Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Connacht vs Munster, Sat 16th April 19.15, Sportsground. Sky Sports 5/TG4

18910111214»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    jm08 wrote: »
    And why do you disagree with him?

    You yourself agree Cronin deserved a card.

    Locking out the scrum is not illegal. Without the illegal scrummaging from Cronin it's a legitimate contest. It's as simple as that. If Bealham had collapsed without being pulled down then a penalty against him would be fair, it didn't happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,301 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    By Eddie, he solely focuses on Bealham nothing to say about Cronins actions

    He said that the loosehead is not obliged to hold the tighthead up. He did analyse one scrum where they both scrummaged legally.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    jm08 wrote: »
    He said that the loosehead is not obliged to hold the tighthead up. He did analyse one scrum where they both scrummaged legally.

    But that ignores the fact that the loosehead pulled the tighthead down. Which you know is illegal, the analysis is useless without that.

    If you were to penalise and card both, what specifically would the penalty against Bealham be for?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,301 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    You yourself agree Cronin deserved a card.

    Locking out the scrum is not illegal. Without the illegal scrummaging from Cronin it's a legitimate contest. It's as simple as that. If Bealham had collapsed without being pulled down then a penalty against him would be fair, it didn't happen.


    It seems you have to hold your own weight up which Bealham wasn't doing and which is dangerous forcing Cronin to collapse the scrum trying to hold him up.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    jm08 wrote: »
    It seems you have to hold your own weight up which Bealham wasn't doing and which is dangerous forcing Cronin to collapse the scrum trying to hold him up.

    Right... Bealham wasn't supporting his own weight while being pulled to the ground by Cronin, and Croning was forced to pull at his arm...

    At least we know what you see


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,773 ✭✭✭connemara man


    jm08 wrote: »
    He said that the loosehead is not obliged to hold the tighthead up. He did analyse one scrum where they both scrummaged legally.

    the loose head has to bind properly which he didn't because he was dragging from the start


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,045 ✭✭✭Yeah_Right


    jm08 wrote: »
    He said that the loosehead is not obliged to hold the tighthead up. He did analyse one scrum where they both scrummaged legally.

    Exactly. The LH doesn't have to hold up the opposing TH. But he has to hold himself up. Bealham put his feet back and locked himself out. Not illegal. Cronin couldn't cope with this and pulled down. This is one of the problems of scrumming against good tall TH (see Carl Hayman).

    The LH has to hold his on weight even if he is going backwards. Cronin couldn't.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    Lads why are ye bothering? Cronin could have bene lying on his back, reaching up grabbing Bealham's collar and manhandling him to the ground and he'd still be arguing that Bealham was going to ground by himself and deserved to be penalised.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,301 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    But that ignores the fact that the loosehead pulled the tighthead down. Which you know is illegal, the analysis is useless without that.

    If you were to penalise and card both, what specifically would the penalty against Bealham be for?

    Dangerous play.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,773 ✭✭✭connemara man


    jm08 wrote: »
    Dangerous play.

    and what was dangerous from the laws of the game?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,301 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    You yourself agree Cronin deserved a card.

    Locking out the scrum is not illegal. Without the illegal scrummaging from Cronin it's a legitimate contest. It's as simple as that. If Bealham had collapsed without being pulled down then a penalty against him would be fair, it didn't happen.

    I'll retract that so.

    If Cronin deserved a card, so did Bealham.

    Anyone got a link to Neil Tracy's analysis? I can't find it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,301 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    and what was dangerous from the laws of the game?

    Law 20.1 (h)

    A crouched position is the extension of the normal stance by bending the knees sufficiently to move into the engagement without a charge.


    Sanction: Penalty kick


    Bealham was not bending his knees.

    ---

    Another one of the scrums:

    (j)
    Stationary and parallel. Until the ball leaves the scrum half’s hands, the scrum must be stationary and the middle line must be parallel to the goal lines. A team must not shove the scrum away from the mark before the ball is thrown in.


