Munster Team Talk Thread VI - Stander Up and Fight

stephen_n

Akrasia wrote: »

How was Arnold acting the Bollox?. He didn't release the ball immediately but there's no law that says he has to allow the other team to take a quick lineout.

They can’t take a quick lineout, he’s in touch holding the ball.

Interested Observer

John Hayes Ligind

Akrasia wrote: »

How was Arnold acting the Bollox?. He didn't release the ball immediately but there's no law that says he has to allow the other team to take a quick lineout.

Yes there is. There's a law that says exactly that, 18.3.

A player who carries the ball into touch must release the ball immediately so that a quick throw may be taken. Sanction: Penalty.

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

See, the problem here is that if some lad in Castres with too much time on his hands goes through the tape frame by frame he'll find plenty to be outraged by too. It's the nature of the game. Munster are well able to play the cynical game when it suits.

The only exception I'd make is the alleged gouge. It doesn't look clear to me but if there's a better picture, then throw the book at him.

That TRK guy is painful, an absolute dose.

yerrahbah

Interested Observer wrote: »

Yes there is. There's a law that says exactly that, 18.3.

It was a Munster scrum that was awarded, not a Castres lineout so Arnold was not preventing a quick throw

Shefwedfan

Apart from pointing the finger at sun, moon and stars

Just wondering what is Johann van Grann current win ratio away from home?

Leave poor old Barnes alone, he is a new favorite in Ireland

Burkie1203

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Just wondering what is Johann van Grann current win ratio away from home?

This season has not been great

Shefwedfan

Burkie1203 wrote: »

This season has not been great

Last season it wasn't hectic either if I remember correctly?



Away last season beat
2 x SA teams in April
Leicester Tiger in December, or was JVG in charge then?

Before that Zebre in Nov
Draw with Castres in Oct
Osprey in September

Rest are all losses away
That is absolutely shocking

Can't blame Barnes for every one of those match's

Akrasia

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

Interested Observer wrote: »

Yes there is. There's a law that says exactly that, 18.3.

Ok, fair cop.

There was no need to shove his face in the mud and knee him in the ribs when he was done

yerrahbah

ScrubsfanChris wrote: »

Pretty defeatist thinking Munster will get nothing against Gloucester no?

Away form hasn't been great

If we play like we did against Castres then it could be a difficult evening.

We are absolutely capable of a LBP or a win, but big improvement needed

BoardAtWork

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

That wasnt anything more than what the officials gave. He slide in to contest for the ball. It wasnt illegal. You could never give anything like a penalty try for a decision like that

You cannot kick the ball while grounded. Even if Conway was not there it was a probable penalty try and yellow card.

As it happened, he clattered into Conway knees first which caused Conway to knock the ball on. A second Castres player then dove shoulder first into a prone Conway. Both incidents should have resulted in a yellow, and there should have been a penalty try.

The no-arm, off-the-ball, above-the-horizontal tackle on POM was a textbook red. Each of those aspects of the tackle alone warranted a yellow.

Richie_Rich89

BoardAtWork wrote: »

You cannot kick the ball while grounded. Even if Conway was not there it was a probable penalty try and yellow card.

As it happened, he clattered into Conway knees first which caused Conway to knock the ball on. A second Castres player then dove shoulder first into a prone Conway. Both incidents should have resulted in a yellow, and there should have been a penalty try.

The no-arm, off-the-ball, above-the-horizontal tackle on POM was a textbook red. Each of those aspects of the tackle alone warranted a yellow.

You couldn't kick it if you'd been tackled to the ground. You'd have to get up first. But you can slide along the ground and kick it, same as you could slide along the ground to collect it in your arms

BoardAtWork

Richie_Rich89 wrote: »

You couldn't kick it if you'd been tackled to the ground. You'd have to get up first. But you can slide along the ground and kick it, same as you could slide along the ground to collect it in your arms

No you cannot. As per Law 13, you may go to ground to collect the ball in your arms, but you cannot go to ground to kick it.

Regardless, the Castres player did not kick the ball, he kicked Conway. It was a clear act of foul play which denied a certain try. It's a yellow card and penalty try.

