logie972.1
Morrissey. I think there is also a wider issue here. We will shortly be having several International match series and there will be Northern Hemisphere referees officiating in these SANZA matches. One of the criticisms of past NZ rugby commentators has been that they are one eyed and never critique their own referees. So let’s get the complaints in about our own in unimportant Super 15 games out of the way. Then we can put the microscope on the real villains and the ones we really love to hate in the near future.Morrissey2.1.1
The “referees” who ruined the 1999 and 2011 Rugby World Cup finals were both from the Southern Hemisphere, and both of them were South Africans.The victim on both farcical occasions was France.
Descendant Of Sssmith2.2
Whatever. The French backs were constantly offside and it was quite clear that the ref was letting the game flow rather than penalising the shit out of a final.Rightly or wrongly that was the call he made on the day.Personally I have no problem with it and enjoyed the game and would have enjoyed it regardless of who won.All Blacks were clearly the best team throughout the tournament and winning it was well done and well deserved. Good on em and if you don’t like the result tough shit, swings and roundabouts, c’est la vie, chin up and whatever other little homilies you might care to think of.Feel free to convert to soccer or hockey or chess…. if you hate rugby so much. It would be miles better than hearing you bleat about this every time rugby comes up in discussion.- Whatever.That is a VERY bad way to begin an argument. It’s dismissive and trivializing. It shows you’re not serious, and not really prepared to argue your corner in good faith.The French backs were constantly offside and it was quite clear that the ref was letting the game flow rather than penalising the shit out of a final.The French backs were NOT constantly offside. The “referee” —-more accurately, the non-referee—did not let the game flow at all. What he did do was let the home side cheat repeatedly and flagrantly, and right in front of him for the whole of that farcical second half.Rightly or wrongly that was the call he made on the day.He made no call at all. That is the problem; he turned a blind eye to the systematic cheating of the home team.Personally I have no problem with it and enjoyed the game and would have enjoyed it regardless of who won.You enjoyed seeing one team cheat repeatedly and not get penalized for it? You enjoyed the outrageous spectacle of a referee delivering the game to the home team, and tainting that victory irretrievably?All Blacks were clearly the best team throughout the tournament….Yes they were, and for all their games except the first 40 minutes of their amazing quarter-final demolition of England, the Tricolors were clearly one of the worst. On that at least we can agree.….and winning it was well done and well deserved.No, that’s not correct. The French team almost certainly would have won it, if they had been allowed to play football. The systematic cheating of the home team, aided and abetted by the “referee”, guaranteed that they would be prevented from doing so.Good on em and if you don’t like the result tough shit, swings and roundabouts, c’est la vie, chin up and whatever other little homilies you might care to think of.You can regurgitate every dull cliché in the book if you want; the fact is that the All Blacks would have probably lost the Rugby World Cup final if the game had been refereed fairly and impartially.Feel free to convert to soccer or hockey or chess…. if you hate rugby so much. It would be miles better than hearing you bleat about this every time rugby comes up in discussion.I love all those other games, in case you’re interested. And I love rugby. Which is why I hate seeing it abused like it was on the night of October 23, 2011.
- If you can’t spot the French backs offside throughout the game then little point in arguing about it really or the times the French forwards had hands in rucks or jumping through our lineout.In short it was a a typical rugby game where not everything that could be penalised was. That’s more a Southern Hemisphere style of reffing and I much prefer it to a more pedantic northern style where everything under the sun gets a blow on the whistle.What you reflect in my view is that our “unpenalised infringements” stick in the mind more because they were at the end of the game while the French had more possession and were tied up in more drama.The ref said he let things go on both sides to help it flow and I think that sums it up.Both sides got away with plenty and the All Black defense at the end was great – infringements or no.As a cricket player I’m quite accepting of decisions not always being spot on as being part of the game and as passionate as I am about both rugby and cricket it’s only sport at the end of the day.
- DOS. It took you a little while to get there, but as I predicted, the anti-Northern Hemisphere bullshit would manifest itself – in your second paragraph. Wonder if you have a similar attitude in your approach to law and order. (The IRB and its rules makers are drawn from both hemispheres.) If the rules are at fault then lobby to change the rules. The games you prefer to see are clearly not Rugby Union if any amount of transgressions are allowed to pass for the sake of entertainment.
- The games you prefer to see are clearly not Rugby Union if any amount of transgressions are allowed to pass for the sake of entertainment.He doesn’t want to be entertained—if he did, he’d have wanted the best team in the world to be allowed to play football and not be systematically strangled by a home team in collusion with an incompetent/corrupt non-referee.
- In short it was a a typical rugby game where not everything that could be penalised was.Rubbish. You’re as willfully blind as those dopes who are insisting that yesterday’s horror in Woolwich just came from the blue.You know as well as I do that you are talking nonsense.
- Rot. A whole group of us watched the game, nearly all current and ex players, and there was constant pointing out of missed infringements on both sides as the game progressed.In real time, at the time these things were noticed and pointed out.This is true of any rugby game and this was no different.I’m happy with he refs having discretion to ref and not penalise every infringement and accept the fact that like players they will make mistakes. They will also interpret things differently from armchair, zoomed in view, slow motion, post match critics.It’s only a game and the approach you guys take of over-analysis and over criticism doesn’t to me reflect people who are passionate about the game. It’s more like you hate it.That you continue to moan about it this far out just reinforces that.One day we might meet in a rest home and I’ll no doubt still hear about it then.
Pascal's bookie…
Pretty much.Adapting to the referee is a crucial part of the game. His word is final on what is legal, afterall.the claim that if the ref had done it different, the all blacks would have lost, is just more nonsense. If there is one thing the AB captain knows how to do, it’s read a referee and adapt to what they are doing.Professor Longhair…
“A whole group of us watched the game, nearly all current and ex players…”One does not wish to be disrespectful, but …. was one of you sober?- I’ve played the game but didn’t watch the match and don’t care about the result BUT I do wonder what experience you have had playing there mozz because although you seem to have a lot to say on it (and good on you for that) your comments seem to be from someone who actually hasn’t played much and doesn’t really know what it like on the field. Oh and I’ve been a ref too, not anymore though.
- Actually that’s a fib – i did watch the game, even dressed up and went to the local theatre and sat there for most of it with my head in my hands praying to the gods lol. I don’t really care if you’ve played too much or not and you’ve probably been asked that a million times so disregard if it bugs you my friend. Everyone can have an opinion, everyone.
- The referee currently blows his whistle for 4 reasons.
Start play.
End play.
Lack of skill (knock on/fumble).
Infringement.In schools, (partly as a demand from the public), values are being taught and no doubt a few commenters here bemoan the fact that values are not taught enough.Take honesty – yet today’s coaches in most team sports, particularly at the top, advocate “working the ref” – “push the limits of the law.” i.e infringe. They actually encourage infringement (cheating).So don’t cheat and you’ll have a virtually whistle free game.Cannot imagine what a round of golf with DOS and his mates would be like with their cavalier attitude to rules. Clockie…
“Cannot imagine what a round of golf with DOS and his mates would be like with their cavalier attitude to rules.”Caddyshack anyone?
- I’ve played the game but didn’t watch the match and don’t care about the result BUT I do wonder what experience you have had playing there mozz because although you seem to have a lot to say on it (and good on you for that) your comments seem to be from someone who actually hasn’t played much and doesn’t really know what it like on the field. Oh and I’ve been a ref too, not anymore though.Yes, marty, I have played many games of rugby, but sadly not any more. I like playing sports—especially tennis, indoor soccer, and (occasionally) golf.But it doesn’t really matter how much I or any other spectator of that farcical World Cup final have played the game, or even if we have never played at all; it was obvious to anyone honest and fair-minded that the Tricolors were stitched up in the most scandalous way. The fact is: ANY referee would have penalised the flagrant, repeated cheating by the All Blacks in the second half of that match; unfortunately, for reasons which have not yet been ascertained, the “referee” on the night doggedly refused to penalise them and simply let them get away with murder (metaphorically speaking).That old fraud Henry got a knighthood out of that disgrace, and now he’s bitching and moaning about an HONEST referee making a couple of marginal calls. The old fool even used the word “shit” on television the other night, which underlines not only his arrogance and lack of class, but also his cast-iron sense of impunity.
Private Baldrick…
I’m all overcome Morrissey, three of your disguises all in one thread – I need a lie down ![lprent: You may shortly receive a holiday as well. Read my previous note. ]- I’m all overcome Morrissey, three of your disguises all in one thread – I need a lie down !I am not those people you think I am, and they are not me. Just ask Mr or Ms Prent.[lprent: Definitely Mister Prentice, although no-one ever calls me that. I already pointed that out to him earlier today. Hell I was sufficiently paranoid enough to look up the IP’s to see if they were known portals. I drew the line at asking you if you if you had a space devouring tardis. ]
- Far from having a cavalier attitude to the rules and having captained both cricket and rugby teams I always encouraged playing to the rules, not fighting and was respected in cricket for ensuring that if people were given out in opposing teams and we knew they were not out that they were put back in.I’m also well aware that not all captains and teams encouraged that.You cannot draw any conclusion about how I played the game and encouraged others to do so from what I said.In relation to the game in question it seems to be quite clear that I’m saying both sides infringed unpenalised throughout the game and each could have been penalised more than they were. The ref chose not to penalise all and everything and that’s OK as far as I am concerned. Many refs do that in many games.What you are saying is that there was bias in favour of the All Blacks and what you are implying is that the bias was deliberate in order to ensure that the All Blacks won.The difference I guess is that I learned as a sportsman to accept a defeat and move on to the next game. To control what I could, which was my own behaviour and discipline and to not blame others for a loss and especially the referee or umpire.You appear to have learned to dwell on the past, to blame others and to not let go.One approach builds better character in my opinion than the other.You write in superlatives that far outweigh the situation and throw accusations at me like I’m a cheat and me and my friends are drunkards so easily that I would seriously dislike to be one of your mates if your real life persona is reflected in your online persona. For the record I rarely drink and didn’t have any that night.Both sides got away with infringements. No ifs no buts.
Tuesday 9 January 2018
Dismaying Hypocrisy: A not so smart Ted talks (May 23, 2013)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wednesday, 22 March 2013