Poverty Bay got absoloutely ridden by Taranaki. 78-0.

networkn:

 

Batman:

 

1. image is not "clear"

 

2. similar to parallax error, viewing something from above which appears to overlap the touch line does not mean it touches the line.

 

 

That was taken from the low res stuff.co.nz video. The refs have access to far greater resolution. Also, they have equipment that allows them to have frame by frame across 2 camera angles. Even though it's not clear, to me it's clear that the white line is breached by a yellow jersey as indicated and it's clear that there is shadow under the ball which wouldn't be present if the ball was on the ground. 

 

 

 

http://findrugbynow.com/2012/11/touch-line-rules/

it says player's body. doesn't mention jersey so presumably not jersey.

So the Lions are boarding a plane to Christchurch today. Thats surprising to me. I would have thought they would have left the day of their last match to give them as much time to recover and get into the new timezone. They should arrive late tomorrow which gives them Thursday, Friday to train and saturday to prepare. Seems a shortish turn around.

networkn:

 

Mo'unga would surely be the form 10 in NZ right now. I am not saying he should take BB's starting jersey in the AB's by any stretch, however, if BB was injured, I would have very few reservations putting him on the field.

 

Yea! Outplayed Barrett like a fiddle, put the Canes under pressure defensively and offensively, allowing Richie to draw BB out with his penchant to move out of line defensively to look for the miracle intercept. Did it 2-3 times that I can recall yet no-one has mentioned it in any articles.

Mo'unga certainly making his presence felt with Sopoanga committing overseas, but at this point he's competing with McKenzie and not on form but on the commitment the selectors have already made on the players who can play 10. Likewise with the comments around Brynn Hall playing with a tremendous amount of hustle for the place earmarked for Triple T from the Chiefs.

Dingbatt: Stay at altitude as long as possible?

Not sure why that would give them any advantage? Surely being less jetlagged would be a better advantage. The coach of the Lions is a smart guy, he has a plan. I am just not sure the logic behind it.

Jogre:

 

networkn:

 

Mo'unga would surely be the form 10 in NZ right now. I am not saying he should take BB's starting jersey in the AB's by any stretch, however, if BB was injured, I would have very few reservations putting him on the field.

 

 

Yea! Outplayed Barrett like a fiddle, put the Canes under pressure defensively and offensively, allowing Richie to draw BB out with his penchant to move out of line defensively to look for the miracle intercept. Did it 2-3 times that I can recall yet no-one has mentioned it in any articles.

 

Mo'unga certainly making his presence felt with Sopoanga committing overseas, but at this point he's competing with McKenzie and not on form but on the commitment the selectors have already made on the players who can play 10. Likewise with the comments around Brynn Hall playing with a tremendous amount of hustle for the place earmarked for Triple T from the Chiefs.

 

While I am a massive Mo'unga fan, and thought he was awesome on the weekend, it does make all the difference when your forward pack is doing the job. The Canes were going backwards half that game and that does make things hard for the back line. B Barrett seemed to be out of ideas and was trying for the miracle intercept quite a few times. The Crusaders were very awake to this though. 

I keep thinking that DM will tone down somewhat and move to a SLIGHTLY less risky type of play, but he seems either 100% committed to it, or unprepared to admit that whilst when it comes off, it's spectacular, a lot of the time, it kills his teams momentum. I don't think it's a case of squashing him entirely, just insisting he takes an extra half a second to consider his movements and make better decisions. The two big passes he threw in the Quarters defied belief. The first one not so much, but had it not of been for Savea not having the legs to run the field twice (WTF?)....

The second player is Jordie Barrett. He seems to lack the composure of his brothers to be honest. He makes a lot of mistakes and does tend to toward silly things. He has been playing for 2 seasons. One season he was great, the second, I think he was more liability than assett for the Canes. He does have a massive boot and his height gives him an advantage in the air, but I think I'd pull him from the AB's and tell him to work on some things for the off season and see how he is next year.

wratterus:

 

While I am a massive Mo'unga fan, and thought he was awesome on the weekend, it does make all the difference when your forward pack is doing the job. The Canes were going backwards half that game and that does make things hard for the back line. B Barrett seemed to be out of ideas and was trying for the miracle intercept quite a few times. The Crusaders were very awake to this though. 

 

The ABs pack is largely made up of Crusaders forwards to an extent, so that familiarity would help even if the forwards aren't generating the same level of go-forward ball.

DM - I think some of that would come with experience, he's been second cab off the rank for so long, this is the first season where he's owning that 'playmaker' role and he's just overeager to make things happen. It paid off in the test against France, but against the Canes he didn't adjust at all.

JB - I heard something where his preferred position is second-five which I thought was interesting given the Canes have a history of bulky second-fives with slender centres hanging off them. He did seem lethargic against the Crusaders and he has come up from being on the wrong end of the Ref's whistle a few times this season with a really puzzled look on his face. Laumape wasn't used to any effect on Saturday and I don't think any semblance of a combination has been formed with him either. Definitely a few work-on's there but I think he needs a clearer idea of how he wants to play and where he wants to play. At the moment he's viewed firmly as a utility-back in the reserves which is hard to train for and gel with the players around you.

I agree that they didn't use Laumape, it seemed amazing to me. When he got the ball he just passed it. I think both of the recent games against the Crusaders the Hurricanes weren't able to get a plan together to fight them off. The Crusaders pretty much just smothered them.

I find it quite strange that JB wants to play 12. Not sure why, he just seems like a fullback to me.

networkn:

 

"There is no clear evidence the player is in touch"

 

 

 

Ahem, yes there is!

 

What is the point?

I was reading back from the end of the topic and thought there must have been some consequential controversy. Instead I find that there is nothing worth looking at and nothing worth discussing.

I'd rather be celebrating the Crusaders' win than wasting any time on a needless point.

Hammerer:

 

networkn:

 

"There is no clear evidence the player is in touch"

 

 

 

Ahem, yes there is!

 

 

What is the point?

 

I was reading back from the end of the topic and thought there must have been some consequential controversy. Instead I find that there is nothing worth looking at and nothing worth discussing.

 

I'd rather be celebrating the Crusaders' win than wasting any time on a needless point.

 

I'm sorry Sire. If you could just let me know what topics are deemed acceptable for discussion here by your measure, I'll try harder to stick to those guidelines.

I thought it was worthy of discussion. It's not a problem except that to me, there WAS clear evidence the try wasn't scored. It didn't change the outcome this time, but I was curious to find out why when he appears over the line, it wasn't judged to that. If it's that jersey doesn't count, then fine, that's the reason.

networkn:

Dingbatt: Stay at altitude as long as possible?

Not sure why that would give them any advantage? Surely being less jetlagged would be a better advantage. The coach of the Lions is a smart guy, he has a plan. I am just not sure the logic behind it.

 

networkn:

 

Hammerer:

 

networkn:

 

"There is no clear evidence the player is in touch"

 

 

 

Ahem, yes there is!

 

 

What is the point?

 

I was reading back from the end of the topic and thought there must have been some consequential controversy. Instead I find that there is nothing worth looking at and nothing worth discussing.

 

I'd rather be celebrating the Crusaders' win than wasting any time on a needless point.

 

 

I'm sorry Sire. If you could just let me know what topics are deemed acceptable for discussion here by your measure, I'll try harder to stick to those guidelines.

 

I thought it was worthy of discussion. It's not a problem except that to me, there WAS clear evidence the try wasn't scored. It didn't change the outcome this time, but I was curious to find out why when he appears over the line, it wasn't judged to that. If it's that jersey doesn't count, then fine, that's the reason.

 

Your sarcasm is wasted on me. If you want to post trivialities and inconsequentials then you are free to do so. I've done my share of them too.

I was asking a clear question - "What is the point?" - so thanks for answering it.

AFAIK, there is no way to "find out why when he appears over the line, it wasn't judged to that". You'd have to take it up with Super Rugby and they don't tend to give any further info even in clear cases of incorrect decisions.

It is absurd to explain this as "If it's that jersey doesn't count, then fine, that's the reason." We both know that jersey does count in the rules - tell me if we have a different view of that then we really would have something to discuss - but the officials did not find clear evidence of the jersey being in touch. Ridiculing their decision and being sarcastic towards me don't help to promote good discussion.

I posted a photo which shows he is over the side line in my view. They had access to at least in as good of view as me and likely much better. I was wondering to the people who participate here, in their views. I agree jersey is "part of the player" but it's not specified in the rules as posted by Batman.

Questioning referees decisions is a common pass time of sports fans the world over. There have been decisions I have questioned from time to time, as to what the reasoning behind it was, and someone has posted a clarification which has helped me understand. I do not expect an explanation from the referees obviously.

As for my sarcasm, it was in response to what I felt was you suggesting my questioning wasn't a good use of your time to read. I didn't ridicule the referees, I simply was surprised they came to a different conclusion given the evidence I posted.

As to the point, the point was I felt the referee made a mistake, and I was interested to see what others thought of the "evidence" I posted as to whether others agreed.

Based on the fact this entire thread doesn't see the light of day to decision makers, coaches, or likely players even, all any of us can do is express our opinions. That's the point.