Re: French Test - was it really that good?
- From: SHUSSBAR <shussbar@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 05:15:05 -0800 (PST)
On Nov 30, 10:44 pm, "Stephen Doyle" <st...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"SHUSSBAR" <shuss...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in messageDon t take your desires for realities. Just participating in the
On Nov 30, 4:57 pm, Brent Hadley <the_1a...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 30, 9:57 pm, JD <_antipode...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 1, 4:28 am, Brent Hadley <the_1a...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 30, 3:21 pm, "Pure Salt" <unlik...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And that is without mentionning the time
when McCaw (him again), running back to defend from a previous ruck,
to get in the balls path (unintentionally of course),
I have to think Rolland never saw that, because I don't think he even
played advantage. It was a nailed on yellow card of course - the most
surprising thing about it all was that McCaw was so slow to get back.
From memory it was a full phase after the initial break, and it's
pretty unusual for McCaw to trail that far behind the play.
Probably for two reasons; he was involved in the previous ruck from
whence the breakout originated and was one of the last back to his
Additionally, the ref obviously considered the following:
Law 11.3/8 and the fact McCaw wasn't looking at the ball.
At 2.37 in the clip, it s clear that he is looking at the ball. A
player, and especially a player of this caliber, is always aware of
the position of the ball, the opponents and his teammate, especially
in the situation we are talking about, close to Ab line with great
danger. It would have been a try for sure. The linesman should be
A Frenchman whining about the refereeing in a game against the AB's.
Oh the irony!
debate about this specific play. FYI Check the post : Good game ABs.
- Prev by Date: Re: Dirty Frog, gets away with it.
- Next by Date: Re: Dirty Frog, gets away with it.
- Previous by thread: Re: French Test - was it really that good?
- Next by thread: Re: French Test - was it really that good?