General Rugby Discussion

sydthebeat

Do australia never produce good refs?

thomond2006

sydthebeat wrote: »

Do australia never produce good refs?

Steve Walsh

sydthebeat

thomond2006 wrote: »

Steve Walsh

a kiwi

razorblunt

total former wrote: »

Refs announced for the RWC - no significant omissions really.


Jackson
Pollock

http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/news/65914

So refereeing is an art!

molloyjh

I see Andy Goode is delighted our George is among the list anyway....

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/world-cup/andy-goodes-congratulatory-tweet-to-george-clancy-on-rwc-selection-drips-of-sarcasm-31126774.html

CatFromHue

I know he's retiring but players shouldn't be allowed comment like that.

Teferi

CatFromHue wrote: »

I know he's retiring but players shouldn't be allowed comment like that.

To be fair he made the comment less than 24 hours ago, World Rugby, the RFU or the Aviva may yet step in and give him a slap on the wrist.

Swan Curry

I'd prefer more people were honest about very clear, very poor refereeing decisions. Discussion of the standard of refereeing in any form is often shut down, with the word 'respect' thrown around a lot as if criticising a referee is for some reason disrespectful. A referee is there to do a certain job and if they can't do it to a high enough standard, especially in a game like rugby where a referee's actions can determine the outcome, why shouldn't they be criticised?

CatFromHue

Swan Curry wrote: »

I'd prefer more people were honest about very clear, very poor refereeing decisions. Discussion of the standard of refereeing in any form is often shut down, with the word 'respect' thrown around a lot as if criticising a referee is for some reason disrespectful. A referee is there to do a certain job and if they can't do it to a high enough standard, especially in a game like rugby where a referee's actions can determine the outcome, why shouldn't they be criticised?

Is it ok for Clancy to start mocking, which is what Goode is doing here, Goode for missing a conversion or other bits of his play he didn't like?

If it's ok for Goode to say what he wants why shouldn't it be ok for the ref to also say what they want? Of course that would turn into a major problem so shouldn't be allowed.

errlloyd

It doesn't negatively affect Clancy when Goode ****s up though, so your comparison really makes no sense. TMO should probably have interjected or something, it wasn't Clancy's fault.

CatFromHue

In the eyes if Goode it seemingly was Clancy's fault.

Yeah they're not direct comparison but the situation could arise where a ref could end up having a go at a player if both parties were allowed say what they want on Twitter.

mfceiling

http://www.the42.ie/brad-thorn-retirement-2036486-Apr2015/

When you hit 40 and think you'll never play professional rugby again you always looked at Brad.

Not any more...

The Lost Sheep

Swan Curry wrote: »

I'd prefer more people were honest about very clear, very poor refereeing decisions. Discussion of the standard of refereeing in any form is often shut down, with the word 'respect' thrown around a lot as if criticising a referee is for some reason disrespectful. A referee is there to do a certain job and if they can't do it to a high enough standard, especially in a game like rugby where a referee's actions can determine the outcome, why shouldn't they be criticised?

Being honest about poor decisions/performances is fine but only in the correct channels and media isn't the place. If someone has an issue contact relevant competition organising group etc other than that keep quiet.

errlloyd

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11429676

So apparently Cheiks had a little look into the officials room during halftime. Because of his suspended sentence (6 month ban) if he is proved guilty, he could miss the world cup...

RobbieRuns

CatFromHue wrote: »

I know he's retiring but players shouldn't be allowed comment like that.

Goode is not retiring, he has signed a one year deal with London Irish for next season.

total former

In what may well be an admission of failure, Bath have picked Sam Burgess at blindside flanker for tomorrow's game against Newcastle.

molloyjh

total former wrote: »

In what may well be an admission of failure, Bath have picked Sam Burgess at blindside flanker for tomorrow's game against Newcastle.

I wonder what the odds are of him still being there next season? I certainly don't see him seeing out the 3 years the way it's going at the moment.

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

I wonder what the odds are of him still being there next season? I certainly don't see him seeing out the 3 years the way it's going at the moment.

He's a massively determined guy though, he doesn't seem the type to give up on the transition this easily.

thomond2006

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He's a massively determined guy though, he doesn't seem the type to give up on the transition this easily.

This does seem to be veering towards a Joel Tomkins type departure. Although Tomkins didn't arrive to the same fanfare as Sam Burgess.

Sangre

errlloyd wrote: »

It doesn't negatively affect Clancy when Goode ****s up though, so your comparison really makes no sense. TMO should probably have interjected or something, it wasn't Clancy's fault.

A ref shouldn't be concerned with being subject to over-the-top public scrutiny and mockery when making his decisions. The overall purpose is to ensure that refs can make decisions as free from bias/pressure to the extent possible. Clearly a ref should ignore these factors anyway but why risk it.

Also, refs aren't 'celebs' in the sense that players are and therefore shouldn't be subject to the same level of public attack imo.

Scythica

Burgess playing 6 for Bath against Falcons. Not particularly sure why but I'm guessing they're just going to try and bleed as many minutes out of him as they can

sydneybound

molloyjh wrote: »

I wonder what the odds are of him still being there next season? I certainly don't see him seeing out the 3 years the way it's going at the moment.

I'm not sure how much aviva prem people here watch but he hasn't been that bad. He's still learning the game so will obviously take time. He's playing behind Eastmond & Joseph probably the best centre partnership in the prem so pretty difficult to break up that pairing especially when your new to the game. There was lots of talk that he was going to play 6 before he came over so not suprised at this move. He's already played 6 for the 2nd Bath team. People are a little too quick to judge.

total former

sydneybound wrote: »

I'm not sure how much aviva prem people here watch but he hasn't been that bad. He's still learning the game so will obviously take time. He's playing behind Eastmond & Joseph probably the best centre partnership in the prem so pretty difficult to break up that pairing especially when your new to the game. There was lots of talk that he was going to play 6 before he came over so not suprised at this move. He's already played 6 for the 2nd Bath team. People are a little too quick to judge.

I feel bad for him but he was a megastar in league and was tipped to be a world cup bolter for England. Shifting to an even more technically demanding position as his first season draws to a close is not how he would have seen it going. I know Eastmond and Joseph are a tough partnership to break up but they're playing Ollie Devoto in the centre tomorrow when they could be looking at Burgess. If he's struggling with centre, I'd be less than optimistic about flanker.

duckysauce

Scythica wrote: »

Burgess playing 6 for Bath against Falcons. Not particularly sure why but I'm guessing they're just going to try and bleed as many minutes out of him as they can

he wanted to play that position originally from the cross over , but England management wanted him in the centre , that position doesn't suit his style of play , can see him doing wreck at 6 if they keep him there.

English Lurker

The whole Burgess for the World Cup thing was unlikely from day one and got even more so when he arrived with an injury. To learn the sport from scratch to an international level of understanding in a non-back three position in less than a full season is, based on previous experiences we've seen, very rare.

If he's just here to make the World Cup and will flounce if he doesn't, good riddance.

If he's here for the long haul, then I'm very happy he's playing at 6. Mike Ford has been very vocal about seeing the back row as the ideal place for Burgess and it's pretty clearly always been the plan for him to go there. They put him at 12 so they could get him onto the pitch quicker, but Bath believe he's a back row and it makes sense to me. They've had Louw mentoring him. The eensy-teensy matter of the breakdown aside, playing in the back-row means he will be involved in more collisions and that's what I think we want from him.

Honestly, there isn't a story here, not insofar as I can see. This is the plan and it's taking place about as quickly as can be expected. It might mean the end of Burgess' world cup dreams - although the England 6 shirt is there for the taking - but I really hope no one was taking it that seriously. He's publicly insisted he's not just here for the world cup and, ok, sure he's going to say that, but I'm inclined to take him at face value. I think he's on course to play international rugby in 2016, which seems a realistic if ambitious goal, and I'm excited that they're moving him to what should be a stronger position for him.

p.s. Devoto kept Eastmond out of the team by merit last season and I wouldn't bet against him doing enough to retain the shirt when Eastmond returns either.

thomond2006

A unique way of controlling the ball at the base: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0yxrayWvBE

its_phil

thomond2006 wrote: »

A unique way of controlling the ball at the base: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0yxrayWvBE

Denis Leamy has contacted his legal team for copyright infringement

sydthebeat

thomond2006 wrote: »

A unique way of controlling the ball at the base: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0yxrayWvBE

iirc that is technically illegal

errlloyd

total former wrote: »

In what may well be an admission of failure, Bath have picked Sam Burgess at blindside flanker for tomorrow's game against Newcastle.

I feel sorry for Matt Banahan, probably having the best season of his career, but it just so happens to coincide with Burgess arriving, Joseph exploding and Ford coming of age. He gets forgotten at Bath.

total former

English Lurker wrote: »

The whole Burgess for the World Cup thing was unlikely from day one and got even more so when he arrived with an injury. To learn the sport from scratch to an international level of understanding in a non-back three position in less than a full season is, based on previous experiences we've seen, very rare.

If he's just here to make the World Cup and will flounce if he doesn't, good riddance.

If he's here for the long haul, then I'm very happy he's playing at 6. Mike Ford has been very vocal about seeing the back row as the ideal place for Burgess and it's pretty clearly always been the plan for him to go there. They put him at 12 so they could get him onto the pitch quicker, but Bath believe he's a back row and it makes sense to me. They've had Louw mentoring him. The eensy-teensy matter of the breakdown aside, playing in the back-row means he will be involved in more collisions and that's what I think we want from him.

Honestly, there isn't a story here, not insofar as I can see. This is the plan and it's taking place about as quickly as can be expected. It might mean the end of Burgess' world cup dreams - although the England 6 shirt is there for the taking - but I really hope no one was taking it that seriously. He's publicly insisted he's not just here for the world cup and, ok, sure he's going to say that, but I'm inclined to take him at face value. I think he's on course to play international rugby in 2016, which seems a realistic if ambitious goal, and I'm excited that they're moving him to what should be a stronger position for him.

p.s. Devoto kept Eastmond out of the team by merit last season and I wouldn't bet against him doing enough to retain the shirt when Eastmond returns either.

Wasn't having a go at Devoto, he's a decent player, but he's not a player who has to be in the team at Burgess' expense.

I know Ford was talking about flanker before he arrived, but Lancaster has been very clear that he saw him as a centre. Obviously you know more about the English situation than I do, but I don't believe that the plan all along has been to play Burgess at 6, that just doesn't stack up. Why get him sort of used to union in one position then switch him to a completely different one?

Anyway, best of luck to him, now that Bath are out of Leinster's way I hope he flourishes!

English Lurker

total former wrote: »

Wasn't having a go at Devoto, he's a decent player, but he's not a player who has to be in the team at Burgess' expense.

I know Ford was talking about flanker before he arrived, but Lancaster has been very clear that he saw him as a centre. Obviously you know more about the English situation than I do, but I don't believe that the plan all along has been to play Burgess at 6, that just doesn't stack up. Why get him sort of used to union in one position then switch him to a completely different one?

Anyway, best of luck to him, now that Bath are out of Leinster's way I hope he flourishes!

Ah. Yes, you're right that Lancaster's been very vocal about saying him as a centre, but that is broadly immaterial. In short, ignore Lancaster. He has zero power over the matter. It's all about what Bath and Mike Ford want and, at the very least, they want to look at him in the back row.

"I think 12 (inside centre) suits learning the game quicker, whereas six (flanker) you need to have more of a knowledge of the game" - that's Burgess' own take on it. The thinking seems to be that they could get Burgess up to a standard where he could play 12/13 more quickly than they could get him to a standard where he could 6/8, so they play him at 12/13 with the intention of having him learn more about the game there in preparation for his eventual move to 6.

The whole "Start him at 12 then move him to 6" thing has been rather controversial in places - plenty of fans don't see the sense of it - but, Mike Ford seems to think it will work. Which is not to say it will work, but it's not a surprise that it's happening this way. As far as I'm concerned, this is what me and most others expected, and I'm quite excited now it's here. I don't know how successful it will be, but I think it's a key step in Burgess' journey as a union player.

Yeah_Right

Ben Afeaki has retired from all rugby at only 27 years old. He has spent the last year trying to recover from concussion but has now decided to call time on it. Sad day for a very promising player.

bilston

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Ben Afeaki has retired from all rugby at only 27 years old. He has spent the last year trying to recover from concussion but has now decided to call time on it. Sad day for a very promising player.

Not good for him or for the sport.

sydthebeat

not good at all...

what worries me is that these bad concussions dont seem to be restricted to any particular position on the field

we've had props (afeaki)
locks (clark)
flankers (hazell and watt-jones)
centres (hape)

we've real worries about players like sexton and north too.

so it cant be any particular aspect of the game that can be targets to reduce these injuries, but more an overall philosophical approach

sydneybound

Census Johnston has retired from international rugby before the World Cup. Seems like a strange time to retire, Toulouse probably paid him extra to stay with them during the early stages of next season when everyone else is away, poor old Samoa.

Yeah_Right

bilston wrote: »

Not good for him or for the sport.

Yeah it is. And it all started with an accidental head clash with his team mate Brodie Retallick.

I suppose I find it especially sad as I have met him and his brother quite a few times, had pints with them. Always found him to be a really nice guy. No ego, very polite and humble. Such a talented athelete, he actually played for NZ schools and junior men in water polo.

thomond2006

sydneybound wrote: »

Census Johnston has retired from international rugby before the World Cup. Seems like a strange time to retire, Toulouse probably paid him extra to stay with them during the early stages of next season when everyone else is away, poor old Samoa.

It might not be just that. A lot of the players have had falling outs with the Samoa union in the last few years, following allegations of corruption of RWC funds. A lot of the veterans got blacklisted from selection.

bilston

sydthebeat wrote: »

not good at all...

what worries me is that these bad concussions dont seem to be restricted to any particular position on the field

we've had props (afeaki)
locks (clark)
flankers (hazell and watt-jones)
centres (hape)

we've real worries about players like sexton and north too.

so it cant be any particular aspect of the game that can be targets to reduce these injuries, but more an overall philosophical approach

I was at one of Ulster's Champions Cup games in December (Scarlets game) and for a change I sat behind the posts and from there I got a totally different perspective on what the players do and see in a game, and what struck me was how a lot of the players were going into contact head first. I couldn't work out if they were vracing themselves for the big hit or whether they were focused on protecting the ball so much that the welfare of their head came second.

I suppose thinking about it I would duck into contact a lot too when I'm playing and that might make the head more susceptible to taking a hit.

I'm not sure whether it would make any difference but would lowering a high tackle limit to the chest (nipple area) from the shoulders help? It would in theory take contact another 6-10 inches further away from the head area. Just a random thought though.

sydthebeat

i suppose an in depth study should b put in to how these concussions come about.. if they are mainly head clashes, or collissions with the ground, legs, shins etc

what i dont like is the tendency now for the tackler to go in high.
i watched sexton last weekend and he practically always goes in high and never at waist height.
I suppose this is becuase hes a top heavy strong guy, but also because he is very positionally aware and doesnt want to get caught at the bottom of rucks etc so hes happy to stand a guy up and bounce off him. This invariably leads to his head clashing with other heads, shoulders etc.

I suppose again we really dont know what percentage of the 'amateur era' players finished up with long term concussion symptoms, so its hard to say with any real degree of accuracy that the modern professional game is basically to blame.

Its interesting that some american college NFL teams have started really pushing the rugby 'waist' tackle as the main tackle type, whereas rugby union seems to be moving into more of a rugby league type tackle.

The 'ever upwards tackle' is to prevent offloads in rugby.

You don't really see all that many laterals in NFL, so players are being taught to tackle in the older conventional tackle style from rugby. Just bring the player to ground, reset. No need to try prevent an offload nor force a fumble.

Carawaystick

So Jaques Burger getting a week suspension? doesn't seem right

Stev_o

Deleted User wrote: »

The 'ever upwards tackle' is to prevent offloads in rugby.

You don't really see all that many laterals in NFL, so players are being taught to tackle in the older conventional tackle style from rugby. Just bring the player to ground, reset. No need to try prevent an offload nor force a fumble.

That and the technique used by a fair chunk of players is pretty woeful. I wince when I see Halfpenny tackle, he forever gets his head on the wrong side.

CatFromHue

thomond2006 wrote: »

It might not be just that. A lot of the players have had falling outs with the Samoa union in the last few years, following allegations of corruption of RWC funds. A lot of the veterans got blacklisted from selection.

Yeah the players were threatening to boycott the England game in the AI's this season and if it wasn't for World Rugby intervention they may well have. The Samoan RFU didn't attend some of the arranged meetings to diffuse the situation either

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/nov/18/samoa-england-twickenham-boycott-world-cup-expulsion

sydneybound

On the very little I've seen Burgess hasn't been bad tonight.

irishbucsfan

Nathan Hughes' ban for the George North incident has been overturned:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32260337

connemara man

I was about to post that. a bit mental IMO

CatFromHue

ridiculous decision, really stupid.

I wonder if the powers that be will hold an investigation into this, they should.

irishbucsfan

Supposedly the appeal was heard by an "independent body", is there any indication who that body is?

EDIT:

The RFU statement is:

Nathan Hughes (Wasps Rugby) appeared before an independent Panel this evening (Friday April 10), appealing against the three-week ban given to him for striking with the knee and/or shin, contrary to Law 10.4(a), during Northampton Saints v Wasps RFC on Friday March 27 in the Aviva Premiership.

The appeal was upheld and the red card is dismissed. Hughes is free to play immediately.

Jeremy Summers (Chair) said:

“The appeal Panel considered it appropriate to hear the matter afresh. Having done so and having had the advantage of evidence not before the original Panel, it concluded that no act of foul play took place in that the incident occurred accidently.”

The Panel comprised Jeremy Summers (Chair), Dr Julian Morris and Meg Gardiner.

Buer

Silly ruling and sets a dangerous precedent. If someone accidentally collides with another player causing significant harm, they can legitimately point to this decision.

One guy who is sitting at home this evening and thinking this is a f*cking joke is Luke Marshall.

irishbucsfan

World Rugby need to get together and specifically make a ruling on accidental collisions, there's far too much inconsistency around it at the moment.