Argentina > England > Lawrence

It is rare for the team who play better to lose in rugby, but it happened today.

Argentina, based on performance, did not deserve to lose that game. My summary of them in a pre-match post stated they had a solid pack, exciting runners in the backs - but a lack of a finisher and inconsistent goal kicking. This turned out spot on.

England were not good, and the main under-performers were the experienced players. Easter, Wilkinson and Tindall were all poor making silly mistakes that on another day would have cost England the game. Thank god for Ben Youngs.

Now to Mr Lawrence. His refereeing was a disgrace. I am not complaining about his decisions against England - he blew up what he saw and fair enough. It was his inconsistency and failure to apply the same adjudications on Argentina that was so poor.

A few examples:

Cole penalised fo pulling down a maul while sat on the ground. Penalty is correct. Yellow card fair enough there had been a lot of penalties - though please note these were mostly awarded for offences between half way and 10m line (as this was).

Leguizamon did the exact same thing when England had a drive on the Argentina 22m - Lawrence ignored it.

Argentina cynically killed the ball on their 5m line in the first half and conceded a series of penalties inside their own 22m line - yest there was never a hint of a yellow card.

England penalised for obstruction when driving a lineout. (Nick Easter claims everyone does it, Lawrence disagrees). Two lineouts later Argentina diod the exact same thing and Lawrence waves play on.

Rant over. We won. Did not deserve to. Hope we get better.

it was an awful performance from him, these SH refs eh! :p

Argentina should have had a yellow at some point.

Our back row is a real issue. Haskell is the only one of the guys out there to have really looked good in the last 4 games, and they can't decide what his position is. Croft needs to put in a big performance soon because he goes missing in internationals far too often.

Well he wasn't much poorer than Walsh.

England always start badly at World Cups, at the end of the day when these 2 teams play there is always a bit more 2 it. Lets be honest Argentinians hate England far more than any of the European rugby countries do, they probably watched a Falklands military video to in the changing rooms before the game to boost themselves.

That would not be a boost they lost that one also.

Ashton was penalised for attempting to get back up after being tackled and not releasing. One of the Argentinian players did the same and got away with it. Ref penalised absolutely anything illegal England did, to the point where even the crowd were getting involved if an England player went anywhere near the side of the ruck. Was so tentative, glad it's over.

This is the third time I've seen Lawrence ref an important game, and each time he's left me cold. No real authority out on the pitch, no consistence in his decision making (another example is when he pinged some English chap in the ifrst half for going off his feet, which the Argentinians had been doing all day), I really hope he isn't in the frame to referee the latter stages of this world cup...

mad,
I have the same feeling. It seemed he called the game, issued a bunch of penalties, but didn't have any real control. Almost seemed that on every play I was waiting for the whistle to go off. The referee equivalent of a low level bureaucrat.

We won. Did not deserve to. Hope we get better..


England (HAVE TOO,) get better, if they are going to go anywhere in this RWC...If they keep playing like they did today, then i can see Englanfd loosing, Might even be before the quarter final.

England made Lawrence look worse than he was. Yes, a couple of decisions went Argentina's way in the second half, but England's problem with the ref was of their own making. A wins a win and lady luck was with them because it was as bad a performance as I have seen from them for years. They also made Argentina look far better than they are.

I imagine Scotland are feeling a bit more optimistic now.

I wonder what percentage of rucks ended up with a whistle rather than a pass? Way too high on both sides. Whatever Lawrence was doing or trying to do it wasnt working.

Yes that is a lot to do with the players but in theory they should be smart enough to eventually work out what they can and cant get away with - as long as the ref is consistent.

lostinwales wrote:I wonder what percentage of rucks ended up with a whistle rather than a pass? Way too high on both sides. Whatever Lawrence was doing or trying to do it wasnt working.

Yes that is a lot to do with the players but in theory they should be smart enough to eventually work out what they can and cant get away with - as long as the ref is consistent.

The key words there are "in theory". There was little evidence of much smart rugby played at all.

There were 27 (16 Arg 11 Eng) penalties and only one yellow (after about 6 English penalties). Interesting the Argentinos missed 6 kicks and England missed 5. England won by 4 so the missed kicks were largely irrelevant

offload wrote:

lostinwales wrote:I wonder what percentage of rucks ended up with a whistle rather than a pass? Way too high on both sides. Whatever Lawrence was doing or trying to do it wasnt working.

Yes that is a lot to do with the players but in theory they should be smart enough to eventually work out what they can and cant get away with - as long as the ref is consistent.

The key words there are "in theory". There was little evidence of much smart rugby played at all.

I thought the key words were "as long as the ref is consistent" which he wasn't. I'm not having a go because England played poorly, but I've never been impressed by Brycie.

Mates,
I think we are all saying the same basic things:

England were poor, no doubts. Argentina were also poor. The result? A poor match.

England did find a way across the whitewash and won the match. Good for them. The better teams simply do find a way to win even when playing like merde.

The penalty count was too high. Players at this level usually do figure out the referee eventually. These ain't club level players. Strangely, today they didn't or couldn't. My opinion is the referee played a large part of that, and also had a poor match. Not biased, just poor.

For either England or Argentina to do any real damage at the RWC, they both need to raise their game significantly. I believe they both can, but are certainly rooting for England to do so (and I truly believe they will).

Referees are being strict as instructed,which today mean`t stop ,start,penalty.Goal kicking on both sides was pants,JW and
Rodriguez were nowhere near it.IF Argentina had the whit to
try more to score tries instead of grinding away.Two key players
for Argentina injured,BUT a win is a win.

emack2,

If refs are being strict as instructed where was the yellow for the spear tackle?

Lawrence refs as he sees fit, that's his job and why he was picked to ref at the world cup.

I really don't have a problem with Lawrence's reffing, I have a problem with England's players not being able to recognise when they're on a hiding to nothing and change their approach to breakdowns accordingly.

Anyone with even half a brain could predict how Argentina were going to go about the game today, apparently no-one in the England camp had developed a plan to deal with it.

If you can't play to a ref and you can't deal with an oponent playing to their obvious strengths, you're going to struggle getting out of your group.

Good luck Johnno and the boys, you're really, really going to need it.

That seems to be the theme so far.
For the victors...'whew... A wins a win...we'll take it'
For the losers...' Great...but no cigar...'
The other theme unfortunately is the state of our game its rules and interpretations is this tournament will be plagued by referees interpretations and rulings.
Already half the posts seem to be about refs rulings. This is a shame and sooner or later fans are going to cry foul when they lose.
Imagine if argie had scored at the death after the ref continued to the lineout after the clock was up.

Taylorman wrote:That seems to be the theme so far.
For the victors...'whew... A wins a win...we'll take it'
For the losers...' Great...but no cigar...'
The other theme unfortunately is the state of our game its rules and interpretations is this tournament will be plagued by referees interpretations and rulings.
Already half the posts seem to be about refs rulings. This is a shame and sooner or later fans are going to cry foul when they lose.
Imagine if argie had scored at the death after the ref continued to the lineout after the clock was up.

Hi Taylorman,

Agreed entirely, the ref's are borderline amateurs and they go out and do a job to the best of their ability - the players are out and out professionals and appear to spend the best part of 80 minutes trying to con the ref one way or the other.

England were terrible today and Lawrence told them so after less than 10 minutes, he told them they were not up to scratch and told them to get better, for God only knows what reason the players chose to ignore him. Given that they are supposed to be professionals, how can they reconcile the idea that the guy in charge of the game doesn't "know" best? Lawrence gave England every opportunity to play the way he wanted them to but they thought they knew best, seriously? Play to the ref was drummed into me as a boy, how can they get to national representative level and wonder why they're getting pinged off the park?

England fans should be slating the players NOT the ref, the players were pathetic and didn't really deserve to win that game in terms of effort and application, the fact that they did just papers over the cracks. England were clueless.

England fans should be slating the players NOT the ref, the players were pathetic and didn't really deserve to win that game in terms of effort and application, the fact that they did just papers over the cracks. England were clueless..[quote]

I agree, and have no problem with the penalties given against England. I do have a major problem that Lawrence did not apply the laws in the same way when Argentina infringed.

[quote="LondonTiger"]England fans should be slating the players NOT the ref, the players were pathetic and didn't really deserve to win that game in terms of effort and application, the fact that they did just papers over the cracks. England were clueless..

I agree, and have no problem with the penalties given against England. I do have a major problem that Lawrence did not apply the laws in the same way when Argentina infringed.

That's fair enough Tiger, but you only get 80 minutes to make a difference - and that's where it ends for the players so there's no excuse for that performance.

England's naivete today reminded me of the 6N 3 years ago where they barely went a game without one or two binnings a match, Lawrence was there to be played as much as Argentina were - England failed on both counts and that is just plain wrong for a team of professionals wanting to win a tournament.

The coaches need to look at themselves too, I knew how Argentina would play the day I heard the pools drawn and if they can't come up with a feasible gameplan to deal with that in all the time they've had, they should quit when England leave the tournament.

Sorry but to suggest there was a spear tackle out there is ridiculous. There were definately inconsistencies in Lawrences reffing (not as many as being made out mind you) and how Argentina didnt see a man in the bin is anyones guess but there were no spear tackles.

Standulstermen wrote:Sorry but to suggest there was a spear tackle out there is ridiculous. There were definately inconsistencies in Lawrences reffing (not as many as being made out mind you) and how Argentina didnt see a man in the bin is anyones guess but there were no spear tackles.

Definition of a spear tackle is lifting a player's legs above his head and letting him drop, that happened with about 5 minutes to go out by the left touchline (England playing left-to-right) and Lawrence had a stern word with the Argentinian concerned and awarded England a penalty but left it at that.

If it wasn't a spear tackle I wonder why he gave a penalty?

For general untidyness in the tackle?

...not seen that in the Laws.

No it wasnt a spear tackle but the tackler did get the ball carrier into a dangerous position.and that is what the penlty was for.
Lawrence penalised England 16 times ,a Northern hemisphere referee would have penlised them 32 times.

PJ

A dangerous tackle doesnt necessarily have to be a spear. For a start the argie didnt lift Foden off the ground. Foden was in the air when the player made contact with him. I agree that it was a dangerous fall but had Foden not taken to the air before the tackle he would not have been spun round like he was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJMw70nEWWQ

Here is a more pronounced version of what happened earlier. In this instance no penalty was given.

Not how I saw it Stand, but I have'nt had the benefit of a replay so I'll stand corrected (no pun intended).

The point I was making in response to emack2 was that referees were instructed by O'Brien prior to the start of the tournament to crack down on 3 elements of play.

Offside, the breakdown and spear tackles.

I immediately thought that it was worthy of said crackdown but I was so apoplectic at England's inability to play smart rugby that I may be wrong, I doubt it, but I wouldn't swear to it.

PJ

I actually think it should have been a yellow purely because Lawrence gave the Puma's the warning minutes earlier. Foden definately jumps (not to the same extent as Shane in that clip) but the tackler doesnt control him after the contact hence the penalty.

Stand, I guess in a roundabout way we agree then.

But I still think the England players only have themselves to blame and have no problem whatsoever with Lawrence's interpretation of the Laws.

You can't expect a yellow for a yellow, but if you're told you're going to get one if you do it again, when you do it again you know what you're going to get.

It's Forest Gump - stupid is as stupid does.

aucklandlaurie wrote: No it wasnt a spear tackle but the tackler did get the ball carrier into a dangerous position.and that is what the penlty was for.
Lawrence penalised England 16 times ,a Northern hemisphere referee would have penlised them 32 times.

It would be classed as an infringement of one of the 10.4 laws, for which a card is not obligatory, just the penalty sanction.

The 'spear tackle' law would be 10.4 (j):

Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player's feet are still off the ground such that the player's head and/or upper body come into contact with the ground is dangerous play.


From what people have said, it sounds like 10.4 (e) or (i) might be more applicable, which carry the same sanction


On a small point of order, England were penalised 11 times (plus a card), Argentina 15.

Thanks hawalsh, that provides some clarification of the infringement in terms of the Laws, I was just surprised that it wasn't cracked down upon as per POB's brief to refs prior to the tournament starting.

I don't think the penalty count is relevant to cards though, Lawrence got on to England's breakdown play early doors and spoke to Tindall and Easter about it within 10 minutes of kick off.

Their subsequent refusal to play to his instructions was ridiculous, self-indulgent and rightly punished with a card.

defo not a spear tackle. dangerous-possibly but thats due more to the ball carrier(Foden) jumping, the tackler went low and if someones coming at speed and in mid air what else do they expect. really dont even think it should be a penalty, will be in the minority i guess. just dont think its fair that an attacker can practically make it impossible to legally tackle them; unless its Shane of course

I think it may become an issue KJ but i do think it was a penalty as the tackler didnt have control of the player. Its a hard one to argue against i think

Standulstermen wrote:I think it may become an issue KJ but i do think it was a penalty as the tackler didnt have control of the player. Its a hard one to argue against i think

The ruling on tip tackles is clear, ts the tacklers responsibility to ensure the player isnt tipped and comes down safely.If he didnt have control of him , and his legs came above his hips, then it was a poor and unsafe tackle.


Interesting to read this morning taht England are rfussing to report anyone to the citing comission at the world cup. I guess ths comes from Johnson, its the same attitude Tigers have traditionaly taken to citings.
Haskell apologised for acussing an Argentinian of gouging hm too

"It (eye-gouging) has happened to me a few times in my career. Tonight was nothing. I was obviously just stressed, it was a difficult game, we were under pressure. I got cleared out and had a hand on my face. It was nothing."
"We have to focus on our own performance without worrying about other stuff."

Seems like a healthy attitude, and one that makes a mockery of the hang and flog em brigade.


As for the penalty count ...Im suprissed that noone has pickd up on how few England conceeded after Col got his card. It seems that Johnson did get that through to the team, play cleaner. They cant blame a specific rferee nterpretation for their problems, the penalties were for all kinds of offences. He was also following the IRB dirctives to be tighter on the kind of sloppy play England were guilty of early on.
Its just a pity they couldnt sort out the handling and passing skills too

Has it passed everyone by that Argntina conceeded considerably more penalties than England? The only realinconsistency I saw was no yellow for repeat infringemnt by them...15 in the game means they must have conceeded at least 8 in a half which was what bought Coles yellow.
I think sometimes people confuse missing things, or seeing them differntly, wth incosistency.

Agree Peter, I think Lawrence saw England as repeatedly infringing at the breakdown/contact and I have to agree with him.

Although Argentina conceeded more penalties, they were in different areas 3 or 4 of them were at scrums, and therefore Lawrence didn't consider them to be repeats of the same nature.

Argentina's penalties were conceded closer to the line than Englands so more cynical?

Also Lawrence penalised England for things he let Argentina get away with - probably because England peed him off at the start so he was looking harder for England offences. This is pathetice by both England AND Lawrence.

I didn't like the way the game was reffed either but more importantly I was mortified at the complete lack of discipline shown by the England pack. I hope 2 things. 1. It was pre-match nerves that will be smoothed after a shaky win and 2. That the coaches absolutely lambaste the team for such a display. Any half descent team would have kicked/scored us out of the game by half time.

PJHolybloke wrote:Agree Peter, I think Lawrence saw England as repeatedly infringing at the breakdown/contact and I have to agree with him.

Although Argentina conceeded more penalties, they were in different areas 3 or 4 of them were at scrums, and therefore Lawrence didn't consider them to be repeats of the same nature.

And Cole got one for bringing down a maul. Which was the first time that had happened.

englandglory4ever wrote:I didn't like the way the game was reffed either but more importantly I was mortified at the complete lack of discipline shown by the England pack. I hope 2 things. 1. It was pre-match nerves that will be smoothed after a shaky win and 2. That the coaches absolutely lambaste the team for such a display. Any half descent team would have kicked/scored us out of the game by half time.

Well at half time they did sort it out. After Co committed just 3 penalties in over 40 minutes, 10 of which they were a man down for. In a niggly game with a strict refthats good discipline, unlike Argentina who were penalty heavy throughout.
Any half decent team would have kicked England out of the game? Wilko missed almost as many.
It wasnt a good performance but I dont think anyone really expected it to be. They were worse than that in the pool games last time. Theres also obvious lineup changes that could be made to improve things, most notably bringing in starting Youngs Palmer Flood and Hartley

Peter, Say what you like but up against one of the big 3 and we would have been 20+ points down by half time. Game over. The England pack need to ask themselves some serious questions. They can't keep playing like that if they want to stay in the comp.

The one thing that the ref did that really cheesed me off(wont say what i really want) was the "offside" pinging England twice for what could have been inchs ofside to the fact england spend most of the time about a foot onside, while ignoring the Argies about two foot offside at most rucks.

I think england decided not to contest rucks as they reliased they would be pinged for any tiny infringment.