Wallabies v Lions II
-
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.
-
-
@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 …
@MajorRage said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@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 …
We're not hosting the broadcast to millions.
-
@MajorRage said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@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 …
We're not hosting the broadcast to millions.
@booboo said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@MajorRage said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@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 …
We're not hosting the broadcast to millions.
Yet ….
-
Fucking Aussies. They always find a way to lose. Guttering. They had them on the ropes.
Lynagh is shite. He cost them that game in my view.
@Canes4life said in Wallabies v Lions II:
Lynagh is shite. He cost them that game in my view.
Also some dumb decisions by Wilson and Sua'ali'i at attacking rucks. Wilson sort of lost the plot in the 2nd half and wasn't making any ground carrying the ball. Unless they were cooked Schmidt's decision to replace Valetini at HT and Skelton early in the 2nd half was a mistake and proved costly.
-
@Canes4life said in Wallabies v Lions II:
Lynagh is shite. He cost them that game in my view.
Also some dumb decisions by Wilson and Sua'ali'i at attacking rucks. Wilson sort of lost the plot in the 2nd half and wasn't making any ground carrying the ball. Unless they were cooked Schmidt's decision to replace Valetini at HT and Skelton early in the 2nd half was a mistake and proved costly.
I was watching the game with a few mates and we were all a bit pissed off at getting pumped in the first half but I wondered aloud that the intensity and frequency of the carries by Skelton and Valetini would be hard to maintain. Towards the end of the first half, Skelton in particular, had lost a lot of impetus in his carrying. I assume the plan was always to use these two as much as possible and then replace them against a tiring Lions defence. Unfortunately the replacements are several rungs below those two.
-
@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.
@MajorRage I'm not sure, I'd have to go back and watch it, but I think that's stretching it. He's well into his dive in the still you posted, so it probably depends if there are any head on Aus defenders in front of him when he starts the dive. I think there is at least one, possibly two or three. It's a dangerous thing to do running into a set defense which again is why it's outlawed.
-
that penalty/non penalty probably sums up rugby at the moment.contact with head is a penalty except when its not.
I'm happy it's wasn't called because what could Morgan have done he got low wasn't upright made head contact because other guy was low as well
but as we have seen countless times before head contact is automatic penalty.@ploughboy said in Wallabies v Lions II:
that penalty/non penalty probably sums up rugby at the moment.contact with head is a penalty except when its not.
I'm happy it's wasn't called because what could Morgan have done he got low wasn't upright made head contact because other guy was low as well
but as we have seen countless times before head contact is automatic penalty.He could have stayed on his feet and not sealed off the ball
-
@MajorRage I'm not sure, I'd have to go back and watch it, but I think that's stretching it. He's well into his dive in the still you posted, so it probably depends if there are any head on Aus defenders in front of him when he starts the dive. I think there is at least one, possibly two or three. It's a dangerous thing to do running into a set defense which again is why it's outlawed.
@No-Quarter he was on his knee before the dive.
Actually got no idea what he was trying to achieve.
If the rules as I say above are correct then I think that still shows it was fine.
Must be a ref on here who can clarify the “out of the game” assumption? @nta @antipodean
-
@MajorRage I'm not sure, I'd have to go back and watch it, but I think that's stretching it. He's well into his dive in the still you posted, so it probably depends if there are any head on Aus defenders in front of him when he starts the dive. I think there is at least one, possibly two or three. It's a dangerous thing to do running into a set defense which again is why it's outlawed.
@No-Quarter said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@MajorRage I'm not sure, I'd have to go back and watch it, but I think that's stretching it. He's well into his dive in the still you posted, so it probably depends if there are any head on Aus defenders in front of him when he starts the dive. I think there is at least one, one possibly two or three. It's a dangerous thing to do running into a set defense which again is why it's outlawed.
I think it displays tremendous split second timing and analysis by Sheehan to determine within 0.01 of a second that the defenders were now out of the game and hence he could leap over them without consequence.
-
Pretty good game.
