Ref/ TMO not on the same page

[shebeen]

Yc issued here from 56:00 on the video timeline.

Referee seems like he wants to talk TMO out of it, but goes along eventually.

Didn't affect result, but wonder if they agreed later?

 

[BikingBud]

Really, in amongst lots of other flopping on, jointing from in the side, hands on the ground beyond the ball and not being penalised despite killing the momentum, 20 odd phases and the TMO decides to call that

He must have been having a cup of tea when only a few moments before there was clear head contact from LeRoux:

Given how much was going on, I thought the officials were all kind of anonymous!

Had the crowd all gone home early or not come out of the bars after half time?

 

[jdeagro]

Wow. I'm one with a major pet peeve against how poorly rucks shape up at the higher levels and never get called, but this is a ridiculous instance to start making those calls. The ruck was well over at the point Blue #2 was in any position to be considered pingable. This was fair and good play, not a penalty.

 

[Dickie E]

1:11:30 on video timeline (55:30 game time)

Felt a bit sorry for Pink 23. Attempts to get on side but is blocked from doing so by a team mate. YC

 

[BikingBud]

1:11:30 on video timeline (55:30 game time)

Felt a bit sorry for Pink 23. Attempts to get on side but is blocked from doing so by a team mate. YC

Pink 23 catches the ball on the way, a lovely little pop from the SH with about 6 bulls players lined up for the pass, what else would you do?

I can almost empathise with Le Roux's question about a penalty try.

But are there no thoughts about his head contact as mentioned above?

 

[shebeen]

Pink 23 catches the ball on the way, a lovely little pop from the SH with about 6 bulls players lined up for the pass, what else would you do?

I can almost empathise with Le Roux's question about a penalty try.

But are there no thoughts about his head contact as mentioned above?

I'm guessing they missed it, head on head so with mitigation could easily be YC.

Wasn't in a position to tackle and was going backwards. clumsy, but not intentionally foul play.

 

[Stu10]

Yc issued here from 56:00 on the video timeline.

Referee seems like he wants to talk TMO out of it, but goes along eventually.

Didn't affect result, but wonder if they agreed later?

Honestly, I don't see anything wrong here... enters through the gate, his feet are at the back foot and I wouldn't call that lying on a player... nowadays that is enough to constitute a bind at the ruck! Anyway, he comes forward after 9 picks the ball and plays his arm... all OK with me.