Quins v Wuss

[Puja]

How the hell can that be given... That TMO needs sacking

On the contrary, it was a clear try. The ball was stripped by the Quins player, but it went backwards in relation to Mills anyway and he fell on it with his stomach. Laws say you can ground the ball with any part of your torso or arms, so it's a try, even if it didn't immediately look right.

Respect to the BT Sport team - they started off being wrong about it, then checked with the TMO to see his reasoning and came back and explained and apologised for calling it a bad decision. If it were Sky, Stuart Barnes would still be doubling down 5 hours later.

Puja

[Scrumhead]

Fair play to Worcester for a very solid defence. At the same time, our attack looks so unimaginative and basic. To quote Gustard ‘we didn’t ask enough questions’ and it was too predictable and easy to contain.

Picking up a losing BP at Sixways isn’t the worst result, but Mills’ try should never have stood.

[Digby]

More of a traditional Friday night game, euurrgh

[Puja]

Mills’ try should never have stood.

Why not?

Puja

[fivepointer]

Mills scored a fair try. It didnt look right but it was properly awarded based on the laws of the game. Really you would expect former elite players and the commentator to understand why it was given.
The game itself wasnt one to remember. Wuss looked a little sharper in attack, and did defend with commendable discipline.

[Stom]

How the hell can that be given... That TMO needs sacking

On the contrary, it was a clear try. The ball was stripped by the Quins player, but it went backwards in relation to Mills anyway and he fell on it with his stomach. Laws say you can ground the ball with any part of your torso or arms, so it's a try, even if it didn't immediately look right.

Respect to the BT Sport team - they started off being wrong about it, then checked with the TMO to see his reasoning and came back and explained and apologised for calling it a bad decision. If it were Sky, Stuart Barnes would still be doubling down 5 hours later.

Puja

But, firstly, when did that change?

And secondly, does he not have to have control anymore?

[Stom]

But beside that, we are now an identikit team, ffs. No ability to find a way through, no invention. Solid defense. Terrible. I don't think I like Gustard.

[ad_tigger]

How the hell can that be given... That TMO needs sacking

On the contrary, it was a clear try. The ball was stripped by the Quins player, but it went backwards in relation to Mills anyway and he fell on it with his stomach. Laws say you can ground the ball with any part of your torso or arms, so it's a try, even if it didn't immediately look right.

Respect to the BT Sport team - they started off being wrong about it, then checked with the TMO to see his reasoning and came back and explained and apologised for calling it a bad decision. If it were Sky, Stuart Barnes would still be doubling down 5 hours later.

Puja

But, firstly, when did that change?

And secondly, does he not have to have control anymore?

IIRC you never did have to have control if the ball isn't in your possession. In that case it's just downward pressure which is required.

[Renniks]

The ball can be grounded in in-goal:

By holding it and touching the ground with it; or

By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.

Pressing down is the only thing the law says. Control of the ball is more to do with knock ons. And as he wasn’t the cause of the loss of control then all that matters was did he press down with the front of his body

[Scrumhead]

I guess if you argue that the ball was knocked away from him by Chisholm’s arm, you can make a case for it being allowed but in the post match interview Mills didn’t even seem to think it was a try, which says it all IMO. I can live with it given that he’s in my fantasy team, but as a Quins fan, it pisses me off.

But beside that, we are now an identikit team, ffs. No ability to find a way through, no invention. Solid defense. Terrible. I don't think I like Gustard.

I think that’s harsh. Clearly we want to be winning more games. However, Gustard has made us harder to beat and we’d never have secured the number of losing BPs we have under JK.

I’d still regard it as early days and I think there are more encouraging signs than not. He’s said that recognise our poor lineout and predictable attack are the key issues and I think he’s working with what he’s got until he has the opportunity to bring in his own personnel.

[Mellsblue]

It’s a bit harsh to be judging a new regime before you’ve even got to December.

[Raggs]

Even if mills lost control it went backwards. No offence. Then grounded with torso, try.

[Puja]

On the contrary, it was a clear try. The ball was stripped by the Quins player, but it went backwards in relation to Mills anyway and he fell on it with his stomach. Laws say you can ground the ball with any part of your torso or arms, so it's a try, even if it didn't immediately look right.

Respect to the BT Sport team - they started off being wrong about it, then checked with the TMO to see his reasoning and came back and explained and apologised for calling it a bad decision. If it were Sky, Stuart Barnes would still be doubling down 5 hours later.

Puja

But, firstly, when did that change?

And secondly, does he not have to have control anymore?

IIRC you never did have to have control if the ball isn't in your possession. In that case it's just downward pressure which is required.

You've never needed to have control - you just need to ground it.

To flip the question the other way - if it's not a try, what's the offence? What's the restart if that's not a try?

Puja