More Of Clancy's Blunders

Anyone remember this from just two years ago?

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/irb-must-act-to-ensure-against-rogue-refereeing-20110826-1je8g.html

"The fact is that Clancy altered the laws of rugby to give an advantage to the home side" ...

"The worst officiating mistake in the modern era..."

Gosh, sound familiar?

Already reprimanded by IRB head referee boss for not knowing the laws, Clancy was let lose again to mess up another international. How many chances will this guy get?

Or just last year?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2113149/Warren-Gatland-frustrated-referee.html

On other news, a "seething" Ewen McKenzie is to follow up Clancy's performance with the IRB following a video review of the match:

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/sport/rugby-union/penalties-cost-wallabies-dearly-as-england-wins-20-13-in-rugby/story-e6frg7o6-1226752119754

It will be interesting to see how NZ v
England pans out with the worlds best referee Craig Joubert named,
With european top whistler Nigel Owens handling the ireland v NZ game. Did Australia's falling reputation see them landed with the most notoriously problematic and least favourable referee?

  

  

I knew you couldn't resist.

More GE character flaws. Poor soul.

GloriousEmpire wrote:I knew you couldn't resist.

At least you admit that you're acting the maggot

If you ever quote the Daily Mail as a source - you instantly lose the argument.
Sorry. Do not pass go do not collect £200

GloriousEmpire wrote:Anyone remember this from just two years ago?

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/irb-must-act-to-ensure-against-rogue-refereeing-20110826-1je8g.html

"The fact is that Clancy altered the laws of rugby to give an advantage to the home side" ...

"The worst officiating mistake in the modern era..."

Gosh, sound familiar?

Already reprimanded by IRB head referee boss for not knowing the laws, Clancy was let lose again to mess up another international. How many chances will this guy get?

Or just last year?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2113149/Warren-Gatland-frustrated-referee.html

On other news, a "seething" Ewen McKenzie is to follow up Clancy's performance with the IRB following a video review of the match:

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/sport/rugby-union/penalties-cost-wallabies-dearly-as-england-wins-20-13-in-rugby/story-e6frg7o6-1226752119754

It will be interesting to see how NZ v
England pans out with the worlds best referee Craig Joubert named,
With european top whistler Nigel Owens handling the ireland v NZ game. Did Australia's falling reputation see them landed with the most notoriously problematic and least favourable referee?

Have a lard rse arsicon! ( -!- )

 I can't help it, I love a nibble.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Anyone remember this from just two years ago?

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/irb-must-act-to-ensure-against-rogue-refereeing-20110826-1je8g.html

"The fact is that Clancy altered the laws of rugby to give an advantage to the home side" ...

"The worst officiating mistake in the modern era..."

Gosh, sound familiar?

Already reprimanded by IRB head referee boss for not knowing the laws, Clancy was let lose again to mess up another international. How many chances will this guy get?

Or just last year?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2113149/Warren-Gatland-frustrated-referee.html

On other news, a "seething" Ewen McKenzie is to follow up Clancy's performance with the IRB following a video review of the match:

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/sport/rugby-union/penalties-cost-wallabies-dearly-as-england-wins-20-13-in-rugby/story-e6frg7o6-1226752119754

It will be interesting to see how NZ v
England pans out with the worlds best referee Craig Joubert named,
With european top whistler Nigel Owens handling the ireland v NZ game. Did Australia's falling reputation see them landed with the most notoriously problematic and least favourable referee?

You have given us three examples of SH whinging. However there must be thousands. I would like to see a comprehensive list. That should keep you busy for weeks.

Exiledinborders wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Anyone remember this from just two years ago?

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/irb-must-act-to-ensure-against-rogue-refereeing-20110826-1je8g.html

"The fact is that Clancy altered the laws of rugby to give an advantage to the home side" ...

"The worst officiating mistake in the modern era..."

Gosh, sound familiar?

Already reprimanded by IRB head referee boss for not knowing the laws, Clancy was let lose again to mess up another international. How many chances will this guy get?

Or just last year?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2113149/Warren-Gatland-frustrated-referee.html

On other news, a "seething" Ewen McKenzie is to follow up Clancy's performance with the IRB following a video review of the match:

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/sport/rugby-union/penalties-cost-wallabies-dearly-as-england-wins-20-13-in-rugby/story-e6frg7o6-1226752119754

It will be interesting to see how NZ v
England pans out with the worlds best referee Craig Joubert named,
With european top whistler Nigel Owens handling the ireland v NZ game. Did Australia's falling reputation see them landed with the most notoriously problematic and least favourable referee?

