agreed, agreed, agreed, agreedMellsblue wrote:Can't see that being anything other than a pen against Owens. Not that anybody would've done anything different than reacting as he did. But thems the laws.
Everyone on top of their game except Iceman. What a match, what a series. Good to see the NZ fans moaning about the referees performance. You know they know they've been in a scrap when that happens.
v All Blacks III: the Decider
Moderators: Puja, Misc Forum Mod
-
- Posts: 20887
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
- Sandydragon
- Posts: 10299
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
A game you couldn't take your eyes off. Despite early AB dominance, the Lions could have won that with an it more composure in the second half.
Some huge performances out there and some average ones on both sides. But if nothing else this series has demonstrated the importance of a good goal kicker.
Some huge performances out there and some average ones on both sides. But if nothing else this series has demonstrated the importance of a good goal kicker.
- morepork
- Posts: 7860
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 1:50 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
Mellsblue wrote:Can't see that being anything other than a pen against Owens. Not that anybody would've done anything different than reacting as he did. But thems the laws.
Everyone on top of their game except Iceman. What a match, what a series. Good to see the NZ fans moaning about the referees performance. You know they know they've been in a scrap when that happens.
I will fight you.
-
- Posts: 20887
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
yet what did we sacrifice today on that altar; Sexton is a good kicker to be fair.Sandydragon wrote:A game you couldn't take your eyes off. Despite early AB dominance, the Lions could have won that with an it more composure in the second half.
Some huge performances out there and some average ones on both sides. But if nothing else this series has demonstrated the importance of a good goal kicker.
-
- Posts: 20887
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
shut up Simmonds you utter utter utter c&nt
-
- Posts: 20887
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
yay, gats called out all Faz's fck ups, there is a god
-
- Posts: 5576
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm
Re: RE: Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
The laws on the matter whilst trying to be clear are actually not and don't help the ref at all. Under law 11.6 it would be a penalty "offside after a knock on". But then under law 11.5 perhaps not as it states accidental offside is "when an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball....".Mellsblue wrote:Can't see that being anything other than a pen against Owens. Not that anybody would've done anything different than reacting as he did. But thems the laws.
Everyone on top of their game except Iceman. What a match, what a series. Good to see the NZ fans moaning about the referees performance. You know they know they've been in a scrap when that happens.
My view on that type of situation has been consistent since the last WC. The players can't make themselves invisible or stop their reactions when they are that close to the play and law 11.6 is for deliberate acts. But as a Scottish Lions fan I would be inclined to think that.
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 16083
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: RE: Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
For me, the issue was he momentarily caught the ball, not that I blame him. If he'd put his hands in the air or just not attempted catch it I'd accept accidental offside. But when you catch it, natural split second reaction as it was, you've got no defence.Big D wrote:The laws on the matter whilst trying to be clear are actually not and don't help the ref at all. Under law 11.6 it would be a penalty "offside after a knock on". But then under law 11.5 perhaps not as it states accidental offside is "when an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball....".Mellsblue wrote:Can't see that being anything other than a pen against Owens. Not that anybody would've done anything different than reacting as he did. But thems the laws.
Everyone on top of their game except Iceman. What a match, what a series. Good to see the NZ fans moaning about the referees performance. You know they know they've been in a scrap when that happens.
My view on that type of situation has been consistent since the last WC. The players can't make themselves invisible or stop their reactions when they are that close to the play and law 11.6 is for deliberate acts. But as a Scottish Lions fan I would be inclined to think that.
- skidger
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:09 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
I didnt notice any of that last week and am sure there will be zero comment on the ref this week.Mellsblue wrote:Can't see that being anything other than a pen against Owens. Not that anybody would've done anything different than reacting as he did. But thems the laws.
Everyone on top of their game except Iceman. What a match, what a series. Good to see the NZ fans moaning about the referees performance. You know they know they've been in a scrap when that happens.
-
- Posts: 20887
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
All in all, as I think Numbers noted earlier in the tour, we've done better than most of us thought we would.
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 16083
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
Accidental or not, this is of the highest quality.skidger wrote:zero comment .Mellsblue wrote:Can't see that being anything other than a pen against Owens. Not that anybody would've done anything different than reacting as he did. But thems the laws.
Everyone on top of their game except Iceman. What a match, what a series. Good to see the NZ fans moaning about the referees performance. You know they know they've been in a scrap when that happens.
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 16083
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
on the bitches.morepork wrote:Mellsblue wrote:Can't see that being anything other than a pen against Owens. Not that anybody would've done anything different than reacting as he did. But thems the laws.
