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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Munster vs Connacht, Fri 14th May 6pm; Eir Sport

1234568»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,262 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    Zzippy wrote: »
    Munster had a penalty advantage, which arguably they could have lost once JOD went after Papali'i. He went back for a Munster penalty. He didn't penalise anyone involved in the scrap, because it was silly handbags that all involved in should know better. Ye had the penalty lads. Someone else has posted about the Munster subs scrapping in another incident. Bleating on and on about the subs is just sour grapes.

    except he didnt, connacht got the penalty for obstruction even though advantage was being played still


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    except he didnt, connacht got the penalty for obstruction even though advantage was being played still

    Play restarted with munster penalty. IIRC they took a scrum 5m out in fairly central position.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,038 ✭✭✭TomsOnTheRoof


    This place is laughable. The amount of supporters from other provinces having a go over, what was up until Friday, a "makey uppy" cup. Semantic arguments left right and centre. We'll be convening a tribunal next to investigate remarks about the referee.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,262 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    Burkie1203 wrote: »
    Play restarted with munster penalty. IIRC they took a scrum 5m out in fairly central position.

    sorry you are indeed correct, indicated penalty to connacht first but gave it (eventually) to munster


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    sorry you are indeed correct, indicated penalty to connacht first but gave it (eventually) to munster

    :)


    Ref should have restarted with a connacht Penalty. JOD was going after AP for absolutely no reason, AP had zero interest in getting involved.

    Stander was whining about all the connacht subs getting involved and the score being chalked off. IMO the ref got it badly wrong about the connacht subs starting it. Don't think it was reviewed fully when it should have been.



    https://twitter.com/threeredkings/status/1393350806796185602?s=19

    https://twitter.com/threeredkings/status/1393359437050617856?s=19


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,817 ✭✭✭b.gud


    There's only one solution left for this thread

    giphy.gif


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,262 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    Burkie1203 wrote: »
    :)
    Ref should have restarted with a connacht Penalty. JOD was going after AP for absolutely no reason, AP had zero interest in getting involved.

    afaik its only 'dangerous' play that can overturn advantage though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    afaik its only 'dangerous' play that can overturn advantage though.


    **** from World Rugby website *****
    9 Foul play


    A player who commits foul play must either be cautioned or temporarily suspended or sent off.

    Obstruction


    When a player and an opponent are running for the ball, neither player may charge or push the other except shoulder-to-shoulder.

    An offside player must not intentionally obstruct an opponent or interfere with play.

    A player must not intentionally prevent an opponent from tackling or attempting to tackle the ball-carrier.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,363 ✭✭✭✭phog


    Sorry folks, to the posters who like to chat about the game, etc, I should have listened to my own advice which I've given out a few times, don't give them oxygen.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,262 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    Burkie1203 wrote: »
    **** from World Rugby website *****
    9 Foul play


    A player who commits foul play must either be cautioned or temporarily suspended or sent off.

    Obstruction


    When a player and an opponent are running for the ball, neither player may charge or push the other except shoulder-to-shoulder.

    An offside player must not intentionally obstruct an opponent or interfere with play.

    A player must not intentionally prevent an opponent from tackling or attempting to tackle the ball-carrier.

    not disagreeing with that, but i dont see what your point is tbh? like i said, as far as i know it has to be a dangerous incident to overturn advantage (could be wrong on this). JOD might have been acting the dick but i wouldnt say it was dangerous play, if he had thrown a punch/slap itd be different


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    not disagreeing with that, but i dont see what your point is tbh? like i said, as far as i know it has to be a dangerous incident to overturn advantage (could be wrong on this). JOD might have been acting the dick but i wouldnt say it was dangerous play, if he had thrown a punch/slap itd be different

    Generally speaking an act of foul play would supercede a technical penalty (offside in this case).

    Marmion got rightly pinged for throwing the ball at Healy not much earlier.

