Ireland v New Zealand - Take Two

[Oldschool]

That was an appalling display. So frustrated with that. When a team reaps benefit from a combination of lack of discipline and from cynical play then the referee really has to look at himself. What we should have had was a high scoring classic, instead whilst we still got an intense game, we didn't really get to see could New Zealand really defend Ireland. They were seldom legal all night. Now we did make our own mistakes, but I don't think they can defend us without tapping out. They were afraid of us. Unfortunately so was the referee of them.

Partially the issue (the ref) I think. But we also struggled to threaten the gain line when we spun it out. We were a bit lateral and passing well before contact/gain line. NZ had a much easier time defending us than in the first test. We needed to be running a bit harder and straighter at them and passing closer to contact to fix them. Still, hell of an effort considering the early changes.

Running harder and straighter could have been done with Henshaw but IMO he was given a pretty cheap shot and after that we lost our main go forward man in the back line. NZ knew what they were up to targeting danger men. It's not the first time (Drico 2005) and it won't be the last but I for one am I'm getting sick of world rugby protecting their brand.

We lost that game by 12 point and NZ had 14 pretty questionable ones given by a Welsh TMO who either had a jar or two before the game or had a few quid riding on it because he made a lot of big questionable calls.

I'm open to correction on this but I think Barrett admitted he didn't touch the ball down for his try.
The ref obviously wasn't sure and should have ruled it out.
Nigel wants refs to take more responsibility!

[desperado]

https://mobile.twitter.com/Murray_Kinse ... 9699986432

Sexton's hamstring again. It sometimes looks like we start a half fit Sexton, which isn't smart. If he's injured, he should be given the time to recover, even if that means he's out next week& beyond.

I don't think New Zealand were a dirty team tonight. Fired up and physical, yeah. Not in the same league as a France game though. Some bad tackles, but they were all dealt with correctly.

Apparently it's not the same injury reoccurring; it's the other leg.

[sunshiner1]

by FLIP » November 19th, 2016, 8:25 pm
I'm very proud of Ireland tonight. In the face of a scumbag New Zealand All Brands team deliberately seeking to injure our best players, with corrupt officials making sure the Kiwis don't lose twice in a row, they never gave up and kept on trying. The New Zealanders pulled very dirty trick in the book and the referees let almost every one of them go.

Shame on World Rugby. Shame on New Zealand. Have your dirty win, you didn't deserve it.

+1

by Oldschool »
Nigel wants refs to take more responsibility!

I lost all respect for Owens the day he let Kieran Read punch Sean O'Brien three or fours times literally 5 metres from him and wagged his finger at him. I think Read got a 'don't do that again'. The crop of referees at the moment is dire. Owens isn't a great ref he's just less sh*t than the others.

[desperado]

Very disappointed with the result. I think Ireland will really look at the number of balls lost in the red zone and be pretty unhappy with it.

We had enough chances to win but the NZ defense won the battle.

We worked so hard to get to the 22, just seemed to be running in treacle when we got there.

NZ are adept in selectively committing offences in the red zone at crucial times; for instance Read in the first half breaking bind. We get a 3 pt pen; rather than a try. All the coverage is on their cheap (or targetted) shots and little mention is given about their cynical ''professional'' fouling in their 22. Shaggy put it nicely in post match analysis on RTE.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

That was an appalling display. So frustrated with that. When a team reaps benefit from a combination of lack of discipline and from cynical play then the referee really has to look at himself. What we should have had was a high scoring classic, instead whilst we still got an intense game, we didn't really get to see could New Zealand really defend Ireland. They were seldom legal all night. Now we did make our own mistakes, but I don't think they can defend us without tapping out. They were afraid of us. Unfortunately so was the referee of them.

Partially the issue (the ref) I think. But we also struggled to threaten the gain line when we spun it out. We were a bit lateral and passing well before contact/gain line. NZ had a much easier time defending us than in the first test. We needed to be running a bit harder and straighter at them and passing closer to contact to fix them. Still, hell of an effort considering the early changes.

I agree but I think you have to factor in how NZ were constantly offside. There were plenty of times when we tried to run hard and straight but the NZ defender was right up in the ball carrier's face as the ball arrived so they either went back inside or ran sideways. It's entirely possible we'd have struggled anyway without CJ and Henshaw though.

Thought Heaslip and VDF adjusted brilliantly to all that. SOB pretty much used blunt force but Heaslip showed great feet and VDF kept coming from deep so that he could attack the space better.

