moanin' kiwee
Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
BrentC
<michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
Always was a moaner - but then sitting on the AB bench all those years
does make you an ideal coach - afterall you will have watched a lot of
games.
BrentC
<michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
Hardly a coat hanger
http://www.rugbyheaven.com.au/ffximage/2009/11/08/WalvNZ14_wideweb__470x347,0.jpg
Gatlin was from the Waikato?
Too many Cow Bells have adled him - still a ready made excuse
Why so serious?
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:03:21 -0800 (PST), Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
>
> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>
> Hardly a coat hanger
>
>
> Gatlin was from the Waikato?
>
> Too many Cow Bells have adled him - still a ready made excuse
I thought Graham Henry's perception of Gatland's claims (i.e. that
referees didn't want to officiate in an upset over NZ) was quite
funny:
‘It’s complete rubbish. I think that’s a huge stretch. I don’t even
think Warren would believe that,’ he said. When told about Gatland’s
claims, Henry replied: ‘Yeah, but he’s said a lot of things this week.’
didgerman
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:03:21 -0800 (PST), Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
> <michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>
>
> Hardly a coat hanger
Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on
the replay and certainly looks high there.
Cite and ban.
Uncle Dave
> BrentC wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:03:21 -0800 (PST), Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
> > <michaelnewp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>
> > Hardly a coat hanger
>
> Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on
> the replay and certainly looks high there.
> Cite and ban.
You can't ban Dan Carter. It's just not cricket and imagine parents
having to explain that Cinderella's been banned to their little 'uns.
Have you no heart?
UD
Klitty
Why would you ban him? That tackle was at the top of the chest. The
hobbity looking guy brought his chin down on top. No where near the
neck.
--
Rum, Sodomy And The Lash. Join The Royal Navy.
didgerman
Heart? Feelings? Me?
Just pure blackness I'm afraid.
I expect Daniel will get a warning. Even though officially, there is no
warning giveable......
>
> UD
Two Dogs
> BrentC wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:03:21 -0800 (PST), Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
> > <michaelnewp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>
> > Hardly a coat hanger
>
> Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on
> the replay and certainly looks high there.
> Cite and ban.
>
Two Dogs
Two Dogs
He won't be playing next week anyway, feel free to ban him for a week.
Unless, of course, you'd be happier with two weeks for some
reason....?
Two Dogs
BrentC
wrote:
>BrentC wrote:
>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:03:21 -0800 (PST), Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
>> <michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>>
>>
>> Hardly a coat hanger
>
>Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on
>the replay and certainly looks high there.
>Cite and ban.
>
>>
Then we need a minimum player height rule and another which states
that you must not stoop down when being tackled - stand up and take
you punnishment like a man (that bit was specially for the English)
Osbourne Ruddock
news:hd6kga$rdl$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>>
>> Hardly a coat hanger
>
> Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on
> the replay and certainly looks high there.
> Cite and ban.
Was a great covering tackle at speed I thought. It's just a shame that
the Welshian chap was a tad, er, diminuitive so the covering arm hitting
at chest height rode up towards his chin. Dan'll get a week off I
suspect.
Loved the way the TV kept going back and back to it all the way through
the last 10 minutes and every time the crowd did a bundle. Several times
you could see Carter saying WTF? to himself. Heh.
--
Cheers, Os
Andrew Dunford
"Osbourne Ruddock" <stri...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CBE5BEB26040s...@130.133.1.4...
Shame really, because it appears to have given the coaching staff a chance
to moan they were robbed of a match in which they were clearly second best
and should have lost by 15 points. Not that the All Blacks were especially
impressive themselves.
Andrew
Osbourne Ruddock
news:7lomluF...@mid.individual.net:
>>> Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high
>>> on the replay and certainly looks high there.
>>> Cite and ban.
>>
>> Was a great covering tackle at speed I thought. It's just a shame
>> that the Welshian chap was a tad, er, diminuitive so the covering arm
>> hitting at chest height rode up towards his chin. Dan'll get a week
>> off I suspect.
>>
>> Loved the way the TV kept going back and back to it all the way
>> through the last 10 minutes and every time the crowd did a bundle.
>> Several times you could see Carter saying WTF? to himself. Heh.
>
> Shame really, because it appears to have given the coaching staff a
> chance to moan they were robbed of a match in which they were clearly
> second best and should have lost by 15 points. Not that the All
> Blacks were especially impressive themselves.
>
For a short time in the second half I thought we looked good, possibly
the best this season in terms of forward momentum and control. But the
first half and end of the match were just more headless chook stuff
unfortunately.
Wales were lively and troublesome but just lacked a little edge in
physicality to put us under real pressure. There lineout wasn't flash and
apparently you just can't scrum al Millenium Stadium so was difficult for
them to get into real attacking positions.
--
Cheers, Os
lord shineything
> "Osbourne Ruddock" <strike...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9CBE5BEB26040s...@130.133.1.4...
>
>
>
> > didgerman <didger...@rfu.com> wrote in
> >news:hd6kga$rdl$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> >>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>
> >>> Hardly a coat hanger
>
> >> Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on
> >> the replay and certainly looks high there.
> >> Cite and ban.
>
> > Was a great covering tackle at speed I thought. It's just a shame that
> > the Welshian chap was a tad, er, diminuitive so the covering arm hitting
> > at chest height rode up towards his chin. Dan'll get a week off I
> > suspect.
>
> > Loved the way the TV kept going back and back to it all the way through
> > the last 10 minutes and every time the crowd did a bundle. Several times
> > you could see Carter saying WTF? to himself. Heh.
>
> Shame really, because it appears to have given the coaching staff a chance
> to moan they were robbed of a match in which they were clearly second best
> and should have lost by 15 points. Not that the All Blacks were especially
> impressive themselves.
Especially, Lord Shiney would say, after Gee Henry's barking
substitutions of three of his best forwards on the day. What had
looked like steadily-increasing dominance to that point became a
shambles immediately thereafter.
Leonard
wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
The whole thing is a bit silly - its turning into a frigging fag fest
- this is rugby.
Dan Carter does not have a incling, record nor reputation for dirty
play anyway and Joubert knew that.
Carter himself has been the victim of many late hits etc and never
lost his cool
If he gets banned it will be ridiculous.
dechucka
"Leonard" <neo...@canada.com> wrote in message
news:96531539-9400-4fb6...@k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
======================================
why? He tackled him high
Klitty
No he didn't. The hobbit ducked into it. No malicious intent there
whatsoever.
dechucka
"Klitty" <mitt...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hd7ks5$fn5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
So Law 10e A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the
line of the shoulders even
if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the
opponent's neck or head is dangerous play.
Penalty: Penalty Kick
but maybe a citeable offence. IMHO penalty yes suspension no
Andrew Dunford
"didgerman" <didg...@rfu.com> wrote in message
news:hd6kga$rdl$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> BrentC wrote:
>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:03:21 -0800 (PST), Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
>> <michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>>
>>
>> Hardly a coat hanger
>
> Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on the
> replay and certainly looks high there.
> Cite and ban.
Yes, it was a high tackle and thus a penalisable offence.
However the implication of what you wrote i.e. that in international matches
all tackles which are technically high should result in a ban irrespective
of the severity of the offence, is complete bollocks.
As per IRB regulation 17.6.2:
"(a) Citing Commissioners shall be entitled to cite a player for any act or
acts of Illegal and/or Foul Play which in the opinion of the Citing
Commissioner warranted the Player concerned being Ordered Off;"
http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/regulation17090730_8711.pdf
The idea that what Carter did was a sending off offence is too silly to
contemplate. I appreciate there have been other cases of the Citing
Commissioner citing players for relatively minor offences, but the idea that
every penalisable high tackle should result in a citation and a ban is
ridiculous. Of course the severity of the offence makes a difference.
Perhaps your domestic competition has a different judiciary process? Dunno.
Andrew
didgerman
>
>
> "didgerman" <didg...@rfu.com> wrote in message
> news:hd6kga$rdl$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> BrentC wrote:
>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:03:21 -0800 (PST), Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
>>> <michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>>>
>>>
>>> Hardly a coat hanger
>>
>> Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on
>> the replay and certainly looks high there.
>> Cite and ban.
>
> Yes, it was a high tackle and thus a penalisable offence.
>
> However the implication of what you wrote i.e. that in international
> matches all tackles which are technically high should result in a ban
> irrespective of the severity of the offence, is complete bollocks.
Is that what I said?
>
> As per IRB regulation 17.6.2:
>
> "(a) Citing Commissioners shall be entitled to cite a player for any act or
> acts of Illegal and/or Foul Play which in the opinion of the Citing
> Commissioner warranted the Player concerned being Ordered Off;"
>
> http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/regulation17090730_8711.pdf
>
> The idea that what Carter did was a sending off offence is too silly to
> contemplate.
Sure it is, nobody ever gets sent off for high tackles, never happens.
Andrew Dunford
"didgerman" <didg...@rfu.com> wrote in message
news:hd987b$krh$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Andrew Dunford wrote:
>>
>>
>> "didgerman" <didg...@rfu.com> wrote in message
>> news:hd6kga$rdl$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> BrentC wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 00:03:21 -0800 (PST), Ponce Allbutt of Manacle
>>>> <michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/welsh/8348853.stm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hardly a coat hanger
>>>
>>> Which is irrelevant. It looked high in real time on TV, looked high on
>>> the replay and certainly looks high there.
>>> Cite and ban.
>>
>> Yes, it was a high tackle and thus a penalisable offence.
>>
>> However the implication of what you wrote i.e. that in international
>> matches all tackles which are technically high should result in a ban
>> irrespective of the severity of the offence, is complete bollocks.
>
> Is that what I said?
Pretty much. You said (a) that whether or not it was a coat hanger tackle
is irrelevant, and (b) that a high tackle is a cite and a ban. If that's
not what you mean then by all means tell us what was bad enough about
Carter's tackle to warrant a sending off.
>> As per IRB regulation 17.6.2:
>>
>> "(a) Citing Commissioners shall be entitled to cite a player for any act
>> or
>> acts of Illegal and/or Foul Play which in the opinion of the Citing
>> Commissioner warranted the Player concerned being Ordered Off;"
>>
>> http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/regulation17090730_8711.pdf
>>
>> The idea that what Carter did was a sending off offence is too silly to
>> contemplate.
>
> Sure it is, nobody ever gets sent off for high tackles, never happens.
Severity of offence. Can't say I've ever seen a player ordered off for a
tackle that innocuous.
<snip>
Andrew
Neilsons
"Andrew Dunford" <adun...@artifax.net> wrote in message
news:7lrd4sF...@mid.individual.net...
Sometimes they don't even get cited for tackles that put the receiver of
said tackle off the field with blood (real) coming from the mouth. Ref. J
Wilkinson v J Thomas last year even.
It's the inconsistency of the whole process that annoys me and this is just
another example.
Cheers, aMtt