NZ v FRA & Barnes

[tevisv]

I thought today's matches were great. But could I get an honest view from everyone on Barnes' match? I don't think he had his best game today, but will not say his decisions caused NZ to loose. After all, they had over 70% of the ball. I'm talking about the yc, the forward pass, the no call against mcalister and the advantage off call with the 50 meter drop attempt.

Again, I'm looking for a fair view.

 

[oxped]

I think he had a decent game, with a couple of close calls. I think the YC was a marginal call, and possibly a little harsh, but macallister did take the man out. As for the forward pass, everyone misses those on occasion and NZ have scored plenty in their time of forward passes, as have everyone else! It was a very short offload so very tricky to see, especially when France have made a break and WB and his TJ's were at least 10 yards behind it.

As for the advantage call, that was a little strange, but it was only a scrum advantage, so maybe he felt that was ok?

Like I said I think he had a generally good game, but everyone will just focus on those close calls.

 

[PeterH]

Maybe this is the first time that a ref will get blamed for a team losing when they felt they deserved to win?

 

[Emmet Murphy]

I thought the YC was 100% correct - replays show McAllister turn into the France player's line of running. A penalty advantage was already being played so to only award a PK after two penalty offences in the red zone would have been hard on France.

I think Barnes did make a slight error with the advantage over call at the end - he shouted 'scrum advantage' but signalled for an intentional knock-on - however he was only playing a scrum advantage so once the kick had been taken 'advantage over' was the correct call. The TV immediately showed the NZ coaching staff make the same intentional knock-on signal so they obviously thought he was playing a penalty advantage and maybe McAllister did as well as he probably did not hear Barnes say 'scrum advantage'. If it had been a penalty advantage (ie if he had deemed the knock-on intentional) then he would almost certainly have come back once he saw the drop-goal miss.

Overall I thought Barnes had a very good game - he penalised NZ early on for offences at the breakdown which had a positive effect on the breakdown area for the remainder of the match.

 

[Davet]

It was a Knock-on only and Barnes was very clear about that. He had a good game, and managed it very well. The forward pass was marginal, and I have seen many top flight refs let much more controversial ones go.

The sin-bin was justified, edging onto harsh, but not overly so, and had an excellent result on the way both teams played from then on, with players being very circumspect about infringing.

All-in-all a very good performance.

 

[Emmet Murphy]

It was a Knock-on only and Barnes was very clear about that.

He made a downward, slapping, gesture as he called the advantage and then said 'scrum advantage' (if memory serves me right) several times. It was very clear to anyone close enough to hear him say it but it couldn't have been clear to the players further away because that signal is often used for intentional knock-ons

 

[Pablo]

I think WB allowed more latitude at the breakdown than I would have liked - several turnovers looked like illegally won ball to me - BUT he was consistent all game, and the French made much better use of his leniency here than NZ. Other aspects of his game were fine. Re: the forward pass on Michalak's break for the winning try - it's common knowledge that such marginal calls are a) hard to spot and b) often not given. How many times have NZ benefited from similar non-calls? (eg., Howlett's go ahead try in the NZ v Wales pool game at RWC03, etc...)

I wasn't convinced by the McAllister YC - I think that Jauzion went looking for the contact as well, and while McAllister dipped his shoulder somewhat defensively, I feel that Jauzion was quite capable of keeping his feet but instead chose to hurl himself to the ground football-style. I believe he embellished it to draw WB into giving the YC.

 

[Dinks]

I thought that he handled it pretty well. I'll never know how much pressure he felt as the game went into the last 20 mins - must have been immense. The YC was deserved and I'd like to see more obstruction (particularly at kick offs) clamped down on.

Reading the NZ press, in a survey only 19% of NZ fans blame the players, 55% of them blame Wayne Barnes...it wasn't him that passed up no end of opportunities to drop into the pocket and get the drop goal was it! McCaw's captaincy has to be called into question, can't imagine Johnson making that kind of fundamental error.

 

[tevisv]

Cool...thanks! I too think WB had a decent game, but think this was not his best of this tournament; again, my op and feel he is well on his way to the top tier whistle blowers. Dinks, spot on with the last 20 mins feelings...must have been intense! The Setanta announcers thought Jauzin took a dive as well; heard that comment in numerous RWC matches. Like everyone here, hope this does not become a trend in our great game.
I was quite amused by the blogs and press from NZ as well. Not too sure if I would call out McCaw, but will say that it was clearly evident leaving Mauger off the side was huge. In the RWC build up, Mauger was the backline's guiding force when Carter was not and he can hit the drop goal. Clearly NZ was looking ahead and home they go with 20,000+ fans that came for the last 3 weeks. So, being part French...Tres bien Les Bleus!!!

 

[Davet]

It wasn't MacAllister dipping hs shoulder that warranted the card, after all it's only natural to brace for impact. It was rather the step across right into the path of Jauzion, who was advancing at speed.

 

[voice of reason]

I realise refs are reticent to critise other Refs but to say he had a decent game is stretching it.

Barnes was mediocre - his inexperience showed.
Last week we had players penalised & binned for "stepping" and "placing" feet on opposition, This week the french did it in the opening ruck - McCaw being rucked and Williams being stood on - Nothing?? next ruck Barnes makes a point of telling the ABs keep you feet to yourself.

The ABs wheel a scrum thru 90 and somehow he gives the put in back to France and warns the AB forwards about scrum infringements?

His inability to police the offside play of the French was due to his poor positioning at the ruck - why was he facing the All Black backline for the majority of the time - They were on attack over 70 % of the time and yet he has his back to the french back line?

While the ABs were camped in the French 22 picking and going the blindside French defenders were permanently offside. Again the TJ should have been helping out here.

I agree many forward passes are missed - this one was not that short and it was obviously a metre forward - The TJ should have picked it up.

I agee the YC was open to interpretation - but a player should be allowed to turn and chase a kick thru - I don't believe McAlister deliberately moved into his Jauzions? path - he merely turned and chased. Barnes was over zealous - it didn't warrant a YC because it was not cynical play as Barnes suggested.

I can't recall a game where the team who has 70% of possession & territory on attack and yet does not get one single penalty awarded in an entire half.
To me that suggests Barnes was focusing on one team only and it wasn't the French.

 

[tevisv]

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and relax because after all, IT'S JUST A BLOODY GAME VOICE OF REASON ET ALL!!! Chaps, no one died and people will recover. But I ask this question, "If NZ had won this match with the same ref and the same calls, would Paddy O'Brien had that press conference?" We all know that answer...

Look, the All Blacks are without doubt, one of the greatest teams ever assmebled, including the NY Yankees, Jordan's Bulls, Man Utd, etc... But the fact remains that since the 1st RWC, they have failed to get the job done...PERIOD. Instead of chastising the ref, Paddy O'Brien and everyone else, why not ask Henry and Company why they choose the lineup they did?

 

[voice of reason]

What? are we not allowed to voice our opinions because they may be disparaging of a collegue??
I have not claimed that NZ would have won or that they were denied victory. My point is that several of the posts here find no fault with Barnes and some suggest he had a decent game. The facts suggest otherwise.

While in the US Rugby may be "just a game" but in NZ, Oz, SA etc etc it is a business and livelihoods and careers hinge on results. It used to be "just a game" but no longer.

In the words of Vince Lombardi "it's not a matter of life or death... it's much more important than that!"

