Try or No Try...

First topic message reminder :

I know this has been debated to death on the game thread, and I also know that, whether to WUM, or real believe or just nationalistic pride, there has been some real "aggressive" (shall I say) debating over the TMOs decision.

But, as every pundit I've heard as stated it was, in their opinion a try, except for Guscott who agreed it was grounded by Anscombe, but points to the knock on by Evans, I would like to know what you guys actually thought, without the need to argue and take a nationalistic stance.

If you want to leave comments to back your theory, do so, but please PLEASE, lets stay civil.

So, I'll put my thoughts in a response, rather than the opening comment ...

So, the poll is was it a Try or Not..

So honest question TC - do you accept the evidence of a knock-on?

If somthing is very easily available oracle it's not my job to provide basics to you. But I would have expected you to hold your hands up. Apologies if youd already done that and I havent seen it.

No 7&1/2 wrote:If somthing is very easily available oracle it's not my job to provide basics to you. But I would have expected you to hold your hands up.  Apologies if youd already  done that and I havent seen it.

It wasn’t easily available. That was the point.

The Oracle wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:If somthing is very easily available oracle it's not my job to provide basics to you. But I would have expected you to hold your hands up.  Apologies if youd already  done that and I havent seen it.

It wasn’t easily available. That was the point.

Was easy to see that he picked himself up by his hands, then spat straight in front. So couldn't have spat on the player. As I said immediately.

Just on that topic, if you watch the game back at the time of the "spit", the camera angle changes a couple of seconds later to show Hartley miles away from Davies. Conveniently the video stops before that.

Its a very nasty video put together solely for the purpose of stirring up this kind of nonsense, and was then tweeted at the WRU, World Rugby and members of the media to try and cause a storm

Anyway, I think you lads must be famished. Yous have been doing Trojan work but go have a tea break and I'll take over the thread for a while to give you a break.

It was a clear try

Nothing clear about it. It wasn't allowed - end of

Rolland agrees with me.

I agree with my eyes. The knock on was a knock on.

Why is an Irishman trolling a thread only Welsh and English people should be allowed to troll on? I want hard borders on threads.

It was available all over the place oracle. But as I say I think it's right that people hold their hands up to these things. If you feel hounded fair enough but when someone is being accused of such a thing as spitting on a player I do think you need to back it up with proof and admit you're wrong when it comes to light it's just some people wanting to cause an issue for a player they don't like. A few people have done it on twitter etc without the good grace you've had here. It's poor form for them.

Very true bam.

Scottrf wrote:Why is an Irishman trolling a thread only Welsh and English people should be allowed to troll on? I want hard borders on threads.

Are Kiwis allowed troll on this thread? We had a Kiwi try disallowed by a Kiwi TMO which upset a Kiwi coach.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Why is an Irishman trolling a thread only Welsh and English people should be allowed to troll on? I want hard borders on threads.

Are Kiwis allowed troll on this thread? We had a Kiwi try disallowed by a Kiwi TMO which upset a Kiwi coach.

Yeah, go on.

Scottrf wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Why is an Irishman trolling a thread only Welsh and English people should be allowed to troll on? I want hard borders on threads.

Are Kiwis allowed troll on this thread? We had a Kiwi try disallowed by a Kiwi TMO which upset a Kiwi coach.

Yeah, go on.

Its all enough to make a Kiwi spit.

As I said.... I asked a simple question to gauge reactions, knowing the thread had a short shelf life before the usual suspects turned it into a childish pee'ing contest.

I never expected it to go on as long as this... or even for it to spawn another thread.



Mods... This thread is dead, please kill it.... please

The media are still talking about.

Here is the strange thing from my point of view. I looked at the play over and over and still can't determine for myself whether it was a try or not. One of my sons did a lot of editing and enhancements to the tv feed to see if he could see for himself. And he can't tell either. Unless World Rugby has other angles which we didn't have, I struggle to see how they can make a determination. And if they did have a different feed, angle or other enhancement, that was not available at the match so the officials would not have been able to see that either.

If anything, the intervention by World Rugby has confused, rather than clarified, matters.

I thought it was a try, because Anscombe’s hand appeared to have contact with the ball, when it also had contact with the ground, and Watson’s hands had no contact. By one reading of the comments attributed to World Rugby, that’s also their opinion.

We don’t know from that statement, however, whether the TMO saw things differently, or whether he had a faulty interpretation of the grounding law.

Also, we don’t know whether World Rugby has an opinion on whether the ball was knocked on originally. If they are going to comment on contentious rulings, then we need chapter and verse.

