New Tackle Laws

First topic message reminder :

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/new-laws-to-clamp-down-on-high-tackles-could-prove-revolutionary-in-rugby-1.2924256

A lot of people concerned about the new tackle laws. My biggest concern is that it gives referees too much power to decide on intent.

I fear that his will just be another excuse for Wayne Barnes to penalise Ireland unfairly and potentially issue us more yellow cards when we play Wales. I don't trust him to apply the rules consistently or fairly.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Barritt not Barrett.

Oh right. Nothing to see here so. Keep up the good work.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Barritt not Barrett.

Oh right. Nothing to see here so. Keep up the good work.

Could say you jumped the Gun

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

ebop wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate

Haha, how are Ireland desperate?

Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?

because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.

 One small matter you seem to be overlooking,you can have all the precedents,Rules,consistency, etc in the World however youre logic is incomplete if you cant apply it to the actual game of Rugby. This is where some of the  Irish Commentators and the majority of Irish fans come up lacking.

 The outcry that the All Blacks get preferential treatment reflects this lack of Rugby sense and wisdom.

 The worst part of it is for the Irish is, as a whole they complain the loudest and make these claims when they lose, which in turn gives the impression that they are more concerned about losing than taking into account all factors in play. two weeks prior to the game in Dublin in Chicago there was no criticsm of the All Blacks as a team or players coming from the Irish (plenty from the New Zealand fans), but after one game against Italy inbetween, the All Blacks had turned into a gang of dirty thugs and baseless demands were made that Israel Dagg and Sam Cane be cited. Thankfully wisdom in the long run prevailed.

 The Irish team, coaching staff and smart old Irish Rugby brains are in a completely different mindset, The Irish fans and media should be applauding their teams achievements and rise in standards over the last year, rather than just engaging in demonstrations of petulance.

No NZ deserve criticism just as an side. The Irish media have been critical of Ireland and plenty of people in the media said that CJ Stander and Henshaw deserved red cards in the SA tour so there has been consistent calls to protect players against head injuries.

The biggest difference is that NZ and their fans cant take criticism and have a hissy fit even if it is warrented. It has pretty much always been that way as far as I can tell.

Hardly baseless cases for citings as Cane was cited (despite your strong assertion he wouldn't be) alonhg with Fekitoa. The point of these changes are to penalise incidents like the Cane challenge more harshly as it would now be red.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hardly baseless cases for citings as Cane was cited (despite your strong assertion he wouldn't be) alonhg with Fekitoa. The point of these changes are to penalise incidents like the Cane challenge more harshly as it would now be red.

 Correct 7.5  Fekitoa wasnt baseless, he put his hand up in admission immediately the incident occurred he knew he had done wrong. Cane was completely baseless as was Dagg.

Th call for a citing clearly wasn't baseless as he was cited. Take it you don't like the new rules whicch say it would be a red now? Perswonally think they're too harsh.

Cane only got off because he is a Kiwi an Hansen told the media it was an accident as per standard Kiwi protocol.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hardly baseless cases for citings as Cane was cited (despite your strong assertion he wouldn't be) alonhg with Fekitoa. The point of these changes are to penalise incidents like the Cane challenge more harshly as it would now be red.

 Correct 7.5  Fekitoa wasnt baseless, he put his hand up in admission immediately the incident occurred he knew he had done wrong. Cane was completely baseless as was Dagg.

Hardly baseless as WR turned round afterwards and said it was without mentioning his name as you've already been told

No 7&1/2 wrote:Th call for a citing clearly wasn't baseless as he was cited. Take it you don't like the new rules whicch say it would be a red now?  Perswonally think they're too harsh.

 My opinion was formed from the point of view of asking myself, what act of foul play had Cane committed? and for the life of me I couldnt see anything. this opinion was confirmed by the analysis of Rugby minds the likes of  Derek Bevan, John Doubleday and from a law interpretation view by Antony Davies.

 In terms of the new laws I agree with you at this juncture I suspect that they are too harsh, but with an open mind I will be watching the upcoming six nations to see what impact if any it has on those games at the International level. games at the amateur level are a completely different ball game and as such  gives arise to other concerns and outcomes.

Well clearly he committed an act of foul play. Just wasn't a red for me or the panel in the end. Wasn't a baseless citing but probably nudged wr towards these harsher penalties.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

ebop wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate

Haha, how are Ireland desperate?

Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?

because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.

 One small matter you seem to be overlooking,you can have all the precedents,Rules,consistency, etc in the World however youre logic is incomplete if you cant apply it to the actual game of Rugby. This is where some of the  Irish Commentators and the majority of Irish fans come up lacking.

 The outcry that the All Blacks get preferential treatment reflects this lack of Rugby sense and wisdom.

 The worst part of it is for the Irish is, as a whole they complain the loudest and make these claims when they lose, which in turn gives the impression that they are more concerned about losing than taking into account all factors in play. two weeks prior to the game in Dublin in Chicago there was no criticsm of the All Blacks as a team or players coming from the Irish (plenty from the New Zealand fans), but after one game against Italy inbetween, the All Blacks had turned into a gang of dirty thugs and baseless demands were made that Israel Dagg and Sam Cane be cited. Thankfully wisdom in the long run prevailed.

 The Irish team, coaching staff and smart old Irish Rugby brains are in a completely different mindset, The Irish fans and media should be applauding their teams achievements and rise in standards over the last year, rather than just engaging in demonstrations of petulance.

Why does what 'the majority' (which I'm sure is an accurate and verifiable measurement) of Irish say fans bother the Kiwis so much?

New Zealand won that game, fair and square.  They were the better team.  They scored more points. They took their chances.  Can't think of a single Irish fan, pundit or commentator who has said otherwise.

The bolloxology that followed the game started as soon as the NZ coach had a microphone in front of him.  He was asked about yellow cards for high tackles after a game in which a player had been carted off in a neck brace and immediately started spouting rubbish.  "Cane's was a head clash", "Fekitoa didn't impede Zebo, he got up and played on".  The usual policy.  

The first thing Shane Horgan said in the studio following that interview was that New Zealand are a fantastic team and that they can't take criticism.  And boy did the NZ'ers prove him right.  The NZ Herald even ran an attempted 'sit down little girl' piece on the reporter who dared do anything other than blow smoke up Hansen's arse. They were called out on their rubbish and couldn't take it so reverted to the old antipodean insult - whingers. Pathetic.

Engine#4 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

ebop wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

ebop wrote:Portuguese for desperate

Haha, how are Ireland desperate?

Why won't rules apply to New Zealand?

because over the years there have been many instances where referees could have given the ABs a red card based on precedent, the rules, consistency etc. but haven't. Just because they are the biggest brand in rugby doesn't mean that they should be subject to more lenient rulings. However, they are.

 One small matter you seem to be overlooking,you can have all the precedents,Rules,consistency, etc in the World however youre logic is incomplete if you cant apply it to the actual game of Rugby. This is where some of the  Irish Commentators and the majority of Irish fans come up lacking.

 The outcry that the All Blacks get preferential treatment reflects this lack of Rugby sense and wisdom.

 The worst part of it is for the Irish is, as a whole they complain the loudest and make these claims when they lose, which in turn gives the impression that they are more concerned about losing than taking into account all factors in play. two weeks prior to the game in Dublin in Chicago there was no criticsm of the All Blacks as a team or players coming from the Irish (plenty from the New Zealand fans), but after one game against Italy inbetween, the All Blacks had turned into a gang of dirty thugs and baseless demands were made that Israel Dagg and Sam Cane be cited. Thankfully wisdom in the long run prevailed.

 The Irish team, coaching staff and smart old Irish Rugby brains are in a completely different mindset, The Irish fans and media should be applauding their teams achievements and rise in standards over the last year, rather than just engaging in demonstrations of petulance.

Why does what 'the majority' (which I'm sure is an accurate and verifiable measurement) of Irish say fans bother the Kiwis so much?

New Zealand won that game, fair and square.  They were the better team.  They scored more points. They took their chances.  Can't think of a single Irish fan, pundit or commentator who has said otherwise.

The bolloxology that followed the game started as soon as the NZ coach had a microphone in front of him.  He was asked about yellow cards for high tackles after a game in which a player had been carted off in a neck brace and immediately spouting rubbish.  "Cane's was a head clash", "Fekitoa didn't impede Zebo, he got up and played on".  The usual policy.  

The first thing Shane Horgan said in the studio following that interview was that New Zealand are a fantastic team and that they can't take criticism.  And boy did the NZ'ers prove him right.  The NZ Herald even ran an attempted 'sit down little girl' piece on the reporter who dared do anything other than blow smoke up Hansen's arse. They were called out on their rubbish and couldn't take it so reverted to the old antipodean insult - whingers. Pathetic.

  So its OK to to act like bad tempered losers so long as its labeled under criticism?

 The annoying thing I find in all this is that the majority of the Irish fans base their opinions on ignorance, that display by New Zealand was arguably their best performance of the year, they were playing at a much higher level than Ireland and a lot of that comes down to the preparation and direction of Hansen, sadly Claire McNamara will never be able to understand or appreciate that, especially if she uses the opportunity of  a post match interview as a vehicle to just harass the man. He is actually a pretty good coach and it could have been a good opportunity for her to have gained some insight into how the man prepares a team to put on such a fantastic display.

 There are some brilliant Irish rugby minds and the Irish players are a credit to the game, sadly they fall into the minority.

Laurie just pops up and proves #4s point

Are AB fans honestly trying to suggest they don't get preferential treatment?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Are AB fans honestly trying to suggest they don't get preferential treatment?

 AB  fans are definitely getting preferential treatment on here.

You're not going to get much detailed insight into Hansen's (obviously very effective) coaching methods in a 2 minute interview. That said, McNamara even asked such a question at the beginning of the interview. The only thing wrong with her questioning was the fawning "didn't Ireland do great and put you under pressure?" lines.

In Ireland it isn't considered harassment for a reporter to press a legitimate line of questioning when their interviewee is being Trumpean in their responses.

Hansen's response to McNamara's first question about discipline was avoidance with a touch of "its the ref's fault not ours". Response to her second was a mixture praising the Irish for their footwork, blaming them for falling into tackles and a couple of complete fabrications regarding specific incidents. Any journalist with a bit of integrity would have continued pressing him.

Your not going to get much insight when you spend three quarters of the interview just rephrasing the same question.

So the new tackle laws are:

1. Wayne Barnes is biased against Ireland and all of their losses are down to this.
2. No referees are allowed to punish NZ for foul play.

Correct?

OR the outlawing of all accidental collisions will mean that there will be no more concussion suffered by rugby players.

I can understand ebop's concern about home broadcasters highlighting offences on the big screen. I suppose that's potentially just one more way the scales might be tipped against the Lions in NZ.

However, the Dublin match seems a poor example to make that point. It took a post match disciplinary committee to hand down a stiffer penalty, so that showed the on-field referee not being influenced by the crowd or broadcaster.

So far, in the Premiership this weekend, the a panel is reassessing an incident which was looked at in full during the Saracens v Exeter fixture by the referee and TMO. If additional punishment is handed down (decision is imminent) then that may be another example of a match official going lightly for fear of disrupting the game.

It's hard to imagine Alain Rolland having such qualms when he refereed matches. He had no hesitation in red-carding Warburton early on in a key World Cup clash.

Not sure who the officials will be for the Lions tour - usually French, South Africans & Australians in NZ - but the identity of the TMO may well come to be as important as the on-field men under these new directives. We'll see during the Six Nations how that interaction works out.

aucklandlaurie wrote:OR the outlawing of all accidental collisions will mean that there will be no more concussion suffered by rugby players.

We just have to ignore that most concussions are suffered by the tackler and the increasing number of players been knocked out by knees, hips etc.

Scottrf wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:OR the outlawing of all accidental collisions will mean that there will be no more concussion suffered by rugby players.

We just have to ignore that most concussions are suffered by the tackler and the increasing number of players been knocked out by knees, hips etc.

 or where concussion is the result of collisions between players of the same team.

Brad Barritt banned for three weeks. He didn't even get a yellow card during the match, so the panel thinks the referee got it wrong. Barrington has no ban, so it looks like the panel thinks his red wasn't warranted. Haven't seen the judgement but it might be that they think he deserved just a yellow rather than nothing at all.

Rugby Fan wrote:Brad Barritt banned for three weeks. He didn't even get a yellow card during the match, so the panel thinks the referee got it wrong. Barrington has no ban, so it looks like the panel thinks his red wasn't warranted. Haven't seen the judgement but it might be that they think he deserved just a yellow rather than nothing at all.

 Its good to see some sense emerge from what was a probably a case of an innocent referee just trying to do his best with a mad law.

Ha. Reading the conclusion seems that there's still uncertainty on what should happen. Barrington is innocent as Parking was already unconcious and if he hadn't fallen he would have been tackled...so surely Hartley s recent ban shouldn't stand either as the player fell into the challenge.

Wow that's horrendous. Hope he recovers fully and quickly.

Engine#4 wrote:

Why does what 'the majority' (which I'm sure is an accurate and verifiable measurement) of Irish say fans bother the Kiwis so much?

New Zealand won that game, fair and square.  They were the better team.  They scored more points. They took their chances.  Can't think of a single Irish fan, pundit or commentator who has said otherwise.

The bolloxology that followed the game started as soon as the NZ coach had a microphone in front of him.  He was asked about yellow cards for high tackles after a game in which a player had been carted off in a neck brace and immediately started spouting rubbish.  "Cane's was a head clash", "Fekitoa didn't impede Zebo, he got up and played on".  The usual policy.  

The first thing Shane Horgan said in the studio following that interview was that New Zealand are a fantastic team and that they can't take criticism.  And boy did the NZ'ers prove him right.  The NZ Herald even ran an attempted 'sit down little girl' piece on the reporter who dared do anything other than blow smoke up Hansen's arse. They were called out on their rubbish and couldn't take it so reverted to the old antipodean insult - whingers. Pathetic.

That pretty much sums it up for me. Any Kiwi that watches or reads Irish media regarding rugby would know how much praise is written throughout the year wioth respect to the All Blacks. However, one item of criticism and Kiwi fans and management throw a hissy fit.

You simply cant criticise All Blacks, even if they dump you on your head smash your collar bone and side line you for 13 months. The standard response is you are being a sook. It is pathetic.

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Talking about these new tackle laws, Brad Thyer had a nasty bump against Glasgow on Saturday night, he now has a bleed on the brain, he is in quite a serious state, he needs an MRI scan, yet he cannot be fitted in to get one done, he has been left in the royal Glamorgan since last weekend, and what have Cardiff Blues done ? Absolutely feck all.

They have just left him to go to hospital and get on with it. There has been no contact from the region what so ever, I was talking to his uncle, he is livid. Cardiff Blues are not even aware of how he is doing, if this is how they treat their players then it's no wonder they are where they are. Not one person from the set up has contacted him, or his family to see how he is getting on.

Disgusting behaviour from a so called pro rugby team.

That's absolute madness, contrast that with when Finn Russell was concussed last season playing in Connacht. Glasgow left medical staff in Galway and Connacht helped look out for them and Russells family

Thats not right at all. I assume if he was a more established player they would be all over it. Really bad form from Cardiff.

Cant believe that the coach hasnt even reached out to him.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Talking about these new tackle laws, Brad Thyer had a nasty bump against Glasgow on Saturday night, he now has a bleed on the brain, he is in quite a serious state, he needs an MRI scan, yet he cannot be fitted in to get one done, he has been left in the royal Glamorgan since last weekend, and what have Cardiff Blues done ? Absolutely feck all.

They have just left him to go to hospital and get on with it. There has been no contact from the region what so ever, I was talking to his uncle, he is livid. Cardiff Blues are not even aware of how he is doing, if this is how they treat their players then it's no wonder they are where they are. Not one person from the set up has contacted him, or his family to see how he is getting on.

Disgusting behaviour from a so called pro rugby team.

That's absolute madness, contrast that with when Finn Russell was concussed last season playing in Connacht. Glasgow left medical staff in Galway and Connacht helped look out for them and Russells family

Thats not right at all. I assume if he was a more established player they would be all over it. Really bad form from Cardiff.

Cant believe that the coach hasnt even reached out to him.

If only technology had progressed to the point you could have a small device at hand whereby you could send an electronic message to him just to ask how he is and reassure him hes being thought about

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Engine#4 wrote:

Why does what 'the majority' (which I'm sure is an accurate and verifiable measurement) of Irish say fans bother the Kiwis so much?

New Zealand won that game, fair and square.  They were the better team.  They scored more points. They took their chances.  Can't think of a single Irish fan, pundit or commentator who has said otherwise.

The bolloxology that followed the game started as soon as the NZ coach had a microphone in front of him.  He was asked about yellow cards for high tackles after a game in which a player had been carted off in a neck brace and immediately started spouting rubbish.  "Cane's was a head clash", "Fekitoa didn't impede Zebo, he got up and played on".  The usual policy.  

The first thing Shane Horgan said in the studio following that interview was that New Zealand are a fantastic team and that they can't take criticism.  And boy did the NZ'ers prove him right.  The NZ Herald even ran an attempted 'sit down little girl' piece on the reporter who dared do anything other than blow smoke up Hansen's arse. They were called out on their rubbish and couldn't take it so reverted to the old antipodean insult - whingers. Pathetic.

That pretty much sums it up for me. Any Kiwi that watches or reads Irish media regarding rugby would know how much praise is written throughout the year wioth respect to the All Blacks. However, one item of criticism and Kiwi fans and management throw a hissy fit.

You simply cant criticise All Blacks, even if they dump you on your head smash your collar bone and side line you for 13 months. The standard response is you are being a sook. It is pathetic.

  I sat in my living room on the other side of the World and saw "how much praise" Claire McNamara was beaming out live about the All Blacks and their coach.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Engine#4 wrote:

Why does what 'the majority' (which I'm sure is an accurate and verifiable measurement) of Irish say fans bother the Kiwis so much?

New Zealand won that game, fair and square.  They were the better team.  They scored more points. They took their chances.  Can't think of a single Irish fan, pundit or commentator who has said otherwise.

The bolloxology that followed the game started as soon as the NZ coach had a microphone in front of him.  He was asked about yellow cards for high tackles after a game in which a player had been carted off in a neck brace and immediately started spouting rubbish.  "Cane's was a head clash", "Fekitoa didn't impede Zebo, he got up and played on".  The usual policy.  

The first thing Shane Horgan said in the studio following that interview was that New Zealand are a fantastic team and that they can't take criticism.  And boy did the NZ'ers prove him right.  The NZ Herald even ran an attempted 'sit down little girl' piece on the reporter who dared do anything other than blow smoke up Hansen's arse. They were called out on their rubbish and couldn't take it so reverted to the old antipodean insult - whingers. Pathetic.

That pretty much sums it up for me. Any Kiwi that watches or reads Irish media regarding rugby would know how much praise is written throughout the year wioth respect to the All Blacks. However, one item of criticism and Kiwi fans and management throw a hissy fit.

You simply cant criticise All Blacks, even if they dump you on your head smash your collar bone and side line you for 13 months. The standard response is you are being a sook. It is pathetic.

  I sat in my living room on the other side of the World and saw "how much praise" Claire McNamara was beaming out live about the All Blacks and their coach.

One interview is representative of ALL Irish media?

So you think journalists should be censored and not allowed to ask such questions?

McNamara was critical of the ABs and Hansen and AB fans couldn't handle it. It just proves what I am saying really.

She has a history of being straight talking and does the same to Irish coaches. Right after Ireland's last game of their failed World Cup in France she asked Eddie O'Sullivan straight to his face if it was time to stand down. No beating about the bush no messing. Much more interesting to hear than other interviewers fawning over their interviewee.

I appreciated her straight line of enquiry but as usual Kiwi's cant handle it. They are too used to getting everything their own way in rugby terms.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:McNamara was critical of the ABs and Hansen and AB fans couldn't handle it. It just proves what I am saying really.

She has a history of being straight talking and does the same to Irish coaches. Right after Ireland's last game of their failed World Cup in France she asked Eddie O'Sullivan straight to his face if it was time to stand down. No beating about the bush no messing. Much more interesting to hear than other interviewers fawning over their interviewee.

I appreciated her straight line of enquiry but as usual Kiwi's cant handle it. They are too used to getting everything their own way in rugby terms.

Hansen doesn't mind playing up the image of being a straight shooter when hes criticising others either

Nobody came out of this looking good, did they?

Both sides should button it pronto

marty2086 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Engine#4 wrote:

Why does what 'the majority' (which I'm sure is an accurate and verifiable measurement) of Irish say fans bother the Kiwis so much?

New Zealand won that game, fair and square.  They were the better team.  They scored more points. They took their chances.  Can't think of a single Irish fan, pundit or commentator who has said otherwise.

The bolloxology that followed the game started as soon as the NZ coach had a microphone in front of him.  He was asked about yellow cards for high tackles after a game in which a player had been carted off in a neck brace and immediately started spouting rubbish.  "Cane's was a head clash", "Fekitoa didn't impede Zebo, he got up and played on".  The usual policy.  

The first thing Shane Horgan said in the studio following that interview was that New Zealand are a fantastic team and that they can't take criticism.  And boy did the NZ'ers prove him right.  The NZ Herald even ran an attempted 'sit down little girl' piece on the reporter who dared do anything other than blow smoke up Hansen's arse. They were called out on their rubbish and couldn't take it so reverted to the old antipodean insult - whingers. Pathetic.

That pretty much sums it up for me. Any Kiwi that watches or reads Irish media regarding rugby would know how much praise is written throughout the year wioth respect to the All Blacks. However, one item of criticism and Kiwi fans and management throw a hissy fit.

You simply cant criticise All Blacks, even if they dump you on your head smash your collar bone and side line you for 13 months. The standard response is you are being a sook. It is pathetic.

  I sat in my living room on the other side of the World and saw "how much praise" Claire McNamara was beaming out live about the All Blacks and their coach.

One interview is representative of ALL Irish media?

So you think journalists should be censored and not allowed to ask such questions?

 When she is being beamed live around the World and into every viewers home in New Zealand she must have some ideas as to how pursuing a particular  line of questioning is going to come across in that country. She knew she had an opportunity to Grand stand, and not All Irish media have that opportunity.

Media are there to challenge as well surely.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Engine#4 wrote:

Why does what 'the majority' (which I'm sure is an accurate and verifiable measurement) of Irish say fans bother the Kiwis so much?

New Zealand won that game, fair and square.  They were the better team.  They scored more points. They took their chances.  Can't think of a single Irish fan, pundit or commentator who has said otherwise.

The bolloxology that followed the game started as soon as the NZ coach had a microphone in front of him.  He was asked about yellow cards for high tackles after a game in which a player had been carted off in a neck brace and immediately started spouting rubbish.  "Cane's was a head clash", "Fekitoa didn't impede Zebo, he got up and played on".  The usual policy.  

The first thing Shane Horgan said in the studio following that interview was that New Zealand are a fantastic team and that they can't take criticism.  And boy did the NZ'ers prove him right.  The NZ Herald even ran an attempted 'sit down little girl' piece on the reporter who dared do anything other than blow smoke up Hansen's arse. They were called out on their rubbish and couldn't take it so reverted to the old antipodean insult - whingers. Pathetic.

That pretty much sums it up for me. Any Kiwi that watches or reads Irish media regarding rugby would know how much praise is written throughout the year wioth respect to the All Blacks. However, one item of criticism and Kiwi fans and management throw a hissy fit.

You simply cant criticise All Blacks, even if they dump you on your head smash your collar bone and side line you for 13 months. The standard response is you are being a sook. It is pathetic.

  I sat in my living room on the other side of the World and saw "how much praise" Claire McNamara was beaming out live about the All Blacks and their coach.

One interview is representative of ALL Irish media?

So you think journalists should be censored and not allowed to ask such questions?

 When she is being beamed live around the World and into every viewers home in New Zealand she must have some ideas as to how pursuing a particular  line of questioning is going to come across in that country. She knew she had an opportunity to Grand stand, and not All Irish media have that opportunity.

So don't ask a question in case someone takes umbrage?

Also how would she know that its being transmitted to NZ? Most broadcasters just have their own interviewers broadcast and not those who work for another broadcaster as was the case for the UK

GunsGermsV2 wrote:McNamara was critical of the ABs and Hansen and AB fans couldn't handle it. It just proves what I am saying really.

She has a history of being straight talking and does the same to Irish coaches. Right after Ireland's last game of their failed World Cup in France she asked Eddie O'Sullivan straight to his face if it was time to stand down. No beating about the bush no messing. Much more interesting to hear than other interviewers fawning over their interviewee.

I appreciated her straight line of enquiry but as usual Kiwi's cant handle it. They are too used to getting everything their own way in rugby terms.

 Thats crazy, Eddie o'Sullivan has a brilliant rugby brain, if only  Irish fans had the Rugby Knowledge that man has in his big toe then the World would be a much happier place, he may not have been the most successful Irish coach but.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Media are there to challenge as well surely.

 All she did was challenge. and after a while Shag asks if shes got anything else, she replied "No" so Shag walked off.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:McNamara was critical of the ABs and Hansen and AB fans couldn't handle it. It just proves what I am saying really.

She has a history of being straight talking and does the same to Irish coaches. Right after Ireland's last game of their failed World Cup in France she asked Eddie O'Sullivan straight to his face if it was time to stand down. No beating about the bush no messing. Much more interesting to hear than other interviewers fawning over their interviewee.

I appreciated her straight line of enquiry but as usual Kiwi's cant handle it. They are too used to getting everything their own way in rugby terms.

 Thats crazy, Eddie o'Sullivan has a brilliant rugby brain, if only  Irish fans had the Rugby Knowledge that man has in his big toe then the World would be a much happier place, he may not have been the most successful Irish coach but.

He does he is a good coach too and quite successful albeit without getting a six nations he loosened the jar for Kidney to get over the line.

However, a great Irish side had just been knocked out of their group in the WC so it is a fair question by McNamara. Ireland were ranked #2 in the world for a period going into that WC.

His response was fair enough too. He simply said no I have no plans to stand down. My only issue with O'Sullivan is he didn't accept responsibility for when the team were under performing and tended to blame it on the players. He was a little inflexible too however very intelligent man.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Media are there to challenge as well surely.

 All she did was challenge. and after a while Shag asks if shes got anything else, she replied "No" so Shag walked off.

So whats the big issue?

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:McNamara was critical of the ABs and Hansen and AB fans couldn't handle it. It just proves what I am saying really.

She has a history of being straight talking and does the same to Irish coaches. Right after Ireland's last game of their failed World Cup in France she asked Eddie O'Sullivan straight to his face if it was time to stand down. No beating about the bush no messing. Much more interesting to hear than other interviewers fawning over their interviewee.

I appreciated her straight line of enquiry but as usual Kiwi's cant handle it. They are too used to getting everything their own way in rugby terms.

 Thats crazy, Eddie o'Sullivan has a brilliant rugby brain, if only  Irish fans had the Rugby Knowledge that man has in his big toe then the World would be a much happier place, he may not have been the most successful Irish coach but.

He does he is a good coach too and quite successful albeit without getting a six nations he loosened the jar for Kidney to get over the line.

However, a great Irish side had just been knocked out of their group in the WC so it is a fair question by McNamara. Ireland were ranked #2 in the world for a period going into that WC.

His response was fair enough too. He simply said no I have no plans to stand down. My only issue with O'Sullivan is he didn't accept responsibility for when the team were under performing and tended to blame it on the players. He was a little inflexible too however very intelligent man.

 I truely respect the man, Grant Fox is another one, if you ever get to hear/watch them being interviewed by an interviewer who can see that depth of their Rugby knowledge, and taps into it, then it can be both an enjoyable and enlightening opportunity.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Media are there to challenge as well surely.

 All she did was challenge. and after a while Shag asks if shes got anything else, she replied "No" so Shag walked off.

So whats the big issue?

 Apparently that New Zealanders cant take criticism.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Media are there to challenge as well surely.

 All she did was challenge. and after a while Shag asks if shes got anything else, she replied "No" so Shag walked off.

So whats the big issue?

His feelings were hurt and that's just mean

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Media are there to challenge as well surely.

 All she did was challenge. and after a while Shag asks if shes got anything else, she replied "No" so Shag walked off.

So whats the big issue?

 Apparently that New Zealanders cant take criticism.

Yeah we agree so. Maybe its a cultural thing. In Ireland we are always cutting people down. You don't last long with a big head before one of your friends or colleagues brings you back to earth.

In Britain people love to talk themselves up and tell anyone who will listen how great they are. Tom Hiddlestone and his Golden Globe speech for example. If the Brits aren't telling the world how great they are then something is up. Thats why we sent Bob Geldof over there.

If a Kiwi like "Shag" comes over here with a big head then you better believe that he is fair game.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Media are there to challenge as well surely.

 All she did was challenge. and after a while Shag asks if shes got anything else, she replied "No" so Shag walked off.

So whats the big issue?

 Apparently that New Zealanders cant take criticism.

Yeah we agree so. Maybe its a cultural thing. In Ireland we are always cutting people down. You don't last long with a big head before one of your friends or colleagues brings you back to earth.

In Britain people love to talk themselves up and tell anyone who will listen how great they are. Tom Hiddlestone and his Golden Globe speech for example. If the Brits aren't telling the world how great they are then something is up. Thats why we sent Bob Geldof over there.

 You're right it Probably is a cultural thing, good work on that Bob Geldoff thing too, he lectures the world on how to bring up kids then goes and calls his kids something like big red apple or banana skin.

 What would make you think that shag has a big head?

Yeah he is a prize tool Bono too. Sadly the only part of Bono that has been outsourced is his tax payments in the Netherlands.

If Ireland hypothetically sucessfully invaded Britain and annexed London I would happily make Bono the mayor of London and rename it to Derry London.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Yeah he is a prize tool Bono too. Sadly the only part of Bono that has been outsourced is his tax payments in the Netherlands.

If Ireland hypothetically sucessfully invaded Britain and annexed London I would happily make Bono the mayor of London and rename it to Derry London.

  I agree,Not only does Bono give me the sh1ts but its that gravelly voice "and Still cant find what Im looking for' well if you took youre stupid yellow glasses off you might see a bloody lot.

Haha.