Fri 11th Nov: RLWC SF: Australia v New Zealand KO 19:45

[unapologetic pedant]

13 hours ago, StandOffHalf said:

Wighton was touched by the defender and the ball-carrying arm was down. The defender didn't slip off until after the arm/ball hit the ground, so the offload should have been called back.

That try should have been chalked off.

The pertinent word in the rulebook is "Held".

"Held" does not mean "touched for a split second".

Not a shadow of a doubt that the call was correct.

Disappointing that even some of the more knowledgeable posters think it was marginal.

[MatthewWoody]

This Kiwi side still don't know when and where they'll play again.

[DavidM]

21 minutes ago, Midlands hobo said:

So if England beat Oz next week with less tries but more kicked goals it's not a real win and you wouldn't celebrate. Give over.

I’ll take a 1-0 win with a drop goal from Tom Burgess that is going way wide as he falls flat on his backside , then it hits a pigeon just flying around doing his own thing and defects in off the bar 

[Midlands hobo]

1 minute ago, DavidM said:

I’ll take a 1-0 win with a drop goal from Tom Burgess that is going way wide as he falls flat on his backside , then it hits a pigeon just flying around doing his own thing and defects in off the bar 

Exactly. It's about who has the most points at the end of the 80 don't matter a dot how they get them.

[Man of Kent]

33 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

The pertinent word in the rulebook is "Held".

"Held" does not mean "touched for a split second".

Not a shadow of a doubt that the call was correct.

Disappointing that even some of the more knowledgeable posters think it was marginal.

‘Tis a pity that what many people are calling the greatest ever Test match is merely yet another The. Ref. Is. A. Disgrace. fest on here.

Ho hum. 

[Black Country Wire]

33 minutes ago, MatthewWoody said:

This Kiwi side still don't know when and where they'll play again.

Thought they were coming over for a test series next year or did I misread something?

[Black Country Wire]

1 minute ago, Man of Kent said:

‘Tis a pity that what many people are calling the greatest ever Test match is merely yet another The. Ref. Is. A. Disgrace. fest on here.

Ho hum. 

This is the problem when you don't have neutral refs.

Klein could have given an absolutely flawless performance but there will always be a perception.

 

[Dunbar]

42 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

The pertinent word in the rulebook is "Held".

"Held" does not mean "touched for a split second".

Not a shadow of a doubt that the call was correct.

Disappointing that even some of the more knowledgeable posters think it was marginal.

In my view, a lot of the confusion comes from the players going to ground quickly when they are close to their own goal line (to avoid being taken back in goal) or deliberately surrendering to the tackle when there is a chance to be pinged for obstruction after running behind their own player.

In those situations a 'hand' on the prone player constitutes a completed tackle.  So people are saying a hand on the player here is a tackle when Wighton clearly had the right to play on as he was nowhere near being held.

The first two scenarios I described are poor in my opinion as no side should be rewarded for surrendering without a tackle in Rugby League.

Edited November 12, 2022 by Dunbar

[MatthewWoody]

11 minutes ago, Black Country Wire said:

This is the problem when you don't have neutral refs.

Klein could have given an absolutely flawless performance but there will always be a perception.

 

Why?

He's doing his job as a professional.

[Dave T]

I don't think we can have it both ways. We can't applaud a ref for ignoring foul play (badged as letting the game flow) and then complain when he doesnt give some things. 

My view is we should be going for consistency and I don't think that means refereeing Origin, Internationals and Finals differently. 

[MatthewWoody]

I don't agree with all this referees must be neutral obsession. 

Given we only have 2 high level nationals league, it's normale IRL decided referees would be designed on merit and not on nationality. 

A professional referee does his job and to think in 2022 he'd let his nationality influence his decision is imho naive. 

Of course we'd all like to have 5-6 competitive professional league and then 5-6 countries with test level referees, but we don't. 

I'd prefer the toughest games of the year being refereed by the best available referre, regardless of the nation.

League has bigger issues, I think.

[Dunbar]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't think we can have it both ways. We can't applaud a ref for ignoring foul play (badged as letting the game flow) and then complain when he doesnt give some things. 

My view is we should be going for consistency and I don't think that means refereeing Origin, Internationals and Finals differently. 

Which foul play did you think he ignored Dave?

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Which foul play did you think he ignored Dave?

I've already highlighted the foul play. Shoulder charge, flop, knees on prone player. 

I would also challenge anyone who applauded the ref 'letting the game flow' on what they mean. Because imo it can only mean one thing. 

[unapologetic pedant]

8 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

In my view, a lot of the confusion comes from the players going to ground quickly when they are close to their own goal line (to avoid being taken back in goal) 

In those situations a 'hand' on the prone player constitutes a completed tackle.  So people are saying a hand on the player here is a tackle when Wighton clearly had the right to play on as he was nowhere near being held.

There shouldn`t be any confusion. The "hand" on a surrendered ball-carrier has to be more than the briefest of momentary touches to be deemed complete.

 

24 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

 or deliberately surrendering to the tackle when there is a chance to be pinged for obstruction after running behind their own player.

The first two scenarios I described are poor in my opinion as no side should be rewarded for surrendering wirhout a tackle in Rugby League.

The problem here is obstructions being called when nobody has been obstructed. It is not automatically illegal to run behind your own player. We should place the responsibility on defenders to adjust. 

[OMEGA]

IMO the Val Holmes Try was OK,   
We often see try’s where a defender has slipped off the ball carrier and is then free to continue running or lunge forward to get the ball over the line. On this occasion the ball was passed and despite being on the ground the defender slipped off leaving the ball carrier free to pass.

Refs got that one correct

[Futtocks]

23 minutes ago, MatthewWoody said:

Why?

He's doing his job as a professional.

Because the perceptions in question are not coming from professionals

[Dunbar]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I've already highlighted the foul play. Shoulder charge, flop, knees on prone player. 

I would also challenge anyone who applauded the ref 'letting the game flow' on what they mean. Because imo it can only mean one thing. 

I think we need to diffentiate between foul play (shoulder charge and knees) and technical indiscretions (flop etc.).

I liked the fact the ref didn't ping too many offsides or ruck penalties.   As long as it is the same for both sides then I am OK with it and that absolutely added to the intensity with very few stoppages.

As for foul play.  There wasn't much.  I didn't think the shoulder charge was too bad, maybe the knees were, but overall it wasn't a dirty game.

And I liked the fact he decided not to bin anyone for a bit of pushing and shoving.

[StandOffHalf]

1 hour ago, unapologetic pedant said:

The pertinent word in the rulebook is "Held".

"Held" does not mean "touched for a split second".

Not a shadow of a doubt that the call was correct.

Disappointing that even some of the more knowledgeable posters think it was marginal.

The stopping of motion/momentum while grounded and touched constitutes ''held''.

The question is whether Wighton stopped moving. I think he did.

[OMEGA]

10 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I've already highlighted the foul play. Shoulder charge, flop, knees on prone player. 

I would also challenge anyone who applauded the ref 'letting the game flow' on what they mean. Because imo it can only mean one thing. 

The Aussies consistently had their hands on the kiwis as they were playing the ball which is an infringement. Late in the game Trbojevic had his hands on a kiwi and was pushed away only to go straight back in pushing the NZ players head down and it almost ended up in a bit of bif. It was obviously a tactic to delay the PTB as there were many Aussie players at it all through the game but they were never penalised for it.

Edited November 12, 2022 by OMEGA

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I think we need to diffentiate between foul play (shoulder charge and knees) and technical indiscretions (flop etc.).

I liked the fact the ref didn't ping too many offsides or ruck penalties.   As long as it is the same for both sides then I am OK with it and that absolutely added to the intensity with very few stoppages.

As for foul play.  There wasn't much.  I didn't think the shoulder charge was too bad, maybe the knees were, but overall it wasn't a dirty game.

And I liked the fact he decided not to bin anyone for a bit of pushing and shoving.

A flop is foul play and a penalty, it certainly doesn't need to be stripped out. I think the ref ignored some things, to 'let the game flow'. 

My issue is if you are going to make a conscious decision to referee a game differently, people will question when some things are not given. 

Letting the game flow, can only possibly mean turning a blind eye. 

[Alan Robertson]

1 hour ago, Mr Frisky said:

I bet your great crack down the pub mate..

You're correct, this time.

[moorside roughyed]

Just switched on,it's a little empty isn't it.

[Dunbar]

13 minutes ago, Dave T said:

A flop is foul play and a penalty, it certainly doesn't need to be stripped out. I think the ref ignored some things, to 'let the game flow'. 

My issue is if you are going to make a conscious decision to referee a game differently, people will question when some things are not given. 

Letting the game flow, can only possibly mean turning a blind eye. 

We turn a blind eye to every feed in every scrum and every incorrect play the ball so that is par for the course in Rugby League.

And let me say again as I wasn't clear enough, when I said you have to diffentiate between foul play and technical penalties, I mean the dangerous stuff.  A flop may be foul play but it isn't in the same category as knees into a prone player.

I would be OK with consistency and I would be OK if Rugby League looked like yesterday's game all the time... of course it was higher quality than you would get every week.

Edited November 12, 2022 by Dunbar

[Dunbar]

11 minutes ago, moorside roughyed said:

Just switched on,it's a little empty isn't it.

I would expect so, the game was yesterday. 

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, unapologetic pedant said:

The pertinent word in the rulebook is "Held".

"Held" does not mean "touched for a split second".

Not a shadow of a doubt that the call was correct.

Disappointing that even some of the more knowledgeable posters think it was marginal.

The interpretation of "held" is having a hand on the player whilst their ball carrying arm is on the floor. The Kiwis did.