Viewing comments for breakaway« back to profile

Wallabies snatch victory from courageous Scots at the death

It's taken a couple of coffees, but I think I see what you're saying. Because the Scotsman grabbed the ball while offside, then maybe that constitutes deliberate foul play and can therefore be sent to the TMO. I think the law recognises the difference between instinctively grabbing at a possibly knocked-on ball (and often, who can tell?), and deliberately playing the ball while being unambiguously offside. And thank God for that. It's only on slo-mo replay that any of us knows for sure that it brushed against Phipps. My position is that the vast majority of even the very best refs would've made the same decision in real time, and players too.

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Wallabies snatch victory from courageous Scots at the death

I demand the TMO. I know it's not allowed, but this is a critical moment in my day.

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Wallabies snatch victory from courageous Scots at the death

I think you missed the intended humour. Do you truly believe I think I convinced everyone, or even anyone? pff!

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Argentina knock Ireland out with convincing Quarter Final win

*Argentina's had the packs…

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Argentina knock Ireland out with convincing Quarter Final win

Argentina's have had the packs and some good, even great, number tens for a long time, but their general back play has really sharpened up in the RCh. I'm sure the All Blacks already knew that but they were still caught on the hop when the Pumas came roaring out of the blocks in the first game. I thought the Irish might roll right back over the Pumas, once they got going, but the way Argentina took the pressure and then came again was impressive. I still think Aust in the SF, but nothing would surprise me.

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Wallabies snatch victory from courageous Scots at the death

I'm not sure why you're asking me about deliberate offside and foul play. I haven't mentioned them. I also haven't said that I'm a big fan of Joubert, in fact I've criticised the yellow card in this game and I think he got the front row penalties mostly wrong too. He has pretty ordinary days.
I'm saying that whatever the fluctuating standards of referees, individually or as a group, rugby is difficult enough to referee as it stands, even with laws mostly as clear as they can be written. It won't improve the situation by insisting that a ref has to decide whether to go to the TMO based on highly subjective ideas about whether that point in the game is crucial or important enough. Any sort of consistency would be impossible and even the decisions to go to the TMO or not every few minutes towards the end of a big match would add controversy. Nobody would be happy. The complaints would increase, not decrease. The TMO protocols are clear and Joubert followed them because he had no alternative. Frankly, I think most other top refs would've made the same decision in real time. See katman's post below, for more common sense.

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Wallabies snatch victory from courageous Scots at the death

I agree, the protocols are not designed for this situation, because they cannot be, in the way you suggest. The TMO protocols are pretty clear about the situations that can be reviewed. They have to be so that as much clarity and objectivity as possible can be brought into situations that get pretty murky and emotional.
If, as I think you're suggesting, the ref could call the TMO not based on clear rules but on subjective feelings about whether the moment is serious enough, which moment is more important than other moments in match, you're putting a huge burden on refs that they can't humanly carry without creating even more angst and controversy. It's hard enough now when the protocols are clear. It would be a nightmare to insist that refs must also decide which bit of general play is more crucial than another. When should every kickable penalty go to TMO; two minutes from the end, five minutes from the end? Only within 40 metres, 22 metres…? I see mayhem.
I'll leave the 2011 stuff. I thought I'd dealt with it on sites like this and convinced everybody four years ago. Anyway, I honestly don't think it's relevant to this situation.

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Wallabies snatch victory from courageous Scots at the death

It's not a matter of games running late, it's more about not wanting people to be irritated out of their brains by having to watch every tight decision played over and over by the TMO. If the TMO was used for all sorts of decisions in general play, then it would just start a whole new level of whingeing… "Why did he check our knock-on and not their knock-on?!" etc etc. Meanwhile people will be walking out the gates in droves. At some point we have to trust the refs, accepting that occasional mistakes will happen; no team or ref ever had a perfect game. In all those historic old test matches there was dodgy stuff going on all the time, and yet the game had no option but to trust the ref, there was no TMO. And players cared just as much about the result as today, maybe more in some cases. Rugby survived just fine.

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Wallabies snatch victory from courageous Scots at the death

Oh dear, this nonsense again. And some people complain about NZers whingeing! I think you should've taken that lie-down immediately, Dan.
As for Joubert, you seem to be saying that he's a bad ref while insisting that he contravene the established protocols regarding the use of TMOs. You can't have it both ways. He doesn't have any licence to use TMO just to check a knock-on in general play with no try involved. You may think that should be available to him, but that's a different matter. The protocols can't be changed in mid-match because one team feels aggrieved.
Personally I think the yellow card was a worse decision (the final penalty just seems worse because of the timing). If a player clearly slaps the ball forward when intercepting, then I can see why the penalty might be given; but when he's putting his hand across the path of the ball to intercept its flight, to me that's not an intentional knock-on. And I think that's the case with Maitland's action. The reason they went to the TMO is to check if the "deliberate knock-on" had stopped a try. Joubert and the TMO decided that the cover was there, so no penalty try. But to me, a card seems way too harsh for what is not a deliberate act. He was trying to intercept, not knock-on.
I was pretty neutral for this one, but can't help feeling for the Scots. In the end, though, a shorter line-out throw and a controlled exit probably would've seen them in the SF. Sometimes teams make their own luck, or invite bad luck.

11 Months, 1 Week ago

Wallabies top 'Pool of death' after resolute defence sees off Wales at Twickenham

Bl**dy Campo… he's been rippin' off my stuff for years, but what can you do?

11 Months, 2 Weeks ago