RugbyRebels

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:52 pm Shaun won't be happy with the French defence

He’ll be giving them hell with a Wigan accent that no one will understand, but the message will undoubtedly get through!

Seeing more replays, still not seeing the mitigation that doesn't apply

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:51 pm

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:47 pm

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:31 pm That's red

Very lucky. Didn't seem to be many arms involved and direct hit to the head.

Yup.
Barely any, if any change in height (he hit before the first tackler had actually affected the dynamics), and a tackle that was always illegal due to a lack of wrap - meaning that you've got to squint to find any mitigation, and then you can't apply mitigation anyway.

ETA, I don't think there was a change in height - willneed to see more replays. Either way, mitigation doesn't get applied for an otherwise illegal tackle.

Just watching the replays and I can't for the life of me see how that is yellow only.

Interesting that the Uruguayans have dropped pretty much every scrum straight away. Wonder if it's a deliberate ploy to avoid getting ground down and conceding pens whilst being physically drained.

How long they can keep up the speed they're playing in the loose will be interesting, especially when the French come out with a rocket up their backsides, and actually start protecting their ball at the ruck.

Having seen a replay, he's a very, very lucky boy. Straight up elbow to the side of the head, with no real drop in height.

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:57 pm Just watching the replays and I can't for the life of me see how that is yellow only.

Yeah, extra replays don't change my mind one iota.
There was no change in height, so no mitigation.
The tackle could never have been legal, so any mitigation is irrelevant anyway.

francoisfou wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:56 pm

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:52 pm Shaun won't be happy with the French defence

He’ll be giving them hell with a Wigan accent that no one will understand, but the message will undoubtedly get through!

Don't think it has!

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:05 pm

francoisfou wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:56 pm

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:52 pm Shaun won't be happy with the French defence

He’ll be giving them hell with a Wigan accent that no one will understand, but the message will undoubtedly get through!

Don't think it has!

Non!!

Crowd don't like it, but sensible to try to get the game won in the first hour, then rack up the tries when Uruguay (theoretically) tire in the last quarter.

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:57 pm

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:51 pm

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:47 pm

Very lucky. Didn't seem to be many arms involved and direct hit to the head.

Yup.
Barely any, if any change in height (he hit before the first tackler had actually affected the dynamics), and a tackle that was always illegal due to a lack of wrap - meaning that you've got to squint to find any mitigation, and then you can't apply mitigation anyway.

ETA, I don't think there was a change in height - willneed to see more replays. Either way, mitigation doesn't get applied for an otherwise illegal tackle.

Just watching the replays and I can't for the life of me see how that is yellow only.

'Cause it ain't

Going for goal signifies a lowering of attacking expectations. Disappointing.

francoisfou wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:14 pm Going for goal signifies a lowering of attacking expectations. Disappointing.

Perhaps they feel they need a bit less piano playing and more piano shifting.

Edit: Uruguay playing some nice tunes, though!

Did I mention that I was worried after the France NZ match, that France would see the rest of the pool games as a procession on the way to their inevitable WC victory, and suffer for their complacency?

Regardless though, this is a brilliant performance by Uruguay

Complacency? More like incompetence.

That's a nicely worked try.

Shame.

4th french try chalked off but Macalou is seriously quick!

pompey-zebra wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:48 pm 4th french try chalked off but Makalou is seriously quick!

Eddie's dream forward who can be put on the wing.

I don’t think I’ve seen such an undisciplined performance by the French for a long time. The match against Italy promises to be interesting!

That was an entertaining match and showed the dangers of fielding a second team against a second tier. On a positive note, Ben O'Keeffe had a great game.

16th man wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:54 pm

pompey-zebra wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:48 pm 4th french try chalked off but Makalou is seriously quick!

Eddie's dream forward who can be put on the wing.

Rassie's gutted he doesnt have 23 forwards like that!

Good match. If only Uruguay had one or both of their set pieces working!

Uruguay approaching the point where they're not going to be given B teams to play against anymore.

Much better game than I expected. Hopefully Uruguay can give Italy a good game.

Agree on the card. Even if there was a drop of height, I am not sure that is mitigation if it is predictable and in line with what the tackler could see (you can't blame you smack someone in the head just because they are dropping). Did make me think that refs must love this bunker system - just don't need to be involved in the controversy. Also re-enforces my view that the 20 min red card should come in - some officials are so wary of giving a red as it is seen as so game ruining and is so controversial that they find any excuse not to. I think the 20 mins and then being replaced (and likely a ban) is a sufficient punishment for the team and the player to encourage change.

Danno wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:13 pm

bruce wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:57 pm

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:51 pm

Yup.
Barely any, if any change in height (he hit before the first tackler had actually affected the dynamics), and a tackle that was always illegal due to a lack of wrap - meaning that you've got to squint to find any mitigation, and then you can't apply mitigation anyway.

ETA, I don't think there was a change in height - willneed to see more replays. Either way, mitigation doesn't get applied for an otherwise illegal tackle.

Just watching the replays and I can't for the life of me see how that is yellow only.

'Cause it ain't

Can't believe this. There's a negligible change in height at best - in the replays you can see the French 5's shoulder is always at head height, before and after any supposed drop. And of course, it's a no arms tackle so always illegal, mitigation can't apply anyway.

And yet the commentary team and the pundit team all agree yellow was the correct call. Is there no one there who can think for themselves? Kind of worrying also, that the bunker ref doesn't understand the laws.

Well done Uruguay, at least preventing France from getting the 5 points. Who knows what might have happened if the red had been given?

Their lineout killed Uruguay. A number of penalties in the second half kicked to the corner only for France to nick the ball. Surprisingly the scrum seemed to improve as the game went, or at least they weren't the ones being pinged all the time. Did we get a completed scrum?
Anyway a fun game to watch as a neutral.

I'm rubbish at assessing scrums, but ref seems to give alternating penalties for the turf rolling away from under their feet.


Elsewhise, at least the anthems were improved (especially when they turned the volume way down on the recording, and just gave us the crowd singing La Marseillaise.
Now there's an idea - if we have to have pre-recorded anthems, why not record the crowd microphones at each team's home ground, and play that back as the RWC anthem?