The refereeing of the 2010 Tri Nations

[ranger]

I'm getting too old for this ****..

Two stats which stuck out to me was McCaw conceding 5 penalties at the tackle/ruck/maul area in one game. Now that is just ridiculous by anybody's judgement. Simply not justifiable.
The other being NZ's offside count. Playing the game offside is cynical. Offside = out of the play. Which therefore means interference with no intention letting the play flow. Which means they were trying to disadvantage a team or players ILLEGALLY. Hopefully that's cleared up.

Right away i don't trust these statistics, why? because i very clearly remember DAN CARTER getting pulled up for not rolling away fast enough in the tackle in that game, it was in the second half of the game, the Springboks where going left to right across the screen and Carter got penalized about 15 metres out from his line near the far touch line. McCaw was involved in the tackle but didn't do anything illegal and Carter was the one penalized. The referee called McCaw out (As the captain, not the perpetrator) and issued him with a team warning for redzone infringements.
Carter doesn't feature on this list of penalties, and that occasion has obviously been attributed to McCaw incorrectly. That was just one discrepancy i can see off the top of my head, how many more are there? In conclusion, bullshit mate.

Also, what is PDVs Springboks going to do with quick ball anyway? they seem to have their heart set on slowing the game down to their own benefit and kicking the ball for percentages, Victor Matfield had a whinge the other day about the All Blacks throwing the ball into the lineout too quickly, which went against his tactic of slowing the lineout down to a screeching halt. The All Blacks are smaller and more mobile, if anyone wants the game to flow its them.

 

[Sparty]

@ shaggy , thats teh point I think , Both Bakkies and BJ received YC as first offenses , in Bakkies case I think it was the first penalty of the game !!

@ Thanks fpr that , next they gonna ask you how he was penalized 5 times at the ruck maul situation ie where was his arms , feet etc etc , stats just dont do it for some

@ nickdnz , yes more or less what I was trying to say/ask. I agree the stats are suspect at least , originally I was quoting from memory but after some research I was astounded to see that the ratio was very much higher , though admitting the source is suspect as well. I see now that it is in fact correct and that NZ conceded almost double the amount of penalties than SA and Aus , as a matter of fact combined SA/AUS conceded 45 which is 3 more than the ABS 42.

Interesting facts are that the NZ according to penalties are not that disciplined and conceded 7 penalties in that category and most glaringly obvious is that Mccaw with 5 penalties in one game for rucks and Maul where if I can remember he was warned officially 3 times play accordingly to a different set of rules maybe ??

 

[Sparty]

Right away i don't trust these statistics, why? because i very clearly remember DAN CARTER getting pulled up for not rolling away fast enough in the tackle in that game, it was in the second half of the game, the Springboks where going left to right across the screen and Carter got penalized about 15 metres out from his line near the far touch line. McCaw was involved in the tackle but didn't do anything illegal and Carter was the one penalized. The referee called McCaw out (As the captain, not the perpetrator) and issued him with a team warning for redzone infringements.
Carter doesn't feature on this list of penalties, and that occasion has obviously been attributed to McCaw incorrectly. That was just one discrepancy i can see off the top of my head, how many more are there? In conclusion, bullshit mate.

Also, what is PDVs Springboks going to do with quick ball anyway? they seem to have their heart set on slowing the game down to their own benefit and kicking the ball for percentages, Victor Matfield had a whinge the other day about the All Blacks throwing the ball into the lineout too quickly, which went against his tactic of slowing the lineout down to a screeching halt. The All Blacks are smaller and more mobile, if anyone wants the game to flow its them.

True stats are crap and I hate how they validate a point. As for the what we will do with fast ball , just take a look what the Boks did last year with fast ball and maybe try more recent our S14 finalist the Bulls and Stormers.

 

[Shaggy]

That's all you took from that whole post? Really? :huh:

Your assumption is way off by the way

Re-read the whole of your post, and see that you were addressing Cookies post mostly, and it looks like I have cherry picked your post to draw my conclusion/assumptions - my bad, sorry

 

[Shaggy]

@ shaggy , thats teh point I think , Both Bakkies and BJ received YC as first offenses , in Bakkies case I think it was the first penalty of the game !!

IMO there were a number of incidents in the game that Bakkies got carded in that leads to the conclusion that the refereeing was poor rather than Biased ... Bakkies sould have been carded for the headbutt on Cowan, Cowan should have been at least penalised for holding Bakkies back ...not sure about BJ incident so won't comment on that

 

[Sparty]

@ shaggy , thats teh point I think , Both Bakkies and BJ received YC as first offenses , in Bakkies case I think it was the first penalty of the game !!

