The Rugby Championship MMXIV

sydthebeat

Silly call George, that was a great tackle

Kiwi_knock

Absolutely nothing wrong with that tackle

Emperor1989

You would have to say Du Plessis and Matfield should be subbed at half time. Bringing nothing to the party and actually a liability.

.ak

Bit of tactical genius from la roux.


Remember the la roux to Leinster rumours?

sydthebeat

Come in boks, finish this out!

sydthebeat

Aussie front row under fierce pressure. Quality of hooker depth being a question as well.

Davei141

Arg vs Aus scrums are going to be a massacre.

Emperor1989

Its amazing the way the Boks once they get into the 22 the way the intensity just goes up a gear.

Boks blowing people off rucks...auzzies down injured.

matthew8

Stupid not to take the 3 when that would make it a 2 score game.

Kiwi_knock

Should have been red :pac:

The Pheasant2

Ah cmon Clancy

Emperor1989

Clancy loves to destroy his reputation....a stupid stupid stupid decision

LuckyGent88

Shocking decision.
Wasn't even a high tackle never mind a yellow card

Swiwi.

What is it with Clancy and head high tackles??

Emperor1989

Will Meyer please take Matfield off...jesus christ he can barely stand up. Hands on knees every break in play.

Emperor1989

Duane Vermulen again crucial turn over.

ongarite

Stupid from Beale there.

matthew8

Outstanding by Australia.

Kiwi_knock

Shocking play by some of the Australians, going for glory for themselves rather than play the pass.

And then Rob Horne goes and scores. Massive kick coming up.

Emperor1989

Morne Steyn.....oh dear.

Awkward Badger

Criminal to miss touch from a penalty off your own try line at that stage in the game a man down.

Kiwi_knock

A massive minute coming up

.ak

Aussie score after butchering an overlap. Took far too long for Mckenzie to try the foley - Beale combo.

Brilliant game for the neutral.

LuckyGent88

Criminal miss touch and it was dualy punished

Swiwi.

.ak wrote: »

Aussie score after butchering an overlap. Took far too long for Mckenzie to try the foley - Beale combo.

Brilliant game for the neutral.

Beale is excellent just not a 10.

matthew8

That is massive for Australian rugby. They had to beat one of the 2 at one point. Morne Steyn has to take the blame for missing touch. Not a time to be agressive.

.ak

Swiwi. wrote: »

Beale is excellent just not a 10.

Agreed. IMO he should be playing that combo more often.

LuckyGent88

Massive win for the wallabies but ya have to feel for habana.
South Africa were cruising in the second half.
The changes that were made by Mckenzie worked very well

DDC1990

Miss JDV.

Such a classy guy. Great captain as well, in terms of how he deals with the referee.

errlloyd

Felt Horne had butchered it not using beale. But his step was class.

Ardillaun

The NZ commentators are not as partisan as they used to be but they're still fairly tribal. One of them accused the assistant ref of DELIBERATELY refusing to call the interference on Savea at the beginning of the match. By contrast, I thought Eales and co. were even-handed in the Oz-RSA game.

Morf

.ak wrote: »

Bit of tactical genius from la roux.


Remember the la roux to Leinster rumours?

Weren't they started and vigorously encouraged by you though? :P

Swiwi.

Ardillaun wrote: »

The NZ commentators are not as partisan as they used to be but they're still fairly tribal. One of them accused the assistant ref of DELIBERATELY refusing to call the interference on Savea at the beginning of the match. By contrast, I thought Eales and co. were even-handed in the Oz-RSA game.

I very much doubt it, but still. If you can post evidence, I'll happily stand corrected.

The bigger elephant in the room is WTH was Nigel Owens doing reffing a Pro 12 game, while a 3rd rate French ref got an international fixture?

I'd say 99.9% of people on this forum know that when you charge-down a kick, it's not a knock-on. I'd say 99.9% also know that if you tackle someone early without the ball, it's a penalty +/- YC depending on the circumstances. And I'd say about 75%+ know that if the ref gets in the way of a pass, it's a scrum, attacking team's ball.

I reckon the disallowed Argentinian try is one of the worst decisions I've ever seen, purely because I just can't see how the ref got that wrong. If he thought it was a charge-down followed by a knock-on, then there's that little matter of the TMO. If he thought a charge-down = knock on, well, I don't know what to say.

There was also Clancy and his infatuation with supposed head-high tackles that marred the other game. It was bad enough Poite sending off Bismarck last year, and this time Vermuelen smashes someone legitimately and gives away 3, and then Habana sent to the bin.

