November test matches

Stuff from around the world.

Moderators: The Fonz, Moderators

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17290
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: November test matches

Post by BR » Sun Nov 18, 2018 3:16 pm

Jackie Brown wrote:I don't mind him letting play continue if the ball is at the back of the scrum. Makes for a better spectacle.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
For a reset - I agree. But a penalty offence should at least generate an advantage.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

User avatar
big mervyn
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 11306
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)

Re: November test matches

Post by big mervyn » Sun Nov 18, 2018 3:55 pm

Dave wrote:
BR wrote:I enjoyed that game.

Re Barnes - why is he telling the NZ team when the ball is out on the Irish side?

For me it is an example of the way he coaches and lets infringements go. Another is the way he ignored infringements in the scrum provided the ball gets played.
Why does he insist on addressing all the players as "mate"?
Touch of the David Brents. He's a bit of a tosser who's been given a wee bit too much authority and secretly just wants to be loved.
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17290
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: November test matches

Post by BR » Sun Nov 18, 2018 4:19 pm

Dave wrote:
BR wrote:I enjoyed that game.

Re Barnes - why is he telling the NZ team when the ball is out on the Irish side?

For me it is an example of the way he coaches and lets infringements go. Another is the way he ignored infringements in the scrum provided the ball gets played.
Why does he insist on addressing all the players as "mate"?
I've no problem with that, mate.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13657
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: November test matches

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Sun Nov 18, 2018 4:23 pm

You'll never agree with every decision by a ref and for me last night was no exception, but overall i thought my mate Barnsie had a decent game.
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17290
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: November test matches

Post by BR » Sun Nov 18, 2018 4:36 pm

Cap'n Grumpy wrote:You'll never agree with every decision by a ref and for me last night was no exception, but overall i thought my mate Barnsie had a decent game.
Not questioning his decisions, more his style.

If the kiwis can't see when a ball is out (or understand his interpretation of that) then that is their problem. They either back themselves and risk a penalty or hold back and leave the opposition some space. That's the game.

If their scrum puts enough pressure on the opposite loose head that he is forced to scrummage illegally, then they deserve a penalty, whether or not they have secured the ball.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13657
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: November test matches

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Sun Nov 18, 2018 5:17 pm

BR wrote:
Cap'n Grumpy wrote:You'll never agree with every decision by a ref and for me last night was no exception, but overall i thought my mate Barnsie had a decent game.
Not questioning his decisions, more his style.

If the kiwis can't see when a ball is out (or understand his interpretation of that) then that is their problem. They either back themselves and risk a penalty or hold back and leave the opposition some space. That's the game.

If their scrum puts enough pressure on the opposite loose head that he is forced to scrummage illegally, then they deserve a penalty, whether or not they have secured the ball.
Okay - would agree with that.

However, on those occasions when he said, "I'll tell you when it's out", I don't recall him actually doing so.

Other referees will often put there hands to the sides and say, "ball's out", thereby letting all and sundry know they can play the ball without fear of sanction - is that any different?

Most of that is concerned with a ruck. I agree with you on the issue of a penalty offence at the scrum, but I don't think Barnes is alone in doing that. I would suggest that most refs allow play to continue if the ball comes back quickly, irrespective of any offences occurring in the scrum. Indeed I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that they are encouraged to do so by the refereeing powers that be.
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17290
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: November test matches

Post by BR » Sun Nov 18, 2018 5:36 pm

Cap'n Grumpy wrote: I agree with you on the issue of a penalty offence at the scrum, but I don't think Barnes is alone in doing that. I would suggest that most refs allow play to continue if the ball comes back quickly, irrespective of any offences occurring in the scrum. Indeed I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that they are encouraged to do so by the refereeing powers that be.
I believe they were encouraged (at the pro game level) to allow a collapsed scrum to play on if the ball was immediately playable. That would be instead of a reset. (At lower levels IIRC, refs had to blow as soon as a scrum collapsed for safety reasons).

That would allow for a penalty advantage in my book, but not simply ignoring the offence.

Yes Barnes is not the only one, but he is a repeat offender imho.

A couple of times I've seen the situation where a team has the ball at the 8's feet, they are putting on the pressure,would be entitled to a penalty, but because they have become static (illegally so) the ref calls "use it".

To me the only time a ref should call "use it" in open play is as a warning that he is about to deem a ball unplayable (or as with th collapsed scrum situation above, he is about to be forced into making a call on a reset). I appreciate that the IRB don't fully agree with me on that
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

Dublin4
Warrior
Posts: 1073
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 5:42 pm

Re: November test matches

Post by Dublin4 » Sun Nov 18, 2018 6:27 pm

That was a wonderful match and a night to be treasured in the memory.
I predicted a one score game and fortunately we came out on the right side of that score.
Half time seemed to be at the 60 minute mark such was the agony of the last 20.
Barnes (should that be Barnsie?) had one of his better matches and handled his business reasonably well.

Imagine if we had our full strength team playing? Murray, O'Brien, Henshaw, Leavy ….and the weapon that is Fergus McFadden? :stir: Couldn't resist that :D

Joe may have sealed the deal to become NZ coach post World Cup. If he goes then let's hope he might go as a World Cup winner.

rumncoke
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 6394
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:39 pm

Re: November test matches

Post by rumncoke » Sun Nov 18, 2018 7:52 pm

A ref saying a ball is out is forcing the team with the ball to play .

Personally I consider as soon as a scrum half puts hands on the ball the ball should be considered in play there is a practice of scrum halfs to stand with one hand on the ball look all round knowing if the opposition come near him or stray off side the ref will penalise them while he is delaying playing the ball .

In those circumstances it is hard for defenders to to know when they can advance without being penalised - because there is no clear definition of when the ruck or maul has ended until after a pass by a scrum half but the ball may be playable without being passed by a scrum half . Whether the ball is playable or not, is a matter of opinion by the referee at the end of maul or ruck, which is why he can demand a team to play the ball .





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Within this carapace of skepticism there lives an optimist

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13657
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: November test matches

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Sun Nov 18, 2018 7:53 pm

BR wrote:
Cap'n Grumpy wrote: I agree with you on the issue of a penalty offence at the scrum, but I don't think Barnes is alone in doing that. I would suggest that most refs allow play to continue if the ball comes back quickly, irrespective of any offences occurring in the scrum. Indeed I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that they are encouraged to do so by the refereeing powers that be.
I believe they were encouraged (at the pro game level) to allow a collapsed scrum to play on if the ball was immediately playable. That would be instead of a reset. (At lower levels IIRC, refs had to blow as soon as a scrum collapsed for safety reasons).

That would allow for a penalty advantage in my book, but not simply ignoring the offence.

Yes Barnes is not the only one, but he is a repeat offender imho.

A couple of times I've seen the situation where a team has the ball at the 8's feet, they are putting on the pressure,would be entitled to a penalty, but because they have become static (illegally so) the ref calls "use it".

To me the only time a ref should call "use it" in open play is as a warning that he is about to deem a ball unplayable (or as with th collapsed scrum situation above, he is about to be forced into making a call on a reset). I appreciate that the IRB don't fully agree with me on that
Yes, I appreciate that quite a bit too. :lol:

World Rugby probably don't agree either >EW
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13657
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: November test matches

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Sun Nov 18, 2018 7:56 pm

rumncoke wrote:A ref saying a ball is out is forcing the team with the ball to play .
I would suggest that a ref saying that is telling both teams they can play the ball.

It is that which forces the team with the ball to play, because if they don't, the opposition will.
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

rumncoke
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 6394
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:39 pm

Re: November test matches

Post by rumncoke » Sun Nov 18, 2018 7:59 pm

The problem with scrum penalties is frequently it is difficult to correctly identify who is offending .
Eg a front row may go down voluntarily or may be forced down by illegal means in such circumstances refs may make a wrong call — knowing that ,frequently no call is better than a wrong call.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Within this carapace of skepticism there lives an optimist

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17290
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: November test matches

Post by BR » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:50 pm

rumncoke wrote:The problem with scrum penalties is frequently it is difficult to correctly identify who is offending .
Eg a front row may go down voluntarily or may be forced down by illegal means in such circumstances refs may make a wrong call — knowing that ,frequently no call is better than a wrong call.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yesterday the TJ was calling penalties which the ref chose to ignore.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17290
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: November test matches

Post by BR » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:57 pm

Cap'n Grumpy wrote:
BR wrote:
Cap'n Grumpy wrote: I agree with you on the issue of a penalty offence at the scrum, but I don't think Barnes is alone in doing that. I would suggest that most refs allow play to continue if the ball comes back quickly, irrespective of any offences occurring in the scrum. Indeed I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that they are encouraged to do so by the refereeing powers that be.
I believe they were encouraged (at the pro game level) to allow a collapsed scrum to play on if the ball was immediately playable. That would be instead of a reset. (At lower levels IIRC, refs had to blow as soon as a scrum collapsed for safety reasons).

That would allow for a penalty advantage in my book, but not simply ignoring the offence.

Yes Barnes is not the only one, but he is a repeat offender imho.

A couple of times I've seen the situation where a team has the ball at the 8's feet, they are putting on the pressure,would be entitled to a penalty, but because they have become static (illegally so) the ref calls "use it".

To me the only time a ref should call "use it" in open play is as a warning that he is about to deem a ball unplayable (or as with th collapsed scrum situation above, he is about to be forced into making a call on a reset). I appreciate that the IRB don't fully agree with me on that
Yes, I appreciate that quite a bit too. [emoji38]

World Rugby probably don't agree either >EW
They are on their 3rd user name that I can remember. That's 2 more than me and 1 more than you iirc. You have to question who is the most reliable.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

rumncoke
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 6394
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:39 pm

Re: November test matches

Post by rumncoke » Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:48 pm

The touch judge- is only an assistant referee -- and he is equally prone to make mistakes as a referee .

Plus how frequently do referees signal a penalty -- play advantage only -- to come back for the penalty about 3 phases later -- a practice I find most annoying-- because the attacking side have virtually Carte Blanche until the ref calls the play back to the penalty whereas the defenders are possibly on a threat of a yellow card if another offence happens basically defending with a hand tied behind them .

Give the penalty immediately if an offence has occurred , because by the time the penalty is finally given most have forgotten what the offence was and where it occurred even more annoying is going back to the offence to produce a card .




Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
Within this carapace of skepticism there lives an optimist

Post Reply