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

Preview Thread -RaboDirect Pro12 Final - RDS, 25th May, 1645 - live on RTE2/TG4/BBCNI

Options
1…161718192022»

Comments

  • Options
    #632
    Grimebox
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,997 ✭✭✭Grimebox


    McEnemy is a very unfortunate name for a ref


  • Options
    #633
    tolosenc
    Registered Users Posts: 6,889 ✭✭✭tolosenc


    Leinster to lay their Rabo final hoodoo to rest?
    awec wrote: »
    The Healy / Afoa incident was another one. For the 3 points you got just before half time Healy held on to Afoa's leg right in front of Clancy to stop Afoa moving and getting involved in tackling.

    Literally Afoa standing up, Healy lying at his feet with his arms around one leg stopping Afoa from moving. Deliberately and illegally preventing him getting involved in defence. He wasn't even trying to bring Afoa to ground, he was literally acting as a dead weight on Afoa's foot. Yards away from Lacey who had a full and clear view of it.

    And Lacey gave the penalty to Leinster?

    Leinster had advantage at that point. If he'd spotted it, Lacey would have blown it up and gone back for the penalty to Leinster. I can see why you'd be upset if Leinster had scored a try, but as it happened, there was ultimately nothing amiss about that call.


  • Options
    #634
    Grimebox
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,997 ✭✭✭Grimebox


    I could easily see a completely different call being made by the ref. Healy clearly was in the wrong but Afoa taking the law into his own hands like that could have (should have...?) had him sent off


  • Options
    #635
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,553 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    tolosenc wrote: »
    Leinster had advantage at that point. If he'd spotted it, Lacey would have blown it up and gone back for the penalty to Leinster. I can see why you'd be upset if Leinster had scored a try, but as it happened, there was ultimately nothing amiss about that call.

    Are you sure Leinster had advantage at the point? I'm not sure they did.


  • Options
    #636
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,553 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    I don't want to sound like a sore loser btw, Leinster were definitely the better team and I do not begrudge you victory.

    But I am far from happy with Lacey's performance and I think he cost us on the day. He wasn't the only thing to cost us - step forward Robbie Diack - but he cost us none the less with some ridiculous calls IMO.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #637
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    I think Laceys generally a good ref. I can only remember one other time when I wasn't happy with his performance and I can't even remember when that was!

    But unfortunately the Ulster boys are not quick to forgive a ref, as Allain Rolland will attest to, so Lacey will probably get a lot if stick up north for the rest of his career.


  • Options
    #638
    Buer
    Registered Users Posts: 24,197 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    awec wrote: »
    Are you sure Leinster had advantage at the point? I'm not sure they did.

    Yup, advantage was from a few phases beforehand.


  • Options
    #639
    Vetinarugbian
    Registered Users Posts: 30 ✭Vetinarugbian


    Did anybody else see that from mid second half Madigan did not play at 12 at all but was firmly stationed at the back of every ruck and maul with Boss?
    I assume this wasn't accidental and him being greedy but it did seem strange to me and I would have thought it annoyed Boss or was it a case of Leinster just keeping it tight and Boss playing as an extra forward. Madigan was rarely outt at 12 and niether was the ball.
    Am i the only person that spotted that. i know people accuse Madigan of being a bit greedy at times but if this was done off his own bat it was strange to the say the least and brought greedy and ill disciplined to a whole new level......... or was it just me??!!


  • Options
    #640
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Vetinarugbian wrote: »
    Did anybody else see that from mid second half Madigan did not play at 12 at all but was firmly stationed at the back of every ruck and maul with Boss?
    I assume this wasn't accidental and him being greedy but it did seem strange to me and I would have thought it annoyed Boss or was it a case of Leinster just keeping it tight and Boss playing as an extra forward. Madigan was rarely outt at 12 and niether was the ball.
    Am i the only person that spotted that. i know people accuse Madigan of being a bit greedy at times but if this was done off his own bat it was strange to the say the least and brought greedy and ill disciplined to a whole new level......... or was it just me??!!

    Moved this post here, cuz we don't really need a thread on it.

    Was this during the period when we had no FB? Didn't really noticed it myself tbh.


  • Options
    #641
    durkadurka
    Registered Users Posts: 6,207 ✭✭✭durkadurka


    I noticed it in the last few minutes. I though he swapped positions with Johnny.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #642
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,256 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Definitely not madigan being 'greedy'... At that stage we were under force pressure and we were being reduced to one out plays...this meant that boss was getting a lot more involved in counter rucking, and he was making snipings himself. There was a few incidents where madigan had to run across from 12 to play scrum half. Then, whether be design or otherwise, he floated around that area allowing boss to play as an extra forward.


