Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

SA vs Ireland First Test 2024 - The World Champions vs The Best Team in the World

1151618202124

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    As opposed to your constant bashing of our own players?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    It was a clear and obvious infringement. He clearly touched the ball with his foot. But it is good enough at this level to ignore clear and obvious infringement at the ruck and award a try instead? Again, cant understand the logic in that.

    Whether he intentionally or accidentally hooked the ball accidentally isn't relevant though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,842 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    Inevitably devolves into ref bashing here. What about the decisions that went out way? Bet ye don't remember any of them.

    Of the big moments.....

    Kelleher played the ball on the ground, sometimes get away with that but it was spotted, a bit unlucky but can't complain.

    Lowe kept that ball in play and it backfired, showed good skill to do it but didn't have support. Can't blame him for trying. Ball left his hand just before door hit the ground.

    Lowe made a mess of the ball in goal and conceded a scrum which we got smashed in. SA would have scored there in all probability.

    If the Irish team complain about the ref and dont concentrate on getting better then we are screwed. But they will move on and work on their own game.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    No, you’re wrong. It wasn’t deemed a penalty for playing it with his feet, it was the fact he was deemed to be on the ground when playing it with his feet that was deemed the penalty.

    What a more competent ref might have considered was the arm wrapped squarely around Kelleher’s neck at the time which was dragging him to ground - an obvious Irish penalty. The notion that he’s dexterous enough to be able to see that ball and play it back with his feet there while he’s got an arm wrapped around his neck is farcical.

    Try should have have stood - I don’t think he deliberately played it with his feet.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    It ridiculous to suggest a more competent referees should ignore an infringement. Again, whether he did deliberately or not is irrelevant. Being fouled doesn't give a player the right to commit an infringement themselves either.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    You said earlier “whether he intentionally or accidentally hooked the ball, accidentally isn’t relevant though” - which is completely factually wrong.

    If the ball came off his heel as he was being wrought to ground around the neck and he had no knowledge of it whatsoever then he didn’t commit any kind of infringement at all and the try should have stood.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    It's not factually wrong. A player must not play the ball when they are on the ground. That's the law. He played the ball on the ground when he was off his feet. That's an infringement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,759 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    Play Prendergast?

    Aren’t you the poster who, a few weeks ago, said it’d be too much of a risk to play Haley?

    Ya….



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    Yeah, but the very term “play” the ball while on the ground indicates an awareness and a conscious decision being taken. If you look at that ruck, he’s facing the touchline and has Willie le Roux actively neck rolling him to the ground as the ball incidentally comes off his heel, in a ruck where Ireland had comprehensively won and arguably already should have had a penalty for Aki being on the ball.
    It was marginal whether he was even on the ground when the ball came off his heel, but there is no way to me it was intentional.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,861 ✭✭✭Pepp1989


    Ben Whitehouse always over interferes as tmo. Sometimes in your favour sometimes not. If you go back for offences like Kellehers then so many tries would be disallowed. They leave them go mostly otherwise the system doesn't work



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    It’s the fact he reviewed that ruck and emerged with a SA penalty, when there were at least one and arguably two Irish penalties prior to that that makes it especially egregious.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,349 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    A key element of assessing what is worth a risk is potential reward.

    The reward of playing a 30 year old who couldnt take a provincial jersey from an unfit retiree is near zero.

    I don't agree with exposing Prendergast to this tour environment but it is not at all far fetched for someone to believe fast tracking one of our best young talents in a position of shallow depth is worth a risk.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


     Again, whether he did deliberately or not is irrelevant

    It's not irrelevant. It was bizarre to come out of that with the decision of a penalty to SA. Also the Snyman tackle was a stone cold penalty. But Whitehouse is just a dreadful TMO so it's hardly surprising.

    Anyway, sure look, the biggest screw up by anyone in the stadium was Lowe's mishandling of the kickoff after our second try. I think we had a real chance to push on and win the game without that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,819 ✭✭✭Dubinusa




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,842 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    Id play Prendergast if he is deemed good enough, at least give him a bench spot.

    Plenty of players have debuted at his age and younger. We are slow to bring through young players in Ireland. He will be the Leinster first choice 10 in a few months time.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,349 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    10 is so key that I'm not sure he has enough time in camp and reps in training to have everything needed down to perform. Backs are likely to be pretty disjointed too given the injuries.

