Lions vs Highlanders

Unreal block on Henshaw there for their first try.

redmca2

Amazing how the media are knocking the team who played yesterday as if they played complete crap, and that the gulf between them and the emerging test side is so wide .......

All it would have taken to completely change this nonsense is for Farrell (a test team player of course) to slot what was for him the simplest of penalties. Once he missed (and Daly too) the prophets of doom are having a field day.

blackdog1

Deleted User wrote:

Unreal block on Henshaw there for their first try.

Henshaw made the wrong call on defender and switched too late. If he was going to get the winger he would have run at the opposite side of the 2nd row. Even if he didn't get touched I'd say he wouldn't have been able to complete that tackle he was too far up and running at speed.

Yeah_Right

blackdog1 wrote: »

Henshaw made the wrong call on defender and switched too late. If he was going to get the winger he would have run at the opposite side of the 2nd row. Even if he didn't get touched I'd say he wouldn't have been able to complete that tackle he was too far up and running at speed.

I agree. Henshaw sprints up expecting the HB to pass to the pod of forwards (including Ainley) for a short drive at the line. The ball goes behind them to Naholo and Henshaw has to change his line. Ainley does obstruct him but he read the play wrong first.

Yeah_Right

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I agree. Henshaw sprints up expecting the HB to pass to the pod of forwards (including Ainley) for a short drive at the line. The ball goes behind them to Naholo and Henshaw has to change his line. Ainley does obstruct him but he read the play wrong first.

I may be an old-fashioned purist but as far as I am concerned if you're ahead of the ball and getting in the way of any player attempting to get to the ball carrier it should be a penalty automatically.

Modern rugby is cursed with this fashion for flooding the area ahead of the ball carrier with dummy runners (blockers) and then capitalising on the resulting confusion. Half the tries you see are scored in this fashion, and it seems to be pinged on a very inconsistent basis.

Former Former

Ah it was a penalty as clear as day. The second row moves across into Henshaw's path. What Henshaw might or might not have done without the block is irrelevant under the rules.

And Henshaw is right up to the ref as soon as it's scored, it should have gone to the TMO.

Former Former

Former Former wrote: »

Ah it was a penalty as clear as day. The second row moves across into Henshaw's path. What Henshaw might or might not have done without the block is irrelevant under the rules.

And Henshaw is right up to the ref as soon as it's scored, it should have gone to the TMO.

Indeed. Not only does he move across Henshaw's path but he's clearly looking for the run and very deliberately playing the block. It's not american football, there's no reason for him to be there and there's no possible reason that once he is there he shouldn't have his hands in the air and remain passive until he can come back onside away from play.

I'd have no issue with the laws being tightened up on this kind of nonsense, it's completely cynical and against the spirit of the game - yellow card. I know that's not going to happen, it's just what I would do....

bluedex

Deleted User wrote: »

Indeed. Not only does he move across Henshaw's path but he's clearly looking for the run and very deliberately playing the block. It's not american football, there's no reason for him to be there and there's no possible reason that once he is there he shouldn't have his hands in the air and remain passive until he can come back onside away from play.

I'd have no issue with the laws being tightened up on this kind of nonsense, it's completely cynical and against the spirit of the game - yellow card. I know that's not going to happen, it's just what I would do....

The game is turning into a version of american football, there's blockers all over the place (illegally) in every game. NZ started this trend years back and everyone does it now, you see it regularly in the Pro12.
In fairness, it's done because it's so hard to find space now with modern defense systems and the hard rush line, but if the offside line was policed properly by the officials this would be much less of an issue.

sydthebeat

bluedex wrote: »

The game is turning into a version of american football, there's blockers all over the place (illegally) in every game. NZ started this trend years back and everyone does it now, you see it regularly in the Pro12.
In fairness, it's done because it's so hard to find space now with modern defense systems and the hard rush line, but if the offside line was policed properly by the officials this would be much less of an issue.

No offside line in open play....

I agree that it's a result of the speed of defenses, but at the same rate Defenders shouldn't be able to scream for penalties when they run into an attacking player who has been missed in the pass.
Was Henshaw illegally blocked, yeah probably simply because ainley looked up and took a step into the line.
But similar incidents happen all over the field which aren't called because it is as much clever attacking play as poor defensive reading.

Yeah_Right

Former Former wrote: »

Ah it was a penalty as clear as day. The second row moves across into Henshaw's path. What Henshaw might or might not have done without the block is irrelevant under the rules.

And Henshaw is right up to the ref as soon as it's scored, it should have gone to the TMO.

It was checked. You can hear the ref say "we looked at it and there was nothing wrong" or something like that.

It's one of those ones that if it happened against my team I'd believe it was a penalty but as it happened in favour of my team I don't think it affected the play.

irishbucsfan

I suppose AWJ should have been penalised for Warburtn's try as well. Swings and roundabouts I suppose

Former Former

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I suppose AWJ should have been penalised for Warburtn's try as well. Swings and roundabouts I suppose

Yeah, definitely.

