Munster Vs Connacht

[rumncoke]

Would or would not unfortunately the not was silent or absent like your sense

Because the Munster player would have been tackled before the line

As stated it was a mistimed tackle by a back row forward not a lard ass-d prop only capable of trotting from ruck to ruck .




Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

[Spiffsson]

The penalty try was a sick joke the incident didn't even deserve a yellow card .

Why players week in and week out play/ take out players off the ball with immunity especially around the ruck. That is one reason against the yellow card

Now the penalty try . What occurred was a mistimed tackle .
The Connaught player was chasing the Munster players he could see Keatley was going to pass the ball .Keatley either tried a dummy or delayed the pass and the Connaught player committed to the tackle .

Keatley did pass and there is nothing to suggest that the Munster player would have made the line to score the fact is he was just tackled early ----- Penalty not penalty try if Keatley had not passed or committed a dummy then the card might have been justified .
Keatley was putting the Connaught tackler in a "heads I win tails you lose situation"
Your damned if you do and damned if you don't and for that reason definitely not a yellow card and definitely not a penalty try










Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

It was mistimed all right. It was early. i.e. - a bloke without the ball was tackled. That is against the laws and a clear offence whether you like it or not, and however you describe it, and has to be penalized. As to the penalty try - perhaps a tad harsh, but right on the edge and could have gone either way. Luckily, it did not affect the outcome of the game.

[Russ]

When an offence is committed the referee must decide what is most likely to have happened if that player didn't exist

Given there was no cover the try would have been scored

[BaggyTrousers]

When an offence is committed the referee must decide what is most likely to have happened if that player didn't exist

Given there was no cover the try would have been scored

When you say "if that player didn't exist" should the ref take account of the social pressures and possible educational shortcomings of his upbringing - especially if Welsh - or should he actually seek to go back in time & get his arsepiece in the way of the players Da just prior to the moment of conception?

It's an interesting thought Russ but I'm troubled by the implications for refs, I mean a ref with a sore arsehole is unlilkley to be mentally adjusted to a free flowing game, he'd rather hobble from set piece to set piece, with his tattered ringpiece, hoping not to prolapse.

[Russ]

When an offence is committed the referee must decide what is most likely to have happened if that player didn't exist

Given there was no cover the try would have been scored

When you say "if that player didn't exist" should the ref take account of the social pressures and possible educational shortcomings of his upbringing - especially if Welsh - or should he actually seek to go back in time & get his arsepiece in the way of the players Da just prior to the moment of conception?

It's an interesting thought Russ but I'm troubled by the implications for refs, I mean a ref with a sore arsehole is unlilkley to be mentally adjusted to a free flowing game, he'd rather hobble from set piece to set piece, with his tattered ringpiece, hoping not to prolapse.

Steve Walsh explained this very well