Nigel Owens loss of form

[Ian_Cook]

I sympathise with the view that a player, once he has jumped, cannot control where he comes down. The logical answer to that is for the player to make sure he knows where he is going to come down before jumping.

If you choose to charge down a kick by jumping while you are running directly at the kicker, you and only you are responsible if you clatter him.

 

[Pegleg]

I don't need to justify a thought?

That's simply what I thought!

If that's YC then let's just have a law that says a player isn't allowed to jump to charge or catch a ball until they can control themselves in the air when their back is turned. I thought is was rugby, not tindlee-winks?

You can think what you like. Choosing to broadcast your thoughts leave yo open to people questioning the basis of them.

I think pretty much every poster feels that you view is, let's politely say, "odd". I'll leave you to consider ,if you wish, why. I think Drift puts it very well.

 

[RobLev]

Thoughts on Michael Hooper's YC?

Nailed on as an incident in itself; screwed and glued when you add the repeat offending aspect (NO says words to the effect of "I've asked for more discipine, I'm not getting it" as he gives the card).

To the argument that he couldn't avoid the collision in mid air I ask; who put him in the air aimed at the kicker's head?

 

[menace]

You can think what you like. Choosing to broadcast your thoughts leave yo open to people questioning the basis of them.

I think pretty much every poster feels that you view is, let's politely say, "odd". I'll leave you to consider ,if you wish, why. I think Drift puts it very well.

Care factor = 0 :shrug:

you might like to read a couple posts again. My thinking was not as odd nor off the charts as you claim.

Two players jump for the ball with eyes on the ball and collide and one comes off 2nd best and everyone thinks it's fine as they were competing for the ball yet even the defender has deliberately jumped into the other player with a deliberate collision course with the aim to play at the ball, then something like this, which is similar really, and every jumps up and applauds the YC (even drift). The 2 just do not equate as that different IMO.

See here: http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?17836-Taken-out-in-the-air&highlight=Ouch

 

[crossref]

IMO however, there is a wider issue here. If the iRB does mean to make it very difficult for chasing players to jump for the ball by placing the duty of care on the chaser for what happens when they miss the ball, then they need to spell that out clearly and publicly Something like the Spear Tackle memo, published on their laws website is the minimum. .

ironically, the Spear tackle memo is NOT published on the IRBLAWS website, indeed mentions of it have actually been excised. So the IRB approach to this, is not dissimilar.

 

[Ian_Cook]

ironically, the Spear tackle memo is NOT published on the IRBLAWS website, indeed mentions of it have actually been excised. So the IRB approach to this, is not dissimilar.

Well, it should have been.

I got it originally from an iRB portal for Canadian referees that I should not have had access to, but did (someone who shall remain nameless gave me their username and password - and that is all I have to say about that!)

The point is, if that is the way they intend to go, then the relevant information needs to be in the public domain so that all players, referees and fans know the story.

 

[Dickie E]

I'm with Menace on this. And i've got to say giving Owen's a card is like giving a toddler a carving knife.

1. in 1st half, shows a card to a Wallaby then changes his mind
2. YC to Phipps who has clearly acted legally
3. YC to Folau then brings him back. Tells Argentina the PK is against them then gives PK to Argentina
4. Tells Hooper his YC is for "disobeying and not listening"

The Clown from the Valleys, boyo

 

[The Fat]

I'm with Menace on this. And i've got to say giving Owen's a card is like giving a toddler a carving knife.

1. in 1st half, shows a card to a Wallaby then changes his mind
2. YC to Phipps who has clearly acted legally
3. YC to Folau then brings him back. Tells Argentina the PK is against them then gives PK to Argentina
4. Tells Hooper his YC is for "disobeying and not listening"

The Clown from the Valleys, boyo

I haven't watched the replay (not sure I can bear to), but I only saw bits and pieces of the Folau one when it was on live. Saw him issue the card, walked out of the room only to hear the other half call out "Folau's come back". Then heard NO discussing that it may have been a push by a Puma on Folau and it was going to be a PK to AUS. Didn't know it went to the Pumas. What's the go there?

 

[The Fat]

I'm with Menace on this. And i've got to say giving Owen's a card is like giving a toddler a carving knife.

1. in 1st half, shows a card to a Wallaby then changes his mind
2. YC to Phipps who has clearly acted legally
3. YC to Folau then brings him back. Tells Argentina the PK is against them then gives PK to Argentina
4. Tells Hooper his YC is for "disobeying and not listening"

The Clown from the Valleys, boyo

Watching the replay now Dickie and I think he simply forgot that he told the Argies the PK was against them. Smart work by the Pumas' kicker to grab the ball and slack on Hoopers behalf for not reminding Nigel Owens who should have had the PK.
The Phipps YC was dubious.
It's a bit of a train wreck actually.

