Official 2011 Rugby World Cup Thread

[sand_man]

I think Pocock got pinged twice. It shouldn't have been confusing for him in the slightest - he cheats. He knows he cheats. And now he got called on it.

A lot more than twice...

[TirNaNog]

I think Pocock got pinged twice. It shouldn't have been confusing for him in the slightest - he cheats. He knows he cheats. And now he got called on it.

Oh, the look on his face the second time said it all. Some players think getting away with cheating gives you an advantage. I wouldn't want him in my side. This is where consistent refereeing can really seperate the men from the boys. NZ played a pretty clean game and came away looking awesome on the day. I was never a big fan of Butch James in his younger day for his frequent shoulder charges, IMO a player like that is a liability despite their skill.

Winning at sport is supposed to make fans proud. Playing a clean game just adds that much more to the value.

[Albereth]

Scrummaging is more about technique and timing then mass. Moving players in and out of a scrum formation would make it more unstable. When a prop or hooker gets sent off you cannot scrum effectively at all so usually a substitute hooker or prop comes on and a flank goes off so your front row is kept in tact but when your 7 man scrum is going backwards that is potentially dangerous so really one should be taking off a wing for the extra forward.

Yes, Wales made their own scrums more dangerous by not swapping Roberts for a proper forward.

[Albereth]

Oh, the look on his face the second time said it all. Some players think getting away with cheating gives you an advantage. I wouldn't want him in my side. This is where consistent refereeing can really seperate the men from the boys. NZ played a pretty clean game and came away looking awesome on the day. I was never a big fan of Butch James in his younger day for his frequent shoulder charges, IMO a player like that is a liability despite their skill.

Winning at sport is supposed to make fans proud. Playing a clean game just adds that much more to the value.

I agree - I would rather the Springboks lost than resorted to being underhand.

Oh wait, that's happened

[VJB 449]

Laughed at one of the comments on News24.

"The look on Pocock's face... Absolutely Bryceless"

LOL

[Albereth]

Oh, the look on his face the second time said it all. Some players think getting away with cheating gives you an advantage. I wouldn't want him in my side. This is where consistent refereeing can really seperate the men from the boys. NZ played a pretty clean game and came away looking awesome on the day. I was never a big fan of Butch James in his younger day for his frequent shoulder charges, IMO a player like that is a liability despite their skill.

Winning at sport is supposed to make fans proud. Playing a clean game just adds that much more to the value.

I think those 'not supporting your own body weight' laws need to be relooked at. Those Aussies dive into rucks to try and clean out. You'll need to watch it to see what I am on about but take a look and answer if any of them could be supporting their own weight? They might not be on the ground but if you removed all the other players, could they support themselves in the position that they are in?

To be fair, it isn't just them.

So simplify and just say no hands in. The ball may not be played by hand until it is out of the ruck. No scrummie picking it up - it must be played with the feet. It won't stop pick and drives - it'll mean that the ball will have to be placed clear of the last feet.

[sand_man]

I think those 'not supporting your own body weight' laws need to be relooked at. Those Aussies dive into rucks to try and clean out. You'll need to watch it to see what I am on about but take a look and answer if any of them could be supporting their own weight? They might not be on the ground but if you removed all the other players, could they support themselves in the position that they are in?

To be fair, it isn't just them.

So simplify and just say no hands in. The ball may not be played by hand until it is out of the ruck. No scrummie picking it up - it must be played with the feet. It won't stop pick and drives - it'll mean that the ball will have to be placed clear of the last feet.

For the last 170 years the law makers have been trying to regulate what happens around the ruck and mauls. The harder they try the more hilarious it becomes.

The only way to accurately assess whether a player is supporting his own body weight or not is with a scale under his hands. Ludicrous rule as is the going off your feet rule. At any given time there 2 or 3 players off their feet in and around a ruck...

[McT]

For the last 170 years the law makers have been trying to regulate what happens around the ruck and mauls. The harder they try the more hilarious it becomes.

The only way to accurately assess whether a player is supporting his own body weight or not is with a scale under his hands. Ludicrous rule as is the going off your feet rule. At any given time there 2 or 3 players off their feet in and around a ruck...

It also leads to a multitude of interpretations, as nobody can get used to a particular set of rules/regulations.

[Albereth]

For the last 170 years the law makers have been trying to regulate what happens around the ruck and mauls. The harder they try the more hilarious it becomes.

The only way to accurately assess whether a player is supporting his own body weight or not is with a scale under his hands. Ludicrous rule as is the going off your feet rule. At any given time there 2 or 3 players off their feet in and around a ruck...

Yep - and I can't help but think that the rules were changed because South Africa became awesome at sorting out whoever was on the wrong side of the ball in a ruck. A certain Richard Bath, if memory serves, used to get on the wrong side of the ball until a match in which he ended up needing a new jersey.

But mountaineering is now a thing of the past.

[Abe]

haha, dead like BOD... He milked it, Clerc did. Yes he was lucky to escape serious injury but he made a meal of it and again later on in the game in an kick and chase scenario...

I agree, he seriously milked it. Was holding the top of his head when that didn't even touch the ground. He also jumped up the moment the red was given. Bringing soccer tactics into rugby and I don't like it at all.

My beef with the call is that it was totally accidental. The guy slipped out of his grasp. It was a yellow and not a red card offense.

[MickeyD]

http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/home/ne...rwc+2011+final

Craig Joubert to referee RWC 2011 Final

Well deserved - he has been consistently the best ref at RWC 2011.

[McT]

Yeah. Great news. At least one Saffer into the final

[DJ...]

Those of you trying to make a correlation between injuries and punishment are being rather daft. Injuries, or lack thereof should never, ever dictate the form of punishment imposed. If Clerc had have broken his neck, would we be having this discussion? Unlikely. The fact that he didn't does not mitigate him, and rightfully so. The reverse is true too.

I have no problem with the red card shown, nor with the way in which players and teams are punished. Picking a player up, tipping him 90 degrees and dropping him like a dead weight on his head/neck is uncalled for and is rightfully dealt with by a red card. There is no law that states that a red card should only be issued if the player drives him into the ground.

And why change the red card rule and other penalty rules so drastically? I do not believe that a penalty try should be awarded for penalisable infringements in the red zone, purely because refs can and do make mistakes. That kind of rule could potentially hand refs even more dictation over the game. Repeat offences in the red zone on the other hand should be dealt with more severely. As it stands it's at the ref's discretion, however IMO it should be a 3 strike rule, and only 3 for each half. Thereafter any repeat infringes result in a penalty try and a sin bin. Then it's fair and it will result in fewer deliberate infringements to prevent tries from being scored.

I haven't read all of the suggestions in the thread yet, but I don't have an issue with the way that cards are handled. Unless of course it's Bryce Lawrence on the pitch.

My money says that Bryce Lawrence will not ref another Super15 match, which is what it looks like our SA ref association is pushing for. His days of reffing competitive rugby are over. Andre Watson has already publicly stated that he won't ever ref another RWC match and that they're submitting their own report to the IRB relating to his refereeing overall. I think a lot can be read into that. The one IRB dictatorship rule I'd like to see done away with is the public discussions of refereeing performances. Every player and coach is entitled to his opinion and they should not be banned from voicing it...

[DJ...]

My beef with the call is that it was totally accidental. The guy slipped out of his grasp. It was a yellow and not a red card offense.

He most certainly didn't slip and turn 90 degrees. Warburton quite clearly tipped him intentionally. The fact that he slipped so he couldn't place him safely is irrelevant in terms of safety. At the end of the day, he tipped him intentionally and dropped him on his head. The rules dictate that is a straight red, or at least the strict enforcement directive issued by the IRB (to all teams) states so.

The forces of one's own body weight combined with the kinetic energy of being tipped are immense and that sort of tackling does not belong in the game, unless you're happy with life threatening injuries being prevalent in the game. The red card was entirely fair in terms of the rules and in terms of eradicating that sort of malicious play from the game...

[DJ...]

I'm all for rugby being a physical game and not for crying French nancys. But tipping a player on his head means you were only trying to do one thing - severely injure him.
Preventing neck and back injuries is welcomed by every single rugby player and that is why red cards are being shown for such tackles.

Remember that the rules aren't only there because paralysis and death make for bad business. They're also there to prevent paralysis and death in junior, amateur and provincial rugby too. I remember when I played rugby I had absolute disregard for my opponents and would tip-tackle only to injure. There was no deeper thinking in it than that...