    The ball never left the scrumhalf hand. This was the scrum that Cronin got carded for.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,813 ✭✭✭CMOTDibbler


    jm08 wrote: »
    Law 20.1 (h) A crouched position is the extension of the normal stance by bending the knees sufficiently to move into the engagement without a charge.

    Sanction: Penalty kick

    Bealham was not bending his knees.
    Glad you quoted that. You missed the bit about the engagement. Cronin pulled Bealham down after the engagement. The above law doesn't require Bealham to have his legs bent at that point.
    jm08 wrote: »
    (j) Stationary and parallel. Until the ball leaves the scrum half’s hands, the scrum must be stationary and the middle line must be parallel to the goal lines. A team must not shove the scrum away from the mark before the ball is thrown in.
    The ball never left the scrumhalf hand. This was the scrum that Cronin got carded for.
    Well it clearly wasn't stationary when Cronin pulled Bealham down. Cronin however was turned in on his hooker. He couldn't even take the pressure of the engagement so he pulled Bealham down. Clear as day.

    To recap:
    1. Bealham was locked out and steady (If you look at the pic, you'll see he wasn't fully locked out, his knees were bent; enough to drive forward if needed)
    2. Cronin was turned in on his hooker (not straight and parallel)
    3. He had an illegal bind on Bealham
    4. He pulled him down. (this is as clear as day). You can see the pulling motion clearly and the cause and effect are immediate and violent.
    5. Eddie O'Sullivan is a backs coach. His knowledge of the scrum wouldn't cover a postage stamp. His motivation would be highly suspect as well seeing as he's out of a job and Munster have just said goodbye to two of their coaching staff.

    btw, you won't find an analysis by Neil Treacy of this game. He didn't do one. But I never said he did. I just asked had you ever read his articles. He often describes this very situation and apart from saying it needs a fair bit of strength to do it, it's never an issue.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Salvatore Yellow Bungalow


    Love that Murray Kinsella's opinion, that it was dangerous of Bealham to lock out as he did (where Murray is clearly saying that it is dangerous for Bealham to do so as he cannot add additional power) has become dangerous play.

    I've never seen someone play chinese whispers with themselves before.

    Fascinating.


  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,574 Mod ✭✭✭✭Robbo


    Munster would have won that scrum and therefore the game if Hiroo Onoda was locking out the scrum.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭former total


    Love that Murray Kinsella's opinion, that it was dangerous of Bealham to lock out as he did (where Murray is clearly saying that it is dangerous for Bealham to do so as he cannot add additional power) has become dangerous play.

    I've never seen someone play chinese whispers with themselves before.

    Fascinating.

    You see, the issue here is that most people reason things out by the following process:
    1. Gather facts
    2. Consider available information
    3. Come to conclusion

    Whereas the other side in this "debate" uses the following:
    1. The conclusion is Go Munster!
    2. Google, google, google until facts are located to support step 1
    3. Where no such facts exist, do not under any circumstances deviate from step 1.
    4. Repeat steps 1-3.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,820 ✭✭✭b.gud


    You see, the issue here is that most people reason things out by the following process:
    1. Gather facts
    2. Consider available information
    3. Come to conclusion

    Whereas the other side in this "debate" uses the following:
    1. The conclusion is Go Munster!
    2. Google, google, google until facts are located to support step 1
    3. Where no such facts exist, do not under any circumstances deviate from step 1.
    4. Repeat steps 1-3.
    5. If all else fails bring up the dual training grounds

    Added 1 step that you missed


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,166 ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    Or this...


    mile-deep-foot-wide.gif

    .




    .


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,813 ✭✭✭CMOTDibbler


    Zzippy wrote: »
    Or this...

    mile-deep-foot-wide.gif
    You have to admire the dedication though. I don't think I spent any more time on this discussion than what it took to write the posts. Most of us are posting on the basis of what we know and can see, jm08 however spent two hours looking for an article that I never said existed and even more time googling the laws on scrummaging.

