SA v All Blacks 1st August

[Jenko]

Thought Nigel Owens had a pretty impressive game today. Managed the breakdown effectively. Was consistent in his decisions and delivery of sanctions. Was impressed as I normally find him a bit pedantic.

 

[OB..]

MoM for my money. The other 44 participants were unimpressive. I have never seen such an incompetent All Black team, and South Africa's running game consisted of getting Habana to chase kicks.

For the Boks "a win is a win", but pressure and precise kicks won't persuade neutrals to cheer.

 

[upnunder]

Owens was excellent.
Great communication to the players all the way through, and nice to see an elite ref pinging both SH for not in straight.

Thought the yellow card for Isaac Ross was a little bit harsh, I thought it was marginal whether the ball was out, but then Ross didnt ask Owens if he could play it, and got pinged.

 

[Phil E]

I was quite surprised at how long he spent explaining decisions to players; something for which I have been picked up by assessors (but then I am not on the tele).

 

[Ian_Cook]

Thought Nigel Owens had a pretty impressive game today. Managed the breakdown effectively. Was consistent in his decisions and delivery of sanctions. Was impressed as I normally find him a bit pedantic.

Owens was excellent.
Great communication to the players all the way through, and nice to see an elite ref pinging both SH for not in straight.

MoM for my money.

You will not find anyone agreeing with you in these parts, but before I get stuck into Owens, let me first say that South Africa fully deserved to win, and that All Blacks did not. That was one of the worst performances I have seen from the All Blacks in recent times; worse than last week, and even worse then the 2007 quarterfinal.

Now for Owens.

I thought he was pedantic and whistle happy, and generally had a very poor game. I would rate him 3 out of 10 at best. It doesn't matter how good your "communications skills" , "management of the breakdown" and "delivery of sanctions are" if you make basic and fundamental errors in Law.

Take for example, the YC he gave to Isaac Ross. This was not just a harsh call, it was a diabolical one, and totally incorrect.... not even a PK.

► The ball was touched on the ground by a SA player who was in the SH position, that meant the ball was OUT.

► That player then joined the "ruck" and his feet ended up ahead of the ball, that also makes the ball OUT.

► Isaac Ross came from an onside position and was entitled to play at the ball.

It is not marginal whether the ball was out or not, it WAS out, by every measure we as referees judge the ball to be out. Isaac Ross did everything according to the book, waited patiently behind the HMF until he saw the the ball out. This should not have even been a PK, let alone a YC.

IMO, Owens was influenced by the crowd booing; we call that a "crowd call" here. It was a very bad mistake by him, and not the first time he has made a call against NZ that was clearly and demonstrably wrong (the McCaw "you were not the tackler" call in 2007 springs to mind).

As for the other YCs

► JP Pietersen's was marginal, I've seen a lot worse than that not carded. If every one of those were given YC in every game, we'd spend a lot of time playing 10-a-side. What about the pole-axing of Cowan a minute or two earlier by Habana. Happened right in front of him in open field and he completely missed it.

► Botha's for offside was another joke. There is no way that was a professional foul or a repeat offending, so why the card? It was not for the earlier tackle (which IMO was legit anyway) because if it was, the resulting PK would have been taken wider out and further back.

In short, I thought Nigel Owens' performance with the whistle today was stilted, unimaginative and ordinary at best. I think he showed little or no affinity for the game. He saw a lot of stuff that no-one else saw, and missed a lot that everyone else saw. This is by far the worst performance I have personally seen by Owens, so I therefore award him the following prize;

He should use it as soon as possible!

[rant]Its time we kicked NH referees out of the Tri-Nations and had SANZAR appoint our own as we do with Super 14. I have been less than impressed with any NH referees I have seen this international season (Rolland was the best of a poor lot) and frankly, I would rather have an Australian referee (even with their limitations) or even a South African referee against South Africa. Craig Joubert and Marius Jonker were head and shoulders above anything we have had to suffer from what's been served up so far from Up North. Let them stick to the 6N and turn those matches into PK/YC fests, and just leave ours alone.[/rant]

 

[Phil E]

[rant]................blah blah blah...........[/rant]

ROFLOL :Looser:

 

[Ian_Cook]

ROFLOL :Looser:

I suppose you are entitled to your opinion, ROLF, just as I am entitled to mine!!

I knew it would provoke a reaction like that. Its why it had the RANT warning

 

[Donal1988]

Ian Im confused. You were all for punishing the likes of Botha calling for more penalties, more yellow cards etc in terms of over aggressive ruck entry. Remember that video and you were saying it needs to be better refereed. You shouted away cries that it would result in 7 a side if referees had that approach.

