Warm Up Match 4: Highlanders v British & Irish Lions (Dunedin)

[The Jones Boy]

His vitriol is warranted....

No.
No it's not.
It never gets a positive response and only causes more anger, resentment and future disharmony.
Manners cost nothing.

 

[ncurd]

His vitriol is warranted when endless incorrect jargon is posted here and guys like you jump on his sack when he's factually correct and most of you are not and give no evidence just type sanctimonious posts, then complain when he displays his frustrations having to deal with posters who don't know exactly what they're talking about trying to argue with the facts.

Just to point out his post about offside line and the attacking team utter nonsense as was pointed out.

 

[The Jones Boy]

I don't think I've ever seen SC draw attention to an instance where a referee ruled incorrectly in favour of a team he is broadly supportive of.

And as the Jones Boy says, what's at all helpful or constructive about using labelling language others as 'whingeing poms' - you're not just attacking an individual you're suggesting something about a lot of people, and all it will do is get peoples backs up. It's also incredibly short-sighted bearing in mind the level of 'whingeing' about the referee / lions in general after the Crusaders game from certain posters on here.

Touche' old fruit.
It's true I have never as yet seen cooky complain about his favoured team taking advantage of a poor referring decision that helps them on their way, but you never know, he has an opportunity next game to right this wrong.
Furthermore, I have been known to keep conspicuously quiet where such occasions occur and if drawn on them been likely to respond with a glib cliche' like ' Oh you know, swings and roundabouts mate.'... and a wry grin.
Life's just so much more enjoyable when we're pleasant to each other, even in strong moments of disagreement.

 

[smartcooky]

Just to point out his post about offside line and the attacking team utter nonsense as was pointed out.

Which post is this? Show me in the Laws of the Game where I am wrong.

 

[Ground We Won]

From what I've seen, this is a pretty one sided forum because there's 10 times the amount of NH posters.

I was watching that Oly guy like tallshorts anti Haka comments calling it a dull dance and xenophobic remarks..

So it goes both ways. But in more way than one I think.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Which post is this? Show me in the Laws of the Game where I am wrong.

Dear Cooky, I gave you a LIKE for this post.
Polite, and encouraging discussion.
Good for you young man.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Can't we lock this thread, very little new is being talked about and defiantly causing more arguments than conversation, pretty over it

 

[MikeTheNative]

I disagree about the Webb one but that's a matter of opinion so whatever but I do have a question about the above though. Doesn't the Highlanders 12 competing for the ball and getting cleared out by the lions make it a ruck? So the tackler then has to retreat behind the back foot and go through the gate before competing as it's after this.

Nobody replied, so I went looking for it and saw 16.4B 'Players must not handle the ball in a ruck except after a tackle if they are on their feet and have their hands on the ball before the ruck is formed.'

Now as he didn't have his hands on prior to when it was a ruck, penalty to lions?

 

[MikeTheNative]

Can't we lock this thread, very little new is being talked about and defiantly causing more arguments than conversation, pretty over it

I enjoy a good debate about rugby rules which are pretty complicated but I agree that's it's go too petty and name calling.

 

[smartcooky]

I disagree about the Webb one but that's a matter of opinion so whatever but I do have a question about the above though. Doesn't the Highlanders 12 competing for the ball and getting cleared out by the lions make it a ruck? So the tackler then has to retreat behind the back foot and go through the gate before competing as it's after this.

Its only a ruck if the clean out was over the ball.

LAW 16 DEFINITIONS
A ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on
their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground. Open play has
ended.

AG clearly did not think it was a ruck (and the Lions didn't complain, so they must have thought it was a tackle too.).

Its all moot anyway, because if you look at the video, the referee was playing advantage to the Highlanders for a knock on by the Lions before any of this happened (he put his arm out toward the Highlanders and gave the secondary signal for a knock on). He then awarded a penalty against the Lions for playing the ball in the ruck that actually did form later.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

From what I've seen, this is a pretty one sided forum because there's 10 times the amount of NH posters.

I was watching that Oly guy like tallshorts anti Haka comments calling it a dull dance and xenophobic remarks..

So it goes both ways. But in more way than one I think.

Please look up the definition of xenophobia because you are way way off.
People are allowed a personal opinion on whether or not they enjoy watching 10 hakas in a test series. I like the haka, I just think it's more special if it's just the ABs and the NZ Maori doing it.


What is it about international rugby that just brings out the worst in people? We've had more bans these past few weeks than the rest of the season combined.

Everyone please play nice, no personal insults, No sweeping generalisations to cause insult etc.

