[RWC2023 QF4] France vs South Africa (15/10/2023)

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Apologies if this has already been posted - if you DIDN'T want to see a video of Nigel Owens sitting on a bail of Hay going through the controversial referee decisions, you aren't in luck



He explains it as simply as it can be really. "Etzebeth goes to knock the ball backwards which you are allowed to do, as long as it goes backwards. If he goes to knock the ball backwards and it goes forwards, it would have been a deliberate knock on and a pretty certain yellow card"

He then goes on to hedge about whether it goes in fact go forwards or backwards but seems to suggest he agrees with the referee because it wasn't clear whether it went forwards or backwards and very hard to tell. So what he thinks himself or what decision he would have made isn't super clear.

Weird though, he doesn't ask the question about it being looked at again, just seems to imply that the TMO must have looked at it and decided it wasn't clear. Which I don't think it's safe to assume, and at least it needed more attention and conversation between officials. A ridiculously huge moment.

Anyway, that's a refs explanation

 

[Zootalaws]

. They are the best ever team to never win it.

1995 ABs would beg to differ

Whether it was deliberate or accidental, having had your team ******** and spewing the morning of a WC final, when they had been so dominant that year and in the tournament…

France lost to a better team. There's no indication they were the best, as evidenced by their loss.

"O'Keefe copped a volley of strident disparagement from Dupont, who is widely regarded as the best player in the world, "

It's like the last sentence in that quote - if he is 'the best player in the world", why isn't he playing better?

Who makes these determinations? French and British journalists? When France tours NZ and beats us with DuPont performing out of his socks, then illl consider it. A couple of years of 6N - which France has never won with "the best player in the world" - is not enough to convince me.

If not for a massive disparity in northern vs southern hemisphere sports journalists, I suspect Peter SdT would be considered "the best"

 

[ncurd]

Only an idiot who has never watched Dupont play doesn't think he's the best player in the world. He'd walk into any side currently.

He'll go watch the first 3mins of SA/Fra match again. Everything created is coming from him.

France won the 6N last year BTW

 

[Wichita]

Here is a new POV of the Kolbe charge down.
Detractors will still say he started to run before Ramos moved however putting a stop watch on a different close up of Ramos taking the conversion showed he took 3.27 seconds to strike the ball - Kolbe covers the distance to the charge down in 3.12 seconds. Argument settled.

The argument will never be settled because you will never be able to tell when Ramos actually started to move. To be honest, your video is adding more weight to the party of "Cheslin started way too early" side, as Ramos does not seem to actually start running. You can take multiple stills showing Kolbe well within the field and Ramos not moving an inch forward...
The law is not precise enough on what movement to take into account, if any movement in any direction is taken into account as a start, none of those considered as star kickers (Wilkinson, Farrell, Sexton, Mehrtens, you name them...) would have scored a single conversion, ie side moves to adjust the run angle should be taken into account or not ? Is raising yourself on your toes before pushing to start actually the beginning of your run ? Because it generally happens at least a second before you actually start running.
Aimless discussions anyway ...

 

[ikvat]

OK, that's cynical. That, at least, is sincere.

The famouse rugby values. Fair-play, respect, probity.

 

[Jer1cho]

The argument will never be settled because you will never be able to tell when Ramos actually started to move. To be honest, your video is adding more weight to the party of "Cheslin started way too early" side, as Ramos does not seem to actually start running. You can take multiple stills showing Kolbe well within the field and Ramos not moving an inch forward...
The law is not precise enough on what movement to take into account, if any movement in any direction is taken into account as a start, none of those considered as star kickers (Wilkinson, Farrell, Sexton, Mehrtens, you name them...) would have scored a single conversion, ie side moves to adjust the run angle should be taken into account or not ? Is raising yourself on your toes before pushing to start actually the beginning of your run ? Because it generally happens at least a second before you actually start running.
Aimless discussions anyway ...

Have you seen this angle? Timing and speed. Thats all it is. So perfectly executed people have gone nuts trying to find something wrong with it.



On your other point, there are plenty of charges that happened when kickers first take steps back:

 

[ncurd]

Have you seen this angle? Timing and speed. Thats all it is. So perfectly executed people have gone nuts trying to find something wrong with it.