    As for other national teams, not many top sides give debuts to such young and inexperienced players away on tours against the world champions. This isn't like doing it against the likes of Argentina or Canada.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,759 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    The “unfit retiree’s” end of season form really seems to have annoyed someone. 😂



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    It doesn't though. If they wanted the rule to just include intentional plays of the ball they have have used the word "intentional". People deciding to interrupt the rule becuase it suits isn't how the laws are to be implemented.

    It is irrelevant. The law says nothing about intentionally playing the ball. I agree in the penalty to SA being wrong decision. But the idea that the try should have been allowed just doesn't make any sense.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,349 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Yeah, I presume it annoyed Haley for sure.

    For all the continued moaning from some posters about Haley's exclusion, the end of season reaffirmed why Haley hasn't been in AF's plans.

    With the solid to good performance of Osbourne I can't seeing Haley making his way back in as a 30 year old.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,819 ✭✭✭Dubinusa


    Is that officiating crew going to be in charge this week?



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    "playing the ball" is an intentional act. It is in the definitions of the Laws

    image.png


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 497 ✭✭Cateym


    My intention is not to bash referees but Whitehouse seemed to be constantly talking in Pearce's ear. Is that the norm for him? I've never been so aware of it until this match. That's why I'm wondering if there are any actual rugby refs on here to give their informed and knowledgeable opinions of some of the decisions that people seem aggrieved by.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,759 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    If you’re going to refer to Zebo as “unfit retiree” rather than acknowledge his excellent form then I don’t think you’re arguing in good faith.

    In which case I’ve no interest in arguing. Enjoy!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    Maybe try actually reading the laws before you spout off on here again like this.

    The very definition of playing the ball, as I said in my prior post, requires an intentional act.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Yes it's normal. You don't normally hear it on the audio feed unless there is a TMO check.

    Whitehouse errs on the side of being more interventionist than most I would say for minor technical things. He's not great at foul play.



  • Posts: 10,091 ✭✭✭✭ Kamila Echoing Ringleader


    All of the fbs in the squad have been simularly "excluded"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,842 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    I think this needs someone to find the law in question and post it before saying whether or not accidental playing the ball is still playing the ball.

    Can't say things like 'the very definition' when we are not the ones tasked with writing or upholding the laws without posting proof.

    For what it's worth, I don't know the answer



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,713 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Here's the Snyman/Casey incident.

    For me, he initially gets a hand on Casey but then there's a totally separate tackle and follow-through after the ball is gone, and he drives through far more than is reasonable before slamming him into the turf. It's 100% intentional and Whitehouse calling it a 'collision' was absolutely mental.

    And even though it's obvious Casey is f**ked and play has stopped, RGS doesn't even check on him. Why not? Because he knows exactly what he's done, and he even gets a high-five from his team-mate. Why would you high-five someone for an innocent, accidental collision?

    Maybe it's just a coincidence but the play immediately prior to this was Casey sticking a brilliant 50-22 into SA territory, followed by a few whoops and fist-bumps. I'd imagine the SA lads didn't like that. But I'm sure that's just coincidence.

    Said it on the Leinster thread, I would rather we never see Snyman on these shores again. If he does his cruciate again, that's absolutely fine by me.

    And once again I'm not seeing any evidence that he's nearly as good a player as he's been painted. The incessant claim that he's a world-class game changer is Emperor's New Clothes levels of delusion.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    Point 14 here states simply playing the ball with the feet is permitted in the ruck. While that’s what the poster claimed the penalty was originally for (and he seems to have been confused on this point), that wasn’t the case, they pinged him for playing it with his feet while he was off his feet.

    https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/law/15

    Podge posted the definition of “playing the ball” on the prior page.

    As I said previously, the idea that he’s intentionally playing the ball while he’s been neck rolled and facing the wrong direction to me looks nonsensical.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 32,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    It is similar, though worse, then what he did to Healy against Edinburgh. There was at least a plausible argument he was committed there (though I don't for a second believe he is).

    He resets here to tackle him after the ball is gone. It was a stone cold penalty at the least. The outcome was somewhat unfortunate, but he knew exactly what he was doing.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement