game or the people who care about it.
We pretend it's all rosy because WR handed the retarded kid the RWC hosting rights to try and save a nation that is rapidly sliding to Tier 2.
-
You know, I sick of what is isn't right with the last ruck, did Tizzano come in from side? Yep looked like it. Did he have head lower than hips? Yep looks like. Did Morgan make contact above shoulders? Yes looks like it (well below in this case as his head was down). Even after these questions are answered one way or other, the question remaining, is why was Keenan not tackled? Was it Ikitau was on heels and never came forward.
-
@voodoo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
All a bit doom and gloom mate. Let’s put it is this way - if Valentini had been able to play a full 80 - heck, even 70 - last night, I reckon we wouldn’t be talking about the ref, we’d be getting pumped for a decider in 6 days time at Homebush
But we're not, are we? Valetini was critical to our chances, and that's one issue (depth) among many.
We gave up control of the game and an 18 point lead. Some dumb fuck penalties like Wilson's clean out past the ruck. Not being able to make simple one on one tackles.
Yeah we've cleaned up our ruck work but they took years and a change in coach.
The systems are fucked. They've been wrecked by successive mismanagement over the last 2 decades.
The grassroots game is dying in the arse. A lot of people like me are sick of trying to push the barrow, while watching the absolute fuckery being perpetrated by the corporates with no feel for the game or the people who care about it.
We pretend it's all rosy because WR handed the retarded kid the RWC hosting rights to try and save a nation that is rapidly sliding to Tier 2.
@NTA said in Wallabies v Lions II:
The systems are fucked. They've been wrecked by successive mismanagement over the last 2 decades.
I think there have been some real improvements in the last few years though
Improved broadcast deal
Huge revenue deals for Lions tour and RWC
U20s improved (this year their best results were beating RSA in RSA, drawing with NZ U20s, putting 68 points on England)
Whilst not able to sign every player there are some players coming through schoolboys who have been captured and are now flourishing on the international stage - I.e. Bell and Jorgensen
A more sensible Super Rugby structure with a new mini Aus based Super Rugby tournament happening later this year for more game time.
-
@booboo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
The most egregious refereeing was allowing Sheehan to dive over tacklers to score a try.
Strangely the Aus comms were ok with that one. Said diving for a try was OK.
...???
As always in rugby it's not black and white.
Here is what World Rugby clarified a couple of years ago
In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@booboo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
The most egregious refereeing was allowing Sheehan to dive over tacklers to score a try.
Strangely the Aus comms were ok with that one. Said diving for a try was OK.
...???
As always in rugby it's not black and white.
Here is what World Rugby clarified a couple of years ago
In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.I don't see a genuine conundrum in distinguishing between the two. For me it matters not that Sheehan was attempting to score a try, he deliberately jumped over attempted tacklers, not a dive towards the line. A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
-
You know, I sick of what is isn't right with the last ruck, did Tizzano come in from side? Yep looked like it. Did he have head lower than hips? Yep looks like. Did Morgan make contact above shoulders? Yes looks like it (well below in this case as his head was down). Even after these questions are answered one way or other, the question remaining, is why was Keenan not tackled? Was it Ikitau was on heels and never came forward.
@Dan54 said in Wallabies v Lions II:
You know, I sick of what is isn't right with the last ruck, did Tizzano come in from side? Yep looked like it. Did he have head lower than hips? Yep looks like.
You're going to have to explain the point of this to me. Tizzano is first there, so there's no ruck. So there's no requirement for him to have his head above his hips.
-
You know, I sick of what is isn't right with the last ruck, did Tizzano come in from side? Yep looked like it. Did he have head lower than hips? Yep looks like. Did Morgan make contact above shoulders? Yes looks like it (well below in this case as his head was down). Even after these questions are answered one way or other, the question remaining, is why was Keenan not tackled? Was it Ikitau was on heels and never came forward.
@Dan54 It's dire defence by Len Ikitau. If he'd made a decent tackle and held on, then no try. Probably a penalty to Australia, the Wallabies win and the series goes to a decider.
He didn't make the tackle. Kennan scores. The Lions win. And the rest is history.
Make your tackles, kids.
-
@voodoo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
All a bit doom and gloom mate. Let’s put it is this way - if Valentini had been able to play a full 80 - heck, even 70 - last night, I reckon we wouldn’t be talking about the ref, we’d be getting pumped for a decider in 6 days time at Homebush
But we're not, are we? Valetini was critical to our chances, and that's one issue (depth) among many.
We gave up control of the game and an 18 point lead. Some dumb fuck penalties like Wilson's clean out past the ruck. Not being able to make simple one on one tackles.
Yeah we've cleaned up our ruck work but they took years and a change in coach.
The systems are fucked. They've been wrecked by successive mismanagement over the last 2 decades.
The grassroots game is dying in the arse. A lot of people like me are sick of trying to push the barrow, while watching the absolute fuckery being perpetrated by the corporates with no feel for the game or the people who care about it.
We pretend it's all rosy because WR handed the retarded kid the RWC hosting rights to try and save a nation that is rapidly sliding to Tier 2.
@NTA said in Wallabies v Lions II:
We gave up control of the game and an 18 point lead. Some dumb fuck penalties like Wilson's clean out past the ruck. Not being able to make simple one on one tackles.
Wilson was remarkably inaccurate at rucks during the game, but what I noticed most (apart from some terribly porous defence) was Australia dictated proceedings whilst they had go forward. That disappeared once Skelton and Valentini left the field.
-
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@booboo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
The most egregious refereeing was allowing Sheehan to dive over tacklers to score a try.
Strangely the Aus comms were ok with that one. Said diving for a try was OK.
...???
As always in rugby it's not black and white.
Here is what World Rugby clarified a couple of years ago
In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.I don't see a genuine conundrum in distinguishing between the two. For me it matters not that Sheehan was attempting to score a try, he deliberately jumped over attempted tacklers, not a dive towards the line. A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
But then you get wingers who go airborne in the corner which is a dive for the tryline but not downwards - so it's not so clear cut.
-
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
But then you get wingers who go airborne in the corner which is a dive for the tryline but not downwards - so it's not so clear cut.
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
But then you get wingers who go airborne in the corner which is a dive for the tryline but not downwards - so it's not so clear cut.
Is there a wall of defenders in front of them or someone coming across in defence? IMO WR have clarified this adequately and the Sheehan try is clear which of the two scenarios it falls into.
-
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
But then you get wingers who go airborne in the corner which is a dive for the tryline but not downwards - so it's not so clear cut.
Is there a wall of defenders in front of them or someone coming across in defence? IMO WR have clarified this adequately and the Sheehan try is clear which of the two scenarios it falls into.
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
But then you get wingers who go airborne in the corner which is a dive for the tryline but not downwards - so it's not so clear cut.
Is there a wall of defenders in front of them or someone coming across in defence? IMO WR have clarified this adequately and the Sheehan try is clear which of the two scenarios it falls into.
There often is someone coming across in defence and they never penalise the diving winger
The reason it was so effective was because the Lions had set it up all tour by having their tap move runs go directly to ground which faked out the Wallabies.
-
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
But then you get wingers who go airborne in the corner which is a dive for the tryline but not downwards - so it's not so clear cut.
Is there a wall of defenders in front of them or someone coming across in defence? IMO WR have clarified this adequately and the Sheehan try is clear which of the two scenarios it falls into.
There often is someone coming across in defence and they never penalise the diving winger
The reason it was so effective was because the Lions had set it up all tour by having their tap move runs go directly to ground which faked out the Wallabies.
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
But then you get wingers who go airborne in the corner which is a dive for the tryline but not downwards - so it's not so clear cut.
Is there a wall of defenders in front of them or someone coming across in defence? IMO WR have clarified this adequately and the Sheehan try is clear which of the two scenarios it falls into.
There often is someone coming across in defence and they never penalise the diving winger
Precisely.
The reason it was so effective was because the Lions had set it up all tour by having their tap move runs go directly to ground which faked out the Wallabies.
Effective and clearly illegal.
-
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@KiwiMurph said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
A typical characteristic of a dive at the tryline is one's motion is downwards, not upwards.
But then you get wingers who go airborne in the corner which is a dive for the tryline but not downwards - so it's not so clear cut.
Is there a wall of defenders in front of them or someone coming across in defence? IMO WR have clarified this adequately and the Sheehan try is clear which of the two scenarios it falls into.
There often is someone coming across in defence and they never penalise the diving winger
Precisely.
The reason it was so effective was because the Lions had set it up all tour by having their tap move runs go directly to ground which faked out the Wallabies.
Effective and clearly illegal.
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
Effective and clearly illegal.
Disagree.
The wording World Rugby says "diving forward for a try". Doesn't say downwards. So in my view not black and white.
But we clearly have differing views so might as well leave it there.
-
@Dan54 said in Wallabies v Lions II:
You know, I sick of what is isn't right with the last ruck, did Tizzano come in from side? Yep looked like it. Did he have head lower than hips? Yep looks like.
You're going to have to explain the point of this to me. Tizzano is first there, so there's no ruck. So there's no requirement for him to have his head above his hips.
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@Dan54 said in Wallabies v Lions II:
You know, I sick of what is isn't right with the last ruck, did Tizzano come in from side? Yep looked like it. Did he have head lower than hips? Yep looks like.
You're going to have to explain the point of this to me. Tizzano is first there, so there's no ruck. So there's no requirement for him to have his head above his hips.
Sorry antipod, just one of arguments I read is that Tizzano isn't allowed head below hips at ruck etc. I not sure, but was just saying what I saw on all the arguments.
-
@NTA said in Wallabies v Lions II:
We gave up control of the game and an 18 point lead. Some dumb fuck penalties like Wilson's clean out past the ruck. Not being able to make simple one on one tackles.
Wilson was remarkably inaccurate at rucks during the game, but what I noticed most (apart from some terribly porous defence) was Australia dictated proceedings whilst they had go forward. That disappeared once Skelton and Valentini left the field.
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@NTA said in Wallabies v Lions II:
We gave up control of the game and an 18 point lead. Some dumb fuck penalties like Wilson's clean out past the ruck. Not being able to make simple one on one tackles.
Wilson was remarkably inaccurate at rucks during the game, but what I noticed most (apart from some terribly porous defence) was Australia dictated proceedings whilst they had go forward. That disappeared once Skelton and Valentini left the field.
I didn’t watch a lot of Super rugby this year, but watching Wilson in this game, it was also noticeable that he was getting smacked on most carries. Has he dropped some weight or lost some power? I don’t recall this from past internationals
-
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@Dan54 said in Wallabies v Lions II:
You know, I sick of what is isn't right with the last ruck, did Tizzano come in from side? Yep looked like it. Did he have head lower than hips? Yep looks like.
You're going to have to explain the point of this to me. Tizzano is first there, so there's no ruck. So there's no requirement for him to have his head above his hips.
Sorry antipod, just one of arguments I read is that Tizzano isn't allowed head below hips at ruck etc. I not sure, but was just saying what I saw on all the arguments.
@Dan54 said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@Dan54 said in Wallabies v Lions II:
You know, I sick of what is isn't right with the last ruck, did Tizzano come in from side? Yep looked like it. Did he have head lower than hips? Yep looks like.
You're going to have to explain the point of this to me. Tizzano is first there, so there's no ruck. So there's no requirement for him to have his head above his hips.
Sorry antipod, just one of arguments I read is that Tizzano isn't allowed head below hips at ruck etc. I not sure, but was just saying what I saw on all the arguments.
No problem, the only issue I have with those peddling that take is it isn't a ruck when Tizzano is attempting to pilfer the ball, so that requirement of the law doesn't apply to him.
What should apply IMO is the requirement to stay on ones feet:
-
Gee, Aussie sports fans like a big old whinge these days.
Can't they see the Lions won that fair and square? Whatever happened to accepting the official's decision and moving on?