    It's admirable really but ultimately pointless. Ironically it reminds me of this:

    duty_calls.png

    The irony being who is actually wrong.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,523 ✭✭✭spurscormac


    mods - any chance of a lock on this thread?
    It's circled so much I thought it would have run out of fuel by now.
    Time for an emergency landing to save lives before it crashes in a highly populated area.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Salvatore Yellow Bungalow


    mods - any chance of a lock on this thread?
    It's circled so much I thought it would have run out of fuel by now.
    Time for an emergency landing to save lives before it crashes in a highly populated area.

    Before it does, who do you think was scrummaging illegally Bealham or Cronin?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,523 ✭✭✭spurscormac


    Before it does, who do you think was scrummaging illegally Bealham or Cronin?

    Who cares, we won :P


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭MarinersBlues


    I think Bealham was fine but Buckley was breaking every rule possible on the other side.
    Whitehouse chose to ignore what was happening right in front of him and went after Cronin for no good reason at all.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    I think Bealham was fine but Buckley was breaking every rule possible on the other side.
    Whitehouse chose to ignore what was happening right in front of him and went after Cronin for no good reason at all.

    I heard Whitehouse was reversing into a parking space outside the changing rooms and Cronin nipped in in front of him.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,813 ✭✭✭CMOTDibbler


    Before it does, who do you think was scrummaging illegally Bealham or Cronin?
    Neither. It was Buckley apparently. :D


    You and your trick questions emmet :p


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭MarinersBlues


    Bazzo wrote: »
    I heard Whitehouse was reversing into a parking space outside the changing rooms and Cronin nipped in in front of him.

    It was an hour before the game but Nigel jumped straight out of his car and ran under the posts to award a penalty try.:D


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,301 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Glad you quoted that. You missed the bit about the engagement. Cronin pulled Bealham down after the engagement. The above law doesn't require Bealham to have his legs bent at that point.

    Well it clearly wasn't stationary when Cronin pulled Bealham down. Cronin however was turned in on his hooker. He couldn't even take the pressure of the engagement so he pulled Bealham down. Clear as day.

    To recap:
    1. Bealham was locked out and steady (If you look at the pic, you'll see he wasn't fully locked out, his knees were bent; enough to drive forward if needed).

    2. Cronin was turned in on his hooker (not straight and parallel)
    3. He had an illegal bind on Bealham
    4. He pulled him down. (this is as clear as day). You can see the pulling motion clearly and the cause and effect are immediate and violent.
    5. Eddie O'Sullivan is a backs coach. His knowledge of the scrum wouldn't cover a postage stamp. His motivation would be highly suspect as well seeing as he's out of a job and Munster have just said goodbye to two of their coaching staff.

    btw, you won't find an analysis by Neil Treacy of this game. He didn't do one. But I never said he did. I just asked had you ever read his articles. He often describes this very situation and apart from saying it needs a fair bit of strength to do it, it's never an issue.

    If the Munster front row didn't engage, Bealham would have fallen flat on his face. He was not supporting his own weight.

    It should have been a reset, if not a free kick to Munster for pushing before the ball was put in.

    Are you a scrum coach of a professional team that you feel that you can dismiss EOS's analysis?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,301 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Love that Murray Kinsella's opinion, that it was dangerous of Bealham to lock out as he did (where Murray is clearly saying that it is dangerous for Bealham to do so as he cannot add additional power) has become dangerous play.

    I've never seen someone play chinese whispers with themselves before.

    Fascinating.

    Ah sure, wasn't Murray Kinsella a centre, what would he know about the scrum ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,523 ✭✭✭spurscormac


    Unsubscribe thread


  • Administrators Posts: 54,256 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Thread is like a turd that's circling the drain. Taking the toilet brush to it, closed.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement