Ref whinging post

First topic message reminder :

Can't believe I havent read more posts about the absolute inconsistency with which the game was refereed. No doubt this is because the lions won. However I feel it was one of the most inconsistent performances I have seen, a couple of points I would like to make:

1. In the first 7 minutes of the game he penalises Lions players at the breakdown. Regardless of whether you feel they were penalties or not (which I feel Bod's wasnt) he then warns Warburton despite both penalties being just inside the lions half and not exactly 'in the red zone'. Then later in the half the wallabies are pinged three times at the breakdown including the third being on the 5m line with the lions in a try scoring opportunity. Many felt it was a yellow card situation, does the ref even talk to the wallabies? No. 
   
2. He penalised the lions alot for going off their feet at the breakdown. However look back at the ruck which lead to the tap penalty for Aussie first try. Stephen Moore comes in from the side and straight off his feet and yet it is the lions who are penalised. In the second half the lions counter ruck with heaslip coming through the gate unopposed and on hist feet and again are pinged.
   
3. The third is slightly more subjective and perhaps because I was so enraged by his reffing that I was looking for it but Australia were given an age at the breakdown, both to win the ruck and to do something with the ball. I would love to time how long the aussies were giving when there were isolated compared to the lions. Because it sure as hell felt like he was quicker to blow up on the lions than the aussie. 
   

Look I dont mind if a ref is wrong during the match. It is a hard job but at least if a ref is consistent it will level out for both sides however the three points I feel point to areas where he wasnt consistent and for me it ruined the game.

Role on a time when refs from other parts of the world i.e US, Canada Argentina are given higher profile games as only then can we have a neutral ref. And by that I dont mean that yesterdays ref was biased because he was from NZ, but rather because he is a s15 ref and likewise his 'style' would suit the wallabies, as no doubt you would imagine/argue a French ref would suit the lions.

well doc we get told so many times he gave us the thing so why not show some appreciation...and... if hes that way inclined...who will he favour this weekend?...hmmm

Sean Maitland?

Taylorman wrote:Don't know how Joubert can be criticised is beyond me...

After all.. he is the defending World cup winning ref.. respect please...

You have to smile at the irony here TM mate. The Lions have been apparently 'warned' that Joubert will be as pedantic as Pollock at the breakdown. Yet every non-Kiwi and his dog was complaining that Joubert wasn't pedantic enough in the 2011 final.

Which is it?

Theres nothing like the old " On your feet" versus "supporting your own body weight ' arguement to show what a referee will allow.

disneychilly wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Don't know how Joubert can be criticised is beyond me...

After all.. he is the defending World cup winning ref.. respect please...

You have to smile at the irony here TM mate. The Lions have been apparently 'warned' that Joubert will be as pedantic as Pollock at the breakdown. Yet every non-Kiwi and his dog was complaining that Joubert wasn't pedantic enough in the 2011 final.

Which is it?

My current theory is that British rugby journalists have been involved in illicit genetic engineering. Somewhere along the way goldfish DNA got inserted into their makeup. As a result they have an effective memory of about 5 seconds.

I know they've been busy and all but surely Gatland and his mates must have spent SOME time watching super rugby and analysing the interpretations down there? If mere I can guess how he's going to call it, surely a professional coaching staff with the largest budget in world rugby must have a sneaking suspicion?

NZ fans on a ref whinging post - sounds about right. Wayne Barnes steer clear.

Disgraceful attempt by Joubert to put the Lions off by pulling his shorts up so high.

Credit where it's due - I thought Joubert had a very good game today. Thought he was very fair and consistent. Well done that man.

Not a winge about the ref but a check on my understanding of the laws ....

If a player knocks the ball backwards (ie no knock-on) but then ends up behind the ball and another player comes from in front of him and picks the ball up is this not offside as the player picking the ball up is in front of the last player to have touched the ball?

Davies obviously thinks so as he asked the ref about this at about 60 mins and I think he was right and Joubert got it wrong by saying he wasn't offside as the ball was knocked backwards.

Be interested to hear who was right.

Can't do that Griff, very nonV606 of you, its one of the rules when you join - must whinge about the ref - especially if not from your hemisphere.

Heaf wrote:Not a winge about the ref but a check on my understanding of the laws ....

If a player knocks the ball backwards (ie no knock-on) but then ends up behind the ball and another player comes from in front of him and picks the ball up is this not offside as the player picking the ball up is in front of the last player to have touched the ball?

Davies obviously thinks so as he asked the ref about this at about 60 mins and I think he was right and Joubert got it wrong by saying he wasn't offside as the ball was knocked backwards.

Be interested to hear who was right.

No you're not offside. The offside line is only there for knock-ons. There is no off-side in openplay.

There was plenty of players off their feet winning turnovers, went too far the other way this week. But hey, that's the crazy farce that is rugby and its law interpretations.

Wish refs would understand the concept of playing advantage. Last week the ref calls penalty advantage to the Lions on edge of Aus 22. The Lions made about 2 yards, ref calls 'advantage over' instead of giving kickable pen, 30 secs later Aus are 7-0 up. This week there is a knock on, BOD is forced to clear his lines, his kick is poor, and Aus counter, that is NOT an advantage, it should be brought back to knock on, it wasnt, massive gain to aus which then led to try. And don't give me any 'you kicked it so advantage over'. That is the basic error the refs are making that is driving me nuts.

logie28 wrote:Wish refs would understand the concept of playing advantage. Last week the Lions maje 2 yards, ref call 'advantage over' instead of giving kickable pen, 30 secs later Aus are 7-0 up. This week there is a knock on, BOD is forced to clear his lines, his kick is poor, and Aus counter, that is NOT an advantage, it should be brought back to knock on, but this 'you kicked it so advantage over' is cowpat

Knock on advantage is supposed to end if you get the ball away clear. What you do with it afterwards is up to you. There was another time he let the Lions go for ages just for a knock-on advantage and then called it back when the Aussies won the turnover.

Sorry, advantage ends once you have secured an advantage. You'll pick up a clue in the wording there. A bad kick giving the oppostition great ball was clearly not the Lions advantage. There is nothing in the laws of the game that states kicking the ball results in losing advantage, its purely a copout by the the refs

I remember watching some ref talking recently about advantage. Penalty advantage is longer than non penalty advantage - though this probably doesn't explain your complaint logie.

logie28 wrote:Sorry, advantage ends once you have secured an advantage. You'll pick up a clue in the wording there. A bad kick giving the oppostition great ball was clearly not the Lions advantage. There is nothing in the laws of the game that states kicking the ball results in losing advantage, its purely a copout by the the refs

Yes and the advantage from a knock on is gaining clean possession. If you get the ball in you hands it's done. If you kick it, pass it or run with it advantage should be over. For a knock-on.

Not to mention the lions clearly knocked on in their last phase prior to the penalty, but Joubert ignored it apparently in the interests of drama.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Heaf wrote:Not a winge about the ref but a check on my understanding of the laws ....

If a player knocks the ball backwards (ie no knock-on) but then ends up behind the ball and another player comes from in front of him and picks the ball up is this not offside as the player picking the ball up is in front of the last player to have touched the ball?

Davies obviously thinks so as he asked the ref about this at about 60 mins and I think he was right and Joubert got it wrong by saying he wasn't offside as the ball was knocked backwards.

Be interested to hear who was right.

No you're not offside. The offside line is only there for knock-ons. There is no off-side in openplay.

Thanks Hammer but if you're right London Irish were hard done by in the H Cup a couple of years back as they lost to a last minute penalty for exactly these circumstances and didn't get out of the group stages due to that ... I did wonder at the time about it ...

Interestingly though the IRB definition says this:

"In general play a player is offside if the player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball, or in front of a team-mate who last played the ball.

Offside means that a player is temporarily out of the game. Such players are liable to be penalised if they take part in the game."

Based on the above it does sound like if you pick the ball up while in front of the last player to touch it you are offside?

Heaf wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Heaf wrote:Not a winge about the ref but a check on my understanding of the laws ....

If a player knocks the ball backwards (ie no knock-on) but then ends up behind the ball and another player comes from in front of him and picks the ball up is this not offside as the player picking the ball up is in front of the last player to have touched the ball?

Davies obviously thinks so as he asked the ref about this at about 60 mins and I think he was right and Joubert got it wrong by saying he wasn't offside as the ball was knocked backwards.

Be interested to hear who was right.

No you're not offside. The offside line is only there for knock-ons. There is no off-side in openplay.

Thanks Hammer but if you're right London Irish were hard done by in the H Cup a couple of years back as they lost to a last minute penalty for exactly these circumstances and didn't get out of the group stages due to that ... I did wonder at the time about it ...

Interestingly though the IRB definition says this:

"In general play a player is offside if the player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball, or in front of a team-mate who last played the ball.

Offside means that a player is temporarily out of the game. Such players are liable to be penalised if they take part in the game."

Based on the above it does sound like if you pick the ball up while in front of the last player to touch it you are offside?

It certainly does. You can trust me though. I have no idea what I'm talking about.  

 

However it is odd that being offside after a knock-on is a specific offence.

Maybe its to deal with the situation where a player knocks on but then ends up in front of the player that picks it up so the above wouldn't apply so you need a specific offence?

The offside is from when the ball is played. An offside player is only penalised if he interferes with play in some way. So either the player is offside and interferes or he's played onside in some way.

It could also be a result of the way the laws have grown over the years. Perhaps at one point only the knock-on one counted and when the other came in it wasn't rescinded even though unnecessary.