There are those who know would say I'm normally a very calm person but Cultra /Bangor West/ Prawn Sandwich/Self-Rightious Social Superiority gets up my nose at times.
"Oh Clive aren't those horrible people terrible booing that poor Connaught boy when he's going to take a kick "
Get in touch- a little empathy for your fellow man goes along way- Marie Antoinette
I'm sure Tender/Marie can answer but seeing what gets up your nose, I'm wondering is that all that gets up your nose, did you snort some Charlie last night?
By the way dear heart, I think what you may have been reaching for was "moral superiority" and it's something I value above almost everything in life, if only the rest of the world shared my morals. I am a very moral man Ron, not a fake who feels the bible allows him to act badly, a proper moral, do the right thing type of stand up guy. It's amongst my many fine attributes and one which I value even beyond my endless charm, wit and good looks.
NEVER MOVE ON. Years on, I cannot ever watch Ireland with anything but indifference, I continue to wish for the imminent death of Donal Spring, the FIRFUC's executioner of Wee Paddy & Wee Stu, and I hate the FIRFUCs with undiminished passion.
UlsterNo9 wrote:I think it was in the 63rd or 64th minute, Ulster touch down in goal.
Ludik takes a quick 22 restart but is tackled / impeded just after he takes the drop out when trying to recollect it by a retreating Connacht player.
No referee sanction or call?
Was that correct.
No, from what I saw he took a very short quick tap which crossed the 22 and a retreating Westie "picked his pocket". Smart play from the Westie as I saw it.
Aye but did he not come from an off-side position?
Cap'n Grumpy wrote:Maybe I'm in a minority of three (at least two people with me came to same conclusion) that all the Connacht player did was hold his ground. He's not obliged to get out of Charlie's way, and he didn't change direction. If there was any contact, it was Charlie jumping into him, and he did brace himself for impact, and it did come on his shoulder, but for once I agree with Fitzgibben.
There was no foul play. For all that Charless stayed down and GG was holding his head steady, when he got up, there was no suggestion of a HIA.That to me is proof positive that any contact with the head was minimal. If Ulster wanted to convince the officials that Charless had taken a blow to the head, they should have been prepared to sacrifice him for the duration of an HIA. The fact they didn't suggests to me that they didn't think anything would have come of it.
Me too.
The booing is really starting to fúck me off. There was nothing in it, yer man had committed to the jump/block and could hardly be expected not to defend himself.
If it was a card against us, I'd have been raging.
Re. the vitrol from the stands. Nothing compared to Garces vs. Sarac**ts.
Ron, you seem to have a bit of an inferiority complex, but keep digging away, you're a plucky sort.
I'm certainly no Cultra Clive, but growing up in some of the worst parts of North Belfast I was fortunate to go to a school, which was then under the control of the late great EWD, so I learned Rugby from an early age and my working class parents raised me with manners.
So your inaccurate judgement that only those you'd consider Socially Superior are the custodians of Ulster's proud traditions, makes a fool out of you. I'm proud to uphold those traditions which set us apart from the dregs.
Re Charles, when you commit to a jump, are you not responsible for the wellbeing of the on rushing player. He could have raised his hands and better protected both himself and Charley, but he turned his shoulder. I might be wrong, but I think he should have been carded.
Support the Team, not the regime Guinness is Good For You.
Cap'n Grumpy wrote:Maybe I'm in a minority of three (at least two people with me came to same conclusion) that all the Connacht player did was hold his ground. He's not obliged to get out of Charlie's way, and he didn't change direction. If there was any contact, it was Charlie jumping into him, and he did brace himself for impact, and it did come on his shoulder, but for once I agree with Fitzgibben.
There was no foul play. For all that Charless stayed down and GG was holding his head steady, when he got up, there was no suggestion of a HIA.That to me is proof positive that any contact with the head was minimal. If Ulster wanted to convince the officials that Charless had taken a blow to the head, they should have been prepared to sacrifice him for the duration of an HIA. The fact they didn't suggests to me that they didn't think anything would have come of it.
Me too.
The booing is really starting to fúck me off. There was nothing in it, yer man had committed to the jump/block and could hardly be expected not to defend himself.
If it was a card against us, I'd have been raging.
Re. the vitrol from the stands. Nothing compared to Garces vs. Sarac**ts.
I never thought I would say this , but I agree with the Cap'n on this one
Also as Amiga said, If the situation was reversed and a card had been given to an Ulster player, there rightly would have been a furore on this MB.
Cornerfleg wrote:The Connacht player protected himself by recklessly endangering an opponent.
This post succinctly ended any debate on this challenge several posts ago. The desire to protect one's self doesn't circumvent all other responsibilities. Perhaps he should have held out his hands in front of him rather than shoulder Charlie's face.
UlsterNo9 wrote:I think it was in the 63rd or 64th minute, Ulster touch down in goal.
Ludik takes a quick 22 restart but is tackled / impeded just after he takes the drop out when trying to recollect it by a retreating Connacht player.
No referee sanction or call?
Was that correct.
No, from what I saw he took a very short quick tap which crossed the 22 and a retreating Westie "picked his pocket". Smart play from the Westie as I saw it.
Aye but did he not come from an offside position?
I don't know, but my guess is not. It's a restart but one that allows you to take it quickly and therefore I doubt offside is involved for that would mean that if a player took a kick one and ran the length of the field nobody starting behind him could tackle him for being offside.
My interpretation is that once he has kicked the ball it's open play and therefore there is no offside line, so not offside.
Any refs or someone who could be bothered going onto World Rugby?
NEVER MOVE ON. Years on, I cannot ever watch Ireland with anything but indifference, I continue to wish for the imminent death of Donal Spring, the FIRFUC's executioner of Wee Paddy & Wee Stu, and I hate the FIRFUCs with undiminished passion.
Cap'n Grumpy wrote:Maybe I'm in a minority of three (at least two people with me came to same conclusion) that all the Connacht player did was hold his ground. He's not obliged to get out of Charlie's way, and he didn't change direction. If there was any contact, it was Charlie jumping into him, and he did brace himself for impact, and it did come on his shoulder, but for once I agree with Fitzgibben.
There was no foul play. For all that Charless stayed down and GG was holding his head steady, when he got up, there was no suggestion of a HIA.That to me is proof positive that any contact with the head was minimal. If Ulster wanted to convince the officials that Charless had taken a blow to the head, they should have been prepared to sacrifice him for the duration of an HIA. The fact they didn't suggests to me that they didn't think anything would have come of it.
Me too.
The booing is really starting to fúck me off. There was nothing in it, yer man had committed to the jump/block and could hardly be expected not to defend himself.
If it was a card against us, I'd have been raging.
Re. the vitrol from the stands. Nothing compared to Garces vs. Sarac**ts.
I never thought I would say this , but I agree with the Cap'n on this one
Also as Amiga said, If the situation was reversed and a card had been given to an Ulster player, there rightly would have been a furore on this MB.
Only from the dickheads Tighty.
If you look again, maybe a few times, you will be convinced that I am right when you accept that a player jumping to contest a kicked ball does so with arms positioned to charge the ball, whereas the Westies yute was positioned for impact, arms in, shoulder dipped towards Charles. If you wish to save yourself from impact you do not jump into a player. It's that simple.
Surely jumping into a player with no arms wrapped, shoulder dipped and high is a penalty in anyone's book? I would not have carded him, I think it was borderline for a card but a cert penalty and he could have had no complaint had he got a yella.
Your Honour, the prosecution rests.
NEVER MOVE ON. Years on, I cannot ever watch Ireland with anything but indifference, I continue to wish for the imminent death of Donal Spring, the FIRFUC's executioner of Wee Paddy & Wee Stu, and I hate the FIRFUCs with undiminished passion.
Whilst Wasps may indeed be a good side their performances to date suggest that they may already have one eye on qualification places in their own league before they even come to Belfast next week..... anything other than a win will be disappointing..
Plus great PR weekend for UR a tight win with everything overshadowed by a shyte ref taking all the flak from supporters.... another win next week and Kiss will get extension on his contract even though they don't know when it ends.
I just watched the game again (my S&M Mistress is on Hols) and my opinion of Charlesgate hasn't changed. He was done, not by the thug, but by a coward.
Rodney is useless. He was only on the field for around 14 minutes, but still looked busted.
He missed three tackles, fell on a few rucks and was lucky not to concede a pen.
I did hear that whistle happy Ashton warning Hendy that a sanction was coming just before he carded Deysel. Now I would never ever accuse a ref of bias, but he was itching to card an Ulster player and Deysel did little to warrant a card, but the totally unbiased ref may have chosen Deysel as one of our better, more aggressive defenders and getting him off the pitch when Kunit where inside our 10mtr line and pushing for a score, helped his cause.
I'm worried if Alster don't play switched on hard rugby next week, Fez might bust a camera.
He was correct in his assessment, we were shyte until Charley was cut down and it shouldn't take that to spark them into life. THAT'S WHAT COACHING STAFF ARE FECKIN PAID FOR.
I thought the Mem Stand were outstanding on Friday night. We should be really pleased with ourselves.
Support the Team, not the regime Guinness is Good For You.
UlsterNo9 wrote:I think it was in the 63rd or 64th minute, Ulster touch down in goal.
Ludik takes a quick 22 restart but is tackled / impeded just after he takes the drop out when trying to recollect it by a retreating Connacht player.
No referee sanction or call?
Was that correct.
No, from what I saw he took a very short quick tap which crossed the 22 and a retreating Westie "picked his pocket". Smart play from the Westie as I saw it.
Aye but did he not come from an offside position?
I don't know, but my guess is not. It's a restart but one that allows you to take it quickly and therefore I doubt offside is involved for that would mean that if a player took a kick one and ran the length of the field nobody starting behind him could tackle him for being offside.
My interpretation is that once he has kicked the ball it's open play and therefore there is no offside line, so not offside.
Any refs or someone who could be bothered going onto World Rugby?
(a)
The opposing team must not charge over the 22-metre line before the ball is kicked.
Sanction: Free Kick at the place of infringement.
(b)
If an opponent is on the wrong side of the 22-metre line and delays or obstructs the drop-out, the player is guilty of misconduct.
Sanction: Penalty kick on the 22-metre.
Seems once the ball crosses the line it is game on and anything goes.
Cap'n Grumpy wrote:Maybe I'm in a minority of three (at least two people with me came to same conclusion) that all the Connacht player did was hold his ground. He's not obliged to get out of Charlie's way, and he didn't change direction. If there was any contact, it was Charlie jumping into him, and he did brace himself for impact, and it did come on his shoulder, but for once I agree with Fitzgibben.
There was no foul play. For all that Charless stayed down and GG was holding his head steady, when he got up, there was no suggestion of a HIA.That to me is proof positive that any contact with the head was minimal. If Ulster wanted to convince the officials that Charless had taken a blow to the head, they should have been prepared to sacrifice him for the duration of an HIA. The fact they didn't suggests to me that they didn't think anything would have come of it.
Me too.
The booing is really starting to fúck me off. There was nothing in it, yer man had committed to the jump/block and could hardly be expected not to defend himself.
If it was a card against us, I'd have been raging.
Re. the vitrol from the stands. Nothing compared to Garces vs. Sarac**ts.
I never thought I would say this , but I agree with the Cap'n on this one
Also as Amiga said, If the situation was reversed and a card had been given to an Ulster player, there rightly would have been a furore on this MB.
Only from the dickheads Tighty.
If you look again, maybe a few times, you will be convinced that I am right when you accept that a player jumping to contest a kicked ball does so with arms positioned to charge the ball, whereas the Westies yute was positioned for impact, arms in, shoulder dipped towards Charles. If you wish to save yourself from impact you do not jump into a player. It's that simple.
Surely jumping into a player with no arms wrapped, shoulder dipped and high is a penalty in anyone's book? I would not have carded him, I think it was borderline for a card but a cert penalty and he could have had no complaint had he got a yella.
Your Honour, the prosecution rests.
The prosecution can rest indefinitely
The judiciary (in the form of the match day officials) have already seen the evidence, reviewed it and found the defendent not guilty!
I'm not arguing -
I'm just explaining why I'm right
I am a very moral man Ron, not a fake who feels the bible allows him to act badly, a proper moral, do the right thing type of stand up guy. It's amongst my many fine attributes and one which I value even beyond my endless charm, wit and good looks.
