Steve Walsh dumped by IRB

by BigTrevsbigmac Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:43 pm

First topic message reminder :

No surprise here then!

Independent -

Steve Walsh, the controversial Australian official who frustrated England to within an inch of their lives during the Six Nations finale in Wales 11 days ago, is the heaviest faller in the latest round of refereeing appointments sanctioned by the International Rugby Board.

Walsh will not control any of the 30 Tests scheduled for early summer, although he has been awarded the opening British and Irish Lions tour match with the Barbarians in Hong Kong on 1 June.

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 6:17 pm

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:That, plus a clip of a bulldog p!ssing on some daffodils.
Cue images of pit closures, Maggie Thatcher, flooded villages, burning holiday cottages and John Redwood 'singing' the anthem.

Shudders...

by Guest Thu Mar 28, 2013 6:56 pm

Anyone met Walsh? just wondering everyone seems to have an opinion on the guy,i was just wondering why they have that opinion?

Please don't tell me your basing it on tv images?

by funnyExiledScot Thu Mar 28, 2013 6:57 pm

viewtothegym wrote:Anyone met Walsh? just wondering everyone seems to have an opinion on the guy,i was just wondering why they have that opinion?

Please don't tell me your basing it on tv images?

by Guest Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:12 pm

I think it's a travesty he has been dropped,
by a mile one of the best refs in World Rugby.

England coaching team have to be careful,they are pretty much encouraging ref abuse, this isn't football.
Any team that go public with a ref complaint should have the complaint thrown out and receive a fine.
It was clear that England wanted the weight of the English media behind them to get what they wanted.

So what next? refs now scared of England? English now have a unfair advantage?
The whole affair is a shocking embarrassment to the game of Rugby,
England may have won the battle but rugby has lost the war.

All the fans that stand by this need to take a long hard look at the bigger picture.

by bluestonevedder Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:16 pm

Pretty eloquent attempt at a WUM there View. At least you're evolving.

by englandglory4ever Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:30 pm

Walsh was a disgrace to the rugby refereeing profession. For a minute I thought the game was being played at Cardiff airport. I lost count of the number of welsh players flying over rucks and landing on their bellies the other side. Can't fault their commitment but Walsh should have pinged them loads.

by offload Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:36 pm

englandglory4ever wrote:Walsh was a disgrace to the rugby refereeing profession. For a minute I thought the game was being played at Cardiff airport. I lost count of the number of welsh players flying over rucks and landing on their bellies the other side. Can't fault their commitment but Walsh should have pinged them loads.

Blah...blah....blah....

by Cyril Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:45 pm

viewtothegym wrote:I think it's a travesty he has been dropped,
by a mile one of the best refs in World Rugby.

England coaching team have to be careful,they are pretty much encouraging ref abuse, this isn't football.
Any team that go public with a ref complaint should have the complaint thrown out and receive a fine.
It was clear that England wanted the weight of the English media behind them to get what they wanted.

So what next? refs now scared of England? English now have a unfair advantage?
The whole affair is a shocking embarrassment to the game of Rugby,
England may have won the battle but rugby has lost the war.

All the fans that stand by this need to take a long hard look at the bigger picture.

Your high horse must be pretty nervous, balancing precariously on that soapbox. Still, you're firmly seated on the saddle of hypocrisy and holding tight onto the reins of hyperbole. I think you'll be ok

by LordDowlais Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:55 pm

As much as I hate to agree with view, behind his wumming and finger pointing on what he has written there is a point. This whole debacle could affect how refs now referee England, and what is to stop any other team/nation doing the same in the future ? Also, this is an emabarrasment to the game we all love, if team England felt aggrieved they should have done this on the quiet, now in the future England will have a big red target on them and if people think England are getting the rub of the green they will harp on back to this incident, the biggest loser here is the game of rugby. I hope Rowntree does not whinge like this if the Aussies beat us in the summer.

by Luckless Pedestrian Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:00 pm

LordDowlais wrote:As much as I hate to agree with view, behind his wumming and finger pointing on what he has written there is a point. This whole debacle could affect how refs now referee England

Only if they're stupid enough to think that the IRB's decision was based solely on the Wales - England game.

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:01 pm

LordDowlais wrote:As much as I hate to agree with view, behind his wumming and finger pointing on what he has written there is a point. This whole debacle could affect how refs now referee England, and what is to stop any other team/nation doing the same in the future ? Also, this is an emabarrasment to the game we all love, if team England felt aggrieved they should have done this on the quiet, now in the future England will have a big red target on them and if people think England are getting the rub of the green they will harp on back to this incident, the biggest loser here is the game of rugby. I hope Rowntree does not whinge like this if the Aussies beat us in the summer.

Be careful, lest you're judged by the company you keep...

You would think that the IRB made this decision purely after watching 80 minutes of rugby in Cardiff 2 weeks ago.

Anyway, you're failing to acknowledge that 'Team England' merely sought clarification of Walsh's interpretation of the laws in the context of what had been agreed prior to the match and what actually happened. They were perfectly entitled to do so and probably remiss if they hadn't. And as for keeping it quiet, are English coaches the only ones who've publically had a pop at refereeing decisions in front of the camera post match?

I think not.

As usual, this 'non story' has been picked up by the press and shagged bandy by anyone with an anti-English axe to grind. Its real boring now.

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:02 pm

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:As much as I hate to agree with view, behind his wumming and finger pointing on what he has written there is a point. This whole debacle could affect how refs now referee England

Only if they're stupid enough to think that the IRB's decision was based solely on the Wales - England game.

Hear hear, but unfortunately it would seem, many are.

by Guest Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:12 pm

The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.

by Cyril Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:17 pm

viewtothegym wrote:The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.

Is that what morg told you?

by LordDowlais Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:18 pm

Jimpy wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:As much as I hate to agree with view, behind his wumming and finger pointing on what he has written there is a point. This whole debacle could affect how refs now referee England, and what is to stop any other team/nation doing the same in the future ? Also, this is an emabarrasment to the game we all love, if team England felt aggrieved they should have done this on the quiet, now in the future England will have a big red target on them and if people think England are getting the rub of the green they will harp on back to this incident, the biggest loser here is the game of rugby. I hope Rowntree does not whinge like this if the Aussies beat us in the summer.

Be careful, lest you're judged by the company you keep...

You would think that the IRB made this decision purely after watching 80 minutes of rugby in Cardiff 2 weeks ago.

Anyway, you're failing to acknowledge that 'Team England' merely sought clarification of Walsh's interpretation of the laws in the context of what had been agreed prior to the match and what actually happened. They were perfectly entitled to do so and probably remiss if they hadn't. And as for keeping it quiet, are English coaches the only ones who've publically had a pop at refereeing decisions in front of the camera post match?

I think not.

As usual, this 'non story' has been picked up by the press and shagged bandy by anyone with an anti-English axe to grind. Its real boring now.

Come on Jimpy, we all know this is just a clever way of them saying it was the refs fault, also I bet, do you honestly think the IRB would have done the same thing to Steve Walsh even if Graham Rowntree and Stuart Lancaster did not go all public with this ? Look if they felt short changed by the ref then fair enough, I have no problem with people questioning the ref about the decisions they make during a game but they could have gone about this differently, but now because of all the publicity this has gotten the IRB were under pressure to act, and now we have this debacle, I will tell you one thing, this does not show Graham Rowntree or Stuart Lancaster in a good light, and English men like you defending them do not come out of this any better either, at the end of the day there is only one loser in this and that is rugby, obviously you enjoy the game because you come on here to debate it, so do you like the negative press this has caused for our game ?

by Guest Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:19 pm

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.
Is that what morg told you?

Nope your moma!! lol. On a serious note that wasn't a wind up comment i really think England being so public about the whole thing will make things worse for everyone in the long run.

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:20 pm

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.
Is that what morg told you?

It must have been, after he came up for air...

I'm just looking up the word 'Truth' on my online dictionary. According to the definition in front of me, I think poor View is getting confused with another word. Or rather two words.

by Cyril Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:21 pm

RIP Rugby Union
Killed by England, March 2013
Crying or Very sad

Please do not send flowers. All donations to the Steve Walsh Benevolent Fund.

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:22 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
Jimpy wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:As much as I hate to agree with view, behind his wumming and finger pointing on what he has written there is a point. This whole debacle could affect how refs now referee England, and what is to stop any other team/nation doing the same in the future ? Also, this is an emabarrasment to the game we all love, if team England felt aggrieved they should have done this on the quiet, now in the future England will have a big red target on them and if people think England are getting the rub of the green they will harp on back to this incident, the biggest loser here is the game of rugby. I hope Rowntree does not whinge like this if the Aussies beat us in the summer.

Be careful, lest you're judged by the company you keep...

You would think that the IRB made this decision purely after watching 80 minutes of rugby in Cardiff 2 weeks ago.

Anyway, you're failing to acknowledge that 'Team England' merely sought clarification of Walsh's interpretation of the laws in the context of what had been agreed prior to the match and what actually happened. They were perfectly entitled to do so and probably remiss if they hadn't. And as for keeping it quiet, are English coaches the only ones who've publically had a pop at refereeing decisions in front of the camera post match?

I think not.

As usual, this 'non story' has been picked up by the press and shagged bandy by anyone with an anti-English axe to grind. Its real boring now.

Come on Jimpy, we all know this is just a clever way of them saying it was the refs fault, also I bet, do you honestly think the IRB would have done the same thing to Steve Walsh even if Graham Rowntree and Stuart Lancaster did not go all public with this ? Look if they felt short changed by the ref then fair enough, I have no problem with people questioning the ref about the decisions they make during a game but they could have gone about this differently, but now because of all the publicity this has gotten the IRB were under pressure to act, and now we have this debacle, I will tell you one thing, this does not show Graham Rowntree or Stuart Lancaster in a good light, and English men like you defending them do not come out of this any better either, at the end of the day there is only one loser in this and that is rugby, obviously you enjoy the game because you come on here to debate it, so do you like the negative press this has caused for our game ?

I wasn't aware that it had generated negative press. Only indignation by a hand full of WUMs on public forums.

by Guest Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:23 pm

Jimpy wrote:
Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.
Is that what morg told you?

It must have been, after he came up for air...

I'm just looking up the word 'Truth' on my online dictionary. According to the definition in front of me, I think poor View is getting confused with another word.

**********Can the mods please consider this, why are you getting personal Jimpy? if you can't debate my point with valid facts and have to resort to childish your a homo humor, maybe you should walk and leave the grown ups talk . so mods please act on this i have just finished a weeks ban for the same type of thing! same rules for all**************************

by LordDowlais Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:24 pm

Jimpy, so you think criticising a ref in public is positive ?

by R!skysports Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:26 pm

LordDowlais wrote:Jimpy, so you think criticising a ref in public is positive ?

by Cyril Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:27 pm

Clarification NOT criticism.

by R!skysports Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:27 pm

viewtothegym wrote:
Jimpy wrote:
Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.
Is that what morg told you?

It must have been, after he came up for air...

I'm just looking up the word 'Truth' on my online dictionary. According to the definition in front of me, I think poor View is getting confused with another word.
**********Can the mods please consider this, why are you getting personal Jimpy? if you can't debate my point with valid facts and have to resort to childish your a homo humor, maybe you should walk and leave the grown ups talk . so mods please act on this i have just finished a weeks ban for the same type of thing! same rules for all**************************

Is this not reporting something in public? Should it not be done behind closed doors angel

by funnyExiledScot Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:27 pm

viewtothegym wrote:
Jimpy wrote:
Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.
Is that what morg told you?

It must have been, after he came up for air...

I'm just looking up the word 'Truth' on my online dictionary. According to the definition in front of me, I think poor View is getting confused with another word.
**********Can the mods please consider this, why are you getting personal Jimpy? if you can't debate my point with valid facts and have to resort to childish your a homo humor, maybe you should walk and leave the grown ups talk . so mods please act on this i have just finished a weeks ban for the same type of thing! same rules for all**************************

Nothing funnier than a WUM being out-Wummed!

by Luckless Pedestrian Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:28 pm

LordDowlais wrote:Do you honestly think the IRB would have done the same thing to Steve Walsh even if Graham Rowntree and Stuart Lancaster did not go all public with this? Because of all the publicity this has gotten the IRB were under pressure to act

Sorry Dowlais, but there's not a shred of evidence to support what you're saying.

by LordDowlais Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:29 pm

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:Clarification NOT criticism.

It is just a clever way of blaming the ref and you know it.

by Cyril Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:30 pm

Riskysports wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:
Jimpy wrote:
Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.
Is that what morg told you?

It must have been, after he came up for air...

I'm just looking up the word 'Truth' on my online dictionary. According to the definition in front of me, I think poor View is getting confused with another word.
**********Can the mods please consider this, why are you getting personal Jimpy? if you can't debate my point with valid facts and have to resort to childish your a homo humor, maybe you should walk and leave the grown ups talk . so mods please act on this i have just finished a weeks ban for the same type of thing! same rules for all**************************

Is this not reporting something in public? Should it not be done behind closed doors

by LordDowlais Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:30 pm

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:Do you honestly think the IRB would have done the same thing to Steve Walsh even if Graham Rowntree and Stuart Lancaster did not go all public with this? Because of all the publicity this has gotten the IRB were under pressure to act

Sorry Dowlais, but there's not a shred of evidence to support what you're saying.

I never said there was, but do you think what happened to Steve Walsh would still have happened anyway if they did not go all public with this ?

by Luckless Pedestrian Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:33 pm

Yes. The alternative is to believe that the IRB made its decision because they went public, which is laughable.

by Cyril Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:33 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
Cyril on 606v2 wrote:Clarification NOT criticism.

It is just a clever way of blaming the ref and you know it.

Do I? One might say you're trying to use this as a stick to beat England, making various assumptions and being a tad holier than thou.

And you know it! Wink

by **Biltong** Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:34 pm

Every referee gets a report card after every match from the coaches of the teams that competed, the refereeing panel reviews these performances as well, based on these performances the IRB refereeing panel issues a list of referees who will be categorised in test rugby officiating.

If england has that much power over the IRB, I am shocked that they have only won the RWC once.

With that kind of power they should have been able to nfluence many more tournaments

by Guest Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:39 pm

Riskysports wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:
Jimpy wrote:
Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
viewtothegym wrote:The speaker of truth ,that's all. No wum.
Is that what morg told you?

It must have been, after he came up for air...

I'm just looking up the word 'Truth' on my online dictionary. According to the definition in front of me, I think poor View is getting confused with another word.
**********Can the mods please consider this, why are you getting personal Jimpy? if you can't debate my point with valid facts and have to resort to childish your a homo humor, maybe you should walk and leave the grown ups talk . so mods please act on this i have just finished a weeks ban for the same type of thing! same rules for all**************************

Is this not reporting something in public? Should it not be done behind closed doors

I would but i haven't got a clue how to report someone because i have never done it before.

by LordDowlais Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:43 pm

Biltong wrote:Every referee gets a report card after every match from the coaches of the teams that competed, the refereeing panel reviews these performances as well, based on these performances the IRB refereeing panel issues a list of referees who will be categorised in test rugby officiating.

If england has that much power over the IRB, I am shocked that they have only won the RWC once.

With that kind of power they should have been able to nfluence many more tournaments

If this is the case then Biltong, then none of us needed to know about Englands concerns because just as you have said Steve Walsh would have had the report card and he would have been reviewed and if there was any wrong doing he would have been punished anyway, but inspite of all what you have just written, Stuart Lancaster and Graham Rowntree still insisted on going all public with this and is what I do not like about this whole incident, why did they feel the need to go all shouting from the rooftops about this when there was a system in place to deal with it anyway ?

by Effervescing Elephant Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:46 pm

We are slowly building our power Biltong my friend. Each day the evil taint of English rugby creeps onwards through the halls of power. Each day we gather our dark forces. Walsh is just the start! Mwahahahahaha, mwahahahaha, mwahahahahhahahaha. *Twiddles moustache and pulls cloak around face*

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:46 pm

Riskysports wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:Jimpy, so you think criticising a ref in public is positive ?

If they were indeed critiscising, which they weren't, then yes, it might be considered negative. But they weren't, so it isn't.

by **Biltong** Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:46 pm

Lordowlais, I must admit I haven't read any UK newspapars, so I don't know exactly how much blowout there is.

My only question is this, were they appraoched by the media, or did they approach the media?

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:47 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
Biltong wrote:Every referee gets a report card after every match from the coaches of the teams that competed, the refereeing panel reviews these performances as well, based on these performances the IRB refereeing panel issues a list of referees who will be categorised in test rugby officiating.

If england has that much power over the IRB, I am shocked that they have only won the RWC once.

With that kind of power they should have been able to nfluence many more tournaments

If this is the case then Biltong, then none of us needed to know about Englands concerns because just as you have said Steve Walsh would have had the report card and he would have been reviewed and if there was any wrong doing he would have been punished anyway, but inspite of all what you have just written, Stuart Lancaster and Graham Rowntree still insisted on going all public with this and is what I do not like about this whole incident, why did they feel the need to go all shouting from the rooftops about this when there was a system in place to deal with it anyway ?

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:48 pm

Biltong wrote:Lordowlais, I must admit I haven't read any UK newspapars, so I don't know exactly how much blowout there is.

My only question is this, were they appraoched by the media, or did they approach the media?

It wouldn't surprise me if they rounded up every gutter hack they could and called a special press conference to announce their criticism of Walshy boy.

Steve Walsh dumped by IRB - Page 3 1347041234

Steve Walsh dumped by IRB - Page 3 1347041234

by Cyril Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:50 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
Biltong wrote:Every referee gets a report card after every match from the coaches of the teams that competed, the refereeing panel reviews these performances as well, based on these performances the IRB refereeing panel issues a list of referees who will be categorised in test rugby officiating.

If england has that much power over the IRB, I am shocked that they have only won the RWC once.

With that kind of power they should have been able to nfluence many more tournaments

If this is the case then Biltong, then none of us needed to know about Englands concerns because just as you have said Steve Walsh would have had the report card and he would have been reviewed and if there was any wrong doing he would have been punished anyway, but inspite of all what you have just written, Stuart Lancaster and Graham Rowntree still insisted on going all public with this and is what I do not like about this whole incident, why did they feel the need to go all shouting from the rooftops about this when there was a system in place to deal with it anyway ?

Exaggeration much? You'll be saying that they booked a slot on Loose Women next.

by bluestonevedder Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:50 pm

They were hardly shouting from the rooftops, let's be honest here. It's the media that have blown it all up. The interview with Rowntree is still up for all to see. He says in a very even-tempered, controlled way, that he is 'seeking clarification' for some of Walsh's decisions. He doesn't accuse him of any wrong doing, he doesn't denounce Walsh as a referee, he doesn't allege favouritism.

If they hadn't gone public with it, and Walsh was then demoted by the IRB, that would look quite suspicious wouldn't it? England would be branded as sore losers, without ever having had the chance to explain themselves.

Once more, we have our idiotic friends the media hyping things up all out of proportion again.

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:51 pm

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
Biltong wrote:Every referee gets a report card after every match from the coaches of the teams that competed, the refereeing panel reviews these performances as well, based on these performances the IRB refereeing panel issues a list of referees who will be categorised in test rugby officiating.

If england has that much power over the IRB, I am shocked that they have only won the RWC once.

With that kind of power they should have been able to nfluence many more tournaments

If this is the case then Biltong, then none of us needed to know about Englands concerns because just as you have said Steve Walsh would have had the report card and he would have been reviewed and if there was any wrong doing he would have been punished anyway, but inspite of all what you have just written, Stuart Lancaster and Graham Rowntree still insisted on going all public with this and is what I do not like about this whole incident, why did they feel the need to go all sb]shouting from the rooftops[/b] about this when there was a system in place to deal with it anyway ?
Exaggeration much? You'll be saying that booked a slot on Loose Women next.

That sounds so filthy on many, many levels..

by Luckless Pedestrian Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:51 pm

And why are they hyping it up? Because they know people will lap it up. It's a vicious circle.

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:53 pm

bluestonevedder wrote:They were hardly shouting from the rooftops, let's be honest here. It's the media that have blown it all up. The interview with Rowntree is still up for all to see. He says in a very even-tempered, controlled way, that he is 'seeking clarification' for some of Walsh's decisions. He doesn't accuse him of any wrong doing, he doesn't denounce Walsh as a referee, he doesn't allege favouritism.

If they hadn't gone public with it, and Walsh was then demoted by the IRB, that would look quite suspicious wouldn't it? England would be branded as sore losers, without ever having had the chance to explain themselves.

Once more, we have our idiotic friends the media hyping things up all out of proportion again.

Its just sad that there are some who actively seek such hype to serve as a vehicle for their anti-English sentiment and then try to dress it up as a 'fair play for all' argument.

by LordDowlais Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:55 pm

Biltong wrote:Lordowlais, I must admit I haven't read any UK newspapars, so I don't know exactly how much blowout there is.

My only question is this, were they appraoched by the media, or did they approach the media?

I saw him do a press conference on SSN last week about it. How the whole topic came about though is another question, and it has been in all the papers up here, I read it in the Daily Mail who let it run for a couple of days, I know other people on here have said it was in the Telegraph, but I cannot say who went to who.

by bluestonevedder Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:55 pm

I agree Jimpy, completely. Some people just can't make their own mind up on a matter.

It's almost like putting the word 'fact' after a statement, and thinking that makes it a completely valid, legitimate argument...

by **Biltong** Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:55 pm

I put this on the wrong thread.

Just my opinion on this Walsh issue, you can dismiss it if you want.

Wales thumped england.
Whether Walsh was the referee or not, it would make no difference to the result.
The English coaching staff is querying some decisions at the breakdown and scrums.
The Welsh see this as an attack on the result, hence their defence of Walsh.
Therefor they castigate the actions of the english coaching staff.
The english supports agree the referee made no difference to the result.
The english supporters accept that.

by LordDowlais Thu Mar 28, 2013 9:03 pm

Biltong, I think you are missing my point, the fact that England wanted "clarification" about refereeing decisions does not bother me in the slightest, what I do not like is how this has gone public, this could all have been done differently, and who the ref was make's no difference to me either, I just wish that I did not have to read it in the papers, watch it on the tele and read about it on here, there are ways to go about doing your business and showing your dirty laundry in public, for me, is not one of them.

by disneychilly Thu Mar 28, 2013 9:09 pm

Querying decisions needn't smack of sour grapes all the time. The coaches need to ask if the team gets hammered as it's obvious what they have been coaching the team is deemed as illegal in the eyes of the ref that day. Maybe it'd be good to have post match briefings between refs and coaches just to explain why they gave the decisions they did. No malice should be in it (though bulletproof windows may be needed after some games), but to help the teams so that next time they play with that ref they get a better idea of what he deems is legal. It's just crappy that it differs with each referee.

by Jimpy Thu Mar 28, 2013 9:29 pm

LordDowlais wrote:Biltong, I think you are missing my point, the fact that England wanted "clarification" about refereeing decisions does not bother me in the slightest, what I do not like is how this has gone public, this could all have been done differently, and who the ref was make's no difference to me either, I just wish that I did not have to read it in the papers, watch it on the tele and read about it on here, there are ways to go about doing your business and showing your dirty laundry in public, for me, is not one of them.

Well, you could have fooled me.

Seriously, are you really getting all excited because somehow, this made it into the public domain? Or do you have another agenda? Do you complain when Gatland takes his foot out of his mouth long enough to make yet another crass and embarassing statement about something or other, only to have it picked up by the press, manipulated and then fed to the salivating anti-this or anti-that brigade?

by Sponsored content