New Zealand v France

Re: New Zealand v France

Lebowski 16 Jun 2018 18:10 pm said..

Not1eyed wrote:Could be more effective to just say no jumping to catch ball. It would be a shame but as it stands it’s a mess


It is only a mess because the idiots who administer our game have made it so with their incomprehensible stupidity.
Posts: 4307
Lebowski
Moderator

Re: New Zealand v France

Gollum 16 Jun 2018 18:17 pm said..


Thanks for that Marble. Blimey, 1977! Was it really that recently? And I'm old enough to just about remember wingers throwing in at the lineout (often underarm) and kicking direct into touch from anywhere on the field. Those were the days!
Posts: 59
Gollum
First team regular

Re: New Zealand v France

HerefordGlos 17 Jun 2018 11:46 am said..

Greetings Shedweb.

I’ve been a long time Lurker, and have always enjoyed the (mainly) knowledgeable posts. I had hoped my first post was going to be to congratulate JA on victory in the Champions Cup Final next May. Ah well, that will be my second post, hopefully.

The law changes to the tackle height and contest in the air, whilst being a laudable attempt to make the game safer, have created many anomalies, as a number of posters have pointed out.

To create a world beating team, rather than scouring the globe for players with tenuous eligibility, I suggest the RFU scours the country for players no taller than 5 foot. Then, train these players to move forward by hopping, rather than running. The advantages are obvious:
• Any tackle made whilst hopping is taking out in the air, leading to multiple penalties and yellow cards awarded against the opposition.
• Any tackle made when the hopping foot is on the ground will be above the shoulders. Repeated penalties, repeated yellow cards.
• Any scrum will end in a penalty against the opposition, as it will be impossible for opposition props to bind onto our shorter props without hingeing. Repeated penalties, repeated yellow cards.
• Eventually, the opposition will be reduced to a seven a side team.

I’m still working on how to retrieve the ball from our own restarts. Perhaps kick straight to touch and hope they’re stupid enough to take the scrum rather than the lineout. :?
Posts: 8
HerefordGlos
On a trial

Re: New Zealand v France

Beddis 18 Jun 2018 06:59 am said..

Posts: 3322  Location: Malahide, Co Dublin. Formerly Lydney
Beddis
Moderator

Re: New Zealand v France

Lurker 18 Jun 2018 07:27 am said..

report says:

"In reaching that conclusion, it is important to record, that no criticism is made of the referee nor, in our opinion, would any be warranted.

Unlike the referee we had the benefit of all the video footage, which showed various angles of the incident. Unlike the referee we had the luxury of time to deliberate and consider, in private, the incident. In contrast, the referee was required to make his decision in a matter of minutes in the full gaze of the public and without the benefit of all the relevant material."

Surely the referee had the benefit of all the video footage via the TMO? Decisions like this cost the impacted team considerably (especially playing with 14 men for 69 minutes). Had that been a World Cup semi or final - the repercussions would have been enormous!
Posts: 1331
User avatar
Lurker
Hall of Famer

Re: New Zealand v France

Theotherjonny 18 Jun 2018 07:51 am said..

Lurker wrote:report says:

"In reaching that conclusion, it is important to record, that no criticism is made of the referee nor, in our opinion, would any be warranted.

Unlike the referee we had the benefit of all the video footage, which showed various angles of the incident. Unlike the referee we had the luxury of time to deliberate and consider, in private, the incident. In contrast, the referee was required to make his decision in a matter of minutes in the full gaze of the public and without the benefit of all the relevant material."

Surely the referee had the benefit of all the video footage via the TMO? Decisions like this cost the impacted team considerably (especially playing with 14 men for 69 minutes). Had that been a World Cup semi or final - the repercussions would have been enormous!


+1 Lurker, thought it was harsh at the time :o
Always remember that you are absolutely unique. Just like everyone else.
Posts: 199  Location: Tewkesbury (most evenings and weekends) Cheltenham (office hours) Kingsholm (home fixtures)
Theotherjonny
Senior squad member

Re: New Zealand v France

Steve M 18 Jun 2018 07:54 am said..

Lurker wrote:report says:

"Unlike the referee we had the benefit of all the video footage, which showed various angles of the incident. Unlike the referee we had the luxury of time to deliberate and consider, in private, the incident. In contrast, the referee was required to make his decision in a matter of minutes in the full gaze of the public and without the benefit of all the relevant material."


Surely statements like this should mean that the referee and/or TMO should err on the side of caution.

Its all well and good to say 'sorry, you shouldn't have been sent off'; but he was and it ruined a great game. France were well on top at the time of the dismissal and lost the game in the following 10mins whilst they got their heads sorted out.
The only problem with doing nothing is not knowing when you have finished.
Posts: 950  Location: Longlevens, Gloucester
Steve M
On the board

Re: New Zealand v France

CMGC 18 Jun 2018 08:06 am said..

It is clearly better that it is overturned than left as it was but it does highlight the problem of the impact such decisions have on a game. I think you have to make the decision at the time ( properly) and then stick with it. The whole jumping/ not jumping in the air for a high ball problem needs looking at again for me.
Posts: 3543  Location: In the sticks
CMGC
Moderator

Re: New Zealand v France

lucifer 18 Jun 2018 09:11 am said..

Personally I think they’ve made an improvement on this at the football (apologies to the soccerphobes for blasphemy) World Cup where linesmen have been told not to flag when a tight decision has to be made. Rather it will subsequently be referred upstairs when there is a break in play. The above incident in the France v NZ game would then have been avoided. I know people will object to taking power away from officials but this is the way forward and increases the chances of getting the decision right and avoids the pitfalls of the game changing consequences of ‘big’ decisions that were wrong. We might even have won the game in Bilbao had this principle been in operation!
Posts: 725
lucifer
Hero in the making

Re: New Zealand v France

Peanutcoxy 18 Jun 2018 09:25 am said..

The defending player always knows that if he jumps and keeps an eye on the ball, he will probably catch it and is safe in the knowledge that they will retain possession at worst. Therefore, it should make it very difficult for the attacker to win the ball back. Will this lead to the reduction in the high ball unless a known defensive weakness has been identified? The increased threat of on field yellow and red cards may just be too much of a risk for coaches
Posts: 804  Location: Brockworth
Peanutcoxy
On the board
PreviousNext

Return to Gloucester Rugby

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests