Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | ... | 642

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1307052 18-May-2015 11:04

One thing that hasn't been taken into account, is what would have been happened if the 1st forward pass had been picked up, and the Hurricanes had the ball so much further down the field than nearly half way when the second forward pass was caught. Obviously different scenarios might have played out, and maybe an identical outcome, but small things can change an outcome significantly.

It was a poor decision by the TMO, I agree after reviewing it.

Dingbatt

6744 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1307091 18-May-2015 11:47

networkn:
Imagine how Crusaders fans felt after the grand final last year then!

You didn't have to be a Crusaders fan to be 'disappointed' by that particular howler. I guess the only difference was that Joubert made a (wrong) ruling on the fly in general play, and let's face it McCaw has a target on his back when he is refereeing. This time the TMO, who's job it is to make these calls with the benefit of replays, got it badly wrong despite watching it closeup multiple times. Yes I agree on the forward pass thing too, but that is far more subjective in open play.
And then there was the yellow card, both Jackson and Munro viewed the same piece of foul play, Jackson decided it was a penalty only and was virtually overruled by Munro and a yellow card was produced.
If I was the Chiefs management I would be pushing for Munro to never officiate another Chiefs fixture.

“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

#1307093 18-May-2015 11:53

If I was the Chiefs management I would be pushing for Munro to never officiate another Chiefs fixture.

Zero chance of that I'd suggest. Lots of refs have had howlers and have gone on to be decent in other fixtures.

I'd have to say I've even seen Barnes have good games recently. I am not sure how I'd feel about him reffing another NZ knockout game in RWC 2015, but it's possible.

I didn't think the yellow deserved a yellow, but his legs were put past the horizontal and he was dropped, so by the letter of the law, it's a yellow card as I understand the rules.

There was a no arms tackle I think by Tamefuna which I think deserved a second look too.

Players need to stop lifting other players off the ground full stop.

I am not sure what everyone is making such a big fuss about Brad Weber (this isn't an anti Chiefs comment) for, calling him mini Smith, but I dunno, I don't think I've seen him do anything that amazing in the games I have seen him play (Admittedly I don't watch every Chiefs game)

TJ Perenara (Who I don't rate that highly) is having a good season too, much better than last season.

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1307216 18-May-2015 14:23

networkn:

If I was the Chiefs management I would be pushing for Munro to never officiate another Chiefs fixture.

....

I didn't think the yellow deserved a yellow, but his legs were put past the horizontal and he was dropped, so by the letter of the law, it's a yellow card as I understand the rules.

There was a no arms tackle I think by Tamefuna which I think deserved a second look too.

Players need to stop lifting other players off the ground full stop.

I am not sure what everyone is making such a big fuss about Brad Weber (this isn't an anti Chiefs comment) for, calling him mini Smith, but I dunno, I don't think I've seen him do anything that amazing in the games I have seen him play (Admittedly I don't watch every Chiefs game)

TJ Perenara (Who I don't rate that highly) is having a good season too, much better than last season.

I think you're probably right about the dump tackles. The issue for me is (other than the fact that that tackle looked like a fair tackle to any objective kiwi rugby fan) that the law is not applied consistently. There have been dozens of tackles this year (including in that game I believe) that go completely unpunished (and nobody bats an eyelid, because while they may be against the letter of the law they appear fine to us rugby fans).

Same situation for the last minute try that was called back for a knock-on. I have seen other situations where the video ref puts his nose in, of his own accord, and the play has been called back. In this situation, the video referee is explicitly asked about a situation and neglects to mention the fact that a knock on was caused by a professional foul.

As for mentioning Tamefuna as though that negates the bad video ref call - what about the red-card-worthy offence by Reggie Goodes on the Chiefs lock that looked to dislocate his knee. That is against the rules AND clearly damaging, I doubt we will see that guy playing rugby again any time soon, but nothing.

... yet a week or two ago in sydney, the video referee got involved for James Lowe tapping some guy on the back with his knee after he was held back.

Very frustrating as a rugby fan.

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1307623 19-May-2015 09:21

I think you're probably right about the dump tackles. The issue for me is (other than the fact that that tackle looked like a fair tackle to any objective kiwi rugby fan) that the law is not applied consistently. There have been dozens of tackles this year (including in that game I believe) that go completely unpunished (and nobody bats an eyelid, because while they may be against the letter of the law they appear fine to us rugby fans).

Same situation for the last minute try that was called back for a knock-on. I have seen other situations where the video ref puts his nose in, of his own accord, and the play has been called back. In this situation, the video referee is explicitly asked about a situation and neglects to mention the fact that a knock on was caused by a professional foul.

As for mentioning Tamefuna as though that negates the bad video ref call - what about the red-card-worthy offence by Reggie Goodes on the Chiefs lock that looked to dislocate his knee. That is against the rules AND clearly damaging, I doubt we will see that guy playing rugby again any time soon, but nothing.

... yet a week or two ago in sydney, the video referee got involved for James Lowe tapping some guy on the back with his knee after he was held back.

Very frustrating as a rugby fan.

I am not sure if you are aware but there are methods for things not picked up, or handled correctly during games, to be reviewed, and all games are reviewed. You often see players cited after a game for (further) punishment. I did see the Chiefs Lock go down and it looked terrible but at the time I didn't get the impression it was intentional. He doesn't appear to
have been cited subsequently (If it's not picked up players, and refs and coaches can request a review if they feel hard done by). No mention of it in the press which also sometimes happens.

Regardless, I was not singling out Tamifuna, but he was one of the people who didn't get picked up that I noticed. It's been a while since Nonu has done the same thing but he was pretty bad for it for quite a while. I would say he is much better and happier in Yellow.

Seems Chiefs fans have been somewhat vindicated

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11450980

Both Refs have been demoted for at least a week.

Hammerer

2476 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1307644 19-May-2015 10:08

It bothers me that the video refereeing issues continue and we still get basic errors even with four officials on the field and able to see the video.

Is it just bad refereeing? Many of the controversies result from referees who have a record of bad decisions, e.g. Ayoub. Whatever the case, they clearly need better decision-making maybe through clearer regulations and more training.

But what also concerns me is that I have developed the distinct impression that video referee decisions are more likely to go against a team from a different country to the video referee. I haven't actually kept any statistics so I could be wrong but it does apply in several of the issues presented above: "dangerous" tackles not being penalised, foul play off the ball being highlighted, who gets the benefit of the doubt, etc. The howler by Munro didn't penalise a team from another country so it is probably more evidence for plain old bad refereeing.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29727 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1307649 19-May-2015 10:22

Maybe he wasn't concentrating and had his mind somewhere else. You can imagine sitting unemployed for long periods and suddenly get called upon

Hatch

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Hatch (affiliate link).

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1307651 19-May-2015 10:23

networkn:

I think you're probably right about the dump tackles. The issue for me is (other than the fact that that tackle looked like a fair tackle to any objective kiwi rugby fan) that the law is not applied consistently. There have been dozens of tackles this year (including in that game I believe) that go completely unpunished (and nobody bats an eyelid, because while they may be against the letter of the law they appear fine to us rugby fans).

Same situation for the last minute try that was called back for a knock-on. I have seen other situations where the video ref puts his nose in, of his own accord, and the play has been called back. In this situation, the video referee is explicitly asked about a situation and neglects to mention the fact that a knock on was caused by a professional foul.

As for mentioning Tamefuna as though that negates the bad video ref call - what about the red-card-worthy offence by Reggie Goodes on the Chiefs lock that looked to dislocate his knee. That is against the rules AND clearly damaging, I doubt we will see that guy playing rugby again any time soon, but nothing.

... yet a week or two ago in sydney, the video referee got involved for James Lowe tapping some guy on the back with his knee after he was held back.

Very frustrating as a rugby fan.

I am not sure if you are aware but there are methods for things not picked up, or handled correctly during games, to be reviewed, and all games are reviewed. You often see players cited after a game for (further) punishment. I did see the Chiefs Lock go down and it looked terrible but at the time I didn't get the impression it was intentional. He doesn't appear to
have been cited subsequently (If it's not picked up players, and refs and coaches can request a review if they feel hard done by). No mention of it in the press which also sometimes happens.

Regardless, I was not singling out Tamifuna, but he was one of the people who didn't get picked up that I noticed. It's been a while since Nonu has done the same thing but he was pretty bad for it for quite a while. I would say he is much better and happier in Yellow.

Seems Chiefs fans have been somewhat vindicated

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11450980

Both Refs have been demoted for at least a week.

I am aware, but if that tackle on nonu hadn't been yellow carded in the game there is absolutely no way a citing commissioner would pick it up - because it wasn't a yellow card offence in the first place according to how most other games are refereed. Put it this way: if it wasn't yellow carded or penalised we would not be talking about "that dangerous tackle the referee clearly missed" (Hurricanes fans let me know if you think im wrong).

And there is a massive variance in how sanzar citing commissioners view things. Remember that bad tackle on Aaron Cruden from Frans Steyn in SA a couple of months ago? I think it was the worst I have seen this season, and it was extremely dangerous and rightfully red carded in the game. But then the sanzar committee came out afterwards saying Steyn was wrong to have been red carded and it wasn't a red card offence therefore he was cleared and no ban.

Because it was such an egregious example of the judiciary getting it so completely wrong, Sanzar itself had to appeal the ruling (of its own judiciary) and in the end he got 5 weeks. So even with extremely bad and dangerous examples where a player was clearly at risk of serious neck injury, the judiciary can't agree. I think the citing commissioners and judiciary get it wrong all the time, but because of politics it has to be a pretty extreme example before sanzar do anything about it.

Reggie Goods has been sighted, the offence met the red card threshold for foul play, it was just missed by the referees and video ref - see http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/68616488/hurricanes-prop-reggie-goodes-cited-for-foul-play-in-thrilling-win-over-chiefs

Seakiwi

144 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#1307652 19-May-2015 10:25

I think that it is more a matter of seeing what they expect to see.

ie the ref says to the TMO can you check for a possible knock on. the TMO looks and sees the ball go forward and calls the knock on.

Bray's comments about procedures not being followed reinforce this, they have to look at the actual action taking place not for the action they expect to see.

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1307659 19-May-2015 10:31

Hammerer: It bothers me that the video refereeing issues continue and we still get basic errors even with four officials on the field and able to see the video.

Is it just bad refereeing? Many of the controversies result from referees who have a record of bad decisions, e.g. Ayoub. Whatever the case, they clearly need better decision-making maybe through clearer regulations and more training.

But what also concerns me is that I have developed the distinct impression that video referee decisions are more likely to go against a team from a different country to the video referee. I haven't actually kept any statistics so I could be wrong but it does apply in several of the issues presented above: "dangerous" tackles not being penalised, foul play off the ball being highlighted, who gets the benefit of the doubt, etc. The howler by Munro didn't penalise a team from another country so it is probably more evidence for plain old bad refereeing.

Probably. Does anyone remember a few years ago when video referees were not allowed to rule on forward passes? There was a NZ vs SA test in SA in which the referee sent an AB's try upstairs to check a grounding.

The South African video referee talked the on-field referee into ruling the try out due to a forward pass. Had the same incident occurred with SA scoring a try on the back of a potentially forward pass, I doubt the video referee would have gone beyond what he was allowed to do in the same way to give a benefit to the AB's.

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1307661 19-May-2015 10:32

I am aware, but if that tackle on nonu hadn't been yellow carded in the game there is absolutely no way a citing commissioner would pick it up - because it wasn't a yellow card offence in the first place according to how most other games are refereed. Put it this way: if it wasn't yellow carded or penalised we would not be talking about "that dangerous tackle the referee clearly missed" (Hurricanes fans let me know if you think im wrong).

And there is a massive variance in how sanzar citing commissioners view things. Remember that bad tackle on Aaron Cruden from Frans Steyn in SA a couple of months ago? I think it was the worst I have seen this season, and it was extremely dangerous and rightfully red carded in the game. But then the sanzar committee came out afterwards saying Steyn was wrong to have been red carded and it wasn't a red card offence therefore he was cleared and no ban.

Because it was such an egregious example of the judiciary getting it so completely wrong, Sanzar itself had to appeal the ruling (of its own judiciary) and in the end he got 5 weeks. So even with extremely bad and dangerous examples where a player was clearly at risk of serious neck injury, the judiciary can't agree. I think the citing commissioners and judiciary get it wrong all the time, but because of politics it has to be a pretty extreme example before sanzar do anything about it.

Reggie Goods has been sighted, the offence met the red card threshold for foul play, it was just missed by the referees and video ref - see http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/68616488/hurricanes-prop-reggie-goodes-cited-for-foul-play-in-thrilling-win-over-chiefs

I don't understand. In your first paragraph you are saying, it won't be cited if not picked up in the game, and then you provide an example where Reggie Goodes WAS cited when it wasn't carded during the game. I obviously missed the fact he was cited, but it does prove my point that games are reviewed and just because a player gets away with something
during a game doesn't mean it won't affect their record.

I think we all need to step back and realize that these officials and judiciaries are full of human beings with different viewpoints and standards, just as this thread has shown how different people view the same game. I don't think the standard is high enough yet, but the processes are in place to capture bad player AND officials performances. In your example, the no red card for AC was reviewed and reversed as it should be. The outcome was correct even if it took a longer route than ideal.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1307666 19-May-2015 10:39

Video ref should be allowed to listen to the sky commentary team who actually got it right.

Or, make it like those quiz shows, where the video ref is allowed to phone a friend / or ask the audience (crowd) for help ha ha.

All kidding aside , it was an atrocious decision and should have been a penalty try (given a try was actually scored).

[edit] of course, which commentary team should they listen to :) Although, a video ref should be adult enough to filter facts/opinions.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1307667 19-May-2015 10:42

networkn: I think we all need to step back and realize that these officials and judiciaries are full of human beings with different viewpoints and standards,

I agree with this. Match adjudicating is not easy but we also need to provide as many tools to get the right decisions.

Over the long term the match officials should have their performances monitored and compared.

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1307669 19-May-2015 10:44

All kidding aside , it was an atrocious decision and should have been a penalty try (given a try was actually scored).

Disagree with penalty try, the only reason the try was scored was because Hurricanes players were appealing for the knock on which left a gap you could drive a bus through, same thing happened with the Crusaders a few weeks ago. Players do need to play till the whistle.

On an unrelated note, I am actually impressed with how well the Hurricanes are defending their try line this season, it has been a weakness for a long time.

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1307671 19-May-2015 10:44

networkn:

I am aware, but if that tackle on nonu hadn't been yellow carded in the game there is absolutely no way a citing commissioner would pick it up - because it wasn't a yellow card offence in the first place according to how most other games are refereed. Put it this way: if it wasn't yellow carded or penalised we would not be talking about "that dangerous tackle the referee clearly missed" (Hurricanes fans let me know if you think im wrong).

And there is a massive variance in how sanzar citing commissioners view things. Remember that bad tackle on Aaron Cruden from Frans Steyn in SA a couple of months ago? I think it was the worst I have seen this season, and it was extremely dangerous and rightfully red carded in the game. But then the sanzar committee came out afterwards saying Steyn was wrong to have been red carded and it wasn't a red card offence therefore he was cleared and no ban.

Because it was such an egregious example of the judiciary getting it so completely wrong, Sanzar itself had to appeal the ruling (of its own judiciary) and in the end he got 5 weeks. So even with extremely bad and dangerous examples where a player was clearly at risk of serious neck injury, the judiciary can't agree. I think the citing commissioners and judiciary get it wrong all the time, but because of politics it has to be a pretty extreme example before sanzar do anything about it.

Reggie Goods has been sighted, the offence met the red card threshold for foul play, it was just missed by the referees and video ref - see http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/68616488/hurricanes-prop-reggie-goodes-cited-for-foul-play-in-thrilling-win-over-chiefs

I don't understand. In your first paragraph you are saying, it won't be cited if not picked up in the game, and then you provide an example where Reggie Goodes WAS cited when it wasn't carded during the game. I obviously missed the fact he was cited, but it does prove my point that games are reviewed and just because a player gets away with something
during a game doesn't mean it won't affect their record.

I think we all need to step back and realize that these officials and judiciaries are full of human beings with different viewpoints and standards, just as this thread has shown how different people view the same game. I don't think the standard is high enough yet, but the processes are in place to capture bad player AND officials performances. In your example, the no red card for AC was reviewed and reversed as it should be. The outcome was correct even if it took a longer route than ideal.

I get why you would not understand me if you are equating tackle on nonu to the one by Reggie goods. The severity of the incidents and the outcomes is not comparable in my view. Unless you are saying the tackle on Nonu was actually a red card incident, it would not have been picked up by a sighting commissioner.

1 | ... | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | ... | 642