I’d like World Rugby to make clear the following

1. Based on the angles the TMO viewed, and the question put to him, should it have been ruled a try? (I’m guessing the answer is yes)
2, Did the TMO rule the way he did because he misunderstood the law, or because he saw things differently?
3. Did the TMO look at everything he should have looked at to make his decision?
4. Does the video evidence indicate there was knock-on, which a reasonable TMO would have been able to see?
5. Was it ultimately the wrong decision, or the right decision (for the wrong reasons)?

I think either you don’t comment publicly, or make sure you walk through the whole process, so everyone can see what went right, and what went wrong.

Can you add another voting option please?

Who cares?

hugehandoff wrote:Can you add another voting option please?

Who cares?

Is it up to you what people discuss? What would you like to talk about instead??? Perhaps we can tailor the site just for you.

The point being it is done and dusted - move on. Debating ref decisions endlessly is pointless. Another voting option to reflect that is valid or are you dictating to me now?

TC - I'm not hounding you but am genuinely interested on whether you accept the evidence for the knock-on?

No try.
Quinnell to Edwards was shewerly forward.

DocGrey

There is a still image, used on the BBC website that does show Anscombe's hand in contact with the ball on the floor (and sufficiently on top of the ball to be considered 'pressing down') and Watson's hand both just above the ball. If that angle had been part of the video review then a lot of the controversy wouldn't have occurred, but the camera that would have shown this was the one that tracked Care as he slid into touch.

It’s really really great that WR have intervened to give their opinion on this try/no-try incident in this high profile game

This could mean WR are about to finally give an opinion on how the two French imbeciles conspired to not award a penalty to the ABs in the dying minutes of T3 in the Lions series that was conveniently swept under the carpet

Waiting patiently

Read didn't say please to the Ref.

Spot on rugby fan

Read was offside.

TightHEAD wrote:I was done with it on Saturday the moment the TMO gave his decision.

That would be true, if you didn’t then create a new thread about it and didn’t continue posting on this thread.

TrailApe wrote:

I'm so pleased there is no game this weekend. Now we can carry on discussing a 2 point difference in the 23rd minute for a whole extra week. Hooray for rest weeks!

naah - that's just soooo last week.

I want to talk about Gatland's reaction when Wales beat Ireland 19-13 in the 2011 Championship – you know the one were the Welsh knowingly broke the laws (quick lineout even though the ballboy had passed over a different ball)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/welsh/9423377.stm

Warren Gatland toasts 'lucky' Wales try over Ireland

"It wasn't the same ball so that's a little bit of luck that's gone our way," said Wales coach Gatland.

"Sometimes you deserve a bit of luck and we haven't had some luck at times. We'll take one of those decisions that go our way."

The cheeky bugger eh? getting away with knowingly breaking the Laws  is 'lucky'??

tut tut Mr Gatland.

Fair point, but in that game they had a penalty when a BOD knock on was missed, so we have already agreed the result was 12-10 Wales I believe

dummy_half wrote:DocGrey

There is a still image, used on the BBC website that does show Anscombe's hand in contact with the ball on the floor (and sufficiently on top of the ball to be considered 'pressing down') and Watson's hand both just above the ball. If that angle had been part of the video review then a lot of the controversy wouldn't have occurred, but the camera that would have shown this was the one that tracked Care as he slid into touch.

Thanks - I think I am looking at the same pic now: I see the ball clearly on the ground, with Anscombe's right hand facing downwards and fingertips on the side of the ball, and Watson's right hand about an inch above the ball.

It must have taken a long time to sort through all the video to find this. I don't know the right answer, but this was split second stuff. I hope we don't have plays which need to be settled like this in the future.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Read was offside.

Welsh guy knocked it on

WR said it was a try

ebop wrote:It’s really really great that WR have intervened to give their opinion on this try/no-try incident in this high profile game

This could mean WR are about to finally give an opinion on how the two French imbeciles conspired to not award a penalty to the ABs in the dying minutes of T3 in the Lions series that was conveniently swept under the carpet

Waiting patiently

You have a point, although I'd disagree with your description. Hard to think of a referereing decision which provoked more discussion

I don't think World Rugby has a policy. Sounds to me like someone had a private conversation with the Welsh coaches, which the Welsh coaches then relayed. This meant that World Rugby had to put something together hurriedly afterwards. That's no fault on the Welsh side. If they were told something material like that, then they are correct to report it.

It just seems very poor form. Are we supposed to understand that no comment from World Rugby in future means they have no problems with a decision? There are two sides in a match, why would you only pass on feedback to one and not the other?

I feel a little bit like Frankenstein creating this thread...


Ok, if this thread wont die, is anyone old enough to remember this TV film, Old Scores [imbd link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102581/ ] . I thought it was really funny at the time, especially as I'm old enough to remember Andy Hayden's cheating b!oody dive out of the line in 78 to steal another win against Wales  (Jump is about 4:50 into the YouTube clip. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r4iOOjOWL4)

... but back to the film. Its called Old Scores, and its a comedy of course, but I think the idea was born out of that 1978 game, although to keep the lawyers happy the film itself is based around a game supposeduly held in 1966 where the referee, on his death bed, confessed to cheating..

I dont know if there's anywhere you can get this from today, but think I'll search the deep recesses of Amazon and eBay to see if I can get a cheap DVD copy.

ah.. dont try and find "Old Scores" on Amazon, if you're on a works computer or share one with your kids.. oops.

Let me just say, the one title (7 in the series) that came back as an option was very enlightening...

Before ebop jumps on the ref didn't give a pen for haydens dive hough haydens admitted himself he was trying to cheat.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Before ebop jumps on the ref didn't give a pen for haydens dive hough haydens admitted himself he was trying to cheat.

So its been reported years later... If you watch the clip though, the "dive" was a pre-called move and you can see more than one of the All Blacks performing the same dive. And actually No 5 also dived (Oliver I believe) as he had already turned to face the dive. It was that "push" the ref later said he'd penalised...

Both where dives, but Hayden's was so blatant.

They have also admitted that it was a pre-determined "play", if they had a chance of a pen, so doesn't matter what ebop says, it was the most desperate cheating move ever performed and the All Blacks should be ashamed of it .. Still today..

It's intriguing what level of cheating is allowed. Any dark arts in the scrum are celebrated. Ruck get on with it. Punching yeah it's a man's game etc.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's intriguing what level of cheating is allowed. Any dark arts in the scrum are celebrated. Ruck get on with it. Punching yeah it's a man's game etc.

BUT ... a fairy dive like that

If it was a MANS dive it would have been something...

Swings in roundabouts.....

Was it a try....yes.  Was our 4th try against Scotland a try...No.   The incredible try Shane Williams scored a couple of years ago with that amazing dive for the corner (against Scotland) a try....No.  

My point is...for every "bad call" we lose out on, I can give you a couple of examples where we have been "lucky"

Every dog has his day....

Welshmushroom wrote:Swings in roundabouts.....

Was it a try....yes.  Was our 4th try against Scotland a try...No.   The incredible try Shane Williams scored a couple of years ago with that amazing dive for the corner (against Scotland) a try....No.  

My point is...for every "bad call" we lose out on, I can give you a couple of examples where we have been "lucky"

Every dog has his day....

But much too reasonable an analysis for 606....

I cannot believe this thread is still going on.....It as been done to death.

Lets move on ok.

Welshmushroom wrote: The incredible try Shane Williams scored a couple of years ago with that amazing dive for the corner (against Scotland) a try....No.  

Whaattt?? Why haven't we discussed this? Right we need to see replays and get a thread for this one!

Which is worse the TMO not awarding a clear try to your side or awarding a try that clearly wasn't a try to you opponent.

The Ben Smith try v Ireland in Chicago where his leg was in touch still grates. Its like the TMO wasn't arsed checking the footage, oh its the ABs lets just give it.

rodders wrote:

Welshmushroom wrote: The incredible try Shane Williams scored a couple of years ago with that amazing dive for the corner (against Scotland) a try....No.  

Whaattt?? Why haven't we discussed this? Right we need to see replays and get a thread for this one!

Replays are no good unless you have neutral cameramen.

Rugby Fan wrote:

ebop wrote:It’s really really great that WR have intervened to give their opinion on this try/no-try incident in this high profile game

This could mean WR are about to finally give an opinion on how the two French imbeciles conspired to not award a penalty to the ABs in the dying minutes of T3 in the Lions series that was conveniently swept under the carpet

Waiting patiently

You have a point, although I'd disagree with your description. Hard to think of a referereing decision which provoked more discussion

I don't think World Rugby has a policy. Sounds to me like someone had a private conversation with the Welsh coaches, which the Welsh coaches then relayed. This meant that World Rugby had to put something together hurriedly afterwards. That's no fault on the Welsh side. If they were told something material like that, then they are correct to report it.

It just seems very poor form. Are we supposed to understand that no comment from World Rugby in future means they have no problems with a decision? There are two sides in a match, why would you only pass on feedback to one and not the other?

Given you’re a reasonable man Rugby Fan I thought you might be interested in this

Highlights a few inconsistencies

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11996677

Well I think it was a try but I think we need another poll just to be sure.

Welshmushroom wrote:Swings in roundabouts.....

Was it a try....yes.  Was our 4th try against Scotland a try...No.   The incredible try Shane Williams scored a couple of years ago with that amazing dive for the corner (against Scotland) a try....No.  

My point is...for every "bad call" we lose out on, I can give you a couple of examples where we have been "lucky"

Every dog has his day....

Looked like a try to me, like the one Wyn Jones scored.... which was also referred to the TMO... who also previously got his call wrong. World Rugby is out to get Wales I tell ye.