 

[tevisv]

VOR, I never implied that you or anyone else could not voice an opinion. But I believe we will have to agree to disagree on this one. While rugby is still very much an amateur game in the States, it is still just a game mate...period. Same can be said for pro football, basketball, soccer, baseball, cricket, etc... I'm fully aware that rugby is religion in certain parts of the world, as is round ball football in others, but regardless if it's a kid out there or a highly paid adult, it's just a game.
As for Barnes, I think (and said) this was his worse game of this RWC if you compare his QF to his previous matches, but he still had a decent game...my opinion and hence why I asked for honest answers. Besides, if you are going to blame someone, then his two tj's should be included since they are the ref's secondary eyes and ears. At the speed and pace our beloved game is played nowadays, there will never be a game that will see everything caught and called. Good luck in your season coach.

 

[voice of reason]

Cheers Tevisv, we will have to disagree on that - here in NZ rugby is more than a game - when the AB's lose governments get booted out, the economy falters, and worst of all domestic violence rises by 40% no kidding.

 

[tevisv]

I know the feeling. Being from Louisiana, samething happens with the LSU (college) football team! No worries mate, back and forth banter is good for the mind and the game. And by the way, my wife cried her eyes out after the loss.

 

[Gareth-Lee Smith]

Voice of reason - surely a simpler explanation of France not conceding penalties would be that they weren't offending?

 

[oxped]

At the speed and pace our beloved game is played nowadays, there will never be a game that will see everything caught and called.

Surely this is the key point. When todays players make a break, it does not matter how good a ref you are, you are going to be chasing the play, and from where WB was he would have to be guessing. The fact that it was a very short pass as well makes it harder to detect.

Everyone has benefited from forward passes being missed in the past, and they will in the future. But to boil the NZ defeat down to this one moment is wrong. If you are the best side in ther world then you should be able to get 3 points in the last 15mins of a match to win it. A combination of injuries and tactics hurt NZ more.

 

[Simon Thomas]

I am Welsh so am impartial !

It is important to separate the roles of the players (and their coaches) and the Team of 3 Match Officials.

At this elite level the coaches determine the overall strategy and major tactical choices, and select their team to deliver it. Then the players have to make their own with how the match unfolds With the benefit of hindsight I believe the NZ players did not play the right game and became obsessed towards the end with emulating the boring, muscular 'pick & drive' we see so much in the NH. They lost because they couldn't adapt, and Ritchie McCaw didn't step up as skipper to take control (he is though one the finest open sides to ever play the Game). Not pushed by anyone until this match, the ABs were over-confident and did not appear ready for an old fashioned match full of passion and physicality from the French. Key impact replacements (Chabal and Michelak) delivered and the AB left it too late with a solitary long drop kick effort, having wasted a number of easier chances.

Wayne Barnes had a pretty good match for someone so inexperienced at this level, made his decisions clearly and with consistency, and communicated well. None of us can imagine the pressure he would have been under, which increased to massive levels in the last 20 minutes.

His critical decisions in my view :

a) French try - possible forward pass. Super fast French break, WB behind by 10-15 m (Spreaders would have 20m + behind !), and at ground level and at that speed very tough to spot it (easy to see on TV with a wide angle). TJ also back on an angle and looking in, so again very tough one to call.
b) YC - deliberate step block, shoulder down and very professionally done by McAlister in the red zone, but Jauzion 'over-theatrical'. WB was playing a penalty advantage already and it was red zone after all. YC
c) he played a scrum advantage, and he called it clearly, and a 50m drop effort is good enough in my book to have gained some advantage.

Overall WB had control, was very clear and consistent, and showed good preventative management. Both AB lost the match and France won it. Wayne Barnes and TJs gave them an equitable match imho.

 

[ex-lucy]

agree with ST.

The ABs wheel a scrum thru 90 and somehow he gives the put in back to France and warns the AB forwards about scrum infringements?

this was a whip wheel. i have done the same, indeed i did it on Saturday and Sat last. If the loose head (or thp) doesnt move forwrad but moves around then you cant count that as a wheel. So reset.
Woodcock did it time and again and should have been pinged.
He wasnt pushing he was dragging his team mates round.

i thought WB did fine. Not as good as previous matches but this one was quicker by a good 10% in places.