Henry Purdy

Re: Henry Purdy

Severus 17 Feb 2020 14:59 pm said..

Davers wrote:Why doesn't it follow the wording of the law?

The referee made a judgement that the try probably wouldn't have been scored; that sounds exactly like the wording of the law.

In that case he was wrong. Its here https://www.premiershiprugby.com/watch/ ... -v-bristol around the 3 minute mark, 9 times out of 10 that is a try.
Posts: 1086
Severus
Hall of Famer

Re: Henry Purdy

Gloucester Mute 17 Feb 2020 16:30 pm said..

coleser wrote:“Maybe he enjoys his beers with the lads in the Montpellier Wine Bar too much !!”

Care to explain?


Chris White as a Cheltenham resident and an ex-GRFC supporter chose not to referee GRFC. I think that at the highest level this was a good call. Wayne Barnes as an ex-Bream RFC boy and GRFC supporter lived in London so didn't believe he had a conflict of interest. CM-K (and Christophe Ridley) both live in Chelt and drink with the GRFC boys in Cheltenham.

For me that is a possible conflict of interest that they should try and avoid. IMHO.

Not a troll BTW so do pipe down Sky Blue and get back to Maine Road/Coventry. ;)
Nothing wrong with free speech or having an opinion - as long as it matches mine !!
Posts: 1874  Location: Dursley - At the heart of the County
Gloucester Mute
Hall of Famer

Re: Henry Purdy

TheOptimistSenior 17 Feb 2020 17:43 pm said..

I think the ref. got this right.
However, to muddy the waters further, if the tackle had been legal i.e.below the level of the shoulders, and Mallinder had also joined the tackle, the try would possibly not been scored. Does an illegal tackle mean that any tackle by the offender should be ignored? I don't know the answer to that - maybe there are ex-referees or current referees out there who have a view on that.
Or am I talking nonsense!?
Posts: 493
TheOptimistSenior
Vice-Captain

Re: Henry Purdy

Walterdrip 17 Feb 2020 17:57 pm said..

A few players were confused why HP was not offered a new contract.
To many wingers, also wingers waiting in the Wings ;)
Posts: 74
Walterdrip
First team regular

Re: Henry Purdy

colinboag 17 Feb 2020 18:02 pm said..

It's simple: salary cap, and the coaches' judgement that they had better options. Hard to argue with that, and they stand or fall by making those decisions. It is arguable that some recruitment decisions were what cost 'only the good' his job.
Cherchez la truffe
Posts: 2861
colinboag
Hall of Famer

Re: Henry Purdy

Gloucester Mute 17 Feb 2020 18:40 pm said..

TheOptimistSenior wrote:I think the ref. got this right.
However, to muddy the waters further, if the tackle had been legal i.e.below the level of the shoulders, and Mallinder had also joined the tackle, the try would possibly not been scored. Does an illegal tackle mean that any tackle by the offender should be ignored? I don't know the answer to that - maybe there are ex-referees or current referees out there who have a view on that.
Or am I talking nonsense!?


Having re-read your comments 3 times I have concluded - nonsense !!

The illegal tackle essentially is ignored/not counted at all because it's illegal. Mallinder did nothing wrong at all BUT might have stopped Joyce. Therefore the score was not probable BUT possible. Therefore no-score. Correct to letter of the Law but not reality !!

LRZ score wasgiven on-field and not enough evidence to over-rule it. I guess if CMK hadn't given it the TMO would have agreed. Bit like Umpire's Call in cricket I guess - but doesn't always sit that easily with me. IF you have cameras use them and let them be the 100% arbiter.
Nothing wrong with free speech or having an opinion - as long as it matches mine !!
Posts: 1874  Location: Dursley - At the heart of the County
Gloucester Mute
Hall of Famer

Re: Henry Purdy

TheOptimistSenior 17 Feb 2020 20:18 pm said..

Many thanks Mute, for your comments. I had to write it three times and still wasn't sure!
Having thought about your post, whose reality?
Posts: 493
TheOptimistSenior
Vice-Captain

Re: Henry Purdy

Davers 17 Feb 2020 22:08 pm said..

Gloucester Mute wrote: IF you have cameras use them and let them be the 100% arbiter.


The trouble is that even with cameras it can still be far from clear exactly what has happened. The LRZ try was a perfect example, from some angles the try looked perfectly good but one angle showed he lost contact with ball for a fraction of a second. However, that same camera angle didn’t show what happened at the point the ball was grounded.
Posts: 156
Davers
Senior squad member

Re: Henry Purdy

DieTrying 17 Feb 2020 22:22 pm said..

Cameras are an aid not a source, not every camera angle tells the whole story and a lot are of no use whatsoever. Under the Laws of the game, the Ref is the sole arbiter of fact. At least in rugby you hear the TMO say "not clear and obvious" on an offside, forward pass etc. Yet in Football, VAR is quite the joke with lines placed over the offside line. One game actually showed a heel mm's over the line. Was it clear and obvious? No. Was it material to a Goal scored on the other side of the 18yd box? No. Was the Goal given? No. Thank god our Sport hasn't gone the route of stupidity.
Posts: 4875  Location: Gloucester
User avatar
DieTrying
Moderator

Re: Henry Purdy

King Prawn Bhuna 17 Feb 2020 23:04 pm said..

Excellent Mute...you have so many inaccuracies in your vilification of a premiership referee.

He hangs around the Wine Bar... you must identify yourself next time your in there hanging out with him and the boys...I'll put a pint in behind the bar if you can get a photo of you, CMK and more than one Gloucester player with a drink in their hand.

Bloody pathetic insinuation in my opinion. More to promote your own persona than truth. Get a life.
I'd love to agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong....
Posts: 7566  Location: Probably in the bar....
User avatar
King Prawn Bhuna
Moderator
PreviousNext

Return to Gloucester Rugby

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests