Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | 150 | 151 | ... | 642

6744 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1651999 16-Oct-2016 18:13

Oh my goodness. Just watched some highlights of Saturday's games. I saw what I believe to be one of the most blatantly wrong TMO decisions I have seen in a long time.
Wellington's second try against Waikato, referred for a possible forward pass in the lead up to the try. "No clear evidence of a forward pass" was the decision. Was the fact that the receiver was closer to the opposition goal line before the ball even left the passer's hands not an indication that the pass had to be forward? If the ball had been kicked instead of passed the receiver would have been ruled offside, ahead of the kicker. I replayed the action multiple times and there is no doubt about the position of the two players.
Didn't affect the outcome of the game, but if Wellington's position in the semis had been by virtue of scoring a four try bonus point, then other teams could have felt justifiably aggrieved.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1652845 18-Oct-2016 13:22

I grow increasingly tired of the media in NZ making out there is a systemic issue with player behaviour off-field and more so that it is in some way Rugby's fault.

We have some men behaving badly, who are rugby players. They aren't doing it because they are rugby players. I am unsure why NZ Rugby feels compelled to apologise in any way, and I am horrified to see a panel created to "deal" with it.

The standards for being an All Black have been clear since Father Ted was in charge, and those have no changed, or lessened in any way under Hansen.

I am a little surprised by the "leniency" of the Aaron Smith's punishment but at the end of the day it's an employment matter.

Those people who's opinions of the AB's, has been affected negatively aren't the real fans. Real fans can seperate the behaviour of the player off-field from the brand.

Was particular galled to see a number of loud-mouthed obnoxious comments from Australia about it when they have enough of their own off-field incidents to write a book about (Kurtley Beale anyone)?

lagbort

263 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#1652924 18-Oct-2016 14:35

Dingbatt: Oh my goodness. Just watched some highlights of Saturday's games. I saw what I believe to be one of the most blatantly wrong TMO decisions I have seen in a long time.
Wellington's second try against Waikato, referred for a possible forward pass in the lead up to the try. "No clear evidence of a forward pass" was the decision. Was the fact that the receiver was closer to the opposition goal line before the ball even left the passer's hands not an indication that the pass had to be forward? If the ball had been kicked instead of passed the receiver would have been ruled offside, ahead of the kicker. I replayed the action multiple times and there is no doubt about the position of the two players.
Didn't affect the outcome of the game, but if Wellington's position in the semis had been by virtue of scoring a four try bonus point, then other teams could have felt justifiably aggrieved.

I have not seen the specific incident in question, but as explained here as long as the movement of the passers hands was backwards, the receiver being in front of the passer does not constitute a forward pass. often if a player is tackled right as they are passing the pass can appear to be 'blatantly' forward when in reality it is a perfectly legal pass.

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1653021 18-Oct-2016 15:54

lagbort:

Dingbatt: Oh my goodness. Just watched some highlights of Saturday's games. I saw what I believe to be one of the most blatantly wrong TMO decisions I have seen in a long time.
Wellington's second try against Waikato, referred for a possible forward pass in the lead up to the try. "No clear evidence of a forward pass" was the decision. Was the fact that the receiver was closer to the opposition goal line before the ball even left the passer's hands not an indication that the pass had to be forward? If the ball had been kicked instead of passed the receiver would have been ruled offside, ahead of the kicker. I replayed the action multiple times and there is no doubt about the position of the two players.
Didn't affect the outcome of the game, but if Wellington's position in the semis had been by virtue of scoring a four try bonus point, then other teams could have felt justifiably aggrieved.

I have not seen the specific incident in question, but as explained here as long as the movement of the passers hands was backwards, the receiver being in front of the passer does not constitute a forward pass. often if a player is tackled right as they are passing the pass can appear to be 'blatantly' forward when in reality it is a perfectly legal pass.

Yup, so it's important to watch the ball as it leaves the hands of the first player, if the ball LEAVES the hands backward but TRAVELS forward, it's ok.

Having said that, I am trying to imagine what it would take for it not to be a forward pass if the receiver is in front of the passer at the time of the pass.

lagbort

263 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#1653023 18-Oct-2016 15:56

networkn:

lagbort:

Dingbatt: Oh my goodness. Just watched some highlights of Saturday's games. I saw what I believe to be one of the most blatantly wrong TMO decisions I have seen in a long time.
Wellington's second try against Waikato, referred for a possible forward pass in the lead up to the try. "No clear evidence of a forward pass" was the decision. Was the fact that the receiver was closer to the opposition goal line before the ball even left the passer's hands not an indication that the pass had to be forward? If the ball had been kicked instead of passed the receiver would have been ruled offside, ahead of the kicker. I replayed the action multiple times and there is no doubt about the position of the two players.
Didn't affect the outcome of the game, but if Wellington's position in the semis had been by virtue of scoring a four try bonus point, then other teams could have felt justifiably aggrieved.

I have not seen the specific incident in question, but as explained here as long as the movement of the passers hands was backwards, the receiver being in front of the passer does not constitute a forward pass. often if a player is tackled right as they are passing the pass can appear to be 'blatantly' forward when in reality it is a perfectly legal pass.

Yup, so it's important to watch the ball as it leaves the hands of the first player, if the ball LEAVES the hands backward but TRAVELS forward, it's ok.

Having said that, I am trying to imagine what it would take for it not to be a forward pass if the receiver is in front of the passer at the time of the pass.

if the passer was running full tilt and the receiver was standing still or jogging, the passer could be behind the receiver at the time the ball was released and still perform a legal pass.

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1653031 18-Oct-2016 16:03

lagbort:

networkn:

lagbort:

Dingbatt: Oh my goodness. Just watched some highlights of Saturday's games. I saw what I believe to be one of the most blatantly wrong TMO decisions I have seen in a long time.
Wellington's second try against Waikato, referred for a possible forward pass in the lead up to the try. "No clear evidence of a forward pass" was the decision. Was the fact that the receiver was closer to the opposition goal line before the ball even left the passer's hands not an indication that the pass had to be forward? If the ball had been kicked instead of passed the receiver would have been ruled offside, ahead of the kicker. I replayed the action multiple times and there is no doubt about the position of the two players.
Didn't affect the outcome of the game, but if Wellington's position in the semis had been by virtue of scoring a four try bonus point, then other teams could have felt justifiably aggrieved.

I have not seen the specific incident in question, but as explained here as long as the movement of the passers hands was backwards, the receiver being in front of the passer does not constitute a forward pass. often if a player is tackled right as they are passing the pass can appear to be 'blatantly' forward when in reality it is a perfectly legal pass.

Yup, so it's important to watch the ball as it leaves the hands of the first player, if the ball LEAVES the hands backward but TRAVELS forward, it's ok.

Having said that, I am trying to imagine what it would take for it not to be a forward pass if the receiver is in front of the passer at the time of the pass.

if the passer was running full tilt and the receiver was standing still or jogging, the passer could be behind the receiver at the time the ball was released and still perform a legal pass.

Allblacks.com has all the highlights (free with registration), I just watched it and I'm with Dingbatt, looks forward to me. Normally Nisbett will make a comment like "looks forward, but play continues" or "That's an extremely flat pass" but nothing from him about it.

Certainly isn't the speed required. It was essentially offloaded in the tackle, he almost seems to fling it away from his chest.

Dingbatt

6744 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1653070 18-Oct-2016 16:49

Yes. Just to clarify. Not a flowing backline move where the forward momentum of the players means the ball is received forward of a line from where it was released. @lagbort, I understand the 'backwards or of the hands' interpretation. But in this case the receiver was closer to the goal line before the pass was thrown. Offside at the least.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Backblaze

Backblaze Unlimited Backup. World’s easiest cloud backup. Get peace of mind knowing your files are backed up securely in the cloud (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1655734 21-Oct-2016 14:15

Please let this be the AB's test that we show as a country we have grown up and feel secure enough in our team and our success that we don't boo Quade Cooper every time he touches the ball (or for any other player too).

Also, please let this be the test that we show kickers the respect they deserve, but letting them put their best attempt over without catcalls and booing as well.

