[2018 Rugby Championship] Round 5: Argentina v New Zealand (30/09/2018)

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

My prediction of a valiant loss for the Pumas held true until 8 mins to go.

Congratulations to the ABs on another tournament victory confirming that they are yet again head and shoulders above their larger competitors at almost every level of organisation within the sport. Never take that for granted no matter how disfunctional your rivals may be.

If the Pumas don't lose their last game will it be the first time that they don't finish last?

 

[Kiwiwomble]

No. These are what forums are for.

I never tell others to get over it. You might but not me. I'd like to discuss it even if it means the forum comes alive with 10 pages of discussions.

"Hello, dont talk about anything, goodbye, I have nothing to talk about".

You can talk about it of course...just don't winge, makes the rest of us look like pussys too, we won and winning inspite of a ref will give the team a harder edge come the world cup

 

[Kiwiwomble]

No. These are what forums are for.

I never tell others to get over it. You might but not me. I'd like to discuss it even if it means the forum comes alive with 10 pages of discussions.

"Hello, dont talk about anything, goodbye, I have nothing to talk about".

You can talk about it of course...just don't winge, makes the rest of us look like pussys too, we won and winning inspite of a ref will give the team a harder edge come the world cup

 

[mania]

thought ref did all right. overall he was ok . there are def worse refs around.
ardie had an awesome game.
cane i thought was a bit quiet. not as industrious as his usual self in the dark arts.
with retallick injured its lucky we still have whitelock.
scottBarret and tuipolotu played well.
beaudy kicked loads better and generally was busy around the park.
mounga came on and right away showed some calm and composure.
naholo was busy on d and o yet rieko scores the 2 tries. we have an awesome back 3
SBW i felt was pretty quiet. did a couple of plays but still has loads of ground to make up before he can claim ownership of his place.
shannonFrizell was countered heaps. pretty much the hit that lavinini put in on frizell was theme for the day. i felt puma's wanted frizell to run more so they could shut him down and they did so most of the time. thats good for frizell as met his challenge head on, whilst he didnt dominate he kept the puma's big hitters focused on him .
front rows did awesome. tuinukuafe is coming a long nicely. just want to see him hit rucks more
tuugafasi made some pretty basic errors but overall did all right. i'm still not a fan but he did all right this night.
codieTaylor is playing well and getting involved.
a competent win without any of the flash stuff. this was a knuckle down and just win the game affair

 

[Bean]

The NZ Herald has the penalty count at 11 Pumas , 12 NZ but whatever there is very little in it. No sign of any major conspiracy against the ABs as is being suggested that i can see .
I find it amusing that some sad people can't just enjoy the win , What benefit is there in getting all bitter and twisted after such a good win i don't know.

1. The ref ignored the rules in order to award the Pumas their first try. He just flat out ignored them when the TMO point it out.
2. The ref ignored a Pumas player having deliberately and obviously knocked down the ball for what was an almost certain try.

These are the facts. This ref was biased as hell.

In addition to these issues that I spotted (and others have spotted many more) he penalised the AB's wherever possible as seen with SBW's Yellow Card.

I don't normally call out ref's like this, but I'll keep an eye on this guy during the RWC, he's as dodgy as they come.

 

[All Black]

SBW i felt was pretty quiet. did a couple of plays but still has loads of ground to make up before he can claim ownership of his place.

Our defence improves with SBW there. As soon as he left, the Pumas scored. SBW helps to keep the opposition score low. Hansen puts him there to keep our D strong, he is the Conrad Smith of the team right now and the 12 jersey will be his come RWC finals time. Some of us may not like it but it's why Hansen persists with the guy.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

can we all agree that is our best 10 - 15? even the Mo'unga coming on and Barrett to the back looked good, steadied the ship as it were rather than things completely loosening up late in the game, spark of attack started coming from the inside backs rather than out wide.

edit:

just read the Herald ratings

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12134515

someone tell me how this works, ben smith has a quiet one and gets 4? unless Chris Rattue an actually list all the things he did wrong its ridiculously harsh

 

[All Black]

Big fan of Reid but Ardie Savea looked better at no.8

 

[All Black]

can we all agree that is our best 10 - 15? even the Mo'unga coming on and Barrett to the back looked good, steadied the ship as it were rather than things completely loosening up late in the game, spark of attack started coming from the inside backs rather than out wide.

edit:

just read the Herald ratings

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12134515

someone tell me how this works, ben smith has a quiet one and gets 4? unless Chris Rattue an actually list all the things he did wrong its ridiculously harsh

I have to agree with Rattue on Ben, he was a little quiet. As long as Bens there, Im happy.

I disagree with Beaudens rating. He made bad decisions in that game.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

quiet = 4? unless he wasn't doing his job then i think thats harsh

 

[All Black]

quiet = 4? unless he wasn't doing his job then i think thats harsh

High expectations of Ben Smith. I don't care if Ben relaxes a bit for games were in control of because I know that its the games that hang in the balance that our senior players like Ben truly come alive. I wouldnt worry about Rattues ratings, he gave King Karl a 10. I dont know was MOTM but he wasnt that good IMO.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

The ref wasn't overly bad, as far as refs go, I thought.

1. The ref ignored the rules in order to award the Pumas their first try. He just flat out ignored them when the TMO point it out.

