Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Willie Ripia gets out of trouble by passing to the Ref
Taranaki came back from being 9-0 down to beat Tasman 21-9 in their Air New Zealand Cup opener on the weekend. Sloppy play in the first quarter didnt do them any favours, as Tasman knocked over three penalties, including an impressive 53m kick.
In the second half Taranaki found their stride, scoring tries through Jayden Hayward and Shayne Austin, with Willie Ripia kicking a conversion and three penalties.
It was flyhalf Ripia who was involved in this interesting bit of play fairly on though, and we thought it would be an interesting bit to share with you.
Trapped in his 22 with no support and under pressure from the opposition, Ripia looked around and saw only one option the referee.
While we cant be 100% sure that his intention was as it appears, the look on his face afterwards did tells a story. It did in fact look like he got out of jail by stretching the law. You decide.
Time: 01:00
Posted at 1:24 pm | 33 comments
|
Posted in Funnies
|
|
Viewing 33 comments
Anonymous August 04, 2009 2:36 pm
f to the i to the r to the ssssssst
what did ref decide ?
what did ref decide ?
Abs7 August 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Niiiice.. that was clever, what was the outcome of that incident???
Sander August 04, 2009 3:27 pm
The outcome was exactly as Ripia hoped: scrum to the side who was in posessions, Taranaki.
Very cheeky play by Ripia!
The Air New Zealand has been suprisingly fun to watch in the first round.
Very cheeky play by Ripia!
The Air New Zealand has been suprisingly fun to watch in the first round.
Anonymous August 04, 2009 3:38 pm
should have been a penalty against his team though, clear it was intentional... Does anyone know what the rules says in such a case? How come he is not penalized? cheers
luxi August 04, 2009 4:10 pm
'anonymous at 5:38pm on aug4th 09'
the rules say that if the ref interfers with play, the team in possesion of the ball is awarded a scrum
the rules say that if the ref interfers with play, the team in possesion of the ball is awarded a scrum
Jonathan August 04, 2009 4:13 pm
Smart play...because there is not a law in the game that will punish this play! Basically he has found a loophole....very clever!
Anonymous August 04, 2009 4:26 pm
Here's another loophole- when does a chargedown turn into a knock-on. If i put both hands up and smash down a high ball can all my team mates then be on-side and what would the refs decision be, apart from confused
opfazonk August 04, 2009 4:30 pm
think about this: you advance to your opponents' 22 and when your forwards worked their way to the try-line you simply kick or throw the ball to the ref - 5 meter scrum, as he'll most likely stand near the ruck. will give you a great attacking platform :D
maybe NZ will use this in their next matches, as mccaw was crap at the breakdown ;)
maybe NZ will use this in their next matches, as mccaw was crap at the breakdown ;)
opfazonk August 04, 2009 4:32 pm
to the anonymus above: nonsense... it's only a charge down, when you block a kick (no matter with what part of your body) right in front of the kicker...
Rawling August 04, 2009 4:43 pm
... and when you charge down a kick, it's not your team that gets put onside, it's the opposition.
cheyanqui August 04, 2009 4:46 pm
Referee could / should have penalized as an "Act Contrary to Good Sportsmanship".
It's one of the great rules in rugby and is meant to cover exactly this sort of thing.
It's one of the great rules in rugby and is meant to cover exactly this sort of thing.
cheyanqui August 04, 2009 4:48 pm
Rule of thumb I have heard from referees:
If ball is in upward flight, it's a chargedown.
If ball is in downward flight, it's a knock-on.
To parallel basketball, a shot block is a block, but goaltending is a knock-on.
If ball is in upward flight, it's a chargedown.
If ball is in downward flight, it's a knock-on.
To parallel basketball, a shot block is a block, but goaltending is a knock-on.
Anonymous August 04, 2009 5:06 pm
Maybe I'm alone on this one, but it looks as if he may have been trying to pass to his teammate coming back in support, #2 I think it was...
AA August 04, 2009 5:16 pm
Agree with above, it was supposed to go to his teammate. Look at it as if the ref wasn't there... that pass would have been perfect to lead his support without being forward.
Now look at his head as he starts the pass, I'd say he's looking at his teammate, he only sees the ref around the same time he's releasing the pass... and anyone who's started a pass while they're being tackled should know it's not really the time to reconsider your course of action.
I don't think this was premeditated at all.
Now look at his head as he starts the pass, I'd say he's looking at his teammate, he only sees the ref around the same time he's releasing the pass... and anyone who's started a pass while they're being tackled should know it's not really the time to reconsider your course of action.
I don't think this was premeditated at all.
Shaft August 04, 2009 5:44 pm
I'm not so sure I agree with you two above.. If you pause it at 0:25 you'll see that his support is pretty far away when he starts the pass, with his hand going in a direct flicking motion towards where the ref is.