 

[menace]

With Phibbs YC...I think he forgot what to do when it's just a tackle zone!
I think he forgot that Argentina was cynical with their PKs but just had gold in his sights (quite justified too)
I think he forgot where to position himself and he got caught too deep behind the breakdown
I think he was too ball focused at the breakdown
I think he uncharacteristically let the home crowd get to him

I think he had an unusually poor game and his decisions influenced the result.

 

[Pegleg]

Care factor = 0 :shrug:

you might like to read a couple posts again. My thinking was not as odd nor off the charts as you claim.

Two players jump for the ball with eyes on the ball and collide and one comes off 2nd best and everyone thinks it's fine as they were competing for the ball yet even the defender has deliberately jumped into the other player with a deliberate collision course with the aim to play at the ball, then something like this, which is similar really, and every jumps up and applauds the YC (even drift). The 2 just do not equate as that different IMO.

See here: http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?17836-Taken-out-in-the-air&highlight=Ouch

NOr do I care about your opinion. Since you started the crap I'll say my last comment on this matter. You come across as a pathetic and bitter loser. Others have said it with less force but why pull it? Your team lost. the other Aussies are taking it like men but sadly you can't. A shame. I''ll step back from the thread as there's no point in discussing it further.

 

[Ian_Cook]

2. YC to Phipps who has clearly acted legally

The Phipps YC was dubious.

It wasn't just dubious, it was completely wrong.

It was a tackle and Phipps was the tackler so he was entitled to get up and play the ball in the position he was in, even with his feet. Nothing in Law 15 says that the tackler must play the ball with their hands. This is not the first time I have seen NO lose track of which player was the tackler.

 

[Pegleg]

That's a bad mistake.

 

[RobLev]

It wasn't just dubious, it was completely wrong.

It was a tackle and Phipps was the tackler so he was entitled to get up and play the ball in the position he was in, even with his feet. Nothing in Law 15 says that the tackler must play the ball with their hands. This is not the first time I have seen NO lose track of which player was the tackler.

Doesn't the tackler have to release ball and man before going back in again? He's still get the (former) BC by the collar while kicking the ball away. Whether that was NO's rationale, however, I don't know.

 

[Ian_Cook]

4. Tells Hooper his YC is for "disobeying and not listening"

No, it was for his third head high contact in a row after two previous warnings.

If you are going to put words in quotes, at least do us all the service of quoting exactly what he said, not your own revised version of it!

"You were in the air when the ball has left. You've got high tackle, high tackle. I've asked you
for discipline and you're not listening"

Hooper hit the Argentine player head high, having previously been warned for two head high tackles, so YC is an excellent call. There is nothing wrong with hitting him late in a situation like that, but the lateness and the fact he was in the air are not the issue. The contact above the line of the shoulders is!

If, instead of hitting him in the head with his buttocks, Hooper had caught him in the face with a forearm after the attempted charge-down, would you still be arguing that YC wasn't the correct call?

If Hooper had not jumped for the ball at all, and instead had caught him in the face with a forearm after the attempted charge down, would you still be arguing that YC wasn't the correct call?

Jumping in the air does not relieve him of responsibility for striking his opponent in the head. If you run directly at a kicker to charge him down, you are responsible for whatever happens next, If you hit him below the line of the shoulders, play on, but if you hit him above the line of the shoulders, its a head high tackle and a PK,

 

[Ian_Cook]

Doesn't the tackler have to release ball and man before going back in again? He's still get the (former) BC by the collar while kicking the ball away. Whether that was NO's rationale, however, I don't know.

If Phipps still had the tackled player by the collar, then he must have arms as long as his legs,; they would have to reach under the Argentine player lying on top of the tackled player's torso!

Besides which, the PK was for side entry.

 

[Dickie E]

anyone got a clip of the TMO referral for the possible try by Kirindrani? 2 quick looks from dreadful camera angles and "no try" the decision.

 

[Dickie E]

No, it was for his third head high contact in a row after two previous warnings.

If you are going to put words in quotes, at least do us all the service of quoting exactly what he said, not your own revised version of it!

Mate, I heard him say what I heard him say - after several replays. Perception is reality.

And, by the way, the 2nd high tackle was not by Hooper. He was involved in the conversation as captain. Please try to get facts correct.

 

[Dickie E]

Watching the replay now Dickie and I think he simply forgot that he told the Argies the PK was against them. Smart work by the Pumas' kicker to grab the ball and slack on Hoopers behalf for not reminding Nigel Owens who should have had the PK.
The Phipps YC was dubious.
It's a bit of a train wreck actually.

Maybe Nigel should add it to his pre-match: "Lads, sometimes I forget which way i give a penalty. First captain to put his hand up and say 'me Sir' gets the kick. OK?"

 

[Pegleg]

I've forgotten for a scrum put in but never a PK. Got it right in the end but you still feel a prat.