I agree that he should listen to the TMO but I've seen this kind of call a lot. Some refs judge that if you don't move your body a second time you can move your arms as many times as you want

2. The ref ignored a Pumas player having deliberately and obviously knocked down the ball for what was an almost certain try.

The assistant ref told the ref that it was in the tackle.

In addition to these issues that I spotted (and others have spotted many more) he penalised the AB's wherever possible as seen with SBW's Yellow Card.

I wouldn't have chosen SBW if I were going to send one person off at that time, but someone(or four) had to go. It should have been cane, at least. At the start of the set of phases before SBW got sent off there were three deliberate attempts to bring down the maul within about 10 seconds. All of those players should have been sent off, or at least cautioned (but that would have been an overly soft call given the circumstances. Note, Cane was actually cautioned but really should have been binned) because all of them were acting cynically. So, on that occasion, the referee was actually incredibly biased toward the All Blacks.

Just some softening perspectives for those points you made....

 

[smartcooky]

I agree that he should listen to the TMO but I've seen this kind of call a lot. Some refs judge that if you don't move your body a second time you can move your arms as many times as you want

Well, if that is what he is doing, then he is completely wrong in Law

When you are a tackled player, whatever you do, you must do immediately

Law 14
7. Tackled players must immediately:
a. Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing
the ball in any direction except forward. They may place the ball in any direction.
b. Move away from the ball or get up.
c. Ensure that they do not lie on, over or near the ball to prevent opposition players
from gaining possession of it.​

If you decide to place the ball, and you fail to reach the goal-line the first time, you must release the ball immediately, and you cannot play the ball again until you are on your feet. If you make a second attempt, then that second attempt is not "immediate" (the first one was) and you should be penalised for not releasing.

This ref was biased as hell.

Bias is a conscious, premeditated decision to rule against certain teams based in some personal criteria. I refuse to believe that a referee at this level, in the modern game at least, would have a bias against certain teams.

The only referee I can recall who I would regard as "biased" was a certain Scottish test referee, and the reason I pick him out is that he was overheard in a Dublin pub by a bunch of kiwi supporters in the week before a test against Ireland saying how he hated New Zealanders and was going to "**** them up this Saturday". He was the Touch Judge, and helped to rule out a try by Grant Fox after claiming that Sean Fitzpatrick had his toes on the touchline when he threw into a lineout.

 

[All Black]

Well, if that is what he is doing, then he is completely wrong in Law

When you are a tackled player, whatever you do, you must do immediately

Law 14
7. Tackled players must immediately:
a. Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing
the ball in any direction except forward. They may place the ball in any direction.
b. Move away from the ball or get up.
c. Ensure that they do not lie on, over or near the ball to prevent opposition players
from gaining possession of it.​

If you decide to place the ball, and you fail to reach the goal-line the first time, you must release the ball immediately, and you cannot play the ball again until you are on your feet. If you make a second attempt, then that second attempt is not "immediate" (the first one was) and you should be penalised for not releasing.



Bias is a conscious, premeditated decision to rule against certain teams based in some personal criteria. I refuse to believe that a referee at this level, in the modern game at least, would have a bias against certain teams.

The only referee I can recall who I would regard as "biased" was a certain Scottish test referee, and the reason I pick him out is that he was overheard in a Dublin pub by a bunch of kiwi supporters in the week before a test against Ireland saying how he hated New Zealanders and was going to "**** them up this Saturday". He was the Touch Judge, and helped to rule out a try by Grant Fox after claiming that Sean Fitzpatrick had his toes on the touchline when he threw into a lineout.

I knew it wasn't a try the very first time I saw it but Raynal, sent it upstairs and the replays showed a case for a double movement or a knock on or both. He knew he wouldn't be questioned and ruled a try.

I think Raynal (and Raynal only) has a bias against us. You cant disprove it and his actions support it.

 

[Immenso]

I think Raynal (and Raynal only) has a bias against us. You cant disprove it and his actions support it.

Jesus. H. Christ.

Reign it in, buttercup.

 

[Carlito]

 

[Umaga's Witness]

Well, if that is what he is doing, then he is completely wrong in Law

When you are a tackled player, whatever you do, you must do immediately

Law 14
7. Tackled players must immediately:
a. Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing
the ball in any direction except forward. They may place the ball in any direction.
b. Move away from the ball or get up.
c. Ensure that they do not lie on, over or near the ball to prevent opposition players
from gaining possession of it.​

yep, he was completely wrong in the law. That happens all the time; in fact, you have incidentally noted my all time favourite rule, the rule that NEVER gets refereed - Law 14 7b - the rule which renders all referees completely wrong in law, all the time.

My point being that refereeing wrongly does not suggest the referee did an overall bad job nor is evidence for bias, because refereeing wrongly occurs blatantly all the time.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

I knew it wasn't a try the very first time I saw it but Raynal, sent it upstairs and the replays showed a case for a double movement or a knock on or both. He knew he wouldn't be questioned and ruled a try.

I think Raynal (and Raynal only) has a bias against us. You cant disprove it and his actions support it.

come on, there is absolutely nothing to suggest it was conscious and or premeditated, some times people just have brain farts, he got it in his head that it was a try and charged ahead with that, much like you're blindly charging ahead with the conspiracy theory's

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

If the Pumas don't lose their last game will it be the first time that they don't finish last?

2015 we finished 3rd too, but it was a WC year so only 3 games each.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

You cant disprove it and his actions support it.

I guess you don't get how the burden of proof works.