Is Jaco Peyper being paid by the minute?

You would think so with the amount of time his games last. Both games he has ref'd have been painful and we have gone for multiple, multiple replays at different speeds etc for things that seem pretty obvious. Just do a Nigel Owens and override the TMO if he is poncing about!!!

Good point about Owens.

I sense he got a bit frustrated with the TMO interjecting in his first game. I recall there was a neck roll incident. He looked at it himself and said nothing in it lets move on. He probably likes the game to flow for his own flow. I like that he has this mindset as long as he picks up stuff that is overly cynical at slowing the game down.

Peyper is a funny one. I never really rated him but prior to the RWC I was beginning to think he was going pretty well. He's getting a bit of a hard time of it at the moment.

Apparently the organisers have picked up on the negative vibes and world rugby are issuing new instructions on TMO use to the refs.

The England game was an absolute joke, not just for the number of things that went to TMO but also the TV companies inability to supply the correct pictures for him.

TMOs are in danger of ruining the game as a spectacle. And removing some of the advantage teams that want to play at a high tempo and rely on fit mobile players have.

It's because Peyper is an atrocious ref who doesn't want to make decisions without the TMO holding his hand.

He does come across as a poor decision maker - either committing too early ie the ball dropped on the line by Fiji in the England match and last night when he awarded a try to France immediately and was then told by the touch judge into going to the TMO as there could have been a double movement.

Even when he has the picture he takes ages. at the end of the game last night the French winger didn't collect his chip through. replay after replay to decide on what happened. Surprisingly he didn't go to the TMO when the French winger scored in the corner as it was tight on the line.

The TMO last night was awful, he got the French try wrong, there were about 5 things wrong with it and then needed to freeze the video to see the wingers foot going into touch even though he'd already seen the knock on, WTF?!

The Romania try looked a bit dodgy to me though I've only seen it once. Looked as if there were 2 players supporting the ball carrier and not part of a maul?

I noticed that too though I missed the start of the move they were bound at the end

I think the refs in general have been pretty heavy handed, especially pro crowd favourites.

The Twickenham crowd virtually ref'd the first game and Fiji were on the receiving end, as they were v Australia where the crowd boo'd heavily a number of decisions in the 2nd half.

NZ were extremely fortunate v Argentina.

Wales and Scotland to lesser extents were also given the rub of the green.

What about that Romania one? You see anything wrong?

You even figured out which rule May broke for jumping yet?

No 7&1/2 wrote:What about that Romania one? You see anything wrong?

You even figured out which rule May broke for jumping yet?

What exactly was wrong with romania's try? Same maul splintered away, ball carrier up front, no obstruction, defender in contact...

It's not rocket science if your not trying to force the reasoning for an agenda!

Supported by 2 players into the tackle, ball carrier up front as you mentioned.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Supported by 2 players into the tackle, ball carrier up front as you mentioned.

Theres your problem, you consider it a tackle when it was a maul.

I only saw it once, I'll have another look as it didn't look like they joined the maul initially but went around.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I only saw it once, I'll have another look as it didn't look like they joined the maul initially but went around.

I just checked it out too, and it could be considered a tackle in all fairness, they joined originally but the splintered a fraction of a second later, they went 2 yards uncontested before the defender hit them.

It's one of those tricky ones that look great, but on review could be considered technically a flying wedge.

Anyway if it's close fair enough, just an example of where if you only look at one side and have your mind made up that the 'big' teams get the best decisions you miss have the decisions.

Plus trying to get this right if you break away from the maul as the ball carrier it becomes a normal carry so it would then need the defender to tackle or engage first then support to come in. Like I said it looked like 2 players supporting but I only saw it the once after it had been given. I'd have thought the ref woud take a little look.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Plus trying to get this right if you break away from the maul as the ball carrier it becomes a normal carry so it would then need the defender to tackle or engage first then support to come in. Like I said it looked like 2 players supporting but I only saw it the once after it had been given. I'd have thought the ref woud take a little look.

Technically not though, a maul can splinter and face no opposition and still be the same maul. therefore a splintered maul could not be collapsed like a tackle.

I thought the Argentina/New Zealand game was reffed well, the ref used the two whilst the game carried on.

No 7&1/2 wrote:What about that Romania one? You see anything wrong?

You even figured out which rule May broke for jumping yet?

Are you allowed to vault over a player? I thought you couldn't? Shane Williams was pinged years back for that if I recall.

technically there is no law about jumping into the tackle. there are laws about endangering the safety of other players, tackling in the air etc. if what may did was seen as specifically dangerous he could be pinged for it, but not for jumping/vaulting/hurdling/etc alone.

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:What about that Romania one? You see anything wrong?

You even figured out which rule May broke for jumping yet?

Are you allowed to vault over a player? I thought you couldn't? Shane Williams was pinged years back for that if I recall.

Jdv was slightly spear tackled against Japan, the only reason the Japanese player wasn't carded was because jdv jumped into the tackle. Neither was penalised so no, I don't think there is anything against jumping into the tackle

There is very much laws that are used to penalise jumping into a tackle (which is far different from jumping over a tackle).

Jumping into a tackle is taught to be penalised as dangerous play, lifting knees and feet to opposing players head height is dangerous, I always penalise under 10.4 m

Is Jaco Peyper being paid by the minute?

I don't know but I know Poite's on the very same deal if he is.

Yeah but in the case of May even you said it wasn't dangerous Fanster so correctly not penalised.

SecretFly wrote:Is Jaco Peyper being paid by the minute?  

I don't know but I know Poite's on the very same deal if he is.

Yeah, if you include Garces they must have gotten a three for one deal.

In the NZ vs Namibia game last night, I thought it was refed quite well, but the TMO failed to stop Nonu at the bottom of a ruck pushing the ball back and out with his hand. He was concentrating on offside, but the question Poite asked was "try or no try". It was obvious to me, he replayed it about 5 times, you can clearly see the arm reaching out and pushing the ball back, but it was completely ignored.

Peyper fails to understand the fundamentals of a scrum or maul and in not understanding makes arbitery decisions which are usually wrong

Rugby spectators want to have their cake and eat it. The ref's decisions must be perfect, because if he makes an error in a WC game he'll be hounded out of the job, but they must make these perfect decisions in a split second, preferably without the use of a TMO, otherwise if they ensure that they make the right decision (using multiple replays) then they'll also be criticised...they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Peyper is running the line for the England v Wales game, we may have a 1st ever TMO referral to decide where the ball went into touch!

Mr Fishpaste wrote:Rugby spectators want to have their cake and eat it.  The ref's decisions must be perfect, because if he makes an error in a WC game he'll be hounded out of the job, but they must make these perfect decisions in a split second, preferably without the use of a TMO, otherwise if they ensure that they make the right decision (using multiple replays) then they'll also be criticised...they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Owens doesn't seem to have a problem, or Poite for that matter, quick look if they think something may be amiss, then decide

Poite was appalling today. He's a glass 3/4 empty referee. Big brother is watching these refs and we're suffering because of it. World Rugby have cOcked it up. This RWC is shaping up to be the dullest RWC in history. After one and a bit rounds, the main taking point is the referee/TMO. And Japan, but that's a distant memory.

The problem isn't just the refs, but the laws and interpretation they are being asked to apply. Too many occasions where players are required to do two contradictory things at the same time.

My current favourite example is completion of a tackle - by the Laws, the tackler must hold the ball carrier until 'brought to ground', but then must immediately release and stand up or move way. Several incidences recently where to my eyes the defender has completed the tackle and released his man very quickly so as to compete for the ball, only for the 'tackled' player to immediately regain hs feet and carry on running, with the ref allowing play on. Johnny May in the run up to Brown's 2nd try was marginal, and there was one I saw last night in the AB game

Very difficult call for the ref to make, considering the ball carrier is attempting to break from the attempted tackle at the same time. My feeling is though at the moment the refs are being a bit lenient on ball carriers in this instance (but also frequently do not correctly penalise tacklers for not releasing the tackled player and therefore preventing fair release of the ball)

The one last night was just very good play by Milner-Skudder I think. The tackle was completed he did release the ball but then was up on his feet and picked it back up. You don't see it often as generally players get there before the tackled player can do it.

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Mr Fishpaste wrote:Rugby spectators want to have their cake and eat it.  The ref's decisions must be perfect, because if he makes an error in a WC game he'll be hounded out of the job, but they must make these perfect decisions in a split second, preferably without the use of a TMO, otherwise if they ensure that they make the right decision (using multiple replays) then they'll also be criticised...they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Owens doesn't seem to have a problem, or Poite for that matter, quick look if they think something may be amiss, then decide

It's not so much time taken to make a decision, it's probably timing styles of refs in how quickly the communicate their decisions, make known their decisions, make clear their decisions.  It's up to a weaker team to invent it's own methods of slowing things down.  Grand by me - every side does it when needs must.  
But I think the ref shouldn't be part of that tapestry of slowing down himself.  If he's made his decision, communicate it quickly and move on.  

At one point in last night's game, Poite had obviously made a decision to yellow card a particular player but took an age to tell another player to tell the offending player that he wanted him over to give the yellow to him.  And then it turned out that before the offending player could approach him, Poite realised, or was told, it was a different player completely that required the yellow.  So yes, a mistake rectified by time taken, but an awful long time to execute a yellow already decided upon.

nathan wrote:I thought the Argentina/New Zealand game was reffed well, the ref used the two whilst the game carried on.

That's because it was Wayne Barnes. Though I know New Zealanders and Irishmen shudder when they hear his name!

ebop wrote:Poite was appalling today. He's a glass 3/4 empty referee. Big brother is watching these refs and we're suffering because of it. World Rugby have cOcked it up. This RWC is shaping up to be the dullest RWC in history. After one and a bit rounds, the main taking point is the referee/TMO. And Japan, but that's a distant memory.

If only! I've been depressed all week...

Mr Fishpaste wrote:

ebop wrote:Poite was appalling today. He's a glass 3/4 empty referee. Big brother is watching these refs and we're suffering because of it. World Rugby have cOcked it up. This RWC is shaping up to be the dullest RWC in history. After one and a bit rounds, the main taking point is the referee/TMO. And Japan, but that's a distant memory.

If only! I've been depressed all week...

Japan's victory over SA should never ever become a distant memory, it should be written in every change room of the Springboks for the rest of time.

A reminder when you are poorly prepared and blase about an opponent, dismissing them because they are supposedly there to make up the numbers, they have nothing to lose and will go for gold.

In fact Meyer and the whole tram should tattoo that date on their person as a reminder of the most humiliating day in SA's rugby legacy.

They should never forget they cheapened the jersey.

It was the most pathetic effort I have ever seen, not once did they show any urgency, not once did they show they cared whether they win or lose, they showed no pride, hunger or passion.

They are in my view not deserved to wear the Springbok jersey.

One assumes Meyer is gone whatever happens unless they win it?

You've had some fun pointing out Wales failure in Japan before Biltong, i guess that won't happen so much now? I still find it hard to believe they did it but i think they thought it was going to be a cakewalk and Japan were uncannily accurate and disciplined.

Bodes well for 2019 in terms of the event.

Gwlad wrote:One assumes Meyer is gone whatever happens unless they win it?

You've had some fun pointing out Wales failure in Japan before Biltong, i guess that won't happen so much now? I still find it hard to believe they did it but i think they thought it was going to be a cakewalk and Japan were uncannily accurate and disciplined.

Bodes well for 2019 in terms of the event.

You are thinking of someone else mate, it isn't in my nature to make fun of any team.