Force vs Highlanders Live updates

[TOCC]

that ref was astounding, he denied the Force a try..

Giteau played a real nice composed game, he will definetly be one of the first picked for the Wallabies. Brown, Pockok and Cross also had fantastic games.

I thought the ref was shit, and i had to turn the commentators down, there coverage was terrible, at one point they were debating whethere there was a club in town called "hooters of shooters".

[Ecky]

Here we go again - damn ref denied Spanner's try and the a golden opportunity for a bonus point win.

Or did he?

No doubt some of you will remember my lesseon relating to the tackle law (found here, of course), well 210 of you will anyway.

In particular, part of the law is thus:

15.5 THE TACKLED PLAYER
(b) A tackled player must immediately pass the ball or release it. That player must also get up or move away from it at once.
(c) A tackled player may release the ball by putting it on the ground in any direction, provided this is done immediately.
(d) A tackled player may release the ball by pushing it along the ground in any direction except forward, provided this is done immediately.
and also
(g) If players are tackled near the goal line, these players may immediately reach out and ground the ball on or over the goal line to score a try or make a touch down.[/I]

So, Spanner, in the opinion of the ref, had been tackled (The law says the ball carrier must be brought to the ground, while held by an opponent). First thing that has to happen is the tackler must release the tackled player - which he did. Then Spanner was required to do one of (b), (c) or (d). Immediately. He didn't. Nor did he do (g). Nothing he did was immediate, other than squirm/crawl closer to the goal line so he could reach it. So he was penalised.

Harsh when you watch the game with blue & black eyes (or yellow & black in away games), but spot on in law.

Damn refs

[gotheforce]

I still thought Lawrence should have gone up to the TMO. If Spanners got the try, it might have given the force some momentum. I thought the tackler had let go for spanners before he went to ground, thus an eligible try. Anyway, we can argue about it now, but the game is over. Lawrence should be glad he didnt rob the force of a win with that call. maybe the referee coach for lawrence might say something about it to him after the game. He did have a bit of a terrible game didnt he.

I dont and still didnt rate Mackay. fair enough that he's back after such a long stint on the sidelines, but Daruda really stood out when he came out. He is exactly what Stephen Brett is to the Crusaders as a second option flyhalf. And you could see it got the highlanders in a mix today when he came on. And Stannard had an average game. he was good in attack and always caught the opposition napping with his darting runs, although its quite true he's a little slow with his passing from set pieces. but defensively, he seemed a bit hesitant to tackle. Cross had a good game and i think he's really putting his hand up for a wallaby jumper. And once again, giteau is setting himself up as one of the best flyhalves in the world. I thought Pocock was exceptional, already in the first few minutes and 2 turnovers to his name. Another player putting his hand up for wallaby selection. Richard Brown is starting to be the form No.8 in Australia, along with Stephen Hoiles, and getting the tries to back that up. On the wings, i still think spanner's ability to break through gaps is being wasted. And drew had a good game with the boot today. Really good clearing kicks, and no matter what everyone else thinks, he's still my first choice for the wing in the wallabies. And shepherd, where do i start with him? Shepherd, its time to put your mark on a new force contract. You will not look good in anything other than a force jumper and a wallaby jumper.

[AndyS]

I was having this discussion in the pub and thought I would check. Even if he wasn't held:

Law 15 - Tackle: Ball-Carrier Brought to the Ground

DEFINITION

A tackle occurs when a ball-carrier is held by one or more opponents and is brought to the ground.

A ball-carrier who is not held is not a tackled player and a tackle has not taken place.

Law 14 - Ball on the Ground - No Tackle

DEFINITION

This situation occurs when the ball is available on the ground and a player goes to ground to gather the ball, except immediately after a scrum or a ruck.

It also occurs when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled...

A player who is not tackled, but who goes to ground while holding the ball, or a player who goes to ground and gathers the ball, must act immediately.

1 PLAYER ON THE GROUND

The player must immediately do one of three things:

Get up with the ball, or
Pass the ball, or
Release the ball.

Whether he was tackled or not, he can't just worm-hump his way to a try. The ref had moments, no doubt, but that wasn't one of them.

[jargan83]

1 PLAYER ON THE GROUND

The player must immediately do one of three things:

Get up with the ball, or
Pass the ball, or
Release the ball.[/I][/INDENT]

Whether he was tackled or not, he can't just worm-hump his way to a try. The ref had moments, no doubt, but that wasn't one of them.

so had he attempeted to get to his feet a try would have been given???

You're a treasure.

Thats what i keep telling everyone

[AndyS]

That's how I would interpret it, assuming the referee didn't consider him tackled. If he did, he was stuffed anyway (as noted by Ecky). Otherwise, he could have got up onto his feet and dived over the line.

[GIGS20]

Generally the ref's decision can be discovered by the penalty that was applied. I'm pretty sure it was a 5m scrum wasn't it? The penalty for a tackled player getting up and running again is a full arm isn't it?

Ecky, can you help out with this?
I'd think that if my foggy recollection of law is correct, he wasn't counted as tackled, but failed to get up and play the ball correctly....am I right?

[jargan83]

Watching the game yesterday it didnt look like he was tackled, more so the tackling player just fell off the tackle

no use debating i guess, the Force won regardless

[BLR]

no use debating i guess, the Force won regardless

we wuz robbed of a bonus point!

[Jehna]

In the end Ref's are human. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong...obviously we prefer the former...but in a game like this one, the force should never have put themselves in a position where such a mistake could be crucial to the outcome of the game.

[gotheforce]

I'd like to bring us back to the first home win of the Force vs Hurricanes. If i remember correctly, Tana Umaga's try was almost similiar. He was 'tackled' but not held, and he just crawled for like 5m before dotting the ball down. So why did the ref then award the try and lawrence didnt?

But that being said, lets be glad we won the game. Bonus point or not, we're in the top 4 right now! WOOHOO!!!! Let's hope if considering our away record is pretty good, the home games are gonna be superb. I cant wait for 3 weeks of LIVE rugby and being able to watch it live and not on tv.

I really hope we beat the stormers, bulls and tahs. Esp the Tahs.

[jargan83]

we wuz robbed of a bonus point!

technically yes

you can't say that we would have scored another try. Had that been awarded the circumsatnces of the Ryan Cross intercept try may have been different. Yes we could of then put the Highlanders to the sword or they may have replied straight away etc.

Nothing is certain in sport (especiacilly Rugby)

[Darren]

In the end Ref's are human.

lawyers, refs ....

[Ecky]

Generally the ref's decision can be discovered by the penalty that was applied. I'm pretty sure it was a 5m scrum wasn't it? The penalty for a tackled player getting up and running again is a full arm isn't it?

Ecky, can you help out with this?
I'd think that if my foggy recollection of law is correct, he wasn't counted as tackled, but failed to get up and play the ball correctly....am I right?

Why yes I can, since you ask!

It was a free kick against Spanner. Whichever version - not releasing after being tackled or playing the ball while off his feet - still has a free kick as the sanction.

The only full arm stuff these days is for offside or foul play or not entering through the gate. If the ref considers the offence to be cynical then that's foul play and could lead to a penalty.

[Ecky]

lawyers, refs ....

Don't put us refs in the same basket as lawyers - that's way below the belt!