[RWC2019][Pool B] Round 1 - New Zealand vs. South Africa (21/09/2019)

[bushytop]

Yup. We have a zero tolerance for people creating new personas for banned profiles...

Fair... still, great name all the same.

 

[BobbyM]

Imagine if Garces did award numerous penalties to SA when Moody dropped at scrumtime. The game would have been a lot more stop-start. There might have been a bigger influence on the scoreboard and the pressures going with that. If it was a repeated infringement, the possibility was there that Moody would've been given a yellow card, and then that opens up other issues for the AB's with regard to switching personnel and so on.

Surprised people still talking about Moody "dropping" at scrum. The Bok player was binding on the arm and moved the bind to the arm after the engage. Both are penalty offences by the Bok player.

 

[OneBlackEye]

I get that. And yes, the refs don't always call it a ruck, and in this situation everything happened so fast that it's very hard to come to a clear conclusion, as there is enough for both parties to substantiate their case/doubt in opposing argument.

What is surprising is that this portion of play is getting the most discussion, when heinous acts such as Kieran Read's coathanger on PSDT is being shovelled to obscurity. Why are we bothering with this issue and not that?

I think because it's more interesting and pretty much everyone here already agreed that the Read incident was a missed card.

I don't think anyone is upset or outraged over the PSTD offside incident, it's still being talked about because it seems like a good case study in the laws around the tackle/ruck and offside line with room for debate.

You seem to be upset and outraged over Reads incident which is fair enough, it's a shocker, but you're using it to push the idea that refferees and World Rugby have a bias for New Zealand and against South Africa which maybe people find less interesting to talk about because it's basically a conspiracy theory. No offense but it is right?

 

[TRF_heineken]

I think because it's more interesting and pretty much everyone here already agreed that the Read incident was a missed card.

I don't think anyone is upset or outraged over the PSTD offside incident, it's still being talked about because it seems like a good case study in the laws around the tackle/ruck and offside line with room for debate.

You seem to be upset and outraged over Reads incident which is fair enough, it's a shocker, but you're using it to push the idea that refferees and World Rugby have a bias for New Zealand and against South Africa which maybe people find less interesting to talk about because it's basically a conspiracy theory. No offense but it is right?

But I'm not driving that... I'm echoing what many are saying on social media.

Yes it's a conspiracy theory. But you have to see it from our perspective. There is a trend now brewing. And not a year goes by where this issue isn't raised. So conspiracy theorists are having a field day about this because they have an annual incident(s) to use these theories.

There are 2 constants. Southa African team and a French Referee. And while that trend continues, these theories will continue to be raised.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

But I'm not driving that... I'm echoing what many are saying on social media.

Yes it's a conspiracy theory. But you have to see it from our perspective. There is a trend now brewing. And not a year goes by where this issue isn't raised. So conspiracy theorists are having a field day about this because they have an annual incident(s) to use these theories.

There are 2 constants. Southa African team and a French Referee. And while that trend continues, these theories will continue to be raised.

3 constants - South Africans abusing French refs/calling them cheats... Hard to have any sympathy really or give the conspiracies any credibility from the outside looking in.

 

[TRF_heineken]

3 constants - South Africans abusing French refs/calling them cheats... Hard to have any sympathy really or give the conspiracies any credibility from the outside looking in.

I hear ya. And I can understand that too. If they keep on beating the same beat on that drum, it will inevitably become white noise.

I'll try and be less of a cynic.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I have sufficiently calmed down and thought it a good idea to revisit this thread LOL.

I think at the end of the day we can all agree it was an atrociously refereed match. It goes both ways and its pointless trying to dissect which side if any would've/could've/should've gotten more out of it. The fact that it was so horribly refereed will inevitably lead to discussion. We all have our own views, interpretations and biases. The thread and reactions (here and elsewhere) could've gone better but surely could've gone worse as well.

For those I've bored before I apologise. I love (and I mean love) a good discussion about the laws of the game. I was kind of hoping that the salty saffer video was tongue in cheek but a few of my Bok friends are now using it as evidence of a conspiracy to ref them out of a game that they were outplayed in. The word used has been "cheat" as in "Garces is a cheat"...... Bizarre, what motivation does he have?

I imagine a technical infraction was committed in almost every single phase of play. I could spend all day reviewing and pointing them out but, well, life is happening...........

FWIW I thought Garces was terrible (I often do). Some simply inexplicable decision making that impacted both sides. How ever many times I watch it, I can't get PSDT onside in the passage of play that led to the Bok try. There's either a tackle that establishes offside lines or more likely a ruck.......... Anyone got a different view?

For me it's just evidence of one more thing the All Blacks are better at than any other team. That is understanding what the referee will allow and adapting to it. It's not a question of a ref favouring them, it's simply they work out the boundaries and play to them quicker than the other team. In this game case in point was the approach of New Zealand ball carriers. Garces has a different interpretation of the following (in respect of tackled players responsibilities):

"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."

Garces seems happy for "jacklers" to just get smashed to pieces when contesting the ball. For me it's poor reffing and puts players in a dangerous position as rather than a quick contest which may be won / lost or a pen conceded players simply continue to smash in to the contesting player until they "lose". He's also lax on binding / staying on feet type stuff. However, he's reasonably consistent in this regard (not 100% but good enough to gamble on). The All Blacks see this happen and simply start holding on to the ball in the tackle preventing any contest knowing that 9 times out of 10 Garces will allow the likes of Louw / Vermeulen to take a fearful hammering (virtually impossible to "survive")before giving a penalty. So the choices for the carrying player are:

a: Play exactly to the laws and get turned over
b: Play to the ref and pretty much guarantee possession

Only the most naive would expect any professional to do anything but b: In fact I would suspect any top-level coach to insist on their players doing so.

This is just one example. The All Blacks have superior game intelligence and will exploit everything they can. From entry angles, "flat passing", blocking lines, managing the scrum to their advantage etc. etc.. This on top of their already formidable skill-set makes them damn hard to beat. Not impossible just very, very hard. Every now and then they will run across a ref who they struggle to read or who has interpretations that they find it more difficult to work around. Usually they adapt but when they can't / don't they become more vulnerable.

You must forgive our paranoia in SA please. In general we mistrust authority as our various governments throughout the years do not seem to have the actual people in mind in any circumstances seemingly.

And in rugby terms, a few years back there was an e-mail circulating where officials from NZ and Aus were colluding to "get the Yarpies" and that type of thing does tend to stick in the back of the mind.

I don't know what I find more offensive, the fact of collusion or the spelling of 'Yarpie' whereas the actual spelling of the common Afrikaans name is spelled 'Jaap' -> 'Japie' as the diminutive.

 

[Zapphod]

You must forgive our paranoia in SA please. In general we mistrust authority as our various governments throughout the years do not seem to have the actual people in mind in any circumstances seemingly.

And in rugby terms, a few years back there was an e-mail circulating where officials from NZ and Aus were colluding to "get the Yarpies" and that type of thing does tend to stick in the back of the mind.

See here's the funny thing I guarantee that the opinion of South African rugby in many kinds (certainly here) that prior to the professional era was that it was driven by chests and steroid built thugs who got away with murder on the field because the ref was bought and paid for in gold watches and Kruger rand's, hell remember Suzi?. (And before it starts a fight I don't buy that one myself).

The conspiracies run both ways unfortunately, we can choose to give them credence or put them behind us and move on but at least accept everyone has conspiracies .

 

[Larksea]

watched the game again, overall still feel the same about it. Kolbe was amazing but that tackle by Richie was something else. A brilliant and brutal game. Talk about winning the big moments in the game that was huge. The two AB tries were fricken awesome, the one they let in was as soft as they get. The concern is the let one in like that last year as well. Really need to make sure the pillars there at the ruck are doing their job. We don't want to be giving away soft tries like that in the finals.

I didn't see the "moody shot" the first time but it was easy to see and was replayed a number of times by the coverage. I know I'm an all black supporter and will lean toward my team for sure, for anyone to say they have no bias is to admit a lie. I do try to be objective, remove emotion and look at what's happening. If I come off as defensive its to try and show another side of the story and counter the all out attack on the AB's from the other side of the discussion.
Firstly, Marx is falling into the tackle, you can't deny that as he and Savea wrestle for the ball he pulls down and goes towards the ground while Savea stays upright. The impact is close to the ground and would have been safe if Marx didn't fall into it. To say any contact to the head was deliberate would be wrong blatantly disingenuous.
2ndly and importantly, Moody basically missed Marx. Not by a lot and both players were bloody lucky the shot mostly grazes Marx's shoulder and goes past his head and the outside of Moody's arm goes past Marx's ear, if there was any contact to the head it was insignificant, and his head hardly moved or reacted to the contact. And to back that claim up with truly objective confirmation. Despite medical staff watching the game and reviewing footage, with indecent being replayed by the coverage no HIA was called for or required and he played out the game. I say both players were lucky because if Moody actually hit him it would have been worthy of a card, still unlucky becuase Marx was falling but a card none the less and Marx would likely have needed an HIA and had some concussion as a result, But it didn't hit.

Compare this incident to the other high shots in this first week, the Samoan ones, Hodge, the shot on Farrell they are basically all straight on tackles where the player has maintained his height and there is contact to the head. They resulted in HIA's and players weren't able to continue in the game because of the contact. The Hodge one was interesting, nothing on field, at first it doesn't look bad but slowed down you can see the Fijian maintains his height and yet Hodge doe make direct contact to his head. At first I thought it was harsh to give hodge 3 weeks but after review it looks like a good call to review it further. IMO These tackles, front on, ball runner maintaining this height and the defender making contact above the ball and too the head. Those are the tackles that need to be punished and removed from the game.

I also found something in defense of Moody's scrumaging. You see him twisting and going down in many of the early scrums with the springboks protesting to the referees. Then at a point later on the ref talks to Moody and Moody points out that the boks are pushing in on his right shoulder bringing his side down. Soon after the Referee goes to Moody's side of the scrum to watch what is happening and suddenly the scrum is solid and the All Blacks win it big time. Read into that what you will. IMO you often see that in games and it's usually vindication for the player in Moody's situation.

 

[Al Bangor]

Wow, y'all LOVE to get into the serious arguments here. My far-less-experienced eyes told me:
A. These teams are remarkably close
B. The officiating impacted the play, and ultimately seemed to give both teams the freedom to do more and more (read, commit penalties), and
C. Both sides can play better than they did... but who will?

Your eyes are pretty sharp my friend.

 

[BobbyM]

I also found something in defense of Moody's scrumaging. You see him twisting and going down in many of the early scrums with the springboks protesting to the referees. Then at a point later on the ref talks to Moody and Moody points out that the boks are pushing in on his right shoulder bringing his side down. Soon after the Referee goes to Moody's side of the scrum to watch what is happening and suddenly the scrum is solid and the All Blacks win it big time. Read into that what you will. IMO you often see that in games and it's usually vindication for the player in Moody's situation.

This. Called it at the time and in the immediate aftermath even referenced the rules. It was illegal scrum bind clear as day by the Bok player