Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 313 | 314 | 315 | 316 | 317 | 318 | 319 | 320 | 321 | 322 | 323 | ... | 640

Networkn
32247 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331593 6-Oct-2019 23:05

Handle9:

networkn:

JarrodM: 8-7 penalties conceded in Namibia’s favour

That is still an improvement over what has been occuring prior to the RWC. I do have a list of penalties somewhere, but by memory we were averaging around 9 or 10 a game

It felt like 5 of those were in the first half.

Definately. I have taken to counting them if I can remember, through a game, hoping for <6

Handle9

11274 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331594 6-Oct-2019 23:07

networkn:

I don't think I've ever seen Steve Hansen show as much positive emotion as when TJP scored that try! I still can't really understand how they didn't rule that pass behind the back as forward, it came out of the hands forward as far as I can see. Now it's been awarded, it's going to go down as the try of the tournament, certainly to date.

Considering we played with 3 half backs, a winger/fullback at 10 in his first time in a test and had players out of position, I think Steve Hansen won't be unhappy with that end result. NAM had nothing to lose and threw everything they had at us, and we didn't leak a single try. It took 35 minutes to break them down, longer than Canada, who really weren't in the game from the first whistle. Discipline would be the big issue I think. I am inclined to agree with Stephen Donald about how are they supposed to tackle players going to ground. They must tackle them, or they get up off the ground and go again.

Does anyone know what the final penalty count was? 12 sound right?

Overall it was ok. We played some unusual forward shapes in the first half and were pretty loose at the breakdown. In the second half our forwards were much more structured with tighter pods.

It was also the second game in 5 days for half the team, as well as being flogged this week in training, so it's not surprising that they didn't play that well. Hansen was pretty clear after the game that he was dark on the first half but Namibia played really well.

They go back on a more normal schedule from here playing 4 Saturdays in a row (if we make the final).

Handle9

11274 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331596 6-Oct-2019 23:09

networkn:

Handle9:

networkn:

JarrodM: 8-7 penalties conceded in Namibia’s favour

That is still an improvement over what has been occuring prior to the RWC. I do have a list of penalties somewhere, but by memory we were averaging around 9 or 10 a game

It felt like 5 of those were in the first half.

Definately. I have taken to counting them if I can remember, through a game, hoping for <6

There were a fair few that seemed inane or unable to be avoided and in a normal test Namibia should have had a card before half time. The referees have been sensible with the games against the minnows and not been to whistle happy against them.

Whitelock and Hansen were both pretty scathing of the first half, which was fair.

networkn

Networkn
32247 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331597 6-Oct-2019 23:12

Handle9:

networkn:

I don't think I've ever seen Steve Hansen show as much positive emotion as when TJP scored that try! I still can't really understand how they didn't rule that pass behind the back as forward, it came out of the hands forward as far as I can see. Now it's been awarded, it's going to go down as the try of the tournament, certainly to date.

Considering we played with 3 half backs, a winger/fullback at 10 in his first time in a test and had players out of position, I think Steve Hansen won't be unhappy with that end result. NAM had nothing to lose and threw everything they had at us, and we didn't leak a single try. It took 35 minutes to break them down, longer than Canada, who really weren't in the game from the first whistle. Discipline would be the big issue I think. I am inclined to agree with Stephen Donald about how are they supposed to tackle players going to ground. They must tackle them, or they get up off the ground and go again.

Does anyone know what the final penalty count was? 12 sound right?

Overall it was ok. We played some unusual forward shapes in the first half and were pretty loose at the breakdown. In the second half our forwards were much more structured with tighter pods.

It was also the second game in 5 days for half the team, as well as being flogged this week in training, so it's not surprising that they didn't play that well. Hansen was pretty clear after the game that he was dark on the first half but Namibia played really well.

They go back on a more normal schedule from here playing 4 Saturdays in a row (if we make the final).

Agreed, it's a tough turn around for any team, I pity those in the pool of death.

Apparently, Hansen handed out an attitude adjustment and a reminder they weren't playing sevens, and it was evident from about 6 seconds into the first half :)

I thought Jordie Barrett had a pretty excellent game at 10 considering his lack of experience and the fact the forwards were getting given a challenge. In the second half, I felt they were relying on him less, a lot more work being done by others.

I lost track of where players went. Did Reiko replace Goodhue at Center, or Reece on Wing? Hansen said they were happy with him last week, whereas I thought he was exceedingly average, I wonder what they thought this week. I think it's probably good for him to have a jolt to his (imo) overconfidence, tonight I felt he was playing a part rather than attemping a solo performance.

I don't see him starting unless one of the others gets injured.

networkn

Networkn
32247 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331599 6-Oct-2019 23:24

Handle9:

There were a fair few that seemed inane or unable to be avoided and in a normal test Namibia should have had a card before half time. The referees have been sensible with the games against the minnows and not been to whistle happy against them.

Whitelock and Hansen were both pretty scathing of the first half, which was fair.

What did you think Namibia did to deserve a card?

I have actually thought the referees handled the minnow teams really well. An amount of leniency seems appropriate.

Handle9

11274 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331600 6-Oct-2019 23:26

networkn:

Handle9:

There were a fair few that seemed inane or unable to be avoided and in a normal test Namibia should have had a card before half time. The referees have been sensible with the games against the minnows and not been to whistle happy against them.

Whitelock and Hansen were both pretty scathing of the first half, which was fair.

What did you think Namibia did to deserve a card?

I have actually thought the referees handled the minnow teams really well. An amount of leniency seems appropriate.

Repeated infringements on their line. There were about 3-4 in a row

Handle9

11274 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331601 6-Oct-2019 23:28

networkn:

Handle9:

networkn:

I don't think I've ever seen Steve Hansen show as much positive emotion as when TJP scored that try! I still can't really understand how they didn't rule that pass behind the back as forward, it came out of the hands forward as far as I can see. Now it's been awarded, it's going to go down as the try of the tournament, certainly to date.

Considering we played with 3 half backs, a winger/fullback at 10 in his first time in a test and had players out of position, I think Steve Hansen won't be unhappy with that end result. NAM had nothing to lose and threw everything they had at us, and we didn't leak a single try. It took 35 minutes to break them down, longer than Canada, who really weren't in the game from the first whistle. Discipline would be the big issue I think. I am inclined to agree with Stephen Donald about how are they supposed to tackle players going to ground. They must tackle them, or they get up off the ground and go again.

Does anyone know what the final penalty count was? 12 sound right?

Overall it was ok. We played some unusual forward shapes in the first half and were pretty loose at the breakdown. In the second half our forwards were much more structured with tighter pods.

It was also the second game in 5 days for half the team, as well as being flogged this week in training, so it's not surprising that they didn't play that well. Hansen was pretty clear after the game that he was dark on the first half but Namibia played really well.

They go back on a more normal schedule from here playing 4 Saturdays in a row (if we make the final).

Agreed, it's a tough turn around for any team, I pity those in the pool of death.

Apparently, Hansen handed out an attitude adjustment and a reminder they weren't playing sevens, and it was evident from about 6 seconds into the first half :)

I thought Jordie Barrett had a pretty excellent game at 10 considering his lack of experience and the fact the forwards were getting given a challenge. In the second half, I felt they were relying on him less, a lot more work being done by others.

I lost track of where players went. Did Reiko replace Goodhue at Center, or Reece on Wing? Hansen said they were happy with him last week, whereas I thought he was exceedingly average, I wonder what they thought this week. I think it's probably good for him to have a jolt to his (imo) overconfidence, tonight I felt he was playing a part rather than attemping a solo performance.

I don't see him starting unless one of the others gets injured.

Ioane replaced Goodhue and Perenara replaced Reece

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

Handle9

11274 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331603 6-Oct-2019 23:33

I don't think the problem with Ioane is about his attitude - he seems to be a player you dislike for whatever reason.

He seems to have had physical problems with his legs since halfway through the Blues season. He doesn't have the burst he'd normally have. He was incredible at the start of the Blues season but they didn't rest him on the same schedule as the other franchise rested players and it seems he's paid the price for it.

Hansen generally praises players who put in effort and follow the plan, regardless of results and I think that's where is coming from with Ioane.

networkn

Networkn
32247 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331605 6-Oct-2019 23:47

I am really pleased that Japan are having a good tournament. They are playing some amazing rugby and I *really* enjoyed the game they played against Samoa last night. The Japan of old would have been happy with any win, but they went for, constructed and scored a bonus point try off determination skill and having the right attitude. If we play them in the Quarters, I hope we beat them comfortably, but I hope they give a great account of themselves if they make it to the quarters.

One thing that has blown me away, are the crowds. They are picking teams to support, singing their anthems, their songs, chants and what not. Almost every game there have been substantial or sell out crowds, and on that I expect they may well pull off record tournament attendance records. It's great for the game.

Handle9

11274 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331613 7-Oct-2019 00:05

The refereeing aside this has been the best World Cup I’ve watched, on and off the pitch. The crowds have been great and playing football on top of the ground has made it attractive and exciting. I think the heat has been great as well as with fatigue comes opportunities to attack.