    I think the game should have restarted with a connacht pen after the disallowed Try.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,496 ✭✭✭irishgrover


    Q1: Has there every been an interpro thread that does not need to be shot in the head after a few weeks.
    Q2: Will Connacht ever actually win an interpro where one or more of the following conditions dont apply
    • It's a nothing game
    • The tournament was already won/lost
    • The other team was concentrating on Europe
    • The other team had their 2nds/3rd out
    • The ref was an absolute disgrace
    • Sure it's in the middle of the international window

    Connacht have won a dair few, and lost a fair few more interpros over the years. However I really can't remember actually winning any because they were the better team would played better rugby and scored more points becuase of it...

    PS: This post is not targeting any individuals, or even this thread, its more of a general observation which applies to fans, experts, pundits, Media etc
    By and large Connacht never win anything, the other team throw it away etc


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,262 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    Burkie1203 wrote: »
    Generally speaking an act of foul play would supercede a technical penalty (offside in this case).

    Marmion got rightly pinged for throwing the ball at Healy not much earlier.

    I think the game should have restarted with a connacht pen after the disallowed Try.[/QUOTE]

    in fairness, JOD had been given a slap (mightve even been an elbow) to the head by AP so i think they more or less cancelled each other out, nothing in the shoving etc from a dangerous play point of view.

    however AP getting shoved out of the way helps the try being scored so advantage over and back for the original penalty.


    marmions try was very questionable, the tap from oliver definitely looked marginal at best


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,328 ✭✭✭theVersatile


    See Burkie, the problem with that is:

    Law 9.7:
    A player must not: a. Intentionally infringe any law of the game.

    That would mean that if foul play cancelled advantage, then pretty much ANY PENALTY would cancel a previous advantage, which is obviously false.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    See Burkie, the problem with that is:

    Law 9.7:
    A player must not: a. Intentionally infringe any law of the game.

    That would mean that if foul play cancelled advantage, then pretty much ANY PENALTY would cancel a previous advantage, which is obviously false.

    Cannot remember the game but about 5 years ago Nigel restarted a game with a penalty after an act of foul play (a high tackle) during a penalty advantage (by the team with the advantage for hands in the ruck). I remember him explaining that foul play supercedes the technical penalty.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203



    in fairness, JOD had been given a slap (mightve even been an elbow) to the head by AP so i think they more or less cancelled each other out, nothing in the shoving etc from a dangerous play point of view.

    however AP getting shoved out of the way helps the try being scored so advantage over and back for the original penalty.


    marmions try was very questionable, the tap from oliver definitely looked marginal at best


    AP uses his left hand, with an open palm and gives JOD a fairly tame slap on the head to free himself so he can get back in the defensive line. JOD then gets up and takes AP out of the game which is an act of foul play.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Shaka Hislop




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,597 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Here’s a really interesting case of inattentive blindness. Everyone is looking so hard for the’knock on’ that overturned Conways try, that nobody noticed Daly lying on the ground on the wrong side of the ruck, , holding the Munster player and preventing him from presenting the ball,

    Connacht player diving off his feet and lying on Klein and putting his hands into the ruck to knock the ball away the ball was very possible knocked back by a Connacht player but there were 3 other penalty infringements by Connacht in this short passage and all of them were ignored in favour of a possible (certainly not obvious) Munster knock on
    https://twitter.com/threeredkings/status/1393345803968724995?s=21


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Maurice Chubby Thimble


    Akrasia wrote: »
    Here’s a really interesting case of inattentive blindness. Everyone is looking so hard for the’knock on’ that overturned Conways try, that nobody noticed Daly lying on the ground on the wrong side of the ruck, , holding the Munster player and preventing him from presenting the ball,

    Connacht player diving off his feet and lying on Klein and putting his hands into the ruck to knock the ball away the ball was very possible knocked back by a Connacht player but there were 3 other penalty infringements by Connacht in this short passage and all of them were ignored in favour of a possible (certainly not obvious) Munster knock on
    https://twitter.com/threeredkings/status/1393345803968724995?s=21

    Bahahahaha


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,817 ✭✭✭b.gud


    Akrasia wrote: »
    Here’s a really interesting case of inattentive blindness. Everyone is looking so hard for the’knock on’ that overturned Conways try, that nobody noticed Daly lying on the ground on the wrong side of the ruck, , holding the Munster player and preventing him from presenting the ball,

    My guess is no one noticed Daly because he's not in that ruck ;)
    Akrasia wrote: »
    Connacht player diving off his feet and lying on Klein and putting his hands into the ruck to knock the ball away the ball was very possible knocked back by a Connacht player but there were 3 other penalty infringements by Connacht in this short passage and all of them were ignored in favour of a possible (certainly not obvious) Munster knock on
    https://twitter.com/threeredkings/status/1393345803968724995?s=21

    I'm not really sure the point you're trying to make here. The TMO check was if there was a knock on in the build up to the try. All the "offences" you highlighted would have zero impact on whether or not the try was allowed. Let's say they were all legitimate penalties then it would have been advantage Munster and that advantage would have been over when the TMO and ref deemed Munster to have knocked it on and the try would still have been disallowed.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 453 ✭✭Former Coach


    Q1: Has there every been an interpro thread that does not need to be shot in the head after a few weeks.
    Q2: Will Connacht ever actually win an interpro where one or more of the following conditions dont apply
    • It's a nothing game
    • The tournament was already won/lost
    • The other team was concentrating on Europe
    • The other team had their 2nds/3rd out
    • The ref was an absolute disgrace
    • Sure it's in the middle of the international window

    Connacht have won a dair few, and lost a fair few more interpros over the years. However I really can't remember actually winning any because they were the better team would played better rugby and scored more points becuase of it...

    PS: This post is not targeting any individuals, or even this thread, its more of a general observation which applies to fans, experts, pundits, Media etc
    By and large Connacht never win anything, the other team throw it away etc
    Pro12 Final springs to mind!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,450 ✭✭✭Wegians89


    Pro12 Final springs to mind!

    Munster fans don’t count finals as they have seen a their team win one in ages


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Shaka Hislop


    Wegians89 wrote: »
    Munster fans don’t count finals as they have seen a their team win one in ages

    Anyone else read that in Luigi from The Simpsons accent?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    This ****e about Papali'i "slapping" O'Donoghue is absolute hysterics. Has anyone actually watched the clip?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,262 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    Bazzo wrote: »
    This ****e about Papali'i "slapping" O'Donoghue is absolute hysterics. Has anyone actually watched the clip?

    i dunno what you mean tbh, he slapped JOD because he was holding onto his leg and then JOD shoved him. Nothing in it between the two of them but its what happened, from the rear angle it looked like there mightve been an elbow but the front angle is clearer and shows there wasnt


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    i dunno what you mean tbh, he slapped JOD because he was holding onto his leg and then JOD shoved him. Nothing in it between the two of them but its what happened, from the rear angle it looked like there mightve been an elbow but the front angle is clearer and shows there wasnt

    He barely touched him, describing it as a "slap" makes it sound like there was even a modicum of force in it. And it certainly didn't warrant any reaction, never mind what O'Donoghue came out with. Especially considering O'Donoghue was the one who had been acting the bollox holding him beyond the ruck in the first place.

    Anyway I really didn't want to weigh in on this train wreck of a thread I've just seen that incident described as a "slap" (possibly starting with three red kings) quite a bit and found it laughable.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,262 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    Bazzo wrote: »
    He barely touched him, describing it as a "slap" makes it sound like there was even a modicum of force in it. And it certainly didn't warrant any reaction, never mind what O'Donoghue came out with. Especially considering O'Donoghue was the one who had been acting the bollox holding him beyond the ruck in the first place.

    i dunno what else you would call it? it was a light slap, but a slap. JOD (over)reacted but nothing in it either way in terms of anything dangerous, since it ended up taking a player out of the game then it was fair enough that the try was disallowed


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,231 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Bazzo wrote: »
    This ****e about Papali'i "slapping" O'Donoghue is absolute hysterics. Has anyone actually watched the clip?

    There was nothing in it, and there was very little in JODs reaction too. That's why he got pinged for obstruction, not foul play, and that's why the ref was right to revert to the Munster advantage.

    For all the shyte talked, I've yet to see anyone find a real error by the ref, rather just loudly advertising their own lack of knowledge.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,997 ✭✭✭realhorrorshow


    This thread is peak boards, Jesus Christ.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,773 ✭✭✭connemara man


    I have seen literal dumpster fires in better condition than this thread

    Closing it now before people end up walking themselves towards warnings or cards


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement