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. 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?
-
@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
@voodoo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
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
Wilson’s game has never really been about dominant carries. There was an interview last year in the Brisbane Times with Scott Higginbotham, where the latter compared Wilson’s style of play to his own.
“Wilso reminds me a bit of myself, him and I are the kind of guys that run holes … some guys don’t like that, some coaches will look at a No.8 and want them to commit defenders and have big contacts and carries.
“When coaches pick teams, it’ll come down to whether he likes a No.8 who is more about attracting defenders … or do you want someone who hits holes, gets offloads and try assists?
“What we have to realise is everyone is different and plays a different style of game in the position they play.
“But I think for Wilso, he’s got a knack for running in between defenders and I think that’s better.”So I don’t anything has really happened to Wilson. He’s never really been a guy that bounces off defenders like Valetini does, so it’s best to play them together like Schmidt wants to. But when Valetini goes off early, like he did yesterday, Wilson’s game becomes much less effective because there’s no one left to create the space to run through.
-
@voodoo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
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
Wilson’s game has never really been about dominant carries. There was an interview last year in the Brisbane Times with Scott Higginbotham, where the latter compared Wilson’s style of play to his own.
“Wilso reminds me a bit of myself, him and I are the kind of guys that run holes … some guys don’t like that, some coaches will look at a No.8 and want them to commit defenders and have big contacts and carries.
“When coaches pick teams, it’ll come down to whether he likes a No.8 who is more about attracting defenders … or do you want someone who hits holes, gets offloads and try assists?
“What we have to realise is everyone is different and plays a different style of game in the position they play.
“But I think for Wilso, he’s got a knack for running in between defenders and I think that’s better.”So I don’t anything has really happened to Wilson. He’s never really been a guy that bounces off defenders like Valetini does, so it’s best to play them together like Schmidt wants to. But when Valetini goes off early, like he did yesterday, Wilson’s game becomes much less effective because there’s no one left to create the space to run through.
@Mauss said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@voodoo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
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
Wilson’s game has never really been about dominant carries. There was an interview last year in the Brisbane Times with Scott Higginbotham, where the latter compared Wilson’s style of play to his own.
“Wilso reminds me a bit of myself, him and I are the kind of guys that run holes … some guys don’t like that, some coaches will look at a No.8 and want them to commit defenders and have big contacts and carries.
“When coaches pick teams, it’ll come down to whether he likes a No.8 who is more about attracting defenders … or do you want someone who hits holes, gets offloads and try assists?
“What we have to realise is everyone is different and plays a different style of game in the position they play.
“But I think for Wilso, he’s got a knack for running in between defenders and I think that’s better.”So I don’t anything has really happened to Wilson. He’s never really been a guy that bounces off defenders like Valetini does, so it’s best to play them together like Schmidt wants to. But when Valetini goes off early, like he did yesterday, Wilson’s game becomes much less effective because there’s no one left to create the space to run through.
That all makes sense, thanks
-
The turning point was when Lynagh dropped the high ball in the 1st half, with no real pressure either as the kick was a bit too far. Should have taken that. They were up by 23-5 at that point. The Lions score a try a few phases later and then one more just before halftime, and you could see the momentum shift after that.
-
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?
@sparky said in Wallabies v Lions II:
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?
Yeah we never do that on here …
-
Mates from Aberdare RFC behind Jac Morgan
Bald one and grey haired one next to him
-
@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.
@No-Quarter said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@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.
Just looking at this, when he dives, the main Oz tackler he dives over has knees on the ground and thus is therefore “out of the game”.
He didn’t try and dive over anybody still in the game.
Am I wrong? Not a law expert (no shit …) but given the above I see no issue at all.
-
