Re: Low Life Pom

On Oct 31, 9:24 pm, simon s-b <baitt...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 30 Oct, 21:32, Stex <stex2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Oct 31, 7:17 am, simon s-b <baitt...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 30 Oct, 20:19, "Matua" <ma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

http://www.rugbyheaven.co.nz/4256703a22363.html

BARNES THE ***!!

Email a Friend | Printable View
JOHN SELKIRK / Fairfax Media
HOT SEAT: Accusations continue to be levelled against English referee
Wayne Barnes after his poor effort in the All Blacks' World Cup
quarter-final.

Related Links
· About RugbyHeaven

Advertisement

AdvertisementSpectators at the rugby World Cup quarter-final between
the All Blacks and France heard referee Wayne Barnes overruling the
advice of his touch judges when he awarded a crucial try to the
French, which saw New Zealand eliminated from the tournament.

--And also saw the biggest national whinge ever recorded. A month now
and still going.

Invercargill man Russell Hill has come home from the World Cup with a
few questions over that forward pass during the All Blacks' quarter-
final loss to France.

--blimey, Invercargill man Russell Hill

France's second try, which appeared to include a blatant forward pass,
has been blamed by many All Black fans for their team's unceremonious
exit from the tournament.

-- this is easier than admitting that they yet again had no plan B and
played like a sack of ***

You mean like

A) Flowing running rugby
B) Keeping it tight in the forwards (thwarted by hands in the ruck)
C) Playing for territory and kicking penalties (The pea in Barnes
whistle was split)
D) Drop Goals (advantage called over twice when none was obtained)

Prey tell (in hindsight too) what was your plan E?

Stex- Hide quoted text -

A) You couldn't do because your backs played like a sack of ***
B) They should have worked the ball to the back of the maul quicker,
then the French dropping it would not have mattered. If you're on your
feet the hands in the ruck isn't an issue. You have to play the ref,
not the rules, and McCaw was Naive in this.
C) They should have played for territory and then dropped goals. You
weren't going to get a penalty.
D) Again, naive. If you'd taken the shot and missed he'd have come
back for the advantage. Once you'd seen how the ref was playing
advantage (as you say it happened twice) then you know to take the
shot earlier.

McCaw flapped. You kept going for tries you obviously weren't going to
get. The ref was not going to give you a kickable penalty, so your
only remaining scoring option was the drop goal. We have plays to get
into position for these from anywhere in the park (see RWC 2003
final). If you lot had not been so bloody complacent, you would have
had them too.

You played the ref badly. Look at the England Aus game. It was obvious
our scrum had supremacy, but the ref initially penalised us. We
changed our plan and took away every excuse he could have for doing
this, and then creamed them. The AB's should have done the same.- Hide quoted text -


Yet the scores were tied at full time and it relied on a last minute
drop goal. The 2003 RWC final is a great example of the ref having an
undue influence on the game. Again without going into specifics after
the game I had the impression the ref had cost you guys 15-20 points
and it would have been unjust for the wallabies to win. Luckily the
England team were a 20 point better side. What if the ref had a 25pt
influence?

If the Wallabies had pulled the rabbit out of the bag and won this my
response would be the same that the Wallabies didn't deserve to win.
I certainly wouldn't be getting all sanctimonious and foretelling doom
for all eternity for English rugby and waxing lyrically about the
wonderful Wallabies running game. It would have been, oh well England
got diddled by the ref, game over, time to move on.

I think the good teams beat bad refs only goes so far. In both these
games the ref had far too much influence and any gripes are
legitimate. Yes there were other problems with the AB's (that were
mentioned before RWC such as Lock, Centre, McCaw being captain), but
the game I saw the AB's were a better side. Not up to the standard a
year or so earlier but still a better side than France on the day.

It's interesting that the home teams on these two occasions were both
heavily favoured by the ref. Watch out in 2011 when the AB's get
favoured by the ref :)

Stex



.

Quantcast