  • Options
    #643
    Tox56
    Registered Users Posts: 11,636 ✭✭✭✭Tox56


    Leinster to lay their Rabo final hoodoo to rest?
    Apoligies if this has already been said but the Afoa/Healy thing could easiy have gone against Ulster. Healy definitely provoked him and deserved what he got but Afoa's reaction could/should have seen any potential penalty reversed. Like the Trimble/Williams incident last week, people wanted Williams sent off despite Trimble clearly being the one who provoked Williams. Afoa's retaliation wasn't as severe as Williams', but Healy's provocation wasn't as serious as Trimble's punch.


  • Options
    #644
    CatFromHue
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    awec wrote: »
    I don't want to sound like a sore loser btw, Leinster were definitely the better team and I do not begrudge you victory.

    But I am far from happy with Lacey's performance and I think he cost us on the day. He wasn't the only thing to cost us - step forward Robbie Diack - but he cost us none the less with some ridiculous calls IMO.

    There were one or two possible wrong calls but the vast majority were correct.


  • Options
    #645
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    Found this on my phone, should be shared.

    I'm the guy shouting 'one more year' for Isa btw..:D

    Enjoy..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVh2S8xuV9c


  • Options
    #646
    lotmc
    Registered Users Posts: 216 ✭✭lotmc


    Grimebox wrote: »
    I could easily see a completely different call being made by the ref. Healy clearly was in the wrong but Afoa taking the law into his own hands like that could have (should have...?) had him sent off

    Schalk Brits reaction to being held by Farrell in today's Lions match was a little more violent than Afoa's lashing out at Healy, but its worth noting that today's ref (Steve Walsh) was clear that he would have red carded Brits were it not for the nature of today's match......

    Afoa was very lucky to stay on the field....


  • Options
    #647
    rockbeast
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,548 ✭✭✭rockbeast


    lotmc wrote: »
    Schalk Brits reaction to being held by Farrell in today's Lions match was a little more violent than Afoa's lashing out at Healy, but its worth noting that today's ref (Steve Walsh) was clear that he would have red carded Brits were it not for the nature of today's match......

    Afoa was very lucky to stay on the field....

    Was sure i remembered "retaliation" and "third man in" being punished more severely or equally to original offence or am I mistaking that for GAA?


  • Options
    #648
    Dave_The_Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 7,342 ✭✭✭Dave_The_Sheep


    Leinster to lay their Rabo final hoodoo to rest?
    rockbeast wrote: »
    Was sure i remembered "retaliation" and "third man in" being punished more severely or equally to original offence or am I mistaking that for GAA?

    I thought that was the case too. I was surprised Farrell wasn't carded too and the penalty to go to the BaaBaas. Yeah, it was an open handed short range jab, but still.


  • Options
    #649
    Buer
    Registered Users Posts: 24,197 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    rockbeast wrote: »
    Was sure i remembered "retaliation" and "third man in" being punished more severely or equally to original offence or am I mistaking that for GAA?

    Generally but there's no law to state it that I'm aware of. Good example is Lewis Moody's red card on the tackle by Tuilagi in Twickers.


  • Options
    #650
    danthefan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    Buer wrote: »
    Generally but there's no law to state it that I'm aware of. Good example is Lewis Moody's red card on the tackle by Tuilagi in Twickers.

    Well Moody wasn't tackled and he just starting throwing crazy amounts of punches so in a test match that's a red card.


  • Options
    #651
    Buer
    Registered Users Posts: 24,197 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    danthefan wrote: »
    Well Moody wasn't tackled and he just starting throwing crazy amounts of punches so in a test match that's a red card.

    Yes but he was the third man in i.e. not the one involved in the original incident.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #652
    Taco Corp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,718 ✭✭✭Taco Corp


    Buer wrote: »
    Generally but there's no law to state it that I'm aware of. Good example is Lewis Moody's red card on the tackle by Tuilagi in Twickers.
    there actually is a law that covers retaliation, basically don't retaliate or it's a penalty. 10.4 (l)

    http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?law=10


  • Options
    #653
    Buer
    Registered Users Posts: 24,197 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    Captain_Hindsight wrote: »
    there actually is a law that covers retaliation, basically don't retaliate or it's a penalty. 10.4 (l)

    http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?law=10
    Yes, but I was responding directly to the post in question i.e. there's no law to state that he who retaliates should carry the can specifically. It's a all very much left open to interpretation as, in fairness, it should be.


  • Options
    #654
    rockbeast
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,548 ✭✭✭rockbeast


    Captain_Hindsight wrote: »
    there actually is a law that covers retaliation, basically don't retaliate or it's a penalty. 10.4 (l)

    http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?law=10

    So, YC Brits and pen to BaaBaas OR YC both and pen to BaaBaas OR YC Brits, RC Farrell and Pen to Lions?

    What would your interpretation be for today's incident?


Advertisement