[sunshiner1]

How the hell does one add images to a post?

[johng]

How the hell does one add images to a post?

You linked to a web page not an image. Just link to the image alone

[johng]

Like this

[jezzer]

Ref was really poor but you have got to admire the skill and accuracy of NZ in the first and third tries even if the final pass on the third did require a look from the TMO. I can't help wondering how the game might have panned out had SOB managed to hold on to that ball from the lineout move. 7 points there and who knows?

What happened on defence for Barret's try? Only saw the pre-TMO phase of it once but he seemed to have waltzed through a weird gap and the flimsiest of tackles. Hell of a tackle by him on SOB in the first half.

Absolutely you have to admire the good stuff from NZ, as much as you hate the dirty stuff. I actually stood up and clapped their third try, it was an amazing score.

OS, Barrett apologised to NZ fans and teammates for trying to get under the posts and "almost not scoring". To be fair I think he scored, even if it wasn't even vaguely clear from the video.

[sunshiner1]

Apologies if this offends anyone. Hopefully it's realized in the spirit of lightheartedness as intended

[ronk]

Happy with the performance not the result. We had a few chances and didn't take them, NZ showed their danger and I always expected them to come strong as we faded. Losing 3 key players early was always going to make it tough.

When the fade happened, we tightened up and didn't really let them cut loose and we made them work to hold off a comeback.

At the top, the margins are much tighter and we are much closer now than ever. Chicago wasn't a fluke.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Ruckedtobits]

Ire v NZ 5mins 58sec elapsed:
Law 15.4 a) The Tackler must immediately release the tackled player.

A penalty try should have been awarded against Beaudon Barrett for not releasing Sean O'Brien immediately as a try would probably have been scored. Rory Best, knowing the Laws queried this with the Referee. However, being from the Southern Hemisphere, and thus not understanding Rory's accent (or less probably the Rugby Laws), ignored the Irish Captain. Thus began an evening in which the Irish Team were ill-served by the Match Officials. It was not to be the last occasion.

Ire v NZ 9mins 58sec elapsed
Law 10.4e. A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the opponent’s neck or head is dangerous play.

A penalty and probable Yellow Card offense, based on the most recent "Interpretation and Clarification issued by World Rugby on high tackles. However, the TMO indicates to the Referee that he does not consider the offence intentional. Mr Hansen, subsequent to the gme, blames the offence on the fact that both players are moving at high speed. There is no equivocation in either the Law or the World Rugby Interpretation about speed of players or intent.

Ire v NZ 13mins 42 sec elapsed
Law 9.A When an attacking player is first to ground the ball in the opponents’ in-goal, a try is scored.

The Referee asks the TMO Mason "Can you see a clear grounding?" Mason replies, "I can see a clear grounding." The Ref asks "Can you see a clear grounding on the grass?" Mason replies "Yes".. This last response is untrue as it is not possible to absolutely confirm from the TV Pictures, even magnified by 40% that the ball is in contact with the grass as first Barrett's arm obscurs the view and then Sexton's arm obscurs the view of ball with grass.

Incidentally, Sexton grasps Barrett's right shoulder from behind with his hand, in his initial contact. At no time does his arm encircle Barrett's head or shoulders. It is unlikely, given that Barrett is moving the same direction as Sexton that this could be judged a dangerous tackle.

Ire v NZ 22mins 43 secs elapsed
Law 10.3 b) Repeated infringements by the team. When different players of the same team repeatedly commit the same offence, the referee must decide whether or not this amounts to repeated infringement. If it does, the referee gives a general warning to the team and if they then repeat the offence, the referee cautions and temporarily suspends the guilty player(s).
Sanction: Penalty kick

A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored.

On this occasion, a 5m scrum has been awarded to Ireland following an attack over the NZ line which is held up without the ball being grounded. NZ have already conceded 3 penalties within 5m of their line during the first 20 mins of play but the Referee has not issued a general warning to the NZ team. At the scrum, which is driven towards the NZ goal line by the Ireland pack, the ball is at the feet of Heaslip when first Cane (No 7) and then Reid (No break from the NZ scrum and attempt to prevent the ball being played by Heaslip within the Irish Scrum. This infringes Law 10 a) and Law 10b) as both Foul PLay and repeated infringement. Once again, the Referee refuses the request of Irish Captain Best to review the infringement.

These particular instances are graphic demonstrations of the ineptitude of the Officials and the cheating of the NZ Team, which goes unpunished by the Officials. Highlighting them will not change the result, but it may provide a clear trace of the evidence which World Rugby should review, in conjunction with Match Officials to ensure that Referees and other Match Officials are called to account

[Ruckedtobits]

Re-watching this is not good for your Blood Pressure. We were screwed by Officials and NZ ferocity.

They deserved to win by taking their chances but we were deprived of points on numerous occasions by bad refereeing and bad decision making. The latter will improve in time, the former will remain forever the fact of that game.

[enby]

The decision to disallow Barrett's try when he stripped the ball off Jackson was ridiculous. Law 12 expressly provides that it is not a knock on if the ball goes forward after being stripped/knocked out of an opponent's hands. Both the ref and TMO seem to be ignorant of the laws of the game.

[CiaranIrl]

The decision to disallow Barrett's try when he stripped the ball off Jackson was ridiculous. Law 12 expressly provides that it is not a knock on if the ball goes forward after being stripped/knocked out of an opponent's hands. Both the ref and TMO seem to be ignorant of the laws of the game.

Yeah, incorrectly disallowed try:

“Law 12, Definitions state: “A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it.”

The Law does not explicitly cover scenarios where the ball is ripped out of the possession of a ball-carrier by an opponent. In these situations it is almost impossible for the referee to determine exactly who last touched or had physical contact with the ball.

For the sake of improving consistency of ruling from referees worldwide, in the following scenarios, has a knock-on occurred? If so, who has knocked the ball on?

1. Ball-carrier A from the red team runs towards the blue team’s dead ball line. Opponent B approaches A from in front and rips the ball out of A’s hands such that neither player has possession of the ball and the ball travels towards the blue team’s goal line. (We often see this ruled a knock-on by A).
2. Ball-carrier A from the red team runs towards the blue team’s dead ball line. Opponent B approaches A from behind and rips the ball out of A’s hands such that neither player has possession of the ball and the ball travels towards the red team’s goal line. (We often see this either ruled play or a knock-on by B).”

Clarification in Law by the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
In each of the scenarios outlined the ball carrier is not responsible for losing possession.

In scenario 1 the ball has been ripped from the ball carrier by a player ripping the ball from the ball carrier’s hands and it goes towards that player’s goal line. There is no infringement in Law and play should continue.

In scenario 2 the player ripping the ball out of the ball carrier’s hands is effectively throwing the ball towards the opposition team’s goal line and this is an infringement which requires the referee to award a scrum with the non-offending team throwing in subject to advantage.

[paddyor]

The decision to disallow Barrett's try when he stripped the ball off Jackson was ridiculous. Law 12 expressly provides that it is not a knock on if the ball goes forward after being stripped/knocked out of an opponent's hands. Both the ref and TMO seem to be ignorant of the laws of the game.

I thought it was that if the ball was stripped forward of the carrier it wasn't considered a knock-on but rather a knock back by the defender. Similarly a stripping defender can't knock the ball forward of themself.

[matt]

Just watching the match again and while acknowledging the immense pressure at the start think we left our right wing completely unmanned.

From 01:10 mins you can see Trimble on left wing outside Zebo and seems to have stayed there until try, Kearney moves left at about 1:50 and stays there, with Trimble last man on left touchline Zebo seems to wander left and right behind tryline without contributing anything while Dagg & Read go for line. Then on 2:42 Barrett spots the obvious and kicks to Fekitoa & Murray ended up with an impossible job covering 3 Kiwis with Savea outside if needed.

Agree that we usually are well organised but the problems against Argentina last year (with different personnel) still persist in that we get too narrow too easily.

Great wholehearted performance by all especially the forwards but defensive organisation for first try was very disappointing and unfortunately after key players Henshaw and Sexton got injured very little control in backs especially back 3.

VDF & Ringrose amongst many positives but when you play NZ they will expose even the slightest weakness.

[OTT]

https://www.sportsjoe.ie/rugby/watch-ho ... site_share


Nearly the worst of the lot.

[Dave Cahill]

Sam c**t and Malakai Fuckhead have been cited

[artaneboy]

Sam c**t and Malakai Fuckhead have been cited

There could have been another three of them named- Dagg, Suvea and Coles at random. Watching it again ferocious tackling from New Zealand some of it even legal was the leitmotif of the match.

Reflecting on it now after the disappointment recedes is a realisation that they were scared and rattled all game. Their precision and ruthlessness in general eventually won it for them. But the presence of Barrett and our loss of Sexton was the paramount individual difference. If Henshawe was still there in the second half I feel we might have converted one of those chances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk