Canes v Tahs (and drinks?)
-
<p>More info:</p>
<p> </p>
<p><img src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cm-gg_7UIAAKhj8.jpg" alt="Cm-gg_7UIAAKhj8.jpg"></p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="595629" data-time="1468106347">
<div>
<p>Crowd was really pissed about the trip on Kellaway and the face action on Foley.<br><br>
Otherwise, it was "home support" no different to any rugby ground in the world.<br><br>
The best thing about not having Fox is no Kearns</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>It was a trip but he was never going to get to the ball. Plus he would have run into the prop who was not obstructing anyway. About facewashing and off the ball stuff the Tahs take the cake. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Dan54" data-cid="595706" data-time="1468126264">
<div>
<p>Fairn enought they were a home crowd and so they meant to be one eyed, I still think it funny noone thought Skelton's shoulder into Shield's neck was ok.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Funny I thought he swung his arm actually.... Kearnsie and the boys just thought it was a standard cleanout....</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Dan54" data-cid="595706" data-time="1468126264">
<div>
<p>Fairn enought they were a home crowd and so they meant to be one eyed, I still think it funny noone thought Skelton's shoulder into Shield's neck was ok.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Actually the replays at the ground took about two minutes to even find anything wrong. Once it established Skelton launched into a bloke on the deck, a few around me people muttered "idiot" and then it went back for the scrum anyway.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Were they expected to boo their own player? I find most crowds will shut the fuck up when they see something wrong on the big screen (if they see it at all!) because they're waiting to see if they dodged a bullet.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="broughie" data-cid="595710" data-time="1468127821">
<div>
<p>It was a trip but he was never going to get to the ball. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Completely irrelevant - a player has obstructed another player coming through, and deliberately stuck his leg out. That's a foot trip and, in a lot of cases, a straight red card. The fact that it wasn't penalised at all is quite amazing given the home OB director gave the officials every chance to see it :)</p> -
<p>Skelton's just one big lazy thug. I remember he got away with trying to rip McCaw's head off on a few occasions when the Waratahs played the Crusaders last year!!</p>
-
<p>Fair play - he's not JUST a big lazy thug. He does have good hands for the offload and is one of the best players I've seen at disrupting mauls.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>He could definitely stand to lose about 10kg and pick his moments to smash someone though.</p> -
Just watching a replay. How the hell did that NSW winger not get a red card?
-
<p>He got a yellow because that is the directive at the moment - only red when lands on shoulder/head. Yeah its a shit decision, but then you look at the danger level of something like this and wonder if yellow was the right call here, given MNS landed on his shoulder/head and it was late and barely a tackle:</p>
</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Not jumping for the ball is the big difference, buts still bloody irresponsible by the Crusaders player.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="canefan" data-cid="595757" data-time="1468141453">
<div>
<p>BB got up smiling. That's all</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Could see him on the big screen having a chuckle once he got his wind back. He knew the guy was off the field, even if it was just for 10 minutes. Glad he landed like he did because it could have been a right shocker.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Taqele can fuck off. Doesn't work hard unless the ball is in his hands, and wasn't smart enough to step inside late in the game with Barrett coming across. Got picked off like the big, fat, lazy prick he is.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="canefan" data-cid="595767" data-time="1468143443"><p>To his credit the big guy apologised to BB, that's when I saw him smiling in reply. Very clumsy and very dangerous though. Reminded me a little bit of the Naholo one versus Wales</p></blockquote>
It was nothing like the Naholo one vs Wales. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="595761" data-time="1468141890">
<div>
<p>He got a yellow because that is the directive at the moment - only red when lands on shoulder/head. </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>It's within Pollock's power to red card him though, isn't it? I know there are guidelines around how a player falls, but if a player intentionally commits foul play, then surely the ref can red card him.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Toddy" data-cid="595773" data-time="1468146984">
<div>
<p>It's within Pollock's power to red card him though, isn't it? I know there are guidelines around how a player falls, but if a player intentionally commits foul play, then surely the ref can red card him.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Yep absolutely. I haven't heard the comms or the ref's mike, just seen replays at the ground from waaaaaay up in the stands opposite the comm boxes. And it looked dodgy as fuck.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So it comes down to the discussion the officials are having, which I haven't been privy to. I suppose they're only going for red when the guidelines give them no choice. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Where did the recommendation come from?</p> -
IMHO it was a shocking decision. Yes there is a directive, but in that situation the ref would have been more than justified in giving a red. But he didn't have the balls. Landed on back? Ok, just a yellow. Fuck that is stupid.
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="595775" data-time="1468148112">
<div>
<p>Yep absolutely. I haven't heard the comms or the ref's mike, just seen replays at the ground from waaaaaay up in the stands opposite the comm boxes. And it looked dodgy as fuck.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So it comes down to the discussion the officials are having, which I haven't been privy to. I suppose they're only going for red when the guidelines give them no choice. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Where did the recommendation come from?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>IIRC it was a typical shit decision by Pollock with no overrule by the TMO or the touchie (until they start making a valuable contribution I can't call them ARs)</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="595784" data-time="1468151374">
<div>
<p>IMHO it was a shocking decision. Yes there is a directive, but in that situation the ref would have been more than justified in giving a red. But he didn't have the balls. Landed on back? Ok, just a yellow. Fuck that is stupid.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Don't blame the ref, blame the laws. The same laws that see people (IMO) quite ridiculously red carded for genuine challenges. The level of punishment is entirely dependent on the landing position of the player in the air. If it's head/neck/shoulders it's a red, if it's on his back it's a yellow. So the YC was right according to that, as BB landed flat on his back.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But it was a genuinely reckless play. I think the law needs to be amended to take intent into account, as well as landing position. It makes no sense that someone with eyes for the ball and arms outstretched can get a red, while Taqele can make an appaling play on a jumping man and get a yellow.</p> -
<p>the law regarding the landings of the player - I think - were specifically made for<strong> </strong><em>contesting the bal<strong>l</strong></em> in the air. Nayaravoro clearly <em>tackled </em>the player in the air, and it was probably one of the worst timed tackles possible, he tackled him exactly at the highest point Barrett jumped to. Red card. SANZAAR agrees.</p>