If the six nations ever opened their eyes rugby could be a much more interesting game. Unfortunately they are unwilling to make any changes to their schedules (and their club setup really doesn’t help) so we only get these types of tournaments every 4 years.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29724 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331673 7-Oct-2019 07:28

tdgeek:

Yes, I know this is an AB thread so dont diss them. But if you fans cant see that. We are good we are not great. In fact rugby is good and its not great, so the top tier sides are not anything to write home about. Anyone can win this as they are all solid and no more.

don't worry , due to the world rugby lottery commission, and the algorithm they apply (underdog gets the red card, favourites get yellow or no card), we'll be fine.

warning: due to the nature of the lottery system, cards may sometimes be awarded for charity.

tdgeek

29650 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331675 7-Oct-2019 07:39

Batman:

tdgeek:

Yes, I know this is an AB thread so dont diss them. But if you fans cant see that. We are good we are not great. In fact rugby is good and its not great, so the top tier sides are not anything to write home about. Anyone can win this as they are all solid and no more.

don't worry , due to the world rugby lottery commission, and the algorithm they apply (underdog gets the red card, favourites get yellow or no card), we'll be fine.

No more card comments please. From what you and TL said about the ARG game, the least shocked at that card was their coach. In any case, while my comment wasnt in the spirit of this thread, I still stand by my opinion that all the top teir teams are average, I dont know why, I can only assume its the European and Japan leagues sucking up players before they are past due date. The days of AUS, RSA and ENG being super tough to beat, and the AB's still doing that most of the time, seem over. It all seems tad diluted to me. It does open it up though

GV27

5885 posts

Uber Geek

#2331676 7-Oct-2019 07:40

Batman:

don't worry , due to the world rugby lottery commission, and the algorithm they apply (underdog gets the red card, favourites get yellow or no card), we'll be fine.

warning: due to the nature of the lottery system, cards may also be awarded for charity.

From what I can tell, the only sure fire way to avoid getting a card is to be wearing an English jersey. We've seen players now given reds for exactly what Piers Francis escaped any sanction at all for at the citing commissioner. Even in the same game they were getting warnings when the Argies were getting cars or penalties for the same thing. It's not hard to see who the IRB wants to win the tournament here.

Handle9

11274 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331678 7-Oct-2019 07:46

JarrodM: I’ve posted this on another site but it sums up my feelings re the cards:

Following the high tackle decision making framework, there are 3 incidents it looks at: shoulder charge, high tackle with contact by tacklers head/shoulder, high tackle with contact by tacklers arm.
If we look at this one it is a high tackle with contact made by the tacklers arm. You then ask if there was head/neck contact -> yes. What I think is missed in the ref’s decision is the next question which asks degree of danger - high = red, low = yellow.
From the decision of both yellows all I hear is the ref saying neck/head contact and the mitigation of the ball carrier being low so just a yellow. He may have in fact decided high degree of danger but just not verbalised it? But I think if the we are following the framework the refs should definitely explain each step on the defined framework, because not all neck/head contact is high danger, if you have a ball carrier low of the ruck at low speed I wouldn’t say there is high danger there vs a high speed winger hit by a high swinging arm.

I’m not disagreeing with the decisions as they are subjective and you could justify all three outcomes if you wanted to, this is just reinforcing there is a framework, and that maybe the refs aren’t following it correctly?

I think the referees are enforcing the framework as it is written. There is no doubt that, particularly in Laulalas tackle, it was dangerous. He made slight contact with the shoulder first and then hard contact with the head. The referee was very clear that it was a mitigated red card.

The problem I have is that by making the framework totally objective they have removed intent and the dynamic nature of the game from the equation. Neither Tuungafasi or Laulala had any intent to hit the head, they were both trying to make a solid low tackle. Laulala was partially unsighted as the Namibian player came round the corner and fell at the same time. If the nambian player hadn't slipped and Laulala hadn't been trying to make a hard tackle he ran the risk of being run over.

Kieran Read got penalised against Canada for no arms. That is the alternative with a falling player so you don't hit the head with your arms. How are the players meant to be able to play if they can't effectively tackle and player low to the ground?

Rugby is inherently dangerous. It is a full contact sport which everyone understands. Rucks are much more dangerous than a lot of high tackles as players are flying into a pile of bodies who can't avoid or brace but the IRB haven't touched them.

I also don't have much time for guys who are really thugs, like we used to have in the game (including Jamie Joseph btw). The tackles that are getting yellow cards now aren't the act of guys trying to hurt each other, they are guys who are making accidental contact to the head. It just doesn't make sense.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29724 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2331708 7-Oct-2019 09:12

does someone have a link to video replays of all these head contact tackles that were red carded, yellow carded and not carded?

I'd like to see to compare.

Yes I have spark sport subscription - as a last resort i could go to the game replay and skip to the time ... maybe a list of match and time?

1 | ... | 313 | 314 | 315 | 316 | 317 | 318 | 319 | 320 | 321 | 322 | 323 | ... | 640