Happy to admit to bias* but sometimes these things aren't grey area and we should be able to agree. Images were only selected because you couldn't see a YT video that I had already linked for you.
There will always be grey areas, even in the most simple decisions, humans interpret things differently according to our life exposure and the prejudice and bias we accumulate, it's a fact of life and what makes us interesting.
incorrect. Head+ elbow is definitely on the ground (my screen shot from above, red arrow - you can at least see that, can't you?). Head is supporting much more of the body weight than legs and player is stopped so no forward momentum.
And?
Tackle requires:
- For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
- Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
- Being held means that a tackler must continue holding the ball-carrier until the ball-carrier is on the ground.
Don't see that test case being met.
You cannot see momentum from a still image.
I also offered that the position we see here occurs probably 80-100 times per game elsewhere on the pitch, ball carrier not held and continues to drive forward, tacklers trying to stop forward motion and lying on top do we penalise or allow it to play out? And I'm quite happy either way but we must be consistent. From the Principles of the Laws:
Law Application
The laws must be applied in such a way as to ensure that the game is played according to the principles of play. The match officials can achieve this through fairness, consistency, sensitivity and, when appropriate, management.
So applying a different lens here doesn't really work.
So are you saying that the ref and TMO would have awarded a penalty try if the comms was working?
No. I'm saying the ref had his arm out for advantage! And from the outcome, we can deduce he considered that advantage had been gained by scoring the try.
I consider that if they had disallowed the try because he was
"tackled" and didn't comply with the immediate obligations of playing the ball, then the ref would have come back for no advantage and awarded the penalty.
I also consider that if green 13 was not offside then blue would likely have scored and awarding a PT would have been a fair decision. (We should see more of these as goal line offside offences are endemic now).
If you listen to the ref comms, WB says to captain that they "will definitely check the try". It shows that he had enough doubt that he wanted the conversation with TMO, he never got line working.
Not really, it's pretty clear for me to see that a player who is grounded can't do three movements to score. You've done nothing to prove to me that this was a valid try. Penalty try for offsides I'd be happy to debate further (I'd then have to bring up the YC that came from the previous movement, which from memory has pretty clear footage that it was the wrong call from WB).
I don't need to prove anything the match officials decided it was a try. I personally see no reason to consider that decision incorrect. You have a feeling that SA are being persecuted and all of France have conspired in that.
Would you like to unpick it and see what options Mr Barnes had, if the comms was good
and they decided that blue was
brought to ground and held, and should therefore have released the ball? I would like to hear you logical and objective comments.
Please clarify what grounded means when applied to a player.
It only really brings me back to bias as mentioned up top.
this thread tells me that
a)Fra captain and coach can call out officials with zero sanction.
You want to restart that discussion that's fine but we are back to conflation of issues.
b)There is bias on this forum against south africa. I take that with the pinch of salt it comes with.
Nope just trying to remain objective, calling out negative rugby (be honest many teams international and club do not observe tackle gates, come in the side and kill rucks by flopping on, both SA and Ireland are very good at it) and wondering why showcase rugby continues to allow many negative aspects to mar the game.
I have sat in the crowd watching live international games, called out what the ref has seen to exclude a try and had to explain why the decision was correct, to supporters of both teams.
I think harsh but fair is the term commonly used not bias.