MATCH THREAD: Ireland vs NZ, 19/11/16, 1730 - Who is the greatest side of all time?

irishbucsfan

Gallant defeat to the best team ever to play the game

Podge_irl wrote: »

Actually I did often wonder about that. Pretty sure he doesn't have any extra angles that we don't get to see though.

In most cases we get a feed of his main display (monitor 0) and if the technology is available the other angles will often be configured to match that feed frame for frame so that they can compare seperate angles at the exact same timestamp. But yes we get access to the same angles that they do, that's why they call it a TMO!

Bigbok

elefant wrote: »

Still reading this thread out of curiosity, but this point keeps coming up and caught my attention.

One of the main retorts against Irish fans' questioning of the refereeing performance is that Sexton should have received a yellow, to go with a penalty try. In a world where this high tackle would have led to a guaranteed yellow, New Zealand would have had numerous players yellow carded. They were actually penalised for a number of high tackles without cards being given, which is fine but it's disingenuous to then use Sexton's lucky escape to mitigate Irish qualms.

The yellow card would have been for preventing a try by a high tackle,not for the actual high tackle

molloyjh

Gallant defeat to the best team ever to play the game

Bigbok wrote: »

The yellow card should have been for preventing a try by a high tackle,not for the actual high tackle

I've corrected that. The point is that there is no guarantee at all that those officials would have penalised Sexton.

CMOTDibbler

Bigbok wrote: »

The yellow card would have been for preventing a try by a high tackle,not for the actual high tackle

It can't be one or the other. If it's a penalty that prevented a try being scored then penalty try all day long. But it has to be a penalty first.

That's debatable. But I can't disagree because it was never called and officials have varying opinions on what constitutes a penalty. Especially those officials. :rolleyes:

Gallant defeat to the best team ever to play the game

Wow.

Just looked this up after reading a Franno article.

Seems Cane likes leading with the Shoulder - gets away with it too only a few months ago:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/78072185/will-chiefs-flanker-sam-cane-be-in-trouble-for-his-cleanout-in-win-over-jaguares

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Wow.

Just looked this up after reading a Franno article.

Seems Cane likes leading with the Shoulder - gets away with it too only a few months ago:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/78072185/will-chiefs-flanker-sam-cane-be-in-trouble-for-his-cleanout-in-win-over-jaguares

I'm not quite sure what your problem is. Rugby has rules, if you break them, you should get punished. I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

I don't even need to look anything up after reading an article to say that Keith Earls likes spear tackling, based on your logic.

irishbucsfan

Gallant defeat to the best team ever to play the game

Basil3 wrote: »

I'm not quite sure what your problem is. Rugby has rules, if you break them, you should get punished. I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

I don't even need to look anything up after reading an article to say that Keith Earls likes spear tackling, based on your logic.

This is exactly what we've been saying since the weekend, only to be accused by you of whining and whinging.

Basil3

Gallant defeat to the best team ever to play the game

Basil3 wrote: »

I'm not quite sure what your problem is. Rugby has rules, if you break them, you should get punished. I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

I don't even need to look anything up after reading an article to say that Keith Earls likes spear tackling, based on your logic.

And if Earls did it in another game and got away with it there would be outrage.

We're not looking for special treatment here, just commenting on the fact that NZ were given it.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

This is exactly what we've been saying since the weekend, only to be accused by you of whining and whinging.

I can't even remember accusing you of whining and whinging, but I'm sure you can link my posts that said that.

I agree that if you break rules, you should be punished. The disagreement is in when rules are broken. I think the Cane incident was an unfortunate collision. As we all know, had he not got his head out of the way and both got knocked out, everyone would be happy.

Anyway, it's been done to death.....I just don't see what an incident of Cane being cited for clearing out a ruck 8 months ago brings to the table.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

And if Earls did it in another game and got away with it there would be outrage.

We're not looking for special treatment here, just commenting on the fact that NZ were given it.

I pray that one day you discover the difference between facts and opinion. Saying something is a fact does not make it so. Fact. :P

Basil3

Gallant defeat to the best team ever to play the game

Basil3 wrote: »

I can't even remember accusing you of whining and whinging, but I'm sure you can link my posts that said that.

I agree that if you break rules, you should be punished. The disagreement is in when rules are broken. I think the Cane incident was an unfortunate collision. As we all know, had he not got his head out of the way and both got knocked out, everyone would be happy.

Anyway, it's been done to death.....I just don't see what an incident of Cane being cited for clearing out a ruck 8 months ago brings to the table.

It's called precedent. It shows that he has a habbit of leading with a shoulder and getting away with it (twice now). He's knocked out two players in the space of 8 months in similar fashion. How long until the next one?

Like I've said, eventually you lose the benefit of the doubt. But sure it's only brain injury, no big deal like.

Bazzo

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Wow.

Just looked this up after reading a Franno article.

Seems Cane likes leading with the Shoulder - gets away with it too only a few months ago:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/78072185/will-chiefs-flanker-sam-cane-be-in-trouble-for-his-cleanout-in-win-over-jaguares

Not sure if I agree with trawling through his past for incidents but I thought this comment on the article, presumable from a Kiwi, was interesting:

Intentional or not doesn't matter he sconed someone in the head using his shoulder. Its no surprise hes been cited and he will probably be suspended as it was a reckless move.

Funny the difference a season makes - I recall Goodes unintentionally taking Aldardices knee out with his shoulder last year and chiefs fans were baying for his blood. Guess it depends on the jersey you're wearing as to whether its dangerous or not.

irishbucsfan

Gallant defeat to the best team ever to play the game

Basil3 wrote: »

I can't even remember accusing you of whining and whinging, but I'm sure you can link my posts that said that.

I agree that if you break rules, you should be punished. The disagreement is in when rules are broken. I think the Cane incident was an unfortunate collision. As we all know, had he not got his head out of the way and both got knocked out, everyone would be happy.

Anyway, it's been done to death.....I just don't see what an incident of Cane being cited for clearing out a ruck 8 months ago brings to the table.

Sorry, by "you" I meant the entire country of New Zealand and by "me" I meant the entire country of Ireland :P

I don't think Cane should have been banned. I don't think him being cited in the past is too relevant. I think he should have been sent off for 10 minutes and I think he would have been in the TMO wasn't such a boodyman.

swiwi_

Deleted User wrote: »

Wow.

Just looked this up after reading a Franno article.

Seems Cane likes leading with the Shoulder - gets away with it too only a few months ago:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/78072185/will-chiefs-flanker-sam-cane-be-in-trouble-for-his-cleanout-in-win-over-jaguares

Venjur, you've become the Mahatma Geansai of Leinster posters. Perfectly reasonable to debate whether yeah or nah that tackle deserved a citing/ban, but the hysterical conspiracy theories about Cane walking away because World Rugby wished to protect their premier brand is just braindead nonsense sorry.

nehe milner skudder

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11754248


new zealand stats regarding reffing and special treatment.

getting hatcheted

Nift

swiwi_ wrote: »

Venjur, you've become the Mahatma Geansai of Leinster posters. Perfectly reasonable to debate whether yeah or nah that tackle deserved a citing/ban, but the hysterical conspiracy theories about Cane walking away because World Rugby wished to protect their premier brand is just braindead nonsense sorry.

Is it?

Nift

nehe milner skudder wrote: »

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11754248


new zealand stats regarding reffing and special treatment.

getting hatcheted

Yeah by Hansen :rolleyes::) what's he going to say?. New Zealand are penalised so much cause as they like to give away penalties particularly cyncial penalties. In some instances its clever...like in 2013 we should have done anything to prevent a try, New Zealand would have.

awec

Gallant defeat to the best team ever to play the game

This one has run it's course, let's move on to the next game.