But still, the Kiwis are big cheating bastards and it's all a conspiracy. I think that's the key take away here.

crisco10

Yeah_Right wrote: »

It was checked. You can hear the ref say "we looked at it and there was nothing wrong" or something like that.

It's one of those ones that if it happened against my team I'd believe it was a penalty but as it happened in favour of my team I don't think it affected the play.

Yeah, the TMO was checking it while the conversion was being lined up and you could hear the ref confirming with him that he was happy it didn't make a difference.

I wasn't happy with it at the time, but then I remembered when the shoe was on the other foot with Ringrose against Australia in November, I thought the try standing was a reasonable call. I.e. its a 50/50 call which is coloured by your allegiance.

cameramonkey

Buer wrote: »

100% obstruction. Not to be a sook (I really do like that word), Ainley sees Henshaw coming up to make the tackle and jumps in front of him to block his path to Naholo. It's as clear as day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zZ6VM6yyzk&t=1m9s

AW jones took out their number 3 for the Sam Warburton try.

cameramonkey

cameramonkey wrote: »

AW jones took out their number 3 for the Sam Warburton try.

Yes, he did.

From my perspective this isn't about NZ being cheats and 'we' are not. Everyone does it, all the time (as I said in my post, it's everywhere).

The issue for me is that an international referee can look at that incident, see a player positioning himself ahead of the ball, looking carefully at the defensive line, who then clearly moves into the line of the defending player seeking to make a tackle - and say no penalty.

What next? Answer - American football.

If the belief is that there isn't enough space in the modern game etc etc, then do something meaningful about that rather than let players cheat 'a bit' on an inconsistent basis - so that games effectively become a lottery (and not rugby)

swiwi_

The off-side rule needs to be enforced. Gardiner did rule a few offsides, I think Raynal kept his whilstle in his pocket - both the Lions and the Crusaders seemed in front of the hindmost foot fairly often - result: stifling defence.

IMHO I think it probably should have been a penalty, I don't think the laws state that obstruction is only a penalty if it clearly stops a try being scored. But as stated, AWJ did a number for Warburton's try too.

Refs don't get it right 100% time, as mentioned multiple times by multiples posters throughout the years.

bluedex

sydthebeat wrote: »

No offside line in open play....

Yes, thank you, I think we all know that!
The general point is that offside is not policed well enough, particularly by TJs, so space is harder to find. This then results is teams using other "less legal" methods of creating space for runners, one of which is blocking - sometimes subtle and sometimes not so - giving us the current situation which seem quasi NFL at times.
Another good one is holding people in a ruck, which you mostly get away it - unless you're playing a European Semi-final in France and you're the away team ;-)

Yeah_Right

Former Former wrote: »

But still, the Kiwis are big cheating bastards and it's all a conspiracy. I think that's the key take away here.

Innovative or cheating?

I don't mind being called a cheating bastard as long as you call me a cheating Kiwi bastard. And not an Aussie like that ****er Awec did :mad:

swiwi_

bluedex wrote: »

Yes, thank you, I think we all know that!
The general point is that offside is not policed well enough, particularly by TJs, so space is harder to find. This then results is teams using other "less legal" methods of creating space for runners, one of which is blocking - sometimes subtle and sometimes not so - giving us the current situation which seem quasi NFL at times.
Another good one is holding people in a ruck, which you mostly get away it - unless you're playing a European Semi-final in France and you're the away team ;-)

Or cleaning out beyond the ruck. Hate that. I would be known as Hitler on that score if I was a ref.

swiwi_

swiwi_ wrote: »

Or cleaning out beyond the ruck. Hate that. I would be known as Hitler on that score if I was a ref.

Don't get me started

I genuinely believe that as fitness and conditioning has improved, and professional defences have got more organised, there's been a general trend to gloss over the problems that causes by giving attacking teams leeway when it comes to the laws. Clearing out ahead of the ruck is a classic example - it happens ALL the time and tries are scored because of it ALL the time (could argue AWJ was a form of this in the game under discussion).

The problem with that is it gets reffed in an almost random fashion, players and viewers don't know where they are and games become a lottery.

I would prefer to see laws strictly enforced and the game look at more radical solutions like weight limits or (gulp) removing a player from each team.

(edited) or just changing the laws - if the attacking team needs help give it to them in a consistent way. Maybe my first post was too radical!

pickarooney

You know what other games has fewer players?

American football.

And rugby league, soccer, netball, camogie, baseball, badminton, coxless pairs, gymnastics, korfball, curling and padel.

Ardillaun

Too much furious gesticulating at the ref these days for penalties e.g. Biggar at 9:20. A bit soccerish.
I still think NFL-style graphics could help the TMO police offside.