Pietersons yellow is only card I actually saw. It was 50-50 in my book but by no means apalling. It just seems odd that only the defeated team have complaints while the neutrals feel he did remarkably well.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Ian Im confused. You were all for punishing the likes of Botha calling for more penalties, more yellow cards etc in terms of over aggressive ruck entry. Remember that video and you were saying it needs to be better refereed. You shouted away cries that it would result in 7 a side if referees had that approach.

What was Botha's YC for; a professional foul for offside (in the backs)? That's what it appeared to be, yet he was a long way from the ball, and I do not recall him being pinged for that at all in the first 50 minutes so it cannot have been for repeat offending. A PK by all means, but it hardly merited a YC. This was another one of Owens' brain explosions.

Pietersons yellow is only card I actually saw. It was 50-50 in my book but by no means apalling. It just seems odd that only the defeated team have complaints while the neutrals feel he did remarkably well.

What did I say? It was marginal, and you say 50/50. That sounds like agreement to me.

I thought Owens' was poor. Winning or losing has nothing to do with it AFAIC. We thumped England 37-20 in 2008 with Owens as the referee and I was less than impressed with him then too.

The YC he awarded against Isaac Ross was piece of "Home-town Harry" refereeing worthy of a Louis Luyt Gold Watch.

Since you haven't seen it, here it is:



All times on the TV clock not the YouTube clock.

30:05: Black 8 and Green 4 are physically bound over the tackle, ball is on the ground so ruck formed. Ball pops out on the Green side

30:07: Green 2 is not bound, and puts his hand in the ball. I know of no referee (except this one) who would say that the ball is not out. Green 2 had his hand on the ball on the ground behind the ruck. Green 2 then lets go of the ball and walks forward, but the ball continues to roll backward and comes out between Green 2's legs. At this stage, you can see Isaac Ross on the left edge of the screen, behind the HMF. The SA player next to him is offside.

30:08 Black 8 points to the ball, and signals that its out. Worst of all, you can see Owens on the right side of the screen looking directly at it. He MUST have seen Green 2 touch the ball, he MUST see that the ball was out.

The rest you can see for yourself. The commentators then get stuck into Owens, making a few remarks about him that I agree with 100%.

At the very worst it should have been play-on, but he could have played advantage Black for a FK against Green 2, for returning the ball to the ruck -Law 16.4(a)

Just like he did with McCaw v England in 2008, he didn't know, so he guessed.... and again, he guess wrong.

If this was just a small error, it might be forgivable, but it wasn't, it was a monumental cock-up that led to 3 points to the Green team that might have been a 7 pointer at the other end. His error also led to a player wrongfully YC'd so taking away the one player advantage Black had from the earlier card, as well as killing the momentum the were beginning to get back. Owens' guess and subsequent cock-up is unforgivable from a referee who appears to make a habit of guessing and getting it wrong.

 

[Phil E]

The ball looked out to me before Green 2 put his hand on it, although I would argue with your definition of out. I was also perplexed as to why it was a YC.

The ball was touched on the ground by a SA player who was in the SH position, that meant the ball was OUT.

SH touching the ball is not out. The ball is out when it leaves the ruck, i.e. beyond the back foot, or lifted off the ground (although that is confused now by the new directive).

However, nothing the ref did is responsible for NZ losing the game.

 

[Ian_Cook]

The ball looked out to me before Green 2 put his hand on it, although I would argue with your definition of out. I was also perplexed as to why it was a YC.

I was perplexed as to why it was even a PK

SH touching the ball is not out. The ball is out when it leaves the ruck, i.e. beyond the back foot, or lifted off the ground (although that is confused now by the new directive).

If the ball was already out, and Green 2 touched it them moved over it and joined up with the players in front, hasn't he in effect returned the ball to the same ruck - 16.4(a)

However, nothing the ref did is responsible for NZ losing the game.

Didn't I already say that?

 

[Dickie E]

I, too, thought Nigel a bit patchy and somewhat influenced by crowd.

In 69th minute a Bok player was correctly penalised for dangerous ruck entry on or near touchline & Nigel brought the PK in 15 metres. Any idea why?

 

[Phil E]

Didn't I already say that?

It's not what you implied here:

If this was just a small error, it might be forgivable, but it wasn't, it was a monumental cock-up that led to 3 points to the Green team that might have been a 7 pointer at the other end. His error also led to a player wrongfully YC'd so taking away the one player advantage Black had from the earlier card, as well as killing the momentum the were beginning to get back.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Ian cook Incident was clearly a mistake, and hopefully he will admit that. Otherwise he referreed to the laws which was what the majority of us do.
Not staright in scrum, numbers in Line out, players off their feet, driving in not bound, etc etc. great call also for offside in a kicking duel.
One he did miss was Matfield joining the line from SH position though it wasn't thrown to him, "material effect"?? though he did get them later for leaving the line after it was formed.
We all make mistakes but it was the players who were comitting the offences not the ref.
As for the high tackle YC could have been a penalty try as he was the last man??

