The refereeing of the 2010 Tri Nations

[woodward]

... He wasn't dropped for ill discipline

 

[Jake Heke]

Why don't you Saffas grow a pair and take the hidings we've been giving yous like men.

 

[smartcooky]

come on cooky i didnt claim to be the insider, besides they said the same thing about isaac ross needing a rest

Did they? In fact, Ross was considered by Steve Hansen to be something of a powder puff as locks go.

As for the Franks swap, well firstly Owen does have a minor calf strain. Also, Ben is physically the stronger of the two brothers and he can also fill in at loosehead. Ted needed to give John Afoa a run so he goes onto the bench. Unless there is an injury, the plan will be for Afoa to replace Woodcock at about the 50-60 min mark, but he will go to tighthead, and Ben will swap to Woodcock's loosehead position.

 

[squirrel]

yes they find little silly injuries to keep the media distracted,like i said they claimed burnout on ross last year,did the same with rocketman a couple of years back

 

[User1245]

^
No, that bad results are because your team played played poorly...

In every aspect were they bettered by the All Blacks. Poor reffing was not a factor. Ill discipline was.

Yeah I don't think a Bok fan on here has said anything positive towards our poor game plan. I'm sure you'd also be hard pressed to find a comment that said we deserved to win in any of our games. But you gotta admit the stats are VERY one sided on this one.

New Zealand: 43 penalties per yellow card. (I'd bet my left nut that 42 of those penalties were conceded by McCaw)
Wallabies: 7 penalties per yellow card.
South Africa: 6 penalties per yellow card.

Thats a significant difference. Both the Aussies and the Boks played lots of rugby with only 14 players, which helped NZ in terms of keeping the intensity on. Most of the time it was deserved (Bakkies). Consistency is a problem though. Much like the 'collapsed scrum to penalties conceded' ratio Australia has, especially in the '08 TN season.

Listen refs... We all know you have LOADS of crap decisions and **** people off. That's a given. But spread the love yo. Homie.

 

[Boggle]

Don't bother Steve-o.

We post valid arguments against sub par refereeing, all the while conceding that the opposition well and truly beat us fair and square, even lamenting our own game plan and out of form players, but all they read are "we didn't deserve to lose, the ref made you guyz win, waah waaah"

You'd think some people could take their blinders off for a second to have a rational debate over some ridiculous refereeing inconsistency, but I guess that would be too much to ask from some.

By the way, all this whining about our apparent whining is starting to make certain posters look like a bunch of childish brats.
Things like

Why don't you Saffas grow a pair and take the hidings we've been giving yous like men.

is pretty silly lads.

For the last time, we were well beaten by sides much better than us on the day, no doubt rubbish ref or not we would have been on the losing side of every game so far, this much we -know-.
What we are saying however, is that the refereeing has undoubtedly been a negative factor towards our game, and we would simply like this stupidity to stop.

 

[Sparty]

Don't bother Steve-o.

We post valid arguments against sub par refereeing, all the while conceding that the opposition well and truly beat us fair and square, even lamenting our own game plan and out of form players, but all they read are "we didn't deserve to lose, the ref made you guyz win, waah waaah"

You'd think some people could take their blinders off for a second to have a rational debate over some ridiculous refereeing inconsistency, but I guess that would be too much to ask from some.

By the way, all this whining about our apparent whining is starting to make certain posters look like a bunch of childish brats.
Things like is pretty silly lads.

For the last time, we were well beaten by sides much better than us on the day, no doubt rubbish ref or not we would have been on the losing side of every game so far, this much we -know-.
What we are saying however, is that the refereeing has undoubtedly been a negative factor towards our game, and we would simply like this stupidity to stop.

Well said Boggle !! well said , we know about our short comings but also recognise that the ABS were simply awesome but the reffing is really crap and made a diffs in our play I feel. Looking back maybe I was a tad wrong or rather too ambitious thinking the reffing could have made a diffs , I concede I was a little off but you must admit it did not help.

 

[Sparty]

When did South Africa win a third World Cup?

Anyway, the game is this Saturday, can everyone please just post constructive things about the game, eg on form players, or players who'd you'd like to see play well, even selection discussions. This forum has turned a bit too hostile recently.

are you counting 1987 as a WC ? And some guys reckon our 2007 WC was hollow , we were not even at the 87 one.

Re the hostility , sorry , no malice intended if it came across , I love the debate , no offense taken from my side.

 

[Shaggy]

yes they find little silly injuries to keep the media distracted,like i said they claimed burnout on ross last year,did the same with rocketman a couple of years back

Hmmmn ... ok, if what you say is true, why hasn't Tony Woodcock got one of these injuries then ... it seems to me that he would be the logical choice to drop with an "injury" due to his lack of discipline and lack of punishment in the last test

 

[smartcooky]

are you counting 1987 as a WC ? And some guys reckon our 2007 WC was hollow , we were not even at the 87 one.

And why was that? I'll give you a clue... it begins with "A".

If you don't like my response, then don't throw the old "we weren't there" chestnut in our faces, because we will throw the "A" word right back at you.

Get it?

Hmmmn ... ok, if what you say is true, why hasn't Tony Woodcock got one of these injuries then ... it seems to me that he would be the logical choice to drop with an "injury" due to his lack of discipline and lack of punishment in the last test

For that matter, Richie McCaw, if you listen to some of the Saffas and Ockers here, he's a walking yellow card risk!

 

[Sam Owen]

are you counting 1987 as a WC ?

1987 was the first ever Rugby World Cup. Of course it counts if it says RWC than it's probably a RWC Sparty, cmon man.

 

[Shaggy]

And why was that? I'll give you a clue... it begins with "A".

If you don't like my response, then don't throw the old "we weren't there" chestnut in our faces, because we will throw the "A" word right back at you.

Get it?

For that matter, Richie McCaw, if you listen to some of the Saffas and Ockers here, he's a walking yellow card risk!

... Brad Thorn, Conrad Smith, Keiran Read ... the list goes on ... honestly, this is kinda off the topic anyway

I'm hoping that the point of the topic is that the refereeing is that it's fair, consistent, and not biased, and while I can understand the disappointment some feel with some off the decisions (as I felt in the AB's v France game 2007), I honestly believe that international referees do not intentionally make decisions to bias one team ... and before we get into the whole number of penalties V cards, maybe have a look at what the penalties and cards are for ... foul play deserves cards

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Have no fear our Nige will show you how to ref a game.

 

[squirrel]

is mike cron still the irb scrum consultant and the all black scrum coach? that to me shows the all blacks have an unfair advantage, i mean its a conflict of interest

 

[Shaggy]

is mike cron still the irb scrum consultant and the all black scrum coach? that to me shows the all blacks have an unfair advantage, i mean its a conflict of interest

I don't know ... who advises the IRB on line outs, back play, etc ... what Nationality are they, and do they have affiliations with there National teams ... does this give them an unfair advantage?

Is Mr Cron refereeing the next test match ... No ... perhaps he's on the judiciary ... No again

Anyway, I thought NZ cheated around the rucks etc ... not sure how Mr Cron is giving an unfair advantage there either

 

[woodward]

penalty to yellow card ratio is NOT a valid argument, this is a fact

 

[Sparty]

And why was that? I'll give you a clue... it begins with "A".

If you don't like my response, then don't throw the old "we weren't there" chestnut in our faces, because we will throw the "A" word right back at you.

Get it?

For that matter, Richie McCaw, if you listen to some of the Saffas and Ockers here, he's a walking yellow card risk!

Apartheid got nothing to do with my point. I am saying if some of you think that our 2007 victory was hollow imagine then how the ABS 87 WC must look to many SA's as we were not even part of that WC. You at least had to opportunity to defend yourselves at the last WC.

The A word or lets just say Apartheid is long gone , we over it , I suggest you do too. lets keep the politics out of it , this is a rugby forum , I am enjoying the debate and diverse opinions not the politics.

FYI - My forefathers fought against the apartheid , as a child I was shot at with rubber bullets and was taught to hate the "Afrikaaner" but times changed , I grew up , Nelson Mandela was released , SA was liberated and I found out that not all "white" people are evil and that the Boks were actually my team while the ABS (whom we loved back then) were in fact the other team. I am so over that.

 

[Sparty]

penalty to yellow card ratio is NOT a valid argument, this is a fact

Explain a little more please ? I tell you why I ask. I see it the other way and continuous penalties should result in a yellow card.

If I may break it down a little more , a penalty can be given for a foul like high tackle , late tackle etc etc , as a first time offense you can get away with it if the ref deemed it accidental - like example I think our FB was very lucky to get away with a borderline yellow card for a high in the SA-ABS game. Now I bet if he transgressed again he would have seen tha yellow so in that case penalty to YC rator is valid.

(by the way those that argue that Rene Ranger's shoulder charge was incorrectly called and justify it by pointing out that he was not sighted needs to then ask themselves if the high tackle of Zane was also called correctly cos he was also not sighted or is it sited ? ANyway....)

A penalty can also be given for prefessional fouls like hands in the ruck , offside play , truck and trailer , obstructioon etc etc and if a player should be say offside once he will in most cases get away with it but if he does it again the ref will caution him cos now it seems as if its not accidental and against the spirit of the game. A 2nd or 3rd trangression would normally mean a official warning and then a YC , so again penalty to YC is valid , the only reason I can see how its not is if say the opposing team gives away penalties but not of the same kind like for example a late tackle maybe , followed by hands in teh ruck , followed by offside etc etc , this way there will be no case for consecutuve tyoe of fouls , the problem with this is there is not much they can do too transgress and eventually they will have to commit a similar crime , there are simply not enough type of fouls to commit and I think the penalty ratio is something like 7/1 for the boks and Aussies while 27/1 for the ABS (note that this stats is thumbsuck and I mildly recall reading it somewhere so apologies if I am way off which I dont believe I am)

Anyway , thats how I look at it , looking forward to how you see it.

 

[Sparty]

Oops double post , sorry bout that.

 

[ranger]

Explain a little more please ? I tell you why I ask. I see it the other way and continuous penalties should result in a yellow card.

If I may break it down a little more , a penalty can be given for a foul like high tackle , late tackle etc etc , as a first time offense you can get away with it if the ref deemed it accidental - like example I think our FB was very lucky to get away with a borderline yellow card for a high in the SA-ABS game. Now I bet if he transgressed again he would have seen tha yellow so in that case penalty to YC rator is valid.

(by the way those that argue that Rene Ranger's shoulder charge was incorrectly called and justify it by pointing out that he was not sighted needs to then ask themselves if the high tackle of Zane was also called correctly cos he was also not sighted or is it sited ? ANyway....)

A penalty can also be given for prefessional fouls like hands in the ruck , offside play , truck and trailer , obstructioon etc etc and if a player should be say offside once he will in most cases get away with it but if he does it again the ref will caution him cos now it seems as if its not accidental and against the spirit of the game. A 2nd or 3rd trangression would normally mean a official warning and then a YC , so again penalty to YC is valid , the only reason I can see how its not is if say the opposing team gives away penalties but not of the same kind like for example a late tackle maybe , followed by hands in teh ruck , followed by offside etc etc , this way there will be no case for consecutuve tyoe of fouls , the problem with this is there is not much they can do too transgress and eventually they will have to commit a similar crime , there are simply not enough type of fouls to commit and I think the penalty ratio is something like 7/1 for the boks and Aussies while 27/1 for the ABS (note that this stats is thumbsuck and I mildly recall reading it somewhere so apologies if I am way off which I dont believe I am)

Anyway , thats how I look at it , looking forward to how you see it.

You can't break down penalties per yellow card into a statistic that just doesnt work, there are just far too many variables.
Like in the instance of not rolling away fast enough, if you do it on the halfway then its not a huge deal, if you do it on your own goal line then thats yellow territory. The All Blacks are smarter in that when they commit penalties, they do it in areas and at times where a yellow card wont be warranted. Bakkies Botha and BJ Botha slowed the game down on their own line, thats criminal and they got yellow carded for it.
Another thing that skews this data is that the All Blacks simply haven't been tackling dangerously or getting thuggish, i can only think of two possible occasions. Jaque Fourie, Quade Cooper, Danie Russuow all got sent off for ill disipline, the All Blacks havent been speartackling anyone and you decide to hold it against them? How about looking at your own team and their stupid tactics instead of whinging about all the worlds top referees (including those from your own country) being unfair.
The referees are obviously trying to stamp out speartackling and thuggishness, the ABs took note and refrained from doing it, the other two teams didnt. Whose fault is that?
I find this funny that at first the big whinge was "They arent penalising the All Blacks enough! they never get penalised" now its "The All Blacks get penalised sooo much and they dont get many yellow cards!" make up your mind.