Thought the Morgan cleanout non-penalty was probably the right decision, though I was rooting for the Wallabies. As others have mentioned, the tackle/cleanout situation regarding head contact is a bit of a gamble these days and very annoying. I think most people who are on the fence agree that the less TMO involvement in these kinds of situation, the better, therefore I am OK with the outcome.The Sheehan try irked me a bit, because I think many/most people will feel the way the law is written is not necessarily word for word the way it should be refereed, as I doubt the way Sheehan jumped over players in this particular situation is the kind of "jumping in a try scoring situation" the lawmakers had in mind. Should not be deemed safe play.
Unlucky Wallabies fans. Bombing a 23-5 lead must have felt way more shite than getting pummeled again.
-
Very happy that Morgan didn't get pinged with the loss attributed to Wales.
But wouldn't have been shocked if they had ruled in Australia's favour.
Genge made a massive difference when he came on but was very lucky not be be pinged several times in the scrum
Gleason was very good and in tandem with Valetini could give the Lions all sorts of headaches
I think the wonder try Australia scored in the first half actually hindered not helped them. They'd been driving in to the heart of the Lions prior to that try, tying in defenders and forcing errors and penalties from the BIL
They went away from that after the try and I think that's what gave the BILs a breather and the opportunity to regroup
-
@No-Quarter he was on his knee before the dive.
Actually got no idea what he was trying to achieve.
If the rules as I say above are correct then I think that still shows it was fine.
Must be a ref on here who can clarify the “out of the game” assumption? @nta @antipodean
@MajorRage said in Wallabies v Lions II:
Must be a ref on here who can clarify the “out of the game” assumption?
It's one of those things listed in the preamble bit to the laws. You don't see it ruled on very often and TBH with the new high tackle framework, you're seeing more players try to get low enough to avoid the ire of the ref.
-
I’m still surprised about the Sheehan try being even considered as regulation play - when other teams (international, domestic, school) start trying to run that plan and someone gets hurt, it will come back and bite WR on the ass if they don’t come out and explain that this shouldn’t have been allowed.
What if he was just a fluffybunny hair short? Then it has to be a penalty. Terrible refereeing
-
@No-Quarter said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@MajorRage I'm not sure, I'd have to go back and watch it, but I think that's stretching it. He's well into his dive in the still you posted, so it probably depends if there are any head on Aus defenders in front of him when he starts the dive. I think there is at least one, one possibly two or three. It's a dangerous thing to do running into a set defense which again is why it's outlawed.
I think it displays tremendous split second timing and analysis by Sheehan to determine within 0.01 of a second that the defenders were now out of the game and hence he could leap over them without consequence.
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@No-Quarter said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@MajorRage I'm not sure, I'd have to go back and watch it, but I think that's stretching it. He's well into his dive in the still you posted, so it probably depends if there are any head on Aus defenders in front of him when he starts the dive. I think there is at least one, one possibly two or three. It's a dangerous thing to do running into a set defense which again is why it's outlawed.
I think it displays tremendous split second timing and analysis by Sheehan to determine within 0.01 of a second that the defenders were now out of the game and hence he could leap over them without consequence.
I’m not saying he made that decison.
He was always going to dive, clearly. It’s whether by the laws it was legal given the tackler was on his knees.
-
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@No-Quarter said in Wallabies v Lions II:
@MajorRage I'm not sure, I'd have to go back and watch it, but I think that's stretching it. He's well into his dive in the still you posted, so it probably depends if there are any head on Aus defenders in front of him when he starts the dive. I think there is at least one, one possibly two or three. It's a dangerous thing to do running into a set defense which again is why it's outlawed.
I think it displays tremendous split second timing and analysis by Sheehan to determine within 0.01 of a second that the defenders were now out of the game and hence he could leap over them without consequence.
I’m not saying he made that decison.
He was always going to dive, clearly. It’s whether by the laws it was legal given the tackler was on his knees.
@MajorRage I think at best there's a frame or two in it as to whether Slipper has a knee on the ground before Sheehan takes flight.
FWIW Slipper makes no effort to wrap, so that's a penalty.
This probably isn't an answer for the technical question you've posed, but I'd have penalised Sheehan for the dive and on TMO referral possibly reversed the penalty for the no arms tackle attempt.