To throw a pass like that in your own 22, and assume that your hooker teamate would get back to grab it, would be helluva risky.
Therefore.. I think he was going for the ref :)
Either or though.. it still creates an interesting discussion, and poses a few questions about the law as it stands.
To throw a pass like that in your own 22, and assume that your hooker teamate would get back to grab it, would be helluva risky.
Therefore.. I think he was going for the ref :)
Either or though.. it still creates an interesting discussion, and poses a few questions about the law as it stands.
Anonymous August 04, 2009 5:54 pm
How about this one you receive a penalty and decided to kick to touch. You have a player down field and out of bounds who receives the kick (out of bounds their for not off side) and throws it in to himself and continues up field to score.
What's your call?
What's your call?
Anonymous August 04, 2009 6:44 pm
...so immediate Penalty there for other team...
Harry Craig August 04, 2009 7:26 pm
The ref could have said play on. You only stop play if either team gains advantage by it. If he did it on purpose the ref could decide to play on, or he could penalise for misconduct but would be unlikely to. If I was reffing this game I would have a word with Ripia and make sure he didn't do it again. With replay it is open to conjecture what his intentions were but in actual time I think the ref made the correct call.
Joe Rob August 04, 2009 8:36 pm
anyone remember when an england player did something similar against new zealand many years ago? he passed it to the touch judge thinking it was the winger about 30m from the all blacks try line, be good to get that on here but no idea when it happened :S
Miguel August 04, 2009 11:36 pm
to the penalty kick question
(guys use anyname just for response)
you cant quick throw on a penalty kick.
I think a quick throw resets play so everyone is on-side. or at least that should be. its confusing which is something people have complained about the new elvs. quick throws are being cut down on because "off-side" players interfere with the quick throw in. anyone know anything about that.
to clear it up: im in a ruck in the opposition 22. ball turned over they clear it to our 22 where we kick it out (legally) on the full. line-out to opposition on the 50m line, but im still lagging well in their territory. am I allowed to interfere with their quick throw in, and then legally be onside if the ball is put back in play?
(guys use anyname just for response)
you cant quick throw on a penalty kick.
I think a quick throw resets play so everyone is on-side. or at least that should be. its confusing which is something people have complained about the new elvs. quick throws are being cut down on because "off-side" players interfere with the quick throw in. anyone know anything about that.
to clear it up: im in a ruck in the opposition 22. ball turned over they clear it to our 22 where we kick it out (legally) on the full. line-out to opposition on the 50m line, but im still lagging well in their territory. am I allowed to interfere with their quick throw in, and then legally be onside if the ball is put back in play?
elliot August 05, 2009 1:42 am
Haha, quick thinking by Ripia! He definitely would've lost it in the ruck or at least conceded a penalty, otherwise.
As long as that doesn't find itself being repeated on a regular basis any time soon, then it's nothing more than a shrewd, albeit not the most honest, move. The fact that rugby is, for the most part, fair and honest, it makes this kind of thing just a funny play.
As long as that doesn't find itself being repeated on a regular basis any time soon, then it's nothing more than a shrewd, albeit not the most honest, move. The fact that rugby is, for the most part, fair and honest, it makes this kind of thing just a funny play.
Anonymous August 05, 2009 3:28 am
The cheeky grin in Ripia's face is just priceless
Anonymous August 05, 2009 11:53 am
I'd have done the same. And wouldn't have felt bad about doing it.
cheyanqui August 05, 2009 3:52 pm
How about this one you receive a penalty and decided to kick to touch. You have a player down field and out of bounds who receives the kick (out of bounds their for not off side) and throws it in to himself and continues up field to score.
What's your call?
Player is in an offside position, as he is ahead of the kicker, and thus "LIABLE" for penalty. If the players actions have no effect on the game (say guy is getting medical attention from prior play), then referee is right to ignore the issue.
However, if the player then runs to throw a quick ball himself, he clearly sought to gain an advantage from being upthere.
Penalty for offsides... Or for that matter, for Acts Contrary to Good Sportsmanship.
What's your call?
Player is in an offside position, as he is ahead of the kicker, and thus "LIABLE" for penalty. If the players actions have no effect on the game (say guy is getting medical attention from prior play), then referee is right to ignore the issue.
However, if the player then runs to throw a quick ball himself, he clearly sought to gain an advantage from being upthere.
Penalty for offsides... Or for that matter, for Acts Contrary to Good Sportsmanship.
Anonymous August 06, 2009 2:27 am
watch once more....could he have been trying to offload to #2?
Anonymous December 06, 2009 9:38 am
if you look carefully you can see one of his team mates making a run behind the ref just as he passed it. could have meant to pass to him? or not haha
Commenting as Guest | Register or Login