Official Tri-Nations 2009 Thread

[The_Techie]

And it was Jacque Fourie's intent, once he realised that he had managed to lift Nonu, to gently place him back to the ground after driving him back but after he got him above vertical he realised that he was a lot heavier than he originally thought and could not hold him up so they fell....

These players are not idiots. They are trained to get their timing just right... if the player is still in the air you stand off until he lands. Many others manage to do it. Is Rokocoko a bit "slow" then?

And what a pity he did absolutely nothing to mitigate what he did. I based his intent on his actions after the tackle, what are you basing your understanding of his intent on? Thumb suck?

These players are also trained to not lose possession of the ball. Amazing how they always manage to do what they are trained to.

As a matter of interest, what would you have the citing committee do with regards to, for example, high tackles? Every high tackle, whether penalized or not, is dangerous. I'm sure with enough motivation you could argue that the player wanted to break his neck, though they didn't manage it. Would you have them cite every player that made a high tackle? What about rucks? If you join a ruck with a bit too much zeal then you can probably break someone's neck in the process, even if you do it legally.

</devils_advocate>

EDIT: But all of this circular arguing isn't really going anywhere, my opinion remains unchanged (as I'm sure yours is too, LancelotSA) though

 

[buffalobill]

EDIT: But all of this circular arguing isn't really going anywhere, my opinion remains unchanged (as I'm sure yours is too, LancelotSA) though

My thoughts are and after the match, is there SHOULD have been three citings. There was just the one. I won't argue the result on the one, BUT there was just the one citing. That smacks of double standards.

I was also disappointed with the ref in that he didn't talk to and warn the NZ scrumhalf after Fourie du Preez's try. If Fourie hadn't scored the try there should have been a penalty try or a yellow card. He was deliberately playing off-side in order to prevent a try. The rules are quite clear on that.

 

[buffalobill]

And what a pity he did absolutely nothing to mitigate what he did. I based his intent on his actions after the tackle, what are you basing your understanding of his intent on? Thumb suck?

p

My understanding is that it's not supposed to be about intent but the fact whether it's dangerous or not. Taking a man out of the air is one of the most dangerous tackles of all.

Clearly, I'm wrong and the new rule sets seems to be based on intent (hence the Bakkies banning). Is the IRB saying now that "Okay, it was dangerous but shame, he didn't mean it?" I thought the rules were quite specific about that and yes, it's a penalty.

My problem remains the after match citings and rulings. Bakkies' banning appears to have been based on the fact that while it's generally perfectly okay to clean out a player, this time it was wrong, because you intended to hurt the player. So, what would have happened if Habana had been seriously hurt. Would there have been a citing?

It would appear that the IRB people who now rule on citings appear to regard "intent" rather than the fact as the most important fact. I find this hard to digest - the rules are there and it looks like they're being interpreted to suit certain people. I'd hate to think so - but there are clearly massive inconsistencies in the citing process.

 

[LancelotSA]

And what a pity he did absolutely nothing to mitigate what he did. I based his intent on his actions after the tackle, what are you basing your understanding of his intent on? Thumb suck?

That was sarcasm I'm sure he had no intention of putting him down gently, just as Rokocoko had no intention of making sure Habana had landed. But an interesting point is raised regarding your actions after the incident playing such a big part. So if you snap someone's neck it should be fine as long as you act innocent afterwards?

These players are also trained to not lose possession of the ball. Amazing how they always manage to do what they are trained to.

Ahh, you see, there is a difference there. When you lose the ball it is not as a result of your own doing. In all likelihood someone else is trying to separate your legs from your torso with a huge tackle. When you are running in an open field bearing down on someone catching the ball it is different. You are fully in control of the situation.

As a matter of interest, what would you have the citing committee do with regards to, for example, high tackles? Every high tackle, whether penalized or not, is dangerous. I'm sure with enough motivation you could argue that the player wanted to break his neck, though they didn't manage it. Would you have them cite every player that made a high tackle? What about rucks? If you join a ruck with a bit too much zeal then you can probably break someone's neck in the process, even if you do it legally.

As stated before, it is ALL about consistency. If every player who commits a high tackle gets a set ban then so be it. Butch was regularly yellow carded for high tackles yet other players get away with just a penalty.

And why should they not cite everyone who commits a high tackle? Is it a necessary part of the game or something we would rather eradicate? Yes, the odd person is going to get banned for "accidentally" tackling someone high but in 90% of the cases there would probably have been intent. I'll tell you something.... I reckon you'll find the number of accidental high tackles decreases all of a sudden....

EDIT: But all of this circular arguing isn't really going anywhere, my opinion remains unchanged (as I'm sure yours is too, LancelotSA) though

Yip, you are correct and I would not expect to change your mind. That is not the intention. It is merely because I would assume most people felt Rokocoko was in the wrong so it's interesting to hear your version

 

[elysian]

Ahh, you see, there is a difference there. When you lose the ball it is not as a result of your own doing. In all likelihood someone else is trying to separate your legs from your torso with a huge tackle. When you are running in an open field bearing down on someone catching the ball it is different. You are fully in control of the situation.

But that was the problem IMHO. Smit and Matfield were in the way, so it was not an open field and Rokocoko could not compete for the ball in the air. He had to keep an eye on them to navigate around, then intercept Habana/ball.

I agree that it was dangerous and he should then have pulled out if he was unable to judge exactly where the ball was. He would usually have the advantage over Habana in the air, so if the field was open in front of him, I don't see any reason why he would deliberately just go to take Habana's legs out, where there is a very good chance that he would've won the ball.

But there are clear inconsistencies as to when we get cited as compared to the rest of the teams. I just don't feel that this was one of those times.

 

[Creag]

Just want to congratulate the lads on a gr8 Tri-Nations!

Am really, really proud of their achievements.

And we're still No. 1!

 

[Creag]

And how about Francois Steyn's (a.k.a. the human mule!) 60 m hoof over the poles?

Yee-ha!

 

[Fiekus]

Interesting article on News24: All Blacks are bad losers
It highlights some interesting things though...

Hamilton – New Zealand confirmed their reputation as bad losers when Springbok centre Jaque Fourie was suspended for four weeks for an alleged spear tackle on Ma’a Nonu in Saturday’s Tri-Nations Test.

All Black lock Brad Thorn was suspended for only a week for a far more serious spear tackle on Bok captain John Smit last year.

Kieran Read, who shoulder-charged Bryan Habana without the ball in Saturday's Test, was not even cited.

The citing commissioner, Scott Nowland, was the same man who suspended Bakkies Botha for legal play against the British and Irish Lions.

Brian O’Driscoll headbutted Danie Rossouw in the same Test without anything being said about the incident.

Wallaby flyhalf Matt Giteau also tried to inflict an injury on Bok scrumhalf Fourie du Preez in this year’s Tri-Nations, but a yellow card was considered sufficient punishment.

Had they been South Africans, Thorn, Read, Giteau and O’Driscoll would have been suspended for a number of weeks.

I totally forgot about the Brad Thorn incident

http://www.sport24.co.za/Content/Rugby/TriNations/355/2c36b740fcb74302afb71bd136da6ddf/14-09-2009-07-02/All_Blacks_are_bad_losers

 

[Ou grote]

Those citer's are fcking racist!!!

Will Winnie and Maleema go to meet them at the airport?
They'll give the IRB an earful.

 

[killadoob]

Racist, no more biased than racist although i suppose you can it racism .

 

[AMG133]

Firstly weldone to the Boks, EPIC game indeed! lots of things to point out at the ref but we wont get into that, Frans was excellent, as soon as that first one went over you knew it was going to be a special game! everyone played their bit so a deserved team effort, felt Morne could have done better in certain aspects of his game but that would be being too picky so I'll just keep quiet

With regards to the ban on Fourie it was quite evident that something was going to happen with the amount of times they showed that replay, but ya plenty *** happened to our players but nothing got cited, just like how Giteau got out scot free with that barge on Du Preez. Its pathetic to see such things from the IRB. Its like theres a vendetta out on the Boks, but good to see we managed to beat all that off and win.

Will be interesting to see if Malema and the rest of them head down to ORT to welcome the Boks today, they deserve it! They always make the nation proud, win or lose!

 

[buffalobill]

Interesting article on News24: All Blacks are bad losers
It highlights some interesting things though...

I totally forgot about the Brad Thorn incident

The ABs are NOT poor losers. In fact they were very gracious in defeat.
And Brian O'Driscoll did NOT headbutt Danie Rossouw. It was offsides, yes, but no headbutt. Anyway, he did us a favour in injuring himelf and bringing on Brussouw.

This is really rubbish "journalism"

 

[elysian]

The ABs are NOT poor losers. In fact they were very gracious in defeat.
And Brian O'Driscoll did NOT headbutt Danie Rossouw. It was offsides, yes, but no headbutt. Anyway, he did us a favour in injuring himelf and bringing on Brussouw.

This is really rubbish "journalism"

I agree, BS journalism that. At least Smit got revenge on Thorn for that "spear tackle" (dropped him on his back) - with that massive tackle. bwahahah

 

[buffalobill]

Meanwhile, the leader of the ANC kindergarten was busy elsewhere. The President of the country managed to find some time in his schedule to welcome the team home.

 

[AMG133]

ya that was good on JZ's part, to give the Bokke the welcome they deserve

 

[sand_man]

http://www.supersport.com/rugby/art...rie to appeal against four-week ban&id=315901

 

[LancelotSA]

“The players would like to see more consistency when it comes to sanctions for this kind of transgression,” said Heymans.

“There have been precedents that point to shorter suspensions.”

The punishment meted out to Fourie is set to trigger fresh unhappiness about rugby’s judicial procedures.

Well there you go, those few sentences pretty much sum up what a few of us have been trying to say on here.

 

[sand_man]

this sums it up...

An Afrikaner guy, an Aussie, a beautiful girl and an old woman are
Sitting in a train.

The train suddenly goes through a tunnel and it gets completely dark.
Suddenly there is a kissing sound and then a slap! The train comes out
Of the tunnel.

The old woman, beautiful girl and the Afrikaner guy are sitting there
looking perplexed. The Aussie is bent over holding his face, which is
red from an apparent slap.

The old woman is thinking: 'That Aussie must have tried to kiss that
Girl and got slapped.'

The Aussie is thinking: 'Damn it, that Afrikaner guy must have tried to
Kiss the beautiful girl. She thought it was me and slapped me instead.'

The beautiful girl is thinking: 'That Aussie must have moved to kiss me,
But kissed the old lady instead and got slapped.'

The Afrikaner guy is thinking: 'If this train goes through another
tunnel, I could make another kissing sound and moer that Aussie again!'

 

[Creag]

Love it, sandmanm34,

 

[APoc184]

One for the Kiwi's

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=192517