On your other point, there are plenty of charges that happened when kickers first take steps back:

Its a great angle, the issue is interpretation for me. What is constituted as movement,

If its when Ramos shifts his weight to be begin moving Kolbe is fine.
If its when he lifts his foot he's gone too soon but its marginal (less than a second in it).
If its when Ramos has actually moved towards the ball taking his first step. Kolbe has massively jumped the gun.

Screen shot here Ramos has shifted his weight but not moved forward but Kolbe has clearly started running and left the line. I'd love World Rugby to clarify the fact they haven't suggests there was a blunder.

 

[Jer1cho]

Its a great angle, the issue is interpretation for me. What is constituted as movement,

If its when Ramos shifts his weight to be begin moving Kolbe is fine.
If its when he lifts his foot he's gone too soon but its marginal (less than a second in it).
If its when Ramos has actually moved towards the ball taking his first step. Kolbe has massively jumped the gun.

Screen shot here Ramos has shifted his weight but not moved forward but Kolbe has clearly started running and left the line. I'd love World Rugby to clarify the fact they haven't suggests there was a blunder.

Why all of these points, when Ramos takes his first two steps at a literal snails pace lol? He kicks slow, and was targeted by someone who not only knows his action, but accelerates extremely fast.

It is, as soon as he moves, backwards forwards sideways, in place. It is whatever he does that starts his kicking action. Ramos was set, then starts moving and Kolbe is a split second after that.

 

[Wichita]

Sorry, it does not change my mind. Ramos is moving to and fro, like a lot of other kickers. In this video, Kolbe starts running in the last backward cycle. When Ramos finally pushes forward, Kolbe has already made a good 5 meters and when he actually puts his left foot on the ground, Kolbe is about 10 meters within the field. When does he really start his run in ?


Kolbe has already entered the field, look at Ramos, still on his left leg



Ramos has not even a foot off the ground, Kolbe is 3 meters in Field. Is this what is considered run-in ?
As usual, a matter of interpretation, I wish the rule would be crystal clear as to what is the beginning of the movement. How often has anyone blocked a conversion in a WC match ? AFAIK, nobody. Have you ever seen that in a top level match ? I have not. In such a high stake game, would it be reasonable to ask the TMO to check ? My answer is "Yes".

 

[Jer1cho]

Lol, if this is how you have to nitpick. Whatever makes you guys sleep better at night. Did you even watch that list of kick charges? Did you see how players like Carter move backwards first? And are then charged? Ridiculous to take a piece of incredible skill and be Karens about it from sour grapes.

 

[ncurd]

Why all of these points, when Ramos takes his first two steps at a literal snails pace lol? It is, as soon as he moves, backwards forwards sideways, in place. It is whatever he does that starts his kicking action. Ramos was set, then starts moving and Kolbe is a split second after that.

It doesn't matter how slow Ramos is what matters is interpretation. I accept your interpretation says Kolbe is fine but if you interpretation is wrong he's not.

Its a superb piece of athleticism by Kolbe no doubt but it still has to be legal.

I also think if you interpretation is correct expect to see a lot more charged down conversions.

 

[Jer1cho]

I also think if you interpretation is correct expect to see a lot more charged down conversions.

This is rubbish and you know it. Reinach tried and couldnt do it. Heck why didn't we just charge every single kick he did? I guess now we will charge him whenever we play him. It really is no wonder this place became a ghost town.

 

[ncurd]

This is rubbish and you know it. Reinach tried and couldnt do it. Heck why didn't we just charge every single kick he did? I guess now we will charge him whenever we play him. It really is no wonder this place became a ghost town.

Find me another example of Kolbe bolting to charge down that early in the routine. Or anyone for that matter.

 

[Jer1cho]

Find me another example of Kolbe bolting to charge down that early in the routine. Or anyone for that matter.

You are brain dead if you think this wasn't planned by himself and Rassie before this match specifically because he played with him for 6 years and would have mentioned it to Rassie. And like I said, ample examples that show kickers being charged, AS SOON AS THEY MOVE. Not move towards the ball.

Anyway im over the quite frankly pathetic attempts at finding faults where there is none.

 

[ncurd]

You are brain dead if you think this wasn't planned by himself and Rassie before this match specifically because he played with him for 6 years and would have mentioned it to Rassie. And like I said, ample examples that show kickers being charged, AS SOON AS THEY MOVE. Not move towards the ball.

Anyway im over the quite frankly pathetic attempts at finding faults where there is none.

Then give them, I literally asked for it. In that match alone.

Its absolutely preplanned I never suggested otherwise, a 100 meter runner still gets disqualified for false starts the Olympics final though.

 

[OwenPB]

This starts to feel like a football forum, everyone blaming the Ref

Of course we are. He was terrible.

As we've all had time to calm down and rewatch the game, the issues that everyone has been up in arms about have not gone away. Those who said France was robbed have had to put a little water in their wine, and those saying SA were hard done by are still not posting here because they won and don't give a toss, but I think no-one can question that, despite the game being complex and there being a huge amount of pressure on the referee, he did not have a good performance.

It's not specifically on the Ref that France lost, because they made mistakes and got away with probably as much as SA got away with, but he contributed a huge amount with the most blatent non-calls.
Flip side: He didn't call anywhaere near as many as he should have for SA either. It could as easily have been a multiple-score win, rather than a 1 point win or a French win and that wasn't the ability of the players, it was BoK's flip-a-coin reffing.

Watching it back again, it was exciting, sure, but it wasn't rugby. Rugby has rules. That was a random free-for-all with, at best, loose guidelines and over which the ref had very little control. The only thing that stopped this game descending into farce was probably the ingrained "respect the ref" rule. Even then, I think Eben & Dupont (and quite a few other players) pushed a lot further than they ever would because a lot of decisions were completely arbitrary and so much was ignored or missed by O'Keefe. Hats off to both teams, to be completely fair to them, because they listened to the ref with utter disbelief, knowing that he was talking absolute guff, and still swallowed it and got on with the game.

And for serving us up this unstructured and error strewn tripe, he gets to ref a semi-final. The mind boggles.

 

[Jer1cho]

Then give them, I literally asked for it. In that match alone.

Its absolutely preplanned I never suggested otherwise, a 100 meter runner still gets disqualified for false starts the Olympics final though.

You are being deliberately obtuse. Which is fine, it's a pattern I have noticed from most of the nonsense you post here. I made my point, and your pussyfooting around it wont make a legal charge any less illegal.

 

[ncurd]

You are being deliberately obtuse. Which is fine, it's a pattern I have noticed from most of the nonsense you post here. I made my point, and your pussyfooting around it wont make a legal charge any less illegal.

Post where your interpretation is accepted by refs.
Post your evidence other charge downs have started as early as per your interpretation.

That's not being obtuse
ob·tuse
adjective
1.
annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.

I'm incredibly quick to understand I know exactly what your saying you've been very clear. You've just provided no evidence your correct other than you want to be.

 

[Jer1cho]

Post where your interpretation is accepted by refs.
Post your evidence other charge downs have started as early as per your interpretation.

That's not being obtuse
ob·tuse
adjective
1.
annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.

I'm incredibly quick to understand I know exactly what your saying you've been very clear. You've just provided no evidence your correct other than you want to be.

So many examples. But you dont bother.

 

[Wichita]

Lol, if this is how you have to nitpick. Whatever makes you guys sleep better at night. Did you even watch that list of kick charges? Did you see how players like Carter move backwards first? And are then charged? Ridiculous to take a piece of incredible skill and be Karens about it from sour grape

Just waiting for a smarter piece of argumentation to be able to reply, incredible skill and sour grapes indeed
France lost to a very good SA side and there is no discussing their position in the semi, nor their chances to win back to back WC, which would be an incredible achievement.
I am not asking for a rematch or pretend the French have been robbed
On my side, there are only two points in discussing this,
- is there a doubt and is the way the rule is written and applied satisfactory?
- Why was this situation not reviewed by the TMO?
Pure rugby nerds questions, you are just as entitled to your opinion as I am...