QF4: Australia v Scotland, 18 October

First topic message reminder :

      
AUSTRALIA v SCOTLAND

18 October 2015
16:00 BST (UTC+01)
Twickenham, London

Live on telly

Ref: Craig Joubert (South Africa)
ARs: Glen Jackson (New Zealand) and Pascal Gauzere (France)
TMO: Ben Skeen (New Zealand)

A. Head to Head

28 Played 28
19 Won 9
0 Drawn 0
9 Lost 19
671 Points 330

B. Recent Form

23 November 2013
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
15 – 21 to Australia

5 June 2012
Hunter Stadium, Newcastle
6 – 9 to Scotland

21 November 2009
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
9 – 8 to Scotland

25 November 2006
Murrayfield, Edinburgh
15 – 44 to Australia

20 November 2004
Hampden Park, Glasgow
17 – 31 to Australia

C. TEAMS:
AUSTRALIA

15 Kurtley Beale; 14 Adam Ashley-Cooper, 13 Tevita Kuridrani, 12 Matt Giteau, 11 Drew Mitchell; 10 Bernard Foley, 9 Will Genia;

1 Scott Sio, 2Stephen Moore, 3 Sekope Kepu, 4 Kane Douglas, 5 Rob Simmons, 6 Scott Fardy, 7 Michael Hooper, 8 Ben McCalman.

Substitutes: 16 Tatafu Polota-Nau, 17 James Slipper, 18 Greg Holmes, 19 Dean Mumm, 20 Sean McMahon, 21 Nick Phipps, 22 Matt Toomua, 23 Quade Cooper.

SCOTLAND

15 Stuart Hogg; 14 Sean Maitland, 13 Mark Bennett, 12 Peter Horne 11 Tommy Seymour; 10 Finn Russell,  9 Greig Laidlaw;

1 Alasdair Dickinson, 2 Ross Ford, 3 Willem Nel, 4 Jonny Gray, 5 Richie Gray, 6 Blair Cowan, 7 John Hardie, 8 David Denton. 


Substitutes: 
16 Fraser Brown, 17 Gordon Reid, 18 Jon Welsh, 19 Tim Swinson, 20 Josh Strauss, 21 Henry Pyrgos, 22 Richie Vernon, 23 Sean Lamont.

Commiserations to the Scots, you were absolutely fantastic. You need to seriously learn how to consistently perform at those heights. The quality is there.

Gotta say, have enjoyed all 4 quarter finals, so little rugby played in one, but brutal and eye watering, total rugby played in another against n imploded opposition, a master class in the third of how to exploit narrow defences, and a gutfest to finish up the weekend...

GREAT WEEKEND!!!

Picking the game apart a wee bit. Scotland 1st choice pack was awesome. The tight 5 put a very good Australia scrum in all kinds of trouble.

Cowan, Hardie and Dozer as a backrow unit were absolutely sensational.

Maybe it was derided Raf because it was a shocker of a decision, if I charge into a ruck with my right shoulder it's ok as long as I wrap by left arm around someone i'm not shoulder charging.

That's not the way I expected the Q-Finals to go. I thought the IRE-ARG match would have the close scoreline!

Based on the World Cup I can see France getting the wooden spoon next

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Commiserations to the Scots, you were absolutely fantastic. You need to seriously learn how to consistently perform at those heights. The quality is there.

Its been coming for a while. this is the first time this group of players under Cotter have actually clicked. We all said it was a good group and a good coach - just the WC was a year too soon. Look out in the 6N. someone will pay for this loss. 4000 caps V 800+ Look at how young most of our guys are and how inexperienced. We are only going to get better

Yes, just to be clear - I think that the ref should have gone to the TMO to determine who actually touched the ball last - good argument it was Phipps. However, I was also expecting that the result wouldn't have changed.

5 tries to 3 against us lads, and we only ha 40% of possession. Let' just bear that in mind, although conversely I still thought that Maitland's yellow card (th turning point in the game) was not correct. Just how hard does one need to throw a pass to warrant the knock-on not being deliberate?

I am proud though. This is a very young Scotland team and their best days are ahead of them.

Oh, and Joubert will get a private kicking in the referees' post match review.

I thought Joubert did pretty well to be honest and got most of the calls right. Some were marginal either way, but I thought did as well as they possibly could there.

Notch wrote:

Poorfour wrote:Contrast that with today's other QF, where Garces went to the TMO before awarding what would have been a red card (because it was the player's second yellow), because "I want to be absolutely sure."

Aye but they still came to the wrong decision in that case... which just proves that the TMO is not some 100% mechanism for getting the right call. If a referee trusts himself he should blow it.

I don't agree with you on either point, and neither did the ref and TMO in the Argentina game. The ref specifically wanted to see if there was an attempt to bind, he saw it, so he did not award the card. Whether it was the right decision or not, it was correct use of the TMO.

We've seen several situations in this RWC where a ref trusted himself and on subsequent TMO review found he got it wrong. It started in the opening game with the Fiji try, and it's gone on since.

I'm not saying the TMO should be invoked willy-nilly, but there is no way Joubert could actually have been "100% sure" of that and it's too important a call not to check.

I can't believe that. Fair play to Foley, who had a bit of a stinker today. That's ballsy.

Heartbreaking for Scotland though. Obviously Welsh people know what it's like to get beaten by a last minute kick by them, so I can only sympathise. What a Scottish performance though.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Commiserations to the Scots, you were absolutely fantastic. You need to seriously learn how to consistently perform at those heights. The quality is there.

This.

Pourfour He is not allowed to use the TMO for that sort of call 

The laws they say wrote:The TMO can be used only in the following circumstances:

-Determining the grounding of the ball in-goal for a try or touchdown and/or whether players were in touch or touch in goal before grounding
-Determining whether a kick at goal has been successful
-Confirm if an infringement has occurred in the build-up to a try or prevention of a try (infringement must be within two phases of the try or touchdown)
-Considering acts of possible foul play

So yesterday folks were saying how Owens is a brilliant ref because he lets things go in order to let the game flow and now folks are saying the ref couldn't do something because of the rules

TJ wrote:Pourfour He is not allowed to use the TMO for that sort of call 

The laws they say wrote:The TMO can be used only in the following circumstances:

-Determining the grounding of the ball in-goal for a try or touchdown and/or whether players were in touch or touch in goal before grounding
-Determining whether a kick at goal has been successful
-Confirm if an infringement has occurred in the build-up to a try or prevention of a try (infringement must be within two phases of the try or touchdown)
-Considering acts of possible foul play

"Considering acts of possible foul play" - yes. In which case why wasn't the TMO asked to look at the shoulder charge on Hogg after he'd kicked the ball clear about 3 minutes from the end?

In some ways we were lucky, interception try etc but the final pen was a big call. It came off phipps. That is obvious. If so it can't be a pen. The ref swas harsh over maitland too. Watch it at slowmo and of course it looks bad buit his hand was to the side not below. Its not a card.

If Scotland did that to AUS in the scrum what will ARG do? ARG can go into the match with real confidence albeit Pocock and Folau will improve AUS drastically.

Look, AUS were marginally the better side but Scotland should have won and I do feel the weight of "world rugby" on his decision.  It did feel "jobs for the boys" around some of his decisions.

Hell boys you make us believe for 5 mins... well thanks to be fair as that's 5 minutes more than I ever believed in the last 15 years.

Can we now put this "oh you're only in the qtrs because Japan only had a 4 day rest after the boks".

PS - how did the boks ever let WP Nel through their fingers. Its ridiculous naivety. We all said so at the time. He cooked the Aussies today.

In which case TJ he got the Maitland call completely wrong, if he deemed it was a deliberate act preventing a try he should have awarded a penalty try because he didn't deem it as such he shouldn't have gone to the TMO.

Never want to watch us play like that again. Simply dreadful for the most part - far too many errors and indiscretions. The scrummaging seemed to take a backward step and that uneasy sense of panic swept in as usual. If they play like that again next week the Pumas will pummel and shred us.

OK - Scotland dealt badly with restarts; and the ref was probably not favouring either side in his interpretations EXCEPT in two big calls. There was no way Maitland deserved a yellow for that knock-on ; and a totally inexplicable refusalt to look at the screen for the last penalty.

BTW - looking at the Maitland card again, I wonder if the pass he knocked-on wasn't forward? Which means the initial offence was Australian?

Well he used the TMO to see if there was defending cover. But isn't a deliberate knock on foul play? So it's covered. So is offside, of course.

Nope - he wanted to check if it was prevent a try - did you listen to the ref?  He specifically asked for a wide angle and said - "no penalty try as the cover was coming across".  So he had decided himself deliberate knock on and wanted to check if it should be a penalty try.

optimist wrote:

TJ wrote:Pourfour He is not allowed to use the TMO for that sort of call 

The laws they say wrote:The TMO can be used only in the following circumstances:

-Determining the grounding of the ball in-goal for a try or touchdown and/or whether players were in touch or touch in goal before grounding
-Determining whether a kick at goal has been successful
-Confirm if an infringement has occurred in the build-up to a try or prevention of a try (infringement must be within two phases of the try or touchdown)
-Considering acts of possible foul play

"Considering acts of possible foul play" - yes.  In which case why wasn't the TMO asked to look at the shoulder charge on Hogg after he'd kicked the ball clear about 3 minutes from the end?

I think that one was a clear error having seen the replay and should have been a pen

Or loaded dog.....I dunno.....maybe Scotland's scrum was better

Guys we are looking like a bunch of chumps bickering about decisions that could've or should've gone our way.

We have a strong pack, pacey and accurate backs. Sort the restarts out and we are 6 contenders.

Bickering about the ref is pretty unbecoming. We made a rod for our own back like England did against Wales. Some naive decisions in that final line out and had Bennett kept that pass in hand halfway through the first half or we can collect restarts we'd be plotting the Pumas downfall right now.

We're a young team and have time on our side.

Gutting defeat but frankly we should have beaten France Ireland and Australia in the last month and lost every single game from winning positions. Just can't do the basics! probably the only chance we'll get to get to a world cup final, stupid long throw at the lineout!

guys - any match we can debate refs calls and say - "this call cost us the match" and equally I bet the Aus fans if they had lost would have been complaining about ref calls that went against them.

But be clear.  Scotland lost this game because they blew two lineouts in their 22, blew 3 restarts and maul defence was poor.

Taking the emotion out of it, and regardless of whether it was the correct call, is it just me or is that kind of penalty the most unsatisfactory penalty you can get in rugby? There's no way that kind of thing is worthy of a penalty imo.

Someone fumbles it forward and the ball lands straight in front of someone - of course they're going to naturally reach out and catch it. Where is the malicious intent? Where is the player trying to deliberately gain an advantage?

That kind of offense should be a free kick in my mind - there's no way it should decide matches.

Obviously if someone deliberately catches the ball to stop the other team gaining an advantage that should be a penalty, but where it is accidental or no advantage gained I don't think it should be a penalty.

TJ wrote:Nope - he wanted to check if it was prevent a try - did you listen to the ref?  He specifically asked for a wide angle and said - "no penalty try as the cover was coming across".  So he had decided himself deliberate knock on and wanted to check if it should be a penalty try.

He clearly says he was happy there was cover and that he wasn't going to award a penalty try...

On the deliberate knock-on decision, I was under the impression the TMO drew Joubert's attention to it, not that Joubert asked for it to be reviewed.

Fanster wrote:

TJ wrote:Nope - he wanted to check if it was prevent a try - did you listen to the ref?  He specifically asked for a wide angle and said - "no penalty try as the cover was coming across".  So he had decided himself deliberate knock on and wanted to check if it should be a penalty try.

He clearly says he was happy there was cover and that he wasn't going to award a penalty try...

after the replay no?

TJ wrote:Pourfour He is not allowed to use the TMO for that sort of call 

The laws they say wrote:The TMO can be used only in the following circumstances:

-Determining the grounding of the ball in-goal for a try or touchdown and/or whether players were in touch or touch in goal before grounding
-Determining whether a kick at goal has been successful
-Confirm if an infringement has occurred in the build-up to a try or prevention of a try (infringement must be within two phases of the try or touchdown)
-Considering acts of possible foul play

He awarded a penalty therefore he had deemed it was an act of foul play!!!!

2ndtimeround wrote:

TJ wrote:Pourfour He is not allowed to use the TMO for that sort of call 

The laws they say wrote:The TMO can be used only in the following circumstances:

-Determining the grounding of the ball in-goal for a try or touchdown and/or whether players were in touch or touch in goal before grounding
-Determining whether a kick at goal has been successful
-Confirm if an infringement has occurred in the build-up to a try or prevention of a try (infringement must be within two phases of the try or touchdown)
-Considering acts of possible foul play

He awarded a penalty therefore he had deemed it was an act of foul play!!!!

Offside/knock ons do not fall under foul play

TJ wrote:

Fanster wrote:

TJ wrote:Nope - he wanted to check if it was prevent a try - did you listen to the ref?  He specifically asked for a wide angle and said - "no penalty try as the cover was coming across".  So he had decided himself deliberate knock on and wanted to check if it should be a penalty try.

He clearly says he was happy there was cover and that he wasn't going to award a penalty try...

after the replay no?

Joubert gave a penalty and the the two intervened, that's when he checked to see if there was cover

Absolutely gutted, but we can't ship five tries in these big games and expect to win them. 

Back to the Pro12 it is then.

Joubert is a complete Kumquat Full Frak stop

Fantasticbarnsmell wrote:

2ndtimeround wrote:

TJ wrote:Pourfour He is not allowed to use the TMO for that sort of call 

The laws they say wrote:The TMO can be used only in the following circumstances:

-Determining the grounding of the ball in-goal for a try or touchdown and/or whether players were in touch or touch in goal before grounding
-Determining whether a kick at goal has been successful
-Confirm if an infringement has occurred in the build-up to a try or prevention of a try (infringement must be within two phases of the try or touchdown)
-Considering acts of possible foul play

He awarded a penalty therefore he had deemed it was an act of foul play!!!!

Offside/knock ons do not fall under foul play

Quite right. Foul play is Law 10. This would have fallen under 'Offside and Onside in General Play'- which is Law 11.

l Ahh Mr TMO lets sort it out. Scotland are a tier 2 team and Oz are tier 1. Hmmm lets see Mr Cheety TMO/ card for nothing and lets see what happens - A Frak disgrace !

Scotland are not a Tier 2 team- just because you finish at the bottom end of the Six Nations most years doesn't mean you are not Tier 1.

TJ, the definition of Foul Play is very broad:

DEFINITIONS
Foul play is anything a player does within the playing enclosure that is against the letter and spirit of the Laws of the Game. It includes obstruction, unfair play, repeated infringements, dangerous play and misconduct which is prejudicial to the Game.

Handling the ball after a knock-on is addressed under Law 11, but as a penalty offence it's covered by the more general category of Obstruction of the Ball, 10.1(d). Which would place it very much within the purview of the TMO.

Incidentally,  Law 10 also includes strict and explicit prohibition of the Flying Wedge, which has been happily waved on in game after game this RWC. So maybe the refs are playing to a set of Laws we mere mortals are not permitted to see.

I can see that the mindless persecution of Joubert is going to be as bad as what Alain Rolland got in 2011.

Notch wrote:I can see that the mindless persecution of Joubert is going to be as bad as what Alain Rolland got in 2011.

He should have sent it to the TMO. He made a mistake.

We on the other hand failed to gather 3 restarts and played a stupidly overcomplicated line out inside our 10 meter line in the poring rain whilst ahead with 2 minutes in the clock.

Throw to 2, stick it up the jumper,  punt it out. Done.

Instead we flung it to the tail and...  Well the rest is history.

Notch wrote:I can see that the mindless persecution of Joubert is going to be as bad as what Alain Rolland got in 2011.

Joubert is crap so he should get perspecuted. Ref's have been officiating in a very SH way this tournament which clearly doesn't suit us amateurs up north. Joubert however has been rubbish since 2011 so he doesn't get to hide behind that excuse.

Incidentally, I don't think criticising those key decisions in the match thread demeans anyone.

The ITV post-match discussion led with both. If Sir Ian McGeechan, Michael Lynagh and Lawrence Dallaglio thought they warranted top mention, then it would be odd if we all avoided the topic out of a misplaced sense of decorum.

With regard to Maitland's yellow card, McGeechan even raised the question of whether those kinds of calls ever go against the top teams to the same extent.

It would be nice to talk about the teams for a bit though...

fa0019 wrote:Look, AUS were marginally the better side but Scotland should have won and I do feel the weight of "world rugby" on his decision. It did feel "jobs for the boys" around some of his decisions.

Didn't think Scotland should have won to be honest, they leaked tries against the form team of the competition when they looked a little off form. Unlucky anyway, the worst type of loss is ones right at the death.

It is a total disgrace ............worst WC ever tbh

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Notch wrote:I can see that the mindless persecution of Joubert is going to be as bad as what Alain Rolland got in 2011.

He should have sent it to the TMO. He made a mistake.

We on the other hand failed to gather 3 restarts and played a stupidly overcomplicated line out inside our 10 meter line in the poring rain whilst ahead with 2 minutes in the clock.

Throw to 2, stick it up the jumper,  punt it out. Done.

Instead we flung it to the tail and...  Well the rest is history.

I agree RuggerRadge, and we need to work on those area's and Joubert's shortcomings also need to be addressed. I don't think it is unreasonable to point out the failings of our team and the ref.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Notch wrote:I can see that the mindless persecution of Joubert is going to be as bad as what Alain Rolland got in 2011.

He should have sent it to the TMO. He made a mistake.

This has already been covered here in some details, he couldn't refer it to the TMO

We talk about the decisions because they were wrong and ultimately decided the outcome of the game. If it was an AI I'd move on, but the ref cost us a place in the semi final if the World Cup.

It's inexcusable

Matalawu's non-try was looked at in the first game. In this game the replay showed Hogg being hit late after his kick. It showed the Oz player knocking the ball before the penalty was awarded. The TMO looks at these replays but never flagged anything up.

Joubert ran off the field at full time. Never stopped to shake anyone's hand. It shows even he knows he got it wrong. But Scotland, like it or not, are a tier 2 team of recent and the ref sided with the tier 1 team. Even Sir Ian said it! Sorry but this needs sorted

Gutted we lost.  Even more gutting is losing from a winning position with 2 mins left.

Ref made an error,  these things happen. It was our mistake to play a complex lineout manoeuvre and kok it up at that stage of the game.

Lot of positives we can take from that game. Especially from such a young team who in theory should only improve.

Congratulations Australia you'll need to play better to progress further, but you have played better in other games so chalk that down to experience, learn from it and move on.