 

[The Jones Boy]

From what I've seen, this is a pretty one sided forum because there's 10 times the amount of NH posters.

I was watching that Oly guy like tallshorts anti Haka comments calling it a dull dance and xenophobic remarks..

So it goes both ways. But in more way than one I think.

Oly has his moments but I believe he has been improving and his position of responsibility here is having a positive effect on his content, and he's a work in progress like the rest of us.
It's true the NH boys far outnumber us but if you look at the population demographics, we are naturally outnumbered as Europeans alone number in the hundreds of millions and we are only 4.5.
However, quality has a chance to win out over quantity, and that is why we need even more to show our quality at all times, as a leading light for others to follow by example.
Cooky's posts are far too often salty and acrimonious in their flavour and in my long history of being a Kiwi, knowing Kiwi's and enjoying Kiwi compatriots and camaraderie, Kiwi's are by nature easy going and friendly.
I firmly believe that the 'Pommie' quotient of the boards can be encouraged to share in a point of view if we use language that is less antagonistic and sarcastic, and more easy going and friendly.
I have a beautiful three year old son, and when he gets a bit of a strop on, if i engage him with aggressive language and rhetoric, he responds in kind at a later date to his mother with the same negative approach.
If I engage him with warmth and intelligence, he responds favourably.
Keep it simple.
Life's too short to be taking rugby quite so seriously.

Cooky is very rarely either easy going or friendly here on this forum and it makes for a disproportionately negative representation of our good natured countrymen.
In the most erstwhile and friendly olive branch kind of way I would recommend Cooky see a Doctor of medicine or Psychology and look to engage at least St Johns Wort in his diet, if not Prozac.
He could do with calming down and looking at his cholesterol levels and blood pressure before he gets any older.
It's a dangerous time for him.
These words are coming from a caring Kaumatua

 

[smartcooky]

From what I've seen, this is a pretty one sided forum because there's 10 times the amount of NH posters.

I was watching that Oly guy like tallshorts anti Haka comments calling it a dull dance and xenophobic remarks..

So it goes both ways. But in more way than one I think.

Us SH posters need to stick around so that the forum doesn't become a self-aggrandizing echo chamber for NH posters

 

[MikeTheNative]

Its only a ruck if the clean out was over the ball.

LAW 16 DEFINITIONS
A ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on
their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground. Open play has
ended.

AG clearly did not think it was a ruck (and the Lions didn't complain, so they must have thought it was a tackle too.).

Its all moot anyway, because if you look at the video, the referee was playing advantage to the Highlanders for a knock on by the Lions before any of this happened (he put his arm out toward the Highlanders and gave the secondary signal for a knock on). He then awarded a penalty against the Lions for playing the ball in the ruck that actually did form later.

I agree it's a moot point but because the ref gave it and that's final. I can see people debating the finer points of a decision but I don't like it when people start slagging refs off saying they are crap. They are human at the end of the day and will never make 100% of the calls right.

 

[The Jones Boy]

I agree it's a moot point but because the ref gave it and that's final. I can see people debating the finer points of a decision but I don't like it when people start slagging refs off saying they are crap. They are human at the end of the day and will never make 100% of the calls right.

Further to this, the different hemispheres may often see referees have different areas where their focus is less or more and this can have an effect on how they officiate.
It's up to the teams to get on with it and play rugby.

 

[MikeTheNative]

I'm out this thread, it's turned to ****, hopefully the moari doesn't end up the same way.

 

[MikeTheNative]

Further to this, the different hemispheres may often see referees have different areas where their focus is less or more and this can have an effect on how they officiate.
It's up to the teams to get on with it and play rugby.

Last post 100% agree, they are pro players and should be able to adapt to how the ref is controlling the game in 10 minutes.

 

[ncurd]

Which post is this? Show me in the Laws of the Game where I am wrong.

Its already been pointed out that attacking team (nearly) always stand nowhere near the offside line for tactical reasons......so your post was deliberately disingenuous or you don't understand basic tactics laws have nothing to do with it.

 

[smartcooky]

Its already been pointed out that attacking team (nearly) always stand nowhere near the offside line for tactical reasons......so your post was deliberately disingenuous or you don't understand basic tactics laws have nothing to do with it.

????

I have no idea what you are talking about. You said all the Highlanders were just offside on the right. That simply isn't true

 

[The Jones Boy]

????

I have no idea what you are talking about. You said all the Highlanders were just offside on the right. That simply isn't true

All the highlanders in that photograph, were clearly onside.