 

[Bill Lee]

Oh dear Ian, and here was I generally admiring your clarity of thought and objectivity' (Rant)
1) JP Pietersen's YC. Every time I see it I agree with the referees decision.
2) The hit on Cowan, I probably agree with you.
3) Re-runs of the Ross YC leaves me amazed he was carded. The Referee was in a good posion to see all aspects of the situation but for me the ball was clearly out.
It was not returned to the ruck but propelled backwards by "2 Green" who then moved his left leg over the path of the ball, which continued moving until outside the line of "2 Greens" legs. Ross noting this and coming from an onside position.

However, the referee does not have the advantage of re-runs, all referees make mistakes and I dont think this would be deemed to be a critical incident.
It did not effect the result. MS 31 - All Blacks 19.

 

[Ian_Cook]

It's not what you implied here:

Irrelevant. I said "might have been a 7 pointer"

"might" is a very big word in that context. Besides, even if it had happened instead of the 3 points, that's only 10, and the difference was 12. :nono:

 

[Ian_Cook]

all referees make mistakes and I dont think this would be deemed to be a critical incident.

Sorry, but I do not buy into the old "all referees make mistakes" chestnut. That's just a defeatist attitude designed con others into accepting mediocrity. Besides, we're not talking about a missed offside or failing to spot a flanker unbind early. Were talking about a player wrongfully dismissed from the field. That is a serious, serious mistake.

We obviously see this differently in the SH. Any incorrect decision by a referee which leads to a player being wrongfully dismissed from the field is a critical incident.

We are also not talking about a Saturday morning grassroots part-timer volunteer referee here. These Elite referees are professionals, they are highly paid for what they do, and I expect a much higher standard from them than what I saw from Nigel Owens on Sunday morning. I do not expect a referee of his level to make such a fundamental error as this. It was an absolute howler!

This season just past, Aussie referee Matt Goddard dished out five YC and a RC in one S14 match, although he was stood down due more to other aspects of this performance. However, when you analysed those dismissals, every one of them was at least justifiable as a PK, although in some cases the cards were harsh. But in Isaac Ross' case, there was no justification whatsoever for even awarding a PK, let alone a YC, and what annoys me most about this particular incident, its not the first time Owens has done this sort of thing, and he does not appear to have learned from his previous mistakes. Nigel Owens "guessed". Nothing is more obvious, he guessed, and he got it wrong. I hope he has the gonads to admit it, but I won't be holding my breath.

 

[Bill Lee]

Having looked again at the Ross YC incident I would further support Ian's view in that as Ross moved from his offside line and "2 Green" was leaning on players on the ground & was the only man on his feet at the so called ruck.
At that moment, what was viewed does not match the criteria given in Law 16. Now I am being pedantic. A further thought is that where the referee was positioned would be most likely to cause him to misjudge the location of the ball in relation to the hindmost feet. A side on view would be less prone to error. (This could be a can of worms !!??)

 

[Dixie]

all referees make mistakes and I dont think this would be deemed to be a critical incident.
It did not effect the result. MS 31 - All Blacks 19.

Sorry, but I do not buy into the old "all referees make mistakes" chestnut. That's just a defeatist attitude designed to con others into accepting mediocrity. ...

We obviously see this differently in the SH. Any incorrect decision by a referee which leads to a player being wrongfully dismissed from the field is a critical incident.

Ian, I'm afraid you've just lost me. Perfection in a 80 minute performance involving many thousands of decisions is not a reasonable expectation, so it's time you did buy into the "all refs make mistakes" chestnut. If you don't, you will never be able to evaluate a refereeing performance rationally.

I would agree that incorrectly sending a player from the field equates to a critical incident, irrespective of whether the decision led to a score. Whether or not that matches the precise definition of a "critical incident", the impact on the game is arguably more serious than making an incorrect decision that results in a single unjustified score.

The consensus seems to be that Ross was hard done by; Owens erred, and should be judged to have done so. But NZ players, who earn much more than St Nigel, made far, far more errors. That is where responsibility lies for the loss, as you concede.

 

[Bill Lee]

Ian. our last posts crossed, whiich is a pity as I might have been somewhat scathing with your opinion that elite referees do not make mistakes. None are infallible. They get most of it right most of the time and shouldn't make mistakes....but it happens. There were a few instances on the Lions tour of SA where many people thought that the lions didn't get the rub of the green with international referees consistently getting it wrong in specific areas.
If the Ross YC is deemed to be a critical incident we won't get to hear about it. Suffice it to say that for international assessment there was probably enough doubt from the referees position to make him think the ball was still in the ruck.
Defeatist attitude!!?? Try Common sense. Acceping mediocrity.. My backside...and... never in my make up or in the NH.