Fight! Fight! Fight! Ref and pundit go toe to toe!

Snickers Man

Former Leinster captain and now Irish Times rugby pundit has been taken to task by ref Nigel Owens following the former's forensic analysis of the latter's (alleged) inconsistencies during the NZ Ireland match on Saturday.

Owens took to the tweetosphere to make a general refutation of his performance by Toland in the Irish Times

Is this a first? I thought referees in all sports, but especially rugby, had to maintain a haughty aloofness in the face of criticism. But Nigel's having none of it.

Looking forward to this one!

thomond2006

hands away now Liam hands away

Thud

poor Nige can't spell either:

“wish he wd rite the facts and not guess what he thinks it should be. Maybe he shoould ask for clarification before printing”

“when they right stuff that are totally wrong and also wrong in law. makes me annoyed. and he is way off with his view of it”.

Quint2010

Owens has made a rod for his own back here. Referees for all their faults should be above engaging with journalists or fans regarding decisons in matches. I think Owens made a few bad calls like most others but he did them in good faith and is generally a good and fair referee.

Burgo

Thud wrote: »

poor Nige can't spell either:

“wish he wd rite the facts and not guess what he thinks it should be. Maybe he shoould ask for clarification before printing”

“when they right stuff that are totally wrong and also wrong in law. makes me annoyed. and he is way off with his view of it”.

Twitter has a character limit so hence the spelling.

mikedragon32

I have to read Owens' tweets twice just to check 1) if it's English or Welsh, then; 2)WTF he's trying to say!

I'd be worried that he's so steadfast in his own defence that he actually believes he made no incorrect calls. Toland was spot on re Fads penalty for being off his feet then missing the ABs flying into rucks.

Maybe Owens should switch disable twitter. In answering his critics, he's compromised himself. The only people he should respond to when questioned or criticised is the IRB.

Fishooks12

Burgo wrote: »

Twitter has a character limit so hence the spelling.

No excuse for "right" instead of "write" though!

Thud

Fishooks12 wrote: »

No excuse for "right" instead of "write" though!

or "rite" instead of "write"

TheKeenMachine

Man, that title promised so much ...

bamboozle

i've watched the game twice and i'm firmly in Toland's corner.

apart from the contentious scrum at end, Toland is not querying the fact Owens awarded the other penalties against us. He's pointing out instances where NZ did similar (12 times in lead up to their try going off their feet) and were not penalised.

Murray being done for delaying put-ins last week twice in contrast to Weepu getting a warning and nothing more this week another glaring inconsistency.

CatFromHue

Here are two of the isolated incidents; the scrum wheel and McFadden's penalty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Fq-dOXTecA

Toland's version of this:
"On the reset in the 75th minute, Healy, summoning energy from the depths, once again hammers into Franks, who once again drops his bind and shunts backwards. With this, his openside, Sam Cane, disengages from his scrummaging position. Now Franks has no bind and loses a vital scrummager behind him and therefore is powerless. It is criminal that Owens’ interpretation is ‘not a straight wheel, you are running it around’. Due to the preceding actions from Franks and Cane, Healy had no opposition."

The direction of the Irish second rows driving certainly makes it look like we're wheeling it but I do think Owens has made a mistake here.

Edit: Actually I'm not really sure. If you just watch the footwork of the second and back rows they do appear to be wheeling it. Healy has put the front row in a position where they're at about a 45 deg angle but it appears the Irish second and back row then don't push straight into the back row but wheel it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CgKn_Agdx8

Toland's version of this:

"On 39 minutes and 22 seconds, Cian Healy carries into contact with All Black secondrow Sam Whitelock, who gets him to ground with the hovering Andrew Hore immediately in to steal the ball. Hore is in so low the next arriving Irish has to get in violently and lower to prevent a steal. That’s exactly what Fergus McFadden and Tuohy manage, perfect body height with a very strong leg pump to drive Hore out of the way and over the ball. Beyond the drive, McFadden goes to ground but with no material effect on the ball or the All Black ability to contest the ball. Owens pings McFadden, declaring ‘off your feet’."

I'm not so sure Toland is fully right here. Ref's have been coming down a lot on players going off their feet at rucks in the last month and from the clip you can see McFadden does but so does Tuohy. Also McFadden loses his feet before or at the same time the ball is being placed. He also doesn't clear out Hore very well either in that he does push him back but doesn't blow him out of it. At the end of the clip you can see Hore is standing but McFadden is on his side and has sealed it off.

mikedragon32

That was the correct penalty call on McFadden. I think Toland's contention is that after the interval, in the build up to the NZ try, there were several similar infractions which were ignored by Owens.

Toland wrote:

From the All Black kick-off, McCaw contests, winning the ball back. I count 12 tackle areas (breakdowns) where All Blacks go off their feet in the exact same way as McFadden had done minutes earlier.

Dangerous Man

It's a bit odd from Nigel. I don't think Toland's criticisms are invalid by any stretch and even if they were wildly inaccurate, Nigel should not engage with them as he's setting himself up for even heavier criticism.

Scioch

Tolands version of "Healy hammers Franks who loses his bind and retreats" isnt accurate. Healy takes two steps back and then the packs runs it around. Healy may very well have gotten the better of Franks and we may well have destroyed them with a straight push. But if a ref sees a scrum step back and then run around with legs clearly not driving straight whats he to do ?

CatFromHue

mikedragon32 wrote: »

That was the correct penalty call on McFadden. I think Toland's contention is that after the interval, in the build up to the NZ try, there were several similar infractions which were ignored by Owens.

I've isolated from the kick off up to Smith's try. The first 6 seconds are stuck but it does play after that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJyTcePSYHo

I don't see anything in the same bracket as what McFadden did (he went to ground without fully blowing Hore out of it and without putting Hore in a position that it would be illegal for him to compete for the ball).

In the sequence of rucks the Irish player is put in a position where it would be illegal for him to compete for the ball and I don't see any sealing off.

There's a couple of nice touches from SBW; one nice offload to Whitelock to keep the Kiwi's going forward and then he skins BOD which creates the break just before Smith is driven over.

Cpt_Blackbeard

The really annoying thing about the scrum incident isn't that Owens blew up the Irish for wheeling the scrum - I can understand that view - but that he blows for the Irish wheel seconds after Franks has already dropped his bind and Cane has come completely unbound.

mikedragon32

CatFromHue wrote: »

I've isolated from the kick off up to Smith's try. The first 6 seconds are stuck but it does play after that.


I don't see anything in the same bracket as what McFadden did (he went to ground without fully blowing Hore out of it and without putting Hore in a position that it would be illegal for him to compete for the ball).

40:15 on the game clock, Black 4 comes in the side off his feet, McCaw right behind him steps beyond the breakdown and takes out the player protecting the fringe (not part of the ruck).

CatFromHue

mikedragon32 wrote: »

40:15 on the game clock, Black 4 comes in the side off his feet, McCaw right behind him steps beyond the breakdown and takes out the player protecting the fringe (not part of the ruck).

Yeah that's debatable all right.

Remember Toland said:

"From the All Black kick-off, McCaw contests, winning the ball back. I count 12 tackle areas (breakdowns) where All Blacks go off their feet in the exact same way as McFadden had done minutes earlier."

I don't see 12 similar situations myself and I'm guessing here but it looks like you've only seen 1 penalty situation.

thomond2006

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

The really annoying thing about the scrum incident isn't that Owens blew up the Irish for wheeling the scrum - I can understand that view - but that he blows for the Irish wheel seconds after Franks has already dropped his bind and Cane has come completely unbound.

Franno says the same: http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/nation-regains-belief-but-this-is-one-that-got-away-3140506.html

Hermy

CatFromHue wrote: »

...the scrum wheel...

Could someone explain what the rule is? I thought Ireland were going to be awarded the penalty for wheeling the scrum but I got that wrong. So what's a 'good wheel' and what's a bad one?

errlloyd

You're only allowed drive forward, you can't try walk backwards or drive sideways in order to get a wheel.

Personally I think the second rows drove forward, they only looked like they were wheeling because the scrum went around a few degrees and drive forward was pushing sideways.

Monty Burnz

CatFromHue wrote: »

I've isolated from the kick off up to Smith's try. The first 6 seconds are stuck but it does play after that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJyTcePSYHo

I don't see anything in the same bracket as what McFadden did (he went to ground without fully blowing Hore out of it and without putting Hore in a position that it would be illegal for him to compete for the ball).

In the sequence of rucks the Irish player is put in a position where it would be illegal for him to compete for the ball and I don't see any sealing off.

There's a couple of nice touches from SBW; one nice offload to Whitelock to keep the Kiwi's going forward and then he skins BOD which creates the break just before Smith is driven over.

Look at the ruck at 1:08 - the ABs just flop over the tackled player, making competing for the ball impossible. Haven't watched the whole thing, there may be more examples...

CatFromHue

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Look at the ruck at 1:08 - the ABs just flop over the tackled player, making competing for the ball impossible. Haven't watched the whole thing, there may be more examples...

You should prob watch the whole clip so. There aren't 12 similar offences to what McFadden did.

Tox56

There aren't 12, but that example at 1:08 is pretty much identical

mikedragon32

CatFromHue wrote: »

Yeah that's debatable all right.

Remember Toland said:

"From the All Black kick-off, McCaw contests, winning the ball back. I count 12 tackle areas (breakdowns) where All Blacks go off their feet in the exact same way as McFadden had done minutes earlier."

I don't see 12 similar situations myself and I'm guessing here but it looks like you've only seen 1 penalty situation.

No, I just highlighted the first one I saw as it proved the point. I don't doubt that Toland has exaggerated, but there are another couple of breakdowns where players come in off their feet and/or side entry. The very last breakdown before the score shows the tighthead clearly infringing.

You've moved on now from saying you didn't see any to not seeing 12. Three have been highlighted for you.

Monty Burnz

CatFromHue wrote: »

You should prob watch the whole clip so. There aren't 12 similar offences to what McFadden did.

I'm not claiming there were 12, but it seems that the rules were not applied consistently to both teams according to what we see in this passage of play.

ayBlaze

Surprised he hasnt blamed the ref for the first test loss as well:eek:

Monty Burnz

ayBlaze wrote: »

Surprised he hasnt blamed the ref for the first test loss as well:eek:

What?

mikedragon32

ayBlaze wrote: »

Surprised he hasnt blamed the ref for the first test loss as well:eek:

Careful now!

shaungil

I'm glad Owens is trying todefend himself , I'd love to see more of this and maybe allow the ref to talk thru decisions. They try their best and do make mistakes but if they could explain a decision as they see it after would certainly clarify things. Of course a lot of pundits and and internet posters might have less things to do.......

durkadurka

mikedragon32 wrote: »

Careful now!

Down with this sort of thing.

Klunk_NZ

Question every marginal call that went against the losing team with flawed logic and luck of understanding of the laws.
Is this going to happen every time a team losses a tight game?

Klunk_NZ

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

Question every marginal call that went against the losing team with flawed logic and luck of understanding of the laws.
Is this going to happen every time a team losses a tight game?

This is unfortunately becoming normal enough. The laws of the game are intricate, and different referees have different interpretations of the game.

It can be frustrating for teams when things don't go their way, and this spills over and is magnified on fan forums / pubs / terraces etc.

What is beyond frustrating is when referees have different interpretations of the same rules within the same game! And that's what Toland is annoyed at. I don't like pointing fingers at referees, it's lazy and excuse searching imo, but that doesn't mean Toland's not right unfortunately.

Tox56

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

Question every marginal call that went against the losing team with flawed logic and luck of understanding of the laws.
Is this going to happen every time a team losses a tight game?

Never met the Welsh eh?

Monty Burnz

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

Question every marginal call that went against the losing team with flawed logic and luck of understanding of the laws.
Is this going to happen every time a team losses a tight game?

Does it not happen in New Zealand?

Klunk_NZ

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Does it not happen in New Zealand?

We don't lose very often;)

Sangre

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

Question every marginal call that went against the losing team with flawed logic and luck of understanding of the laws.
Is this going to happen every time a team losses a tight game?

Why don't you ask Wayne Barnes?

CatFromHue

mikedragon32 wrote: »

No, I just highlighted the first one I saw as it proved the point. I don't doubt that Toland has exaggerated, but there are another couple of breakdowns where players come in off their feet and/or side entry. The very last breakdown before the score shows the tighthead clearly infringing.

You've moved on now from saying you didn't see any to not seeing 12. Three have been highlighted for you.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I'm not claiming there were 12, but it seems that the rules were not applied consistently to both teams according to what we see in this passage of play.

I think you're being overly critical and not realistic to what is accepted in a game to be honest.

In the ruck at 1.08 in my clip Thompson drives Ryan into the ground and clears him out of the ruck. It's not comparable at all to what McFadden did. Ryan wasn't left standing at the ruck with Thompson lying on the ground sealing off.

At 40.15 on the match clock I suppose a penalty could have been given, it would have been very harsh though. Take a look at the min or so before the Irish try below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWYrRi8GBLw

At around 21 seconds in McFadden punches it up. D'arcy clears out the NZ players in pretty much the exact same was Thompson does at 1.08 in the original clip. Fast forward to 55 seconds on the clip and you have Ryan coming in the side of a ruck to clear a NZ player out of it.

So what's the problem?

Toland wrote an article saying that what McFadden was penalised for the Kiwis did at all the rucks leading up to their try. Owen has said he's wrong and doesn't have his facts right. Owens in my opinion is right and frankly Toland is talking bull****, look back through the footage and you'll see why.

Remember what Toland said is that at every single ruck leading up to their try they did the same as what McFadden did.

Monty Burnz

CatFromHue wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWYrRi8GBLw

At around 21 seconds in McFadden punches it up. D'arcy clears out the NZ players in pretty much the exact same was Thompson does at 1.08 in the original clip. Fast forward to 55 seconds on the clip and you have Ryan coming in the side of a ruck to clear a NZ player out of it.

And at 38 seconds, with Ireland desperate to win fast ball in front of the posts, at least one Kiwi player is holding onto the ball in the ruck while off his feet. No penalty. Meh.

Klunk_NZ

Sangre wrote: »

Why don't you ask Wayne Barnes?

We got completely robbed by Barnes in 07.
It swings in roundabouts, France 4 years later in get screwed over by the best ref in the world Jourbert on a couple of calls. Gota roll with the punches. Personally I'd rather we had won 07 our team was much stronger. But can't complain when things even out.

pickarooney

I think a lot of the rules work against the popularisation of the sport of rugby. Almost every aspect of the scrum is a toss-up as regards the way the decision will go and it's hard to explain to a novice watcher why a penalty is given against someone for falling on wet grass or why when you block a kick the opposition is given another go.

Are the IRB not working against themselves by constantly making the rules at once more specific and nebulous? What new fans are they going to win over when people who have been watching and playing the game for decades can't agree on a lot of the basics of the laws?

Thud

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

best ref in the world Jourbert .

:rolleyes:

profitius

I thought Owens was ok. He gave a few 50/50 decisions to NZ but every ref does that.

A big call came from Poite (surprise, surprise). I'm not sure Ross knocked the ball on near the end as it went backwards between his legs. The replay didn't show much. Owens said it went backwards but Poite made the call. If the ball went backwards then thats a massive call from Poite especially since he went against the refs decision.

daveharnett

CatFromHue wrote: »

Here are two of the isolated incidents; the scrum wheel and McFadden's penalty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Fq-dOXTecA

Edit: Actually I'm not really sure. If you just watch the footwork of the second and back rows they do appear to be wheeling it. Healy has put the front row in a position where they're at about a 45 deg angle but it appears the Irish second and back row then don't push straight into the back row but wheel it.

PK is correct for me too.

CatFromHue wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CgKn_Agdx8

I'd say the penalty for off-the-feet was harsh (he does lose his feet, but he's driven his man two yards - the intent is positive). It's a moot point though - as Owens pointed out at the time, the tackled player rolled forward in the ruck before releasing - also a penalty.


As to the broader point, refs at Owens' level have absolutely no business allowing themselves to be dragged into public commentary or debate about a specific match or incident. He's better than most at explaining his decisions live during downtime, and that's the only public communication he should be engaging in.

lobber

Aside from all of the clips and discussions on whether Toland's view is correct or incorrect, the real problem is still with Nigel Owens.

He has no business to infer that Toland doesn't know what he is talking about because he is not a ref. Toland is entitled to air his opinion on the matter and if he gets it consistently wrong then his employers and his readers will respond accordingly. It comes across badly on Owens part that none of us know what we are talking about because we are not refs either.

Owens should be reprimanded by the IRB in the same manner as players would be and have been for what in my view is bringing the game and ethos of rugby into disrepute. Yes he is getting a lot of abuse and digs on twitter but just read some of his responses, he is calling people 'knobs' and saying they were 'dragged up'. He should just stick to telling us his gym workouts and where he is walking his dog on twitter and if he has a problem with what people write about him let him respond in a proper manner.

Tim Robbins

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

We got completely robbed by Barnes in 07.
It swings in roundabouts, France 4 years later in get screwed over by the best ref in the world Jourbert on a couple of calls. Gota roll with the punches. Personally I'd rather we had won 07 our team was much stronger. But can't complain when things even out.

Barnes missed a forward pass. A forward pass is not open to interpretation, it is a matter of judgement.
Owens got things where there is scope for interpretation and the interpretation seemed to be inconsistent and go against Ireland.

It is better that we get to the bottom of this.

daveharnett

lobber wrote: »

He has no business to infer [imply] that Toland doesn't know what he is talking about because he is not a ref.

I'm not sure that was implied (at least specifically to the article in question). There is a point there though:

Toland wrote:

Firstly, Ireland demolish the All Black scrum on 62 minutes and 20 seconds to gain a penalty; 19-16. On 70 minutes and 2 seconds with the precedent set, Eoin Reddan puts the ball into the Irish scrum and the All Blacks are hammered backwards [and collapse] but no penalty as Owens chooses a reset. The reset, on 70 minutes 57 seconds is once again smashed by the Irish and the All Blacks buckle, concede a wheel, but again no penalty.

Toland sees two scrums which (in his opinion) should have resulted in penalties to Ireland.
In the third scrum, Ireland engaged a hair early (which Liam didn't notice or chose not to mention), won the shove, wheeled about 30 degrees, and got good ball out. No material infringement from the Kiwis whatsoever.

In the second scrum, there is a moment of is-it-or-isn't-it out at the 8's feet. At the same time, the front rows drop. Middle of the pitch, so no help from the TJs. He fessed up immediately - he was watching the 8 so he couldn't make the call about who dropped it: scrum reset. Absolutely the correct decision in the circumstances, no ref or assessor would criticize him for it, but a fan, player or pundit very well might - after all, he missed the call.

What freaks me out is that Owens knows this - fans, players and pundits all see the match from a different perspective than the ref, to the point where the ref cannot expect a holistic assessment of their performance from them. The only opinions he should give significant weight to should be his own, and those of his assessors. Arguing the toss with others is unproductive at best, and sets a terrible precedent when done in public.

davidpfitz

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Barnes missed a forward pass. A forward pass is not open to interpretation, it is a matter of judgement.

And a bloody hard judgement it is! See the video below!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg

Snickers Man

thomond2006 wrote: »

Franno says the same: http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/nation-regains-belief-but-this-is-one-that-got-away-3140506.html

Franno is right. Never mind the scrum wheel. The mistake Nigel Owens made was in awarding the 5m scrum to New Zealand in the last minute from which they dropped their goal.

The problem may be that Nigel Owens didn't know that there was a crucial sentence added to Law 11.4 (Offside under the 10m law) in the IRB's Lawbook sometime between 2009 and 2012.

Here is the 2012 version of the basic statement of the law. It is identical to the 2009 version except for the bit in bold which has been added since but which does not affect this case.


Law 11.4 Offside under the 10m law
(a) When a team-mate of an offside player has kicked ahead, the offside player is considered to be taking part in the game if the player is in front of an imaginary line across the field which is 10 metres from the opponent waiting to play the ball, or from where the ball lands or may land. The offside player must immediately move behind the imaginary 10-metre line or the kicker if this is closer than 10 metres. While moving away, the player must not obstruct an opponent.
Sanction: Penalty kick

The crucial change between 2009 and 2012 comes in subsection f, again highlighted in bold.

(f) The 10-metre Law does not apply when a player kicks the ball, and an opponent charges down the kick, and a team-mate of the kicker who was in front of the imaginary 10-metre line across the field then plays the ball. The opponent was not ‘waiting to play the ball’ and the team-mate is onside. The 10-metre Law applies if the ball touches or is played by an opponent but is not charged down.


What a difference a sentence makes, eh?

I don't have a recording of the match but if the two New Zealand players who forced Reddan into playing the ball dead were in front of Carter when he attempted the drop goal, which seems plausible (please somebody post a video to clear this up) then they were offside under the current law and the correct call should have been a penalty to Ireland.

Of course, Nigel who has been around for a while may have been playing to the "old" laws.

It is important that this becomes better known. Wasn't a Leinster Schools Cup match the season just gone decided on just that very point? A player in an offside position picking up a failed drop goal attempt which had been touched in flight/charged down and scoring a last minute winning try?

I suppose it all hinges not on whether it was touched but whether it was or wasn't "charged down".

But no such ambiguity would apply in the case of the Ireland New Zealand match.

Tox56

I think what SOB did would fall under where it says the ball "touches" an opponenent, "but is not charged down". As in, SOB didn't charge it down, it just touched him.

Snickers Man

Tox56 wrote: »

I think what SOB did would fall under where it says the ball "touches" an opponenent, "but is not charged down". As in, SOB didn't charge it down, it just touched him.

I don't think there's any dispute about that. Which means that the 10m law APPLIES in this case and at this time.

So how could the two New Zealanders who pressurised Reddan be onside?

Please please pretty please somebody post the video clip.