NZ Media Reaction.

First topic message reminder :

I think it's fair to say that large parts of the NZ rugby media are filthy about Romain Poite's decision. There is certainly also a good deal of appreciation being shown to the visitors, and for the Lions tour as an event, but the NZ Herald and Stuff.co.nz sites had well over half a dozen separate articles up soon after the final whistle which focused on Poite.

Today, Gregor Paul has a piece called "World Rugby's Big Problem". Paul is a Scot, but he's also a leading Herald rugby writer, so it's fair to see him as a representative of NZ rugby media. I found this caveat interesting:

The All Blacks don't want to become a team who give the impression they only lose or don't win because they have been robbed by the officials. That's not the narrative they want to promote

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11888071

It really is going to be hard for that not to become the narrative, though. It's almost as if the rest of the rugby world is being told "Yes, we know you've all complained about officiating decisions in the past but this time, it really matters (because it's happened to us)".

That controversial play was probably a penalty (although I see that Jonathan Kaplan agrees with Gatland and says he would have ruled it to the Lions not New Zealand). I would certainly have been annoyed to lose a Test that way but I was annoyed when the Lions lost the first test in 1993 to one of the worst last minute penalty calls ever seen. Given that the Lions took the second Test comfortably, it could have been the defining series decision.  No-one in NZ was concerned at the time, and I've yet to see it brought up now.

England had Simon Shaw sent off against New Zealand in 2004 after an illegal intervention from the linesman. He asked the TMO to identify Shaw, something the law allows now, but didn't at the time. Shaw was consequently cleared of the offence by the disciplinary panel after the match but that was too late to save England. Again, there was no sense from NZ media that anything untoward had happened.

These things happen to all teams, and some of them in games against New Zealand. That's not to defend poor officiating but to ask that commentators like Paul consider the wider context.

We all want our officials to be consistent but it often seems that none of us really want to be held to that standard ourselves. I saw suggestions that Garces should not have awarded the Lions last penalty in the second Test because it was more in the nature of a technical offence based on an inadequate law. Now Poite appears to have shared that view yesterday, the same voices want referees to be sticklers. Yes, both approaches are at odds with each other but we can't just choose which we prefer based on which result suits us best.

Paul doesn't just take aim at the officals in his piece. Here he is on Lions tactics:

Perhaps, though, the bigger worry in the wake of this series is that cynicism was richly rewarded. The Lions were terrific. They defended supremely well, attacked with poise and vision and deserved their share of the series. But they played a cynical hand in the second and third tests that was unquestionably smart, but still cynical.

No-one in rugby can take this observation seriously unless it's accompanied with an acknowledgement that the world champions of smart but cynical play over the years are New Zealand. Most of us who hold this view about the All Blacks do so with a grudging admiration, or even envy. Richie McCaw lived offside for most of his playing career but is widely, and rightly regarded as one of the game's greats, rather than someone who undermined the integrity of the game.

I'm still puzzled as to why they couldn't just say they weren't good enough. No need for clichés. Unless you want to blame the ref of course, which it seems NZ are insistent they aren't doing, whilst simultaneously doing.

cascough wrote:I'm still puzzled as to why they couldn't just say they weren't good enough.

Are we talking about Ireland in Dublin here or NZ again? This thread is confusing

No 7&1/2 wrote:I agree your thought that only the head coach matters is a very strange one.

It's strange that you think I said that. I think assistant coaches are important. But the 'head' coach is obviously the most important because he is the 'head' coach right? The leader of the pack. So where are the Welsh, Irish and English 'head' coaches leading their national sides? £10 says you're incapable of answering that simple question.

ebop wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I agree your thought that only the head coach matters is a very strange one.

It's strange that you think I said that.

Not that strange, ebop. Earlier, you called assistant coaches "lackeys", which didn't suggest you placed too high a value on their role.

Rugby Fan wrote:

ebop wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I agree your thought that only the head coach matters is a very strange one.

It's strange that you think I said that.

Not that strange, ebop. Earlier, you called assistant coaches "lackeys", which didn't suggest you placed too high a value on their role.

It's very typical that some get really focused on the rhetoric to debate something and miss the point completely. 7.5 has a forum career built on it. So where are the Welsh, Irish and English 'head' coaches Rugby Fan? Maybe you can answer that because 7.5 is bound to take me on another torturous journey into the abyss. Or do you also like to miss the point?

ebop wrote:It's very typical that some get really focused on the rhetoric to debate something and miss the point completely.

I guessed "lackeys" was just hyperbole but it seemed as if you didn't want to give credit to the input from assistant coaches when it's clear from the examples of people like Wayne Smith, Mike Cron and Eddie Jones (with South Africa) that they can play a crucial role.

You've dropped your mention of Scotland, as Townsend is a head coach. You'll need to drop Ireland too, as Conor O'Shea coaches Italy.

There's no shame in appointing a foreign coach. Just ask New Zealand, who appointed a Scot to be in charge of the All Blacks sevens programme . Mind you, it's perhaps not surprising New Zealand would turn to the north for sevens expertise. The gold and silver medallists at the Olympics both had English coaches.

In all seriousness, though, England are in a bit of a chicken and egg situation. The RFU said explicitly they wanted the next coach after Lancaster to have international experience which immediately excluded all active English club coaches unless they planned on re-appointing Andy Robinson . However, our greatest success came when the RFU selected a club coach with no international experience - Clive Woodward.

I think Rob Baxter of Exeter pointed out that England's poor showing at the last two World Cups came under coaches who didn't even have top level club experience, let alone international, so he was a bit aggrieved that the RFU was seemingly undervaluing the Premiership as a proving ground, when they'd ignored it completely for the previous two appointments.

It's taken time for English rugby to develop professional coaches, in part because of the dual nature of club and country rugby. Where the RFU is in charge of the whole show, as it is in sevens, the coaching routes are much clearer, which is one reason so many English coaches are on the sevens circuit. That's not to say the RFU would make a great job of nurturing 15s coaches too, but it has no role in appointing Premiership coaches, so the available pool is always going to be out of their direct control.

The good news is that teams have much larger coaching staffs now, and so there are more routes for people to get into that side of the game. The salaries make it a realistic career option too. 10 years from now, there's a good chance you'll see English coaches in a quite a few international set-ups.

That's a pretty good post Rugby Fan

I've dropped Scotland, fair dues. I knew he was to take the reigns but hadn't realised he had already. I'll watch how he goes with interest but he's started well. Won't be dropping Ireland though sorry as they are still reliant on a NZer for a head coach. Same with Wales/England depending on outside leadership.

As for NZR appointing a Scot as our 7s coach. Don't rate the decision at all and it's embarrassing how far we've sunk in a short space of time. We're one of the most successful 7s outfits in history and we're hiring foreign coaches now, not good at all. He's probably a good coach but it's not the point. Reckon there should be nationality rules for coaches as there are for players. Even more so given the IP involved. Just my opinion.

You changed your focus ebop. First it was coaches of British and Irish teams. Then head coaches of British and Irish teams minus scotland as you forgot about townsend already starting in the AIs. None is the answer to your last attempt to wum.

Incidentally I fully back the stance that coaches should play to the same rules on eligibility as players. Said it for a fair while.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Incidentally I fully back the stance that coaches should play to the same rules on eligibility as players. Said it for a fair while.

Can we wait until Eddie has won us the World Cup? Then I'm all for it (make way for Rob Baxter!).

Or mccall depending on whether the new rules continue from playing or start afresh from coaching. Are the wolfhound s still the 2nd team in Ireland?

Not biting 7.5

Must.....show......restraint

Ha. Move past it. There's normally a good discussion to be had after the initial storm.

Taylorman wrote:I guess the interesting thing for me is if the teams that these people support were to base their opinions on the same thinking as their fans of their opposition they would have zero chance of competing.

Without the aid of punctuation it appears you are saying:
There are teams
And people support those teams
Those teams have opinions
They also have fans who are also fans of the opposition (?)
They have opinions too
If the teams opinions were based on those of the fans then they wouldn't compete (presumably in rugby rather than opinion forming?)

So if I get this right .... if teams had the opinion of fans who are their fans but also fans of the opposition then they wouldn't bother playing because they would want to win and lose at the same time?

Possibly needs more us of  "they" and "theirs" in it.

Two high tackle yellow cards in the Super Rugby quarter finals this weeked were awarded to NZ players. Jeff Toomaga-Allen & Sam Cane. The Sam Cane sin bin could have been costly for the Chiefs.

Don't think that says NZ players are dirtier than any others but, to my mind, it casts further doubt on the idea that they are better coached to "take the referee out of the equation" in that area.

Home broadcasters were having a field day in those pretty weak YCs. Reminded me of what it's like playing up in the NH with the big screen replays played over and over and over until the TMOs and referee take notice.

ebop wrote:Home broadcasters were having a field day in those pretty weak YCs. Reminded me of what it's like playing up in the NH with the big screen replays played over and over and over until the TMOs and referee take notice.

Your post reminded me of the typical arrogance shown by some kiwi fans. Its never a kiwi's players fault, always a problem with th system.

Rugby Fan wrote:Two high tackle yellow cards in the Super Rugby quarter finals this weeked were awarded to NZ players. Jeff Toomaga-Allen & Sam Cane. The Sam Cane sin bin could have been costly for the Chiefs.

Don't think that says NZ players are dirtier than any others but, to my mind, it casts further doubt on the idea that they are better coached to "take the referee out of the equation" in that area.

Was it also Liam Squire for the Hurricanes as well for a very stupid tackle?

Sorry Highlanders perhaps?

The All Blacks are more likely to take the referee out of the equation with a clothesline tackle than the nonsense Taylorman was on about.

ebop wrote:That's a pretty good post Rugby Fan

I've dropped Scotland, fair dues. I knew he was to take the reigns but hadn't realised he had already. I'll watch how he goes with interest but he's started well. Won't be dropping Ireland though sorry as they are still reliant on a NZer for a head coach. Same with Wales/England depending on outside leadership.

As for NZR appointing a Scot as our 7s coach. Don't rate the decision at all and it's embarrassing how far we've sunk in a short space of time. We're one of the most successful 7s outfits in history and we're hiring foreign coaches now, not good at all. He's probably a good coach but it's not the point. Reckon there should be nationality rules for coaches as there are for players. Even more so given the IP involved. Just my opinion.

not as bad as depending on ringers

A comment on Stuff.co.nz after the Lions beat the Hurricanes

Ultimately the Lions' victory was deserved, as their relentless intensity and pressure told. But one or two dubious second-half decisions were made by the officials that turned the momentum in the home side's favour.

This is one reason I've taken issue with the idea that New Zealand teams aim to take the referee out of the equation. For the second week running, a leading All Black has picked up a yellow card of the sort often - not always - awarded in rugby around the world.

Last week, the Chief's came through Sam Cane's 10 minutes. This week, the Hurricanes went from 22-29 up to 39-29 down when Beauden Barrett was carded.

I don't think either NZ player intended to act illegally. In Cane's case, he hit high because his opponent was falling, and he hadn't given himself a big enough margin of error. With Barrett, he was so eager to roll away from the tackle, his feet took the ball as he did so.

Under current regulations, you can't play rugby on the edge and also "take the referee out of the equation".

Rugby Fan wrote:A comment on Stuff.co.nz after the Lions beat the Hurricanes

Ultimately the Lions' victory was deserved, as their relentless intensity and pressure told. But one or two dubious second-half decisions were made by the officials that turned the momentum in the home side's favour.

This is one reason I've taken issue with the idea that New Zealand teams aim to take the referee out of the equation. For the second week running, a leading All Black has picked up a yellow card of the sort often - not always - awarded in rugby around the world.

Last week, the Chief's came through Sam Cane's 10 minutes. This week, the Hurricanes went from 22-29 up to 39-29 down when Beauden Barrett was carded.

I don't think either NZ player intended to act illegally. In Cane's case, he hit high because his opponent was falling, and he hadn't given himself a big enough margin of error. With Barrett, he was so eager to roll away from the tackle, his feet took the ball as he did so.

Under current regulations, you can't play rugby on the edge and also "take the referee out of the equation".

I'm pretty sure Barrett did that on purpose...he was looking at the ball the whole time...

Rugby Fan wrote:A comment on Stuff.co.nz after the Lions beat the Hurricanes

Ultimately the Lions' victory was deserved, as their relentless intensity and pressure told. But one or two dubious second-half decisions were made by the officials that turned the momentum in the home side's favour.

This is one reason I've taken issue with the idea that New Zealand teams aim to take the referee out of the equation. For the second week running, a leading All Black has picked up a yellow card of the sort often - not always - awarded in rugby around the world.

Last week, the Chief's came through Sam Cane's 10 minutes. This week, the Hurricanes went from 22-29 up to 39-29 down when Beauden Barrett was carded.

I don't think either NZ player intended to act illegally. In Cane's case, he hit high because his opponent was falling, and he hadn't given himself a big enough margin of error. With Barrett, he was so eager to roll away from the tackle, his feet took the ball as he did so.

Under current regulations, you can't play rugby on the edge and also "take the referee out of the equation".

Rugby Fan, it was truly remarkable how the British/Irish Lions took the referees out of the equation. Especially that last minute flip flop in Test 3 by Poite and Garces. That was....well, that was something special.

How did the Lions do it? Managed to get only a yellow card for Vunipola, Henderson, nothing for SOB, no card for AWJ's continual cynical play, and next to no penalties awarded for Lions offside play, flopping over the ball and getting away with poor sportsmanship.

A masterclass from the Lions in taking the referees and Aussie citing commissioners and judiciary out of the equation. Reckon they set a new benchmark for getting away with murder and good on them

ebop wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:A comment on Stuff.co.nz after the Lions beat the Hurricanes

Ultimately the Lions' victory was deserved, as their relentless intensity and pressure told. But one or two dubious second-half decisions were made by the officials that turned the momentum in the home side's favour.

This is one reason I've taken issue with the idea that New Zealand teams aim to take the referee out of the equation. For the second week running, a leading All Black has picked up a yellow card of the sort often - not always - awarded in rugby around the world.

Last week, the Chief's came through Sam Cane's 10 minutes. This week, the Hurricanes went from 22-29 up to 39-29 down when Beauden Barrett was carded.

I don't think either NZ player intended to act illegally. In Cane's case, he hit high because his opponent was falling, and he hadn't given himself a big enough margin of error. With Barrett, he was so eager to roll away from the tackle, his feet took the ball as he did so.

Under current regulations, you can't play rugby on the edge and also "take the referee out of the equation".

Rugby Fan, it was truly remarkable how the British/Irish Lions took the referees out of the equation. Especially that last minute flip flop in Test 3 by Poite and Garces. That was....well, that was something special.

How did the Lions do it? Managed to get only a yellow card for Vunipola, Henderson, nothing for SOB, no card for AWJ's continual cynical play, and next to no penalties awarded for Lions offside play, flopping over the ball and getting away with poor sportsmanship.

A masterclass from the Lions in taking the referees and Aussie citing commissioners and judiciary out of the equation. Reckon they set a new benchmark for getting away with murder and good on them

I may be misreading this, but I'm not sure anyone is saying the Lions "took the ref out of the equation" they're saying the concept itself is drivel.

Hood83 wrote:I may be misreading this, but I'm not sure anyone is saying the Lions "took the ref out of the equation" they're saying the concept itself is drivel.

That's all I'm contending. There's nothing it says which can't be better described in simpler ways.

ebop wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:A comment on Stuff.co.nz after the Lions beat the Hurricanes

Ultimately the Lions' victory was deserved, as their relentless intensity and pressure told. But one or two dubious second-half decisions were made by the officials that turned the momentum in the home side's favour.

This is one reason I've taken issue with the idea that New Zealand teams aim to take the referee out of the equation. For the second week running, a leading All Black has picked up a yellow card of the sort often - not always - awarded in rugby around the world.

Last week, the Chief's came through Sam Cane's 10 minutes. This week, the Hurricanes went from 22-29 up to 39-29 down when Beauden Barrett was carded.

I don't think either NZ player intended to act illegally. In Cane's case, he hit high because his opponent was falling, and he hadn't given himself a big enough margin of error. With Barrett, he was so eager to roll away from the tackle, his feet took the ball as he did so.

Under current regulations, you can't play rugby on the edge and also "take the referee out of the equation".

Rugby Fan, it was truly remarkable how the British/Irish Lions took the referees out of the equation. Especially that last minute flip flop in Test 3 by Poite and Garces. That was....well, that was something special.

How did the Lions do it? Managed to get only a yellow card for Vunipola, Henderson, nothing for SOB, no card for AWJ's continual cynical play, and next to no penalties awarded for Lions offside play, flopping over the ball and getting away with poor sportsmanship.

A masterclass from the Lions in taking the referees and Aussie citing commissioners and judiciary out of the equation. Reckon they set a new benchmark for getting away with murder and good on them

You must be referring to when AWJ cynically played on after being short armed by yet another NZ player. Disgraceful on his part