You have given us three examples of SH whinging. However there must be thousands. I would like to see a comprehensive list. That should keep you busy for weeks.

In detail, with video evidence.  

We can see that England were not brilliant, but still beat an even poorer Australia. The clue is in this key passage from the AU article.

"But England monstered the forwards and the lack of authority shown by the Wallaby pack must frustrate McKenzie"

I guess he IS frustrated and so he kicks the ref.

"The Wallabies have now lost eight of their past 11 matches"

how many did Clancy ref ?

Hypocrite and bad sportsman are the two flaws that come to mind with this post.

gregortree wrote:"The Wallabies have now lost eight of their past 11 matches"

how many did Clancy ref ?

Well to be fair, he isn't blaming Clancy for the other losses.  

i remember the Italy and Wales game . frustrated by the amount of whistle stoppages . spoilt the game

Clancy's   ha ha

Keep it up Clancy.  You're doin' a rootin' tootin' job of annoying the regal Rugby Union Overlords with your eejitry and ballyhooism.

It's only Chapter one, folks.  To paraphrase Jack Nicholson's Joker.  WC2015 "Wait till they get a load of me!!!"

 

Scrumpy wrote: 

A record request, Scumpy?

Certainly.  My Pleasure.  Clancy's latest:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cujri54RPKw

I hear that the British film industry is to resurrect the "Carry On" series with the new rugby based "carry on clowns shoes" featuring a hilarious game of rugby refereed by the errant Clancy and his gang. Apparently there will be fumbling and incompetent backs dropping the ball hilariously, blind linesmen and a drunk tmo who can't see obstruction.

Ha! Ha!!! A normal day in Pro12 then? Ah the pleasures of life when you can have a Guinness and a fag in the TMO office.

GloriousEmpire wrote:I hear that the British film industry is to resurrect the "Carry On" series with the new rugby based "carry on clowns shoes" featuring a hilarious game of rugby refereed by the errant Clancy and his gang. Apparently there will be fumbling and incompetent backs dropping the ball hilariously, blind linesmen and a drunk tmo who can't see obstruction.

I think your being harsh on the Aus backs there, it was their forwards who were the weakness.

[quote="butterfingers"
I think your being harsh on the Aus backs there, it was their forwards who were are the weakness.[/quote]
There, fixed it for ya!!

OzT wrote:[quote="butterfingers"
I think your being harsh on the Aus backs there, it was their forwards who were are the weakness.

There, fixed it for ya!!  [/quote]
On a serious note, how do you rate the Aus pack. Man for man they aren't a bad unit, Robinson and Alexander a touch small, but there is quality at lock, solid 8 and 7, and experience throughout. What do you think the problems are?

Fardy seems a bit out of his depth if I'm honest, Slipper isn't having the effect lots of people thought he would, and I'm not a fan of having young captains with few caps, which is what seems to be the case in the last season or so.

Well butterfingers, I've argued for years on here that generally the wallabies' scrum is not that weak, on a good day with 1st choice front row they have embarassed some sides. But the mounting evidence and on last week's showing I am thinking I may be wrong and they are weak at scrums. else they just ran out of puff in the 2nd half, not really acceptable for professional players.

Young skipper we've got cause we are out of motavating skippers worth their place in the squad.

But no worries, just wait till next year when we'll unearth some hulks from up NT or the depths of Qld that'll shock the world with their scrummaging prowess!!

They were penalised out of the game. Some people are saying unfairly so. It's not so much a matter if what they did, but how they are perceived.

OzT wrote:

But no worries, just wait till next year when we'll unearth some hulks from up NT or the depths of Qld that'll shock the world with their scrummaging prowess!!  

I quite agree.   Australians with scrummaging prowess would be one heck of a shock.

GloriousEmpire wrote:They were penalised out of the game. Some people are saying unfairly so. It's not so much a matter if what they did, but how they are perceived.

Excellent analysis by an Aussie on this video. Shows Clancy did OK at scrums.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YYas0aXtRzU

Exile,
thank you for this detailed Aussie analysis on the scrums.
Aussie certainly suffered from England pressure over the 17 scrums, yes, 17, and plainly were tired before the end.
Despite Aussie scrum tricks, Clancy called most penalties exactly right.
In fact Clancy ignored some minor issues to keep the game flowing.

Exiledinborders wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:They were penalised out of the game. Some people are saying unfairly so. It's not so much a matter if what they did, but how they are perceived.

Excellent analysis by an Aussie on this video. Shows Clancy did OK at scrums.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YYas0aXtRzU

I like the way you say "by an Aussie" here. Interesting invalid arguing technique known as the appeal to false authority.

I think Clancy did ok, he wasn't at fault for Brown being in touch (if he was!) and he went upstairs for the Farrell try (which was a try as there was clearly no obstruction)

GE,
So your authority is more authentic ?
I look forward to your detailed Youtube rebuttal to the 'Aussie' guy's video.
Scott Allen is a knowledgable Aussie coach with a proper cv and a public persona:

Scott
"I'm a rugby coach, analyst and writer.
You can find my articles at http://www.theroar.com.au/author/scott-allen/ …
Australia · auspacrugby.com "

gregortree wrote:GE,
So your authority is more authentic ?
I look forward to your detailed Youtube rebuttal to the 'Aussie' guy's video.
Scott Allen is a knowledgable Aussie coach with a proper cv and a public persona:

Scott
"I'm a rugby coach, analyst and writer.
You can find my articles at http://www.theroar.com.au/author/scott-allen/ …
Australia · auspacrugby.com "

A true professional doesn't publish propaganda into the public domain on youtube.

Of course you think Clancy did a good job. It's quite laughable, and a point I was making in another thread.

GE:
Scott Allen says Clancy did a fair job.
My own opinion as a fan would be biased, and in my case also uninformed and amateur.
Which is why I am grateful for Allen's professional technical analysis on Youtube.
Plus the other insights from many 606 posters.
I find your damning 'analysis' of Clancy somewhat less convincing than Allen's and lacking detail.

People always complain how Clancy never lets the game flow but accept that he is as right about his calls as others. Would we like a bryce were we let the game run and not stop it for infrigments unless the ball dies

The secret of the complaint is this.  
Clancy (and other refs who don't let a game 'flow') gets in the way of fast and slick sides cheating.
He is therefore not the quality of ref for the new world where bums must be kept on seats, where bills must be paid, where sponsors must be won over; where rugby must be seen to 'flow', where speed of legs and hands can easily fool less diligent refs who wisely overlook sly forward passes and ruck infringements etc.

And if a fast and sly side can innately evade a ref's eye more than a slow and ponderous side, then so be it - the sly sides should get the ref's benefit of the doubt because they are bringing the style of rugby to the world audience that the world audience wants to see.

ie...a cheating side should always win if they are more camera-friendly.  And refs should ref accordingly to let their TV friendly cheating 'flow'.

No is just prefer it if he could spot the knock ons and when the ball went into touch and not have a predetermined idea who he's going to penalise at each scrum. That would do me.

When is Clancy's next AB game ?
I must get back onto 606 after that one to see what happened.

gregortree wrote:GE:
Scott Allen says Clancy did a fair job.
My own opinion as a fan would be biased, and in my case also uninformed and amateur.
Which is why I am grateful for Allen's professional technical analysis on Youtube.
Plus the other insights from many 606 posters.
I find your damning 'analysis' of Clancy somewhat less convincing than Allen's and lacking detail.

Thing is you are only looking at sources that validate what you want to hear. It's a desperate appeal to authority to validate your own need to feel positive about a ropey England performance and to be convinced by a convenient "expert". Hence you seek solace in the words of anyone who will agree with you and attempt to discredit the character/knowledge if anyone who disagrees.

Stick your head in the sand if you want. But Clancy's performance was rank. England were very lucky to get not just the rub of the green, but most of the green itself handed to them.

If you look for it, you will find plenty of experts presenting that view as well.

You need to be honest with yourself. The fact you're getting so upset at anyone who contradicts your opinion is telling.

Classic  

Classic  

In before the lock!

The nazis burned the books that said truths they didn't want heard.

Irish ref is poor 'shocker'

munkian wrote:Irish ref is poor 'shocker'

Even GE keeps away from 'Racifying' it.

 

GloriousEmpire wrote:The nazis burned the books that said truths they didn't want heard.

OMG another classic  

 

 , still waiting for your analysis of these other expert opinions.
My opinion does not count for much as at least I realise I am no scrum expert.
Mr Allen seemed to know what he is talking about, backed with some detail and so his piece is informative.
I'll take a look at your expert analysis if you do one, but so far all I see are your assertions.
And when does Clancy ref the ABs again ? I'd love to read your 'analysis' after that one.

From the tone of your post I don't think you want these things at all.

Clancy was poor in many areas, including the obvious ones of not knowing where the touch line was, what a knock on was, or what obstruction was. If you need someone to spoon feed you that on youtube then you own knowledge and understanding is fairly limited. So what do I care of your opinion? I don't.