International Rugby

[JD]

SBW has got a four week ban, so not playing in the final test. Laumape will start the next test and I think he will be more than a decent replacement. 

[paul_e]

Here's a question for you Paul,  this chap was saying that the final penalty, tackle in the air on Sinkler, was not a penalty as you can't jump into a pass!
Is this right?
I think he's getting mixed up with jumping the tackle.
Been a long time since I looked at the rule changes, but, it certainly wasn't there when I played.

Just to add this guys a New Zealander 😊

It's actually a pretty contentious one ad it's worth pointing out that I didn't actually see the award the incident that led to it so I haven't seen the specifics of it.

So, if you have to jump to claim the pass then of course  you're allowed to so the final point is wrong but I get where he's coming.

After that it gets messier, if you're committed to the tackle and then the player jumps to collect the pass when you would'n't have expected it are you responsible for tackling in the air?  There was loads of arguments about this at club level a few years back because some people saw it as a way to buy a cheap penalty if you jump and then the tackler makes contact.  Whilst there is a point there the key thing about all of the dangerous play related rules in rugby is that they're all about outcomes if you do something which puts another player at risk of injury then you are responsible for anything that happens to him.

On that basis if you take someone in the air but they land safely a penalty is normally the expected result, if they land on their back it's normally a yellow card or on their neck or head it's a red.  So It's a harsh one but by the book it's ok.

[nigel]

Here's a question for you Paul,  this chap was saying that the final penalty, tackle in the air on Sinkler, was not a penalty as you can't jump into a pass!
Is this right?
I think he's getting mixed up with jumping the tackle.
Been a long time since I looked at the rule changes, but, it certainly wasn't there when I played.

Just to add this guys a New Zealander 😊

It's actually a pretty contentious one ad it's worth pointing out that I didn't actually see the award the incident that led to it so I haven't seen the specifics of it.

So, if you have to jump to claim the pass then of course  you're allowed to so the final point is wrong but I get where he's coming.

After that it gets messier, if you're committed to the tackle and then the player jumps to collect the pass when you would'n't have expected it are you responsible for tackling in the air?  There was loads of arguments about this at club level a few years back because some people saw it as a way to buy a cheap penalty if you jump and then the tackler makes contact.  Whilst there is a point there the key thing about all of the dangerous play related rules in rugby is that they're all about outcomes if you do something which puts another player at risk of injury then you are responsible for anything that happens to him.

On that basis if you take someone in the air but they land safely a penalty is normally the expected result, if they land on their back it's normally a yellow card or on their neck or head it's a red.  So It's a harsh one but by the book it's ok.

Cheers, Paul.

[paul_e]

SBW has got a four week ban, so not playing in the final test. Laumape will start the next test and I think he will be more than a decent replacement. 

I've watched it back a few times and I think that's a little harsh.  I think they've taken him looking at Watson as a sign that he saw an opportunity to put in a hit which is a misreading of it for me.  I suspect his intent was to add weight to the tackle with a big hit but bounce off so he could get straight over the ball as they hit the ground, it's something you see from NZ a lot.  They normally make a better show of wrapping the arms and time it better so they're not following the man down with the shoulder and it's those 2 things that made it look so nasty.

That said I'm glad they backed the ref and gave a proper ban because it knocks the 'untouchable' attitude that the ABs so often have when it comes to toying with the laws.

[tomd2103]

Here's a question for you Paul,  this chap was saying that the final penalty, tackle in the air on Sinkler, was not a penalty as you can't jump into a pass!
Is this right?
I think he's getting mixed up with jumping the tackle.
Been a long time since I looked at the rule changes, but, it certainly wasn't there when I played.

Just to add this guys a New Zealander 😊

It's actually a pretty contentious one ad it's worth pointing out that I didn't actually see the award the incident that led to it so I haven't seen the specifics of it.

So, if you have to jump to claim the pass then of course  you're allowed to so the final point is wrong but I get where he's coming.

After that it gets messier, if you're committed to the tackle and then the player jumps to collect the pass when you would'n't have expected it are you responsible for tackling in the air?  There was loads of arguments about this at club level a few years back because some people saw it as a way to buy a cheap penalty if you jump and then the tackler makes contact.  Whilst there is a point there the key thing about all of the dangerous play related rules in rugby is that they're all about outcomes if you do something which puts another player at risk of injury then you are responsible for anything that happens to him.

On that basis if you take someone in the air but they land safely a penalty is normally the expected result, if they land on their back it's normally a yellow card or on their neck or head it's a red.  So It's a harsh one but by the book it's ok.

It was a nailed on penalty Paul.  Sinckler jumped to catch the pass and the AB player hit him in the air.  It was questionable if any arms were used as well. 

The build up this week is going to be great and it is now just a one off game.  I think the Lions ard going to have to produce something special to win it, but you never know.

[tomd2103]

SBW has got a four week ban, so not playing in the final test. Laumape will start the next test and I think he will be more than a decent replacement. 

I've watched it back a few times and I think that's a little harsh.  I think they've taken him looking at Watson as a sign that he saw an opportunity to put in a hit which is a misreading of it for me.  I suspect his intent was to add weight to the tackle with a big hit but bounce off so he could get straight over the ball as they hit the ground, it's something you see from NZ a lot.  They normally make a better show of wrapping the arms and time it better so they're not following the man down with the shoulder and it's those 2 things that made it look so nasty.

That said I'm glad they backed the ref and gave a proper ban because it knocks the 'untouchable' attitude that the ABs so often have when it comes to toying with the laws.

Yeah I do have some sympathy for SBW and slow motion replays always make it look worse.  To the letter of the law it was a red, but I think not every ref would have given that as a red.  There was a similar one, if not worse, in Maori game and that only got yellow. 

The Aussie TMO trying to steer Garces away from red was very questionable as well.

[paul_e]

SBW has got a four week ban, so not playing in the final test. Laumape will start the next test and I think he will be more than a decent replacement. 

I've watched it back a few times and I think that's a little harsh.  I think they've taken him looking at Watson as a sign that he saw an opportunity to put in a hit which is a misreading of it for me.  I suspect his intent was to add weight to the tackle with a big hit but bounce off so he could get straight over the ball as they hit the ground, it's something you see from NZ a lot.  They normally make a better show of wrapping the arms and time it better so they're not following the man down with the shoulder and it's those 2 things that made it look so nasty.

That said I'm glad they backed the ref and gave a proper ban because it knocks the 'untouchable' attitude that the ABs so often have when it comes to toying with the laws.

Yeah I do have some sympathy for SBW and slow motion replays always make it look worse.  To the letter of the law it was a red, but I think not every ref would have given that as a red.  There was a similar one, if not worse, in Maori game and that only got yellow. 

The Aussie TMO trying to steer Garces away from red was very questionable as well.

It had to be a red, there's no question there and the base for that sort of offence is 2 weeks, the choice to classify it as mid-range and up to up weeks is the bit that I'm not sure about

[paul_e]

Here's a question for you Paul,  this chap was saying that the final penalty, tackle in the air on Sinkler, was not a penalty as you can't jump into a pass!
Is this right?
I think he's getting mixed up with jumping the tackle.
Been a long time since I looked at the rule changes, but, it certainly wasn't there when I played.

Just to add this guys a New Zealander 😊

It's actually a pretty contentious one ad it's worth pointing out that I didn't actually see the award the incident that led to it so I haven't seen the specifics of it.

So, if you have to jump to claim the pass then of course  you're allowed to so the final point is wrong but I get where he's coming.

After that it gets messier, if you're committed to the tackle and then the player jumps to collect the pass when you would'n't have expected it are you responsible for tackling in the air?  There was loads of arguments about this at club level a few years back because some people saw it as a way to buy a cheap penalty if you jump and then the tackler makes contact.  Whilst there is a point there the key thing about all of the dangerous play related rules in rugby is that they're all about outcomes if you do something which puts another player at risk of injury then you are responsible for anything that happens to him.

On that basis if you take someone in the air but they land safely a penalty is normally the expected result, if they land on their back it's normally a yellow card or on their neck or head it's a red.  So It's a harsh one but by the book it's ok.

It was a nailed on penalty Paul.  Sinckler jumped to catch the pass and the AB player hit him in the air.  It was questionable if any arms were used as well. 

The build up this week is going to be great and it is now just a one off game.  I think the Lions ard going to have to produce something special to win it, but you never know.

I've seen it now, it's a definite penalty but just the description of it made it fairly nailed on.  No matter how much sympathy you can have for it being an accident the responsibility is always with the tackler in those situations, the ref really had no choice on that, as soon as you make contact with someone who's in the air whilst you're on the floor you're in trouble unless there's a clear sign that you're trying to let them land.

[tomd2103]

SBW has got a four week ban, so not playing in the final test. Laumape will start the next test and I think he will be more than a decent replacement. 

I've watched it back a few times and I think that's a little harsh.  I think they've taken him looking at Watson as a sign that he saw an opportunity to put in a hit which is a misreading of it for me.  I suspect his intent was to add weight to the tackle with a big hit but bounce off so he could get straight over the ball as they hit the ground, it's something you see from NZ a lot.  They normally make a better show of wrapping the arms and time it better so they're not following the man down with the shoulder and it's those 2 things that made it look so nasty.

That said I'm glad they backed the ref and gave a proper ban because it knocks the 'untouchable' attitude that the ABs so often have when it comes to toying with the laws.

Yeah I do have some sympathy for SBW and slow motion