IMO there were a number of incidents in the game that Bakkies got carded in that leads to the conclusion that the refereeing was poor rather than Biased ... Bakkies sould have been carded for the headbutt on Cowan, Cowan should have been at least penalised for holding Bakkies back ...not sure about BJ incident so won't comment on that

Agree , that was in the first 2 mins of the game , Cowan held Bakkies back = should have been a penalty , Bakkies head butts Cowan = in IMO a red card and suspension , Bakkies kills ball in the red zone though = penalty , he was yellow carded most likely because the ref missed the first offense but it still dont make it right.

 

[Shaggy]

Agree , that was in the first 2 mins of the game , Cowan held Bakkies back = should have been a penalty , Bakkies head butts Cowan = in IMO a red card and suspension , Bakkies kills ball in the red zone though = penalty , he was yellow carded most likely because the ref missed the first offense but it still dont make it right.

I agree with all of the above .. Bakkies's Yellow card was probably catch up for the first incident

 

[ranger]

True stats are crap and I hate how they validate a point. As for the what we will do with fast ball , just take a look what the Boks did last year with fast ball and maybe try more recent our S14 finalist the Bulls and Stormers.

I didn't say i don't trust statistics in general, i said i don't trust these statistics for reasons i went on to explain in detail. There is a subtle difference there see if you can spot it sunshine..
Being smarmy doesn't help anyone, and its an especially bad look when you haven't got your facts straight/ don't know what you are talking about.
Also, look what the boks did with it last year? what kick it away like it was going out of fashion? in a game where the Boks won 31-19 they scored a single try. Their kick at all opportunity tactic meant that the All Blacks could no longer carry real wingers and had to resort to players that could catch kicks first and foremost. Im not saying there is anything wrong with that, but what i am saying is that if the game is slowed down it would largely be to a South African advantage. Matfield wants to slow the lineout down because when things get stagnant and its down to set piece, hes the best in the world. When the All Blacks hurry things up SA cant handle it. Its very much the same in the tight, when neither team has any momentum in the trenches, SAs raw power would probably see them have the advantage.

P.S the super 14 effectively means nothing at this stage..

 

[smartcooky]

Two stats which stuck out to me was McCaw conceding 5 penalties at the tackle/ruck/maul area in one game. Now that is just ridiculous by anybody's judgement. Simply not justifiable.

So if he was, it would be 1 yellow per 21.5 penalties, and the Saffa/Ocker media wankers would still be whinging!!

The other being NZ's offside count. Playing the game offside is cynical. Offside = out of the play. Which therefore means interference with no intention letting the play flow. Which means they were trying to disadvantage a team or players ILLEGALLY. Hopefully that's cleared up.

Cynical? Really? 10 offside penalties in 320 minutes of rugby, less than 3 times per game.

Also, penalties AWARDED for offside does not take into account the number of times that their opposition had an offside advantage against them that did not result in a penalty because the advantage was gained and therefore over. Since the All Blacks have a total of 1600 running metres gained v about 1200 conceded, and have scored (count 'em) SEVENTEEN tries and conceded only six pretty much shows that they are making most of the play, and when that happens the defending team infringes a lot, but the advantage elapses. In the first 3N match 9 - 3 gained penalty advantages in favour of NZ. That is as clear an indication as any the their opposition infringe as much as they do, but it doesn't always end up in a penalty in the stats.

 

[Sam Owen]

Here on TRF we dont care about the score in the game of Rugby. We care about the penalty count.:redcard::lol::lol:

Like most of us I cant wait for the game. Some of us cant wait to watch Nigel Owens :lol::lol:..

But hey we need controversy or well have nothing to talk about, aye guys...alrighty then.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Here on TRF we dont care about the score in the game of Rugby. We care about the penalty count.:redcard::lol::lol:

Like most of us I cant wait for the game. Some of us cant wait to watch Nigel Owens :lol::lol:..

But hey we need controversy or well have nothing to talk about, aye guys...alrighty then.

Hey now leave Nige alone :lol:

Also if you read some of the latest post here, newbies will think that all this forum is about moaning about penalty counts ... dear lord please forgive those who have sinned!

 

[squirrel]

agree with you there cookie dough every team pushes the off side line your a bloody fool not to,i reckon though this all black team only really cares about slowing down opposition ball illegally or legally
did anyone else notice in the 05 lions series the all blacks were obsessed about taking out opposition support players when they made a line break, i think henrys quite clever where to test the ref, two years ago it was at scrum time especially against australia
this is not a whinge by the way, just admiration for good coaching

 

[Sker]

Oh no, we have Nigel Owens? Why another bloody NH ref! Well he is sortoff good.

 

[User1245]

You guys are really something else.

Catch up yellow cards? So that's what the refs and captains talk about. They deal like poker. I'll check and raised your 2 penalties for a yellow kind of stuff?

