Steve Walsh Correct Or Not?

[Gavin]

Since the Brumbies lost to the Waratahs 19-12 many in the Brumbies squad have been slagging off the referee at the time Steve Walsh. Walsh disallowed a try to the Brumbies in the 28th minute because he deemed that Adam Ashley-Cooper made a double movement in scoring the try. This is the try that was not given:



I would like to know everyone's opinion on this disallowed try. From watching it several times I believe that is was a double movement and Walsh was correct in not allowing it, as at 11-12 seconds on the video it would seem that Ashley-Cooper crawled on his knees slightly which gave him more momentum in order to get over the try-line.

Another question I would like to ask is what does everyone make of the Brumbies wanting Walsh to be axed from their next game against the Reds (I believe). Matt Giteau was quoted in saying we:

'may as well not turn up'

I am an admirer of Giteau though I sternly believe that these remarks were not needed and should not have been said.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I thought that the double movement was if you came to a standstill, then moved, he still had momentum going, just helped himself along a bit.
I'd say that was a try, but i'm not a ref/what's done is done.
I don't like it when teams speak out about refs afterwards for things like this. I realise it cost them the match, but it was the refs interpretation of the laws, so they should just accept it as that.

 

[SelimNiai]

To me that is 6 of one, half-dozen of the other. He does crawl forward but he never lost forward momentum. Either way people are gonna whine and moan about the decision. Although I would have said that Walsh got it right, technically the act of crawling made it a double movement.

How long after the game did Giteau make that remark, as within an hour or so after the game emotions will be running high. I'm sure Matt will have read that back and wince at what he said. It is similar to Roger Johnson said not long after the Aston Villa vs Birmingham game on Sunday after a questionable penalty decision. Johnson labelled the decision "disgraceful" which is comment dripping in emotion and anger.

 

[gingergenius]

it was a try.

Walsh has always been a prick.

end of.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

He crawled regardless ... no try!

 

[dullonien]

It's one of those things that really can go either way depending on the interpretation (as can be seen on this thread). He was tackled short, but it appeared to be mostly momentum that took him over the line. I'd personally judge that as a try. This is another area of the game that needs better clarification though, not just in the act of scoring.

There's way to many players getting tackled and just getting back to their feet at the moment, which is kinda similar to this. The new law interpretations tell tacklers they must release the tackled player immidately, letting some players get back up. Unless it's a tap tackle, I think a law closer to rugby league needs to be introduced where if knees and elbows hit the deck, the tackle is completed.

 

[TyphoonsRugby]

I think we're all forgetting something here, theres no such thing as a double movement in rugby union. The fact he crawled (which it doesnt appear he did, just went with the flow of the momentum) means he was held and was fully entitled to keep moving. Flat out thats a try, poor refereeing.

 

[lynam1104]

im not to sure might of been ather ref but i think it was the same one refd the Scotland Aus QF in the 2003 world cup made few bad descons there.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

I think we're all forgetting something here, theres no such thing as a double movement in rugby union. The fact he crawled (which it doesnt appear he did, just went with the flow of the momentum) means he was held and was fully entitled to keep moving. Flat out thats a try, poor refereeing.

Might not exist but as soon as the tackler is tackled he has to release the ball otherwise its a penalty.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

After a quick look at the laws, it's a hazy area.
It says if the player is tackled he must release immediatley, but also that if he has momentum he is allowed to carry the ball over for a try/can reach out for a try,
However in this case, there's no way of knowing if momentum alone will carry him over because he does help himself along, so it's a moot point

 

[Wally]

I thought his refereeing of the scrums was probably just as poor as that decision to not award the try. He's been dumped in any case.

 

[User1245]

No try. His used his knees after being brought to ground, regardless of momentum, it was used to increase it and give him an advantage.

Good, ballsy call. BTW it looks like it was a shared by the linesman and Walsh.

 

[iWin]

Ashley cooper was tackled short of the line. Therefore he is able to place the ball in any direction, as well as letting his momentum take him forwards.
What actually happened was that AAC propelled himself forwards while off his feet. This could be let go on occasion as part of placing the ball under momentum, but he crawled forwards, using multiple leg drives to reach the line, thereby playing the ball on the ground.
It's hazy, technical, and all round a hard call, but what the Brumbies and everyone else are forgetting is that it was the touch judge's call as well. Are people asking for him to be banned from further Brumbies matches?

 

[Tomsey]

I can't find the article but the offical reason given by Lindon Brey Walsh was dropped from the match is becuse too much attention would be given to him and they didn't want to distract attention from the actual game. Whether or not thats true it is still a fairly good point.