Hammerer

2476 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1655750 21-Oct-2016 14:27

networkn:

Please let this be the AB's test that we show as a country we have grown up and feel secure enough in our team and our success that we don't boo Quade Cooper every time he touches the ball (or for any other player too).

Also, please let this be the test that we show kickers the respect they deserve, but letting them put their best attempt over without catcalls and booing as well.

And, while we're at our optimistic best, please let there be world peace too.

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1655752 21-Oct-2016 14:28

Hammerer:

networkn:

Please let this be the AB's test that we show as a country we have grown up and feel secure enough in our team and our success that we don't boo Quade Cooper every time he touches the ball (or for any other player too).

Also, please let this be the test that we show kickers the respect they deserve, but letting them put their best attempt over without catcalls and booing as well.

And, while we're at our optimistic best, please let there be world peace too.

Seems I am the only one who thinks there is even a tiny chance of an upset this weekend. I am desperately hoping we can win, it would be nice to see this final hurdle, but I do feel Australia can upset us, if we try and be too clever.

I am concerned about Hooper and Pocock, and Speight as well. Even their selected 12 is a reasonable choice.

JonnyCam

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#1655753 21-Oct-2016 14:35

networkn:

Please let this be the AB's test that we show as a country we have grown up and feel secure enough in our team and our success that we don't boo Quade Cooper every time he touches the ball (or for any other player too).

Also, please let this be the test that we show kickers the respect they deserve, but letting them put their best attempt over without catcalls and booing as well.

Agreed

Especially now as he will be coming off the bench. I got the hate in the first game against us after the perceived slight / knee to McCaws head, but let it go. People seem to be doing it out of fun / joke rather than actual hate, but it doesn't come across as that.

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1655754 21-Oct-2016 14:39

JonnyCam:

networkn:

Please let this be the AB's test that we show as a country we have grown up and feel secure enough in our team and our success that we don't boo Quade Cooper every time he touches the ball (or for any other player too).

Also, please let this be the test that we show kickers the respect they deserve, but letting them put their best attempt over without catcalls and booing as well.

Agreed

Especially now as he will be coming off the bench. I got the hate in the first game against us after the perceived slight / knee to McCaws head, but let it go. People seem to be doing it out of fun / joke rather than actual hate, but it doesn't come across as that.

Sometimes I feel (as a nation) we don't deserve or behave in a way that befits fans of best team in the world. The same things that indicate to us that it's ok to boo another team, are same issues that stop us being truly great in other areas.

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek

#1655786 21-Oct-2016 15:15

Oh please - it happens everywhere in sport, look at Kyrgios. You reap what you sow, and its less about growing up as a nation and more about being a smart international player. Coopers biggest issue is that because he is disliked everytime he makes a mistake people love that, but it affects his game big time. Then the media beat it up throughout the week, and pile on the pressure and he fails. Thats sport, if he had not done those things to the AB's [and it wasnt percieved, and it wasnt only once] he would not have an issue coming to NZ. Lump it Cooper, karmas a bitch

PS coming out on twitter and saying you are NZ public enemy number 1...

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1655787 21-Oct-2016 15:18

itxtme:

Oh please - it happens everywhere in sport, look at Kyrgios. You reap what you sow, and its less about growing up as a nation and more about being a smart international player. Coopers biggest issue is that because he is disliked everytime he makes a mistake people love that, but it affects his game big time. Then the media beat it up throughout the week, and pile on the pressure and he fails. Thats sport, if he had not done those things to the AB's [and it wasnt percieved, and it wasnt only once] he would not have an issue coming to NZ. Lump it Cooper, karmas a bitch

PS coming out on twitter and saying you are NZ public enemy number 1...

Obviously, you don't believe in letting sleeping dogs lie, being the bigger man, or showing class? Just stick the boot in?

If we are as good as we think we are, QC having a good game shouldn't be the difference.

I always teach my son that it's important to be a good loser, but it's MORE important to be a good winner.

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek

#1655814 21-Oct-2016 15:52

You are missing my point, its not me yelling at him. What I think personally is irrelevant. He wasn't smart on multiple occasions, and now this is his NZ reality

1 | ... | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | 150 | 151 | ... | 642