Disputing stats that are provided by the SA Rugby Referees Organisation approved by SARU.

Saying SA are trying to slow the game down? WTF are you doing offside 3 times more than any other team, highest ruck infringement rate, highest penalty on everything. The AB's are playing more "rugby" without the ball then when they have it. And the whole running metres gained is a crock of **** and you know it cooky. You ask for stats, I gave them to you. Instead you backward rationalise them with some hypothetical scenarios, and quickly sweep them under the carpet. You don't acknowledge opinions, stats or even facts, yet you whip out your ever ready law book definitions and interpreted them just right to suit your team. Always. It's f**king predictable now.

The issue is consistency with citings and cards given in the game. It's as clear as day there is a significant difference. Too many things don't add up. Woodcock's charge on Fianga was as cynical as they come. Yet nothing. It's ridiculous that Jean De Villiers' foul play/dangerous tackle was viewed more serious than Woodcocks cowardly off-the-ball shoulder charge.

 

[Sam Owen]

Hey now leave Nige alone :lol:

Also if you read some of the latest post here, newbies will think that all this forum is about moaning about penalty counts ... dear lord please forgive those who have sinned!

Lol at first I thought it'll die down but our (TRF gang) guys really do some homework to get their point across.

i.e...'YOU SEE THIS, THIS SAYS IM RIGHT', hahahaha.

 

[squirrel]

i think im the only neutral here, and i conclude the ab's are filthy cheats but rugby is a game built on cheating

 

[smartcooky]

And the whole running metres gained is a crock of **** and you know it cooky.

Its not actually, it is a valid point, its just you don't want it to be valid because it doesn't suit your argument

The FACT is that the sample used to generate the completely false conclusion comes from a sample that is far too small. This is Statistical Analysis 101. "Small samples yield large errors"

In the case we have here, the smallest possible change (one card) on one side of the equation can lead to an unacceptable level of covariance, a huge change the the resultant and a massive skewing of the conclusions.

Take the 43/1 penalty for yellow card count. All it would have taken was one yellow card given to either Ranger or Woodcock and suddenly its 43/2 (21.5/1)... a 200% change in the resultant created by only one referees decision. That is a slightly colossal margin for error. Make it a yellow card for both and its 43/3 (14.33/1) and a 300% change!!!

However, if it had been a long term trend, say 10 yellow cards for every 430 penalties awarded, that is still 43/1 but an extra yellow card would make it 39.1/1, only a 10% change in the resultant.

There is a lesson to be learned here. Any statistics that have very small numbers in the data set on one side of the equation are completely unreliable, and any results from them should be regarded with deep suspicion. Certainly, trends should ever be deduced from them; it takes a LOT of raw data to show a trend, a lot more than the idiots at Green and Gold have used.

 

[Shaggy]

i think im the only neutral here, and i conclude the ab's are filthy cheats but rugby is a game built on cheating

Quite possibly you are the only one that "claims" to be neutral here (I wouldn't be surprised if you were the only one that thinks that you are) ... can't speak for everyone else, but i'm definitely an All Black supporter and don't claim to be neutral.

If the game is built on cheating, and the AB's are "filthy cheats", and cheating the best this year, does that make the springboks the best cheats last year? (by virtue of the facts that they won)

Oh please!...all professional sports teams push the referees and the rules both on and off the field to gain advantage, and even IF the ABs are the best at doing that at the moment, that doesn't mean that they are cheats ... it's the old adage of "playing to the Referee's whistle"

 

[Sparty]

OKay , I think I am just about bored with this , May I change the subject ? what all this we keep hearing abour Sonny Bill ? Is he really that good ? Will he be ready for the WC seeing that he is only making his debut next year ? He must be something special and I ant wait to see how he fits in. I mean u guys have Mccaw who legally or not legally is a awesome rugby player , probably the best we have seen in that position ever , def in the top 3 of all time , he is like Sean Fitz with his slyness , Josh Kronfeld with his hardness and Jerry Collins with his pilfering , is Sonny better than that ? I find it hard to believe and intrigued to witness. What position will he play ?

 

[Sam Owen]

OKay , I think I am just about bored with this , May I change the subject ? what all this we keep hearing abour Sonny Bill ? Is he really that good ? Will he be ready for the WC seeing that he is only making his debut next year ? He must be something special and I ant wait to see how he fits in. I mean u guys have Mccaw who legally or not legally is a awesome rugby player , probably the best we have seen in that position ever , def in the top 3 of all time , he is like Sean Fitz with his slyness , Josh Kronfeld with his hardness and Jerry Collins with his pilfering , is Sonny better than that ? I find it hard to believe and intrigued to witness. What position will he play ?

Wrong thread Sparty lol. This thread is 'The refereeing of the 2010 Tri-Nations.