The Lost Sheep

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

BoardAtWork wrote: »

No you cannot. As per Law 13, you may go to ground to collect the ball in your arms, but you cannot go to ground to kick it.

Regardless, the Castres player did not kick the ball, he kicked Conway. It was a clear act of foul play which denied a certain try. It's a yellow card and penalty try.

Its not a yellow or penalty try. He slid in for the ball he was slidding before conway was in possession and he didnt kick conway he slid into him. Not a penalty try.

BoardAtWork

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Its not a yellow or penalty try. He slid in for the ball he was slidding before conway was in possession and he didnt kick conway he slid into him. Not a penalty try.

He kneed Conway before he gathered the ball. If someone can't see that as a penalty, there's no conversation to be had.

Richie_Rich89

BoardAtWork wrote: »

No you cannot. As per Law 13, you may go to ground to collect the ball in your arms, but you cannot go to ground to kick it.

Regardless, the Castres player did not kick the ball, he kicked Conway. It was a clear act of foul play which denied a certain try. It's a yellow card and penalty try.

Players, who go to ground to gather the ball or who go to ground with the ball, must immediately:
Get up with the ball; or
Play (but not kick) the ball; or
Release the ball.
Sanction: Penalty.

It says players who have gone to ground to gather the ball can't then kick it. It doesn't say you can't go to ground to kick it away without gathering it in the first place

The Lost Sheep

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

BoardAtWork wrote: »

He kneed Conway before he gathered the ball. If someone can't see that as a penalty, there's no conversation to be had.

No penalty there. He slid in to contest for ball and with them on ground i wouldnt give a penalty for that.

Jump_In_Jack

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Its not a yellow or penalty try. He slid in for the ball he was slidding before conway was in possession and he didnt kick conway he slid into him. Not a penalty try.

I think the contact made the difference, without making contact with Conway he most likely would have gathered it first time.
I thought at the time it was very similar to interfering with a guy (as in subtly nudging or holding back an arm etc) that is just about to receive a pass close to the line. Often this does get missed, sometimes the ref just waves that it was a knock-on and doesn't bother looking for the replay. Can be very frustrating. Especially if the TMO is consulted and failed to bring it to the ref's attention.
When I saw the contact in real time I assumed it would be a penalty try because it was a sliding tackle on a player gathering the ball into his arms in the process of scoring a try.

Jump_In_Jack

Would it be similar to attacking player in the act of catching a high ball near the try line and the defending player jumping and bumping the attacking player while not close enough to catch the ball?
I think that would be a penalty try also (not talking about a big hit in the air).

Sirius Boner

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Its not a yellow or penalty try. He slid in for the ball he was slidding before conway was in possession and he didnt kick conway he slid into him. Not a penalty try.

That's rubbish and you know it, he led with his feet, he was never getting there first ..the old duty of care goes out the door with some people doesn't it

Henry Ford III

Sirius Boner wrote: »

That's rubbish and you know it, he led with his feet, he was never getting there first ..the old duty of care goes out the door with some people doesn't it

Slide tackles are fine in soccer.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

Jump_In_Jack wrote: »

I think the contact made the difference, without making contact with Conway he most likely would have gathered it first time.
I thought at the time it was very similar to interfering with a guy (as in subtly nudging or holding back an arm etc) that is just about to receive a pass close to the line. Often this does get missed, sometimes the ref just waves that it was a knock-on and doesn't bother looking for the replay. Can be very frustrating. Especially if the TMO is consulted and failed to bring it to the ref's attention.
When I saw the contact in real time I assumed it would be a penalty try because it was a sliding tackle on a player gathering the ball into his arms in the process of scoring a try.

Again, neither player was in possession. The Castres player (can never remember how to spell his name) was fully entitled to slide for the ball in an attempt to clear it into touch.

Slide tackles are allowed in soccer. Slide clearances are allowed in rugby, and often they’ll become (legal) slide tackles where you have two players going for a loose ball.

BoardAtWork

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Again, neither player was in possession. The Castres player (can never remember how to spell his name) was fully entitled to slide for the ball in an attempt to clear it into touch.

Slide tackles are allowed in soccer. Slide clearances are allowed in rugby, and often they’ll become (legal) slide tackles where you have two players going for a loose ball.

No he was not. You are not allowed to kick the ball if you are not on your feet.

The Castres kicked Conway while trying to illegally stop a try.

Caranica

All the internationals in Ireland camp. Will make for an interesting selection on Friday night

Try_harder

https://twitter.com/rugbypass/status/1074560380884652033?s=21

The Lost Sheep

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

Jump_In_Jack wrote: »

I think the contact made the difference, without making contact with Conway he most likely would have gathered it first time.
I thought at the time it was very similar to interfering with a guy (as in subtly nudging or holding back an arm etc) that is just about to receive a pass close to the line. Often this does get missed, sometimes the ref just waves that it was a knock-on and doesn't bother looking for the replay. Can be very frustrating. Especially if the TMO is consulted and failed to bring it to the ref's attention.
When I saw the contact in real time I assumed it would be a penalty try because it was a sliding tackle on a player gathering the ball into his arms in the process of scoring a try.

I dont think it does. It was an entirely fair contest IMO. Player would have been short of line as well so where is the probable try. The contact was fine. If the ball was well into in goal then you can look at possibility of penalty try but not where it happened.

Sirius Boner wrote: »

That's rubbish and you know it, he led with his feet, he was never getting there first ..the old duty of care goes out the door with some people doesn't it

Not rubbish at all. Duty of care hasnt gone out window at all.

Elvisjuice

John Hayes Ligind

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

No penalty there. He slid in to contest for ball and with them on ground i wouldnt give a penalty for that.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1074360029229318144

Jump_In_Jack

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

I dont think it does. It was an entirely fair contest IMO. Player would have been short of line as well so where is the probable try. The contact was fine. If the ball was well into in goal then you can look at possibility of penalty try but not where it happened.

Not rubbish at all. Duty of care hasnt gone out window at all.

I would dig a bit deeper there, a contest would be both players close to winning possession of the ball (either gathering or clearing), but in reality the Castres player wasn't close to the ball and pulled out of the challenge a little late but (while lessening the contact) still made enough contact to upset the player gathering the ball. That was contact about 2 or 3 feet away from where the ball was, i.e. without realistically getting close enough to get at the ball.

Also, you are not allowing for the fact that the ground was very slippery, Conway slid about 5 metres, that has to count in the decision (in terms of how close he was to scoring).

thomond2006

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

https://munsterrugby.ie/2018/12/17/86435-munster-ulster-squad-update/

I'd go for:

Loughman, KOB, Archer, Kleyn, Wycherley, Botha, Oliver, Stander
Mathewson, Johnston, Nash, Bleyendaal, Daly, Wootton, JJH

Sherry, LOC, Parker, DOS, TOD, Williams, Taute, Fitzgerald

Injured: Marshall, Cronin, Scott (tbc), JOD, DOC, Hart, Farrell
Rested: N Scannell, Kilcoyne, Ryan, Beirne, Cloete, Murray, Carbery, R Scannell, Arnold, Earls, Conway, Haley

Munster have named strong sides this season when I didn't expect them to but it would really buck a trend if we saw anything close to a full team go to Belfast. Stander might possibly travel as he was rested versus Edinburgh.
By the sounds of it Goggin and Sweetnam won't make it back for Friday.

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Not rubbish at all. Duty of care hasnt gone out window at all.

It's funny, the last time Andrew Conway and 'duty of care' were mentioned in the same sentence, it was when he broke another player's jaw with his head.

Only back then, people were losing their sh*t at the suggestion that a tackler might have a duty of care not to smash a guy's jaw. Any suggestions to the contrary were sour grapes, moaning and whatever else.

I'm glad the same people are now so concerned for player welfare. A real maturing of our attitudes.

BoardAtWork

Former Former wrote: »

It's funny, the last time Andrew Conway and 'duty of care' were mentioned in the same sentence, it was when he broke another player's jaw with his head.

Only back then, people were losing their sh*t at the suggestion that a tackler might have a duty of care not to smash a guy's jaw. Any suggestions to the contrary were sour grapes, moaning and whatever else.

I'm glad the same people are now so concerned for player welfare. A real maturing of our attitudes.