It's not hard at all to see the RWC ruined by a crap decision such as this, and it's getting to the point where there are only about 5 refs or so who can be trusted to ref international games.

astonaidan

Israel Folau is utter class, dont get Foley at all then that could just be my love of Cooper

Ardillaun

Swiwi. wrote: »

I very much doubt it, but still. If you can post evidence, I'll happily stand corrected.

.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h4-AcJocrEk

At 7.57 '...I do not believe that the assistant referee did not see that..'

Swiwi.

Ardillaun wrote: »

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h4-AcJocrEk

At 7.57 '...I do not believe that the assistant referee did not see that..'

[RANT]I guess it depends on what you want to hear. I think the commentators were (rightly) so incredulous that a barn-door obvious case of an early tackle in the line of vision of the assistant and his ref could be missed by international level referees.

What you are stating "one of them accused the assistant ref of DELIBERATELY refusing to call the interference on Savea at the beginning of the match" is that he is saying the touch judge is a cheat, and he says this because he is such a one-eyed NZ commentator. The commentators were just as scathing (if not more so) of the missed Argentinian try, but that doesn't fit the argument, so you don't reference it.

TBH Ardillaun my enthusiasm for this site, and in particular games involving NZ has completely waned. The appeal of this site has always been that more outlandish comments are moderated (and I've been pulled up on this myself), so that there is some sort of balance. In reality this is applied in the main to the neverending Munster v Leinster spats, and less so in other areas. .ak even thought your post was so spot on, he gave it an acknowledgment.

I probably should have copped on earlier, and it's a self-evident truth, and not necessarily a criticism, but this site is an Irish rugby site for followers of all things Irish rugby. Through a combination of limited interest in rugby south of the equator, and limited ability to comment through the simple fact of not having watched much of the players concerned, there is minimal discussion of the rugby championship. Some people will probably just think good riddance, F.O. Kiwis, you're not wanted here, but this forum could be more than it currently is IMO.

I would have thought, with the RWC once again looming, that the performance of the refs in the weekend would have been an interesting discussion point. If that match had been Ire v Eng, and Ire had been denied a try from a charge-down, especially if it had been Joubert or your pick of a NZ ref, the pages would have been overflowing. My main surprise to date is that no-one has accused the IRB of deliberating interfering in the non-Argentinian try.

Just like the 6N wouldn't accept an ITM-cup level referee, I have no idea why neither Nigel Owens nor Craig Joubert nor Wayne Barnes has been sighted in the RC to date, and instead we were subjected to a woeful display from Gauzère (at least 5 to 10 fundamental simple errors), and the SAs had to put up with Clancy who has shown on multiple occasions that he just isn't good enough for international refereeing.[/END OF RANT]

CatFromHue

I don't think that's right about the RC. On a Satruday morning I don't like getting up early, actually any morning, so for the home Oz or Nz games I miss them completely. That's half the games already. Equally the home Arg games tend to be Sat night so if I'm heading out they're gone too or they'll conflict with Pro12 games which I'd watch more. So the times for 3/4 of the RC games are out the window for me, and I'd say alot of people, just to their KO times.

I'm happy to go out on a limb and say it's the same story with SH people and NH rugby. The times just conflict too much, I mean I have sat in The Bog (a pub and not the toilet) in the old ChCh to watch an Ireland game but I couldn't see straight let alone a TV as it was at 3 or 4 am on a Sunday morning.

In relation to Gauzere he reffed Italy - England in the 6N so he has appeared in the 6N, Clancy has been a fixture for a few seasons now. Though I wouldn't be over the moon if Gauzere was to be reffing an Ireland game.

I do agree though it was a poor decision from the ref as Savea was tackled without the ball.

Ardillaun

Swiwi. wrote: »

[RANT]I guess it depends on what you want to hear. I think the commentators were (rightly) so incredulous that a barn-door obvious case of an early tackle in the line of vision of the assistant and his ref could be missed by international level referees.

What you are stating "one of them accused the assistant ref of DELIBERATELY refusing to call the interference on Savea at the beginning of the match" is that he is saying the touch judge is a cheat, and he says this because he is such a one-eyed NZ commentator. The commentators were just as scathing (if not more so) of the missed Argentinian try, but that doesn't fit the argument, so you don't reference it.

I did not set out to review the whole match in my one comment, in fairness, and I do not regard myself as some fanatical critic of NZ rugby.

Perhaps there is another possibility but I am unable to see how the statement made by the commentator can be reconciled with anything other than the AR deliberately refusing to call the interference. He says he believes the AR must have seen it. Surely the implication is inescapable here? The fact that he was scathing about the charge down decision is irrelevant.

CatFromHue

It's hard to see how the touch judge didn't see it though, it happened only a couple of meters in front of him.

Ardillaun

CatFromHue wrote: »

It's hard to see how the touch judge didn't see it though, it happened only a couple of meters in front of him.

It is hard to see. I would agree with that.

Awkward Badger

I think the commentator just meant that rather than go with the other guy who was saying the ref and TJ didn't see it that he thinks it was seen (as it couldn't have been missed) and a bad call was made not to penalise it.

former legend

I thought Clancy was somewhat justified in binning Habana. Was it an especially dangerous tackle? No, but it was high, so it was a penalty offence - but if you factor in where it was on the pitch, i.e. defending just outside the 5m line, then the ref has to take a more stringent view of it. Could have gone either way but not an outrageous call.

Re: the blockdown/knock-on, I was pretty bemused by that one too so I replayed it a couple of times and the more I watched it, the more convinced I am that Gauzere got it right. There's very little power in the chip and I think the Argentine lad was trying to catch it, you can tell by the movement of his hands, and if that's the case, knock-on was the correct call.

I missed the Savea obstruction non-penalty so can't comment. Edit: Just saw it on the YouTube clip above, yeah, pretty clear-cut and the touch-judge should have flagged. Not Gauzere's fault though.

philthrill69

former legend wrote: »

I thought Clancy was somewhat justified in binning Habana.

Do you and George take your guide dogs for walks in the park together?

philthrill69

That yellow card is almost as ridiculous as Habanas.

RuggieBear

philthrill69 wrote: »

That yellow card is almost as ridiculous as Habanas.

banned
do not argue with moderation on thread.

sydneybound

Juan Imhoff and Manuel Montero back in for the Pumas.

http://www.planetrugby.co.uk/story/0,25883,16024_9463350,00.html

Reckon they'll give Australia a good run for their money. They should beat them in Argentina in a few weeks.

Journeyman_1

Barrett back on the bench, and so is Jane. Starts for Thrush and Luatua. Big chance for Luatua to make a claim for the Jersey ahead of Messam! Thrush is pushing for a bench spot at best with Whitelock fit though.

Pollard back in at 10 for SA, and bismarck still on the bench.

Those are the only changes that stand out for me, hopefully this will be a cracker!

Swiwi.

Journeyman_1 wrote: »

Barrett back on the bench, and so is Jane. Starts for Thrush and Luatua. Big chance for Luatua to make a claim for the Jersey ahead of Messam! Thrush is pushing for a bench spot at best with Whitelock fit though.

Pollard back in at 10 for SA, and bismarck still on the bench.

Those are the only changes that stand out for me, hopefully this will be a cracker!

Hopefully, but SA have been surprisingly poor in recent months - after I had half-written their name on the Webb Ellis in 2013. Their SXV teams were poor, and they have way too many players overseas these days. Then there is the whole quotas thing hanging about, and a coach who doesn't seem to know whether to stick with the tried and trusted but rather anachronistic style these days or the brave new world of more dynamic but perhaps less brawny players. I mean Victor Matfield is 39 years old.

From a NZ perspective, yeah Thrush was surprisingly good last week, and I think at least one of Kaino/Messam/Luatua/Vito will miss put on the RWC squad, so SL will be looking for a big game. The Cruden v Barrett debate is not settled for me either.

I have to say, depending on whether Ireland plays like Ireland of last year's 6N or the relative dross of Munster & Leinster's performances last weekend, I'd have some confidence of an Irish victory in November over SA.

matthew8

SH teams have been on a different level to NH teams recently so SA should still be favourites against Ireland. This week's selection is uninspiring though. Matfield is past it, and there are very few top class nations for whom Pollard would start. The SA pack will struggle to even get on top, let alone dominate, which seems to be necessary against NZ these days.

Tox56

matthew8 wrote: »

SH teams have been on a different level to NH teams recently so SA should still be favourites against Ireland. This week's selection is uninspiring though. Matfield is past it, and there are very few top class nations for whom Pollard would start. The SA pack will struggle to even get on top, let alone dominate, which seems to be necessary against NZ these days.

Historically we dont do too bad against the likes of SA and Aus though, and we're coming off a 6N winning season