[RWC2019][Pool B] Round 3 - Australia vs. Uruguay (05/10/2019)

[bushytop]

Another high tackle?

Bloody hell Cheika, what have you been doing in tackle sessions?

 

[OneBlackEye]

Well he did specifically say he doesn't know the rules anymore.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Australia haven't got to grips with staying below the neck, there has been a few others that didn't get picked up as well

 

[bushytop]

Can't wait for Cheika's post match presser.

 

[bushytop]

Toomua missing touch from a penner again.

Edit. Lovely try that.

 

[OneBlackEye]

Great try.

White and Beale are next level for Australia.

 

[Dead Grubber]

Good strong reffing being shown for once. Good to see yellows being given for high tackles!

 

[Which Tyler]

Australia haven't got to grips with staying below the neck, there has been a few others that didn't get picked up as well

Yup, they could have given away a few more penalities, and probably another yellow (for persistent offence)

 

[OneBlackEye]

Ha that was the worst attempt to milk a penalty ever!

 

[bushytop]

The Uruguayans starting to look visibly frustrated by Matthieu's interpretation at the break down... could be a portent of an absolute blow out during the second half.

 

[Which Tyler]

Nice

 

[bushytop]

Yes Uruguay... deserved.

Edit. Oh well

 

[TommiG88]

I agree with the TMO

 

[Which Tyler]

TMO doesn't like Uruguay (he's right this time, but...)

 

[donmcdazzle]

He's correct I suppose the TMO, but if you reviewed every ruck you'd fine at least a couple of infringements. Pretty frustrating for Uruguay no doubt that he decided to review that one

 

[bushytop]

He's correct I suppose the TMO, but if you reviewed every ruck you'd fine at least a couple of infringements. Pretty frustrating for Uruguay no doubt that he decided to review that one

Same TMO from Wales vs Oz I think (Skeen)... he loves to get involved.

 

[TommiG88]

He's correct I suppose the TMO, but if you reviewed every ruck you'd fine at least a couple of infringements. Pretty frustrating for Uruguay no doubt that he decided to review that one

Its because it led to the try, and it was a lot more offside than the infamous one from England against NZ last autumn.

I would argue the ball was still in the ruck as it didn't look to be behind the last foot.

 

[OneBlackEye]

He was walking towards the ruck too, if he kept running he had time to retreat that extra half meter on his way there and enter correctly.

It's a shame but I guess correct call and a bit avoidable.

 

[bushytop]

Its because it led to the try, and it was a lot more offside than the infamous one from England against NZ last autumn.

I would argue the ball was still in the ruck as it didn't look to be behind the last foot.

How's that keg going?

 

[Which Tyler]

He's correct I suppose the TMO, but if you reviewed every ruck you'd fine at least a couple of infringements. Pretty frustrating for Uruguay no doubt that he decided to review that one

Yep, he's right by inches.
Having said that, I don't like TMOs involving themselves for penalty offences.
IMO his job is to review play when requested by the ref, or as a 3 touch judge for clear and obvious stuff.
He deals with marginals when the ref requests, but obvious stuff when he's interjecting.

If Reynald asked him to get involved, I missed it (easily possible).

I would argue the ball was still in the ruck as it didn't look to be behind the last foot.

Now that would have been fair. It probably wasn't behind the back foot, but it was well clear of any of the players - always a bit of a grey area.