Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 148 | 149 | 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | ... | 356

21941 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756252 4-Apr-2017 12:28

JonnyCam:

networkn:

Any rule against you sliding in front of a player moving to the try line, so you effectively arrive parallel but in front of the line? Basically so you block the try being scored without tackling the player?

In what regard? Why would you not want to tackle the player, is it due to being in an offside position?

Tackling a player may not result in being able to stop him scoring, but blocking his path to the try line esp if he is also going low....

Just musing, not really too worried either way.

JonnyCam

562 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1756284 4-Apr-2017 13:15

networkn:

JonnyCam:

networkn:

Any rule against you sliding in front of a player moving to the try line, so you effectively arrive parallel but in front of the line? Basically so you block the try being scored without tackling the player?

In what regard? Why would you not want to tackle the player, is it due to being in an offside position?

Tackling a player may not result in being able to stop him scoring, but blocking his path to the try line esp if he is also going low....

Just musing, not really too worried either way.

Suspect the momentum of the player would push the 'tackler' over the line if going low. There is also the safety aspect of going in potentially feet first, a la Billy Slater in the league (which is why they banned it - not sure if there is a similar rule in union.)

TeaLeaf

3465 posts

Uber Geek

#1756297 4-Apr-2017 13:25

JonnyCam:

Suspect the momentum of the player would push the 'tackler' over the line if going low. There is also the safety aspect of going in potentially feet first, a la Billy Slater in the league (which is why they banned it - not sure if there is a similar rule in union.)

That would be my first guess too, given Refs being the cynical creatures they are and if he calls it no try ......

But I thought leading with the feet was banned in Union as well?

But hey still doesnt stop Silly Slater from doing it. I think its a bad habit. Bit like how Matt Ridge use to always put his head on the wrong side of a tackle.

lagbort

183 posts

Master Geek

#1756303 4-Apr-2017 13:27

networkn:

JonnyCam:

networkn:

Any rule against you sliding in front of a player moving to the try line, so you effectively arrive parallel but in front of the line? Basically so you block the try being scored without tackling the player?

In what regard? Why would you not want to tackle the player, is it due to being in an offside position?

Tackling a player may not result in being able to stop him scoring, but blocking his path to the try line esp if he is also going low....

Just musing, not really too worried either way.

As long as you slid head first towards the player and didn't do something silly like sliding a shoulder into their face I can't see why there would be any issue. I can't find any laws that would disallow "Defensive Obstruction" so as long as you didn't break any other laws in the process you should be fine.

networkn

21941 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756319 4-Apr-2017 13:46

lagbort:

As long as you slid head first towards the player and didn't do something silly like sliding a shoulder into their face I can't see why there would be any issue. I can't find any laws that would disallow "Defensive Obstruction" so as long as you didn't break any other laws in the process you should be fine.

Yeah, I think that was how I imagined it.

networkn

21941 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756641 4-Apr-2017 21:29

Toulouse v Munster, Munster gave them a hiding in the quarters.

A few significant plays by ex Kiwi players, esp Tyler Bylandaal (ex Crusaders).

Highlights worth a watch, even if to just watch the different style of play to Southern teams like NZ.

It would be most interesting to see how the winner of this competion fared against the Hurricanes, or Crusaders, or Highlanders.

Dingbatt

4181 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1759265 7-Apr-2017 21:32

Hurricanes hung in well there in the end after blowing the Warratahs off the park in the first 12 minutes. I was annoyed by Barrett's first yellow card, it was more like a failed attempt at an intercept than a deliberate knock down. If there was an example of a deliberate knock down it was his second yellow! At the same time as the first yellow, two pieces of foul play that should have led to yellows, no arms tackle off the ball on Jordie Barrett, that led to a concussion test (penalty only) and the elbow to the throat of Jane (unpunished).

Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

itxtme

1711 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1759277 7-Apr-2017 22:01

^ Agreed on all points. I was miffed with the first yellow, this is an ongoing issue in super rugby, a real lack of consistency. The ref is doing himself no favours by refusing to go upstairs and check, but it seemed he was consistent in failing to do this all game (go figure).

networkn

21941 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1759278 7-Apr-2017 22:02

Can't really agree with that. It wasn't a knockdown, but it was interference of what was a very likely scoring opportunities (1st one). He had no real chance of securing the ball, so even though he made it look like he was going for the ball it was never going to happen.

The second absolutely should have been a penalty try. I have no problem with the red card decision, both were cynical. He is way too classy to play those sort of tactics.

The No Arms tackle and leading with the elbow, I agree with, should have been looked at.

Dingbatt

4181 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1759322 8-Apr-2017 07:40

One person supports this post

But then any intercept is interference in a potential scoring move, isn't it? I rewatched the first one multiple times, and in my opinion, there was a genuine attempt to catch the ball. While constant referrals to the TMO become a blight on the flow of the game, for something that impacts the game as markedly as a yellow card, I believe they are essential.

Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

lagbort

183 posts

Master Geek

#1759324 8-Apr-2017 08:01

Dingbatt: But then any intercept is interference in a potential scoring move, isn't it? I rewatched the first one multiple times, and in my opinion, there was a genuine attempt to catch the ball. While constant referrals to the TMO become a blight on the flow of the game, for something that impacts the game as markedly as a yellow card, I believe they are essential.

Just watched the replay now, the second one was fair enough but that first yellow was an absolute travesty. How could it have been any more of a genuine effort without actually catching it?

kiwifidget

1795 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1759594 8-Apr-2017 21:17

Why has SBW taped over the BNZ logo on his collar?

Life is too short to remove USB safely.

Dingbatt

4181 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1759610 8-Apr-2017 21:35

Did someone spike the Blue's Gatorade at half-time?

Again.

Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

networkn

21941 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1759619 8-Apr-2017 22:55

Pulu is a good runner, has pretty good vision, but his distribution from the base of the ruck is too slow. Passes between players at the Blues is too high, they lose their forward momentum which allows teams to crowd them on defense, then they lack the maturity and composure to reset well enough. They are extremely prone to passing instead of taking contact.

Pulu is taking an extra step. He needs to just pass. It's throwing the entire blues line out of sync time and time again.

networkn

21941 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1759621 8-Apr-2017 23:00

kiwifidget:

Why has SBW taped over the BNZ logo on his collar?

Religious Beliefs. BNZ have said they are ok with it.

1 | ... | 148 | 149 | 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | ... | 356