Everyone on top of their game except Iceman. What a match, what a series. Good to see the NZ fans moaning about the referees performance. You know they know they've been in a scrap when that happens.
I will fight you.
-
- Posts: 5576
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
To me in that scenario catching the ball is a reflex reaction in an unavoidable situation given how close he was to the play. IIRC he pretty much puts his hands up when he realises what happened which to me suggests his previous actions wasn't deliberately impacting play from an offside position. There was no reasonable way for him to get out the way so for me, and I do accept others disagree, Poite made the right call eventually.Mellsblue wrote:For me, the issue was he momentarily caught the ball, not that I blame him. If he'd put his hands in the air or just not attempted catch it I'd accept accidental offside. But when you catch it, natural split second reaction as it was, you've got no defence.Big D wrote:The laws on the matter whilst trying to be clear are actually not and don't help the ref at all. Under law 11.6 it would be a penalty "offside after a knock on". But then under law 11.5 perhaps not as it states accidental offside is "when an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball....".Mellsblue wrote:Can't see that being anything other than a pen against Owens. Not that anybody would've done anything different than reacting as he did. But thems the laws.
Everyone on top of their game except Iceman. What a match, what a series. Good to see the NZ fans moaning about the referees performance. You know they know they've been in a scrap when that happens.
My view on that type of situation has been consistent since the last WC. The players can't make themselves invisible or stop their reactions when they are that close to the play and law 11.6 is for deliberate acts. But as a Scottish Lions fan I would be inclined to think that.
If he had been a couple of metres further away I'd give a penalty.
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 16083
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
Yep, tough call. Glad it wasn't me.Big D wrote:To me in that scenario catching the ball is a reflex reaction in an unavoidable situation given how close he was to the play. IIRC he pretty much puts his hands up when he realises what happened which to me suggests his previous actions wasn't deliberately impacting play from an offside position. There was no reasonable way for him to get out the way so for me, and I do accept others disagree, Poite made the right call eventually.Mellsblue wrote:For me, the issue was he momentarily caught the ball, not that I blame him. If he'd put his hands in the air or just not attempted catch it I'd accept accidental offside. But when you catch it, natural split second reaction as it was, you've got no defence.Big D wrote: The laws on the matter whilst trying to be clear are actually not and don't help the ref at all. Under law 11.6 it would be a penalty "offside after a knock on". But then under law 11.5 perhaps not as it states accidental offside is "when an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball....".
My view on that type of situation has been consistent since the last WC. The players can't make themselves invisible or stop their reactions when they are that close to the play and law 11.6 is for deliberate acts. But as a Scottish Lions fan I would be inclined to think that.
If he had been a couple of metres further away I'd give a penalty.
-
- Posts: 5576
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:49 pm
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
Aye. I wouldn't want to be an international ref.Mellsblue wrote:Yep, tough call. Glad it wasn't me.Big D wrote:To me in that scenario catching the ball is a reflex reaction in an unavoidable situation given how close he was to the play. IIRC he pretty much puts his hands up when he realises what happened which to me suggests his previous actions wasn't deliberately impacting play from an offside position. There was no reasonable way for him to get out the way so for me, and I do accept others disagree, Poite made the right call eventually.Mellsblue wrote: For me, the issue was he momentarily caught the ball, not that I blame him. If he'd put his hands in the air or just not attempted catch it I'd accept accidental offside. But when you catch it, natural split second reaction as it was, you've got no defence.
If he had been a couple of metres further away I'd give a penalty.
- skidger
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:09 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
On stuff.co.nz the main headline is 'what the.......?' with the two different stories underneath having the following headlines-
Ref stuns in final minute
Test descends into french farce.
Some of the NZ media make Arsene Wegner look gracious. Every time there is a defeat(or draw) it seems they quickly rush to put it on the ref. Such a shame as its the best rugby country in the world.
Ref stuns in final minute
Test descends into french farce.
Some of the NZ media make Arsene Wegner look gracious. Every time there is a defeat(or draw) it seems they quickly rush to put it on the ref. Such a shame as its the best rugby country in the world.
- Mellsblue
- Posts: 16083
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
I blame Wayne Barnes.skidger wrote:On stuff.co.nz the main headline is 'what the.......?' with the two different stories underneath having the following headlines-
Ref stuns in final minute
Test descends into french farce.
Some of the NZ media make Arsene Wegner look gracious. Every time there is a defeat(or draw) it seems they quickly rush to put it on the ref. Such a shame as its the best rugby country in the world.
- skidger
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:09 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
It all started with Wayne. Shame on him.Mellsblue wrote:I blame Wayne Barnes.skidger wrote:On stuff.co.nz the main headline is 'what the.......?' with the two different stories underneath having the following headlines-
Ref stuns in final minute
Test descends into french farce.
Some of the NZ media make Arsene Wegner look gracious. Every time there is a defeat(or draw) it seems they quickly rush to put it on the ref. Such a shame as its the best rugby country in the world.
-
- Posts: 6486
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
Owens caught the ball so could legitimately be said to have played it. I appreciate its an instinctive reaction but i dont think the Lions could have complained had Poite stood by his original penalty decision.
That aside, NZ have only themselves to blame for failing to win last week and this. They had their chances and blew them.
That aside, NZ have only themselves to blame for failing to win last week and this. They had their chances and blew them.
-
- Posts: 2497
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 9:05 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
What'd he say?Banquo wrote:yay, gats called out all Faz's fck ups, there is a god
-
- Posts: 965
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:11 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
Wummery aside, I guess it's a positive that we didn't lose either the series or the Eden Park record. As others have said, the AB's should've been far more clinical so as to remove the very random French refereeing variable. If they had their house in order it could've been all but over at half time.
As for the tour as a whole, the Blues won, the Crusaders lost. The touring Lions fans were good value, as always. An entertaining tour all round. Good stuff. Hope they continue as is, without the English clubs further encroaching upon them.
As for the tour as a whole, the Blues won, the Crusaders lost. The touring Lions fans were good value, as always. An entertaining tour all round. Good stuff. Hope they continue as is, without the English clubs further encroaching upon them.
- Sourdust
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
I tend to think that by the strictest interpretation of law, it should have been a pen.
But the law is so vague in these circumstances, and has been so controversial before, that to decide a test series on that moment would have been intolerably cruel. I think even NZ fans would have felt a bit hollow about it if they're fully honest with themselves. IMO Poite applied natural justice in full "empathy with the game". Whether he was entitled to make that call, is another issue.
When something hits you your hands go to the point of impact. It's a reflex, and I hate seeing it penalized. The law needs to be cleared up, so that for a penalty there must be a clear and obvious intent to play the ball from a knowingly offside position, otherwise it's the same offence as bumping into a teammate.
But the law is so vague in these circumstances, and has been so controversial before, that to decide a test series on that moment would have been intolerably cruel. I think even NZ fans would have felt a bit hollow about it if they're fully honest with themselves. IMO Poite applied natural justice in full "empathy with the game". Whether he was entitled to make that call, is another issue.
When something hits you your hands go to the point of impact. It's a reflex, and I hate seeing it penalized. The law needs to be cleared up, so that for a penalty there must be a clear and obvious intent to play the ball from a knowingly offside position, otherwise it's the same offence as bumping into a teammate.
- skidger
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:09 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
Timbo wrote:What'd he say?Banquo wrote:yay, gats called out all Faz's fck ups, there is a god
Graham 'look at me' Simmons was about to push for him to be knighted when Gatland just replied with a comment about all his mistakes. Although the New Zealand Herald still enjoys acid it seems
12. Owen Farrell - 8
Powerful all-round game, including strength in tackle and levelling penalty. Confidence gave Lions momentum.
-
- Posts: 2497
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 9:05 am
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
He had a good second half I thought. 3 for the first and a 7 for the second, for a bang average 5 overall.skidger wrote:Timbo wrote:What'd he say?Banquo wrote:yay, gats called out all Faz's fck ups, there is a god
Graham 'look at me' Simmons was about to push for him to be knighted when Gatland just replied with a comment about all this mistakes. Although the New Zealand Herald still enjoys acid it seems-
12. Owen Farrell - 8
Powerful all-round game, including strength in tackle and levelling penalty. Confidence gave Lions momentum.
-
- Posts: 2851
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:14 pm
Re: v All Blacks III: the Decider
I'd be all for that not being a penalty but to change it in the final minute of a lions test is farcical. Those are always given and it is always said that they are unlucky but those are the rules. It's not like all other penalties are for full on skulduggery.Sourdust wrote:I tend to think that by the strictest interpretation of law, it should have been a pen.
But the law is so vague in these circumstances, and has been so controversial before, that to decide a test series on that moment would have been intolerably cruel. I think even NZ fans would have felt a bit hollow about it if they're fully honest with themselves. IMO Poite applied natural justice in full "empathy with the game". Whether he was entitled to make that call, is another issue.
When something hits you your hands go to the point of impact. It's a reflex, and I hate seeing it penalized. The law needs to be cleared up, so that for a penalty there must be a clear and obvious intent to play the ball from a knowingly offside position, otherwise it's the same offence as bumping into a teammate.
I think he just bottled it. I don't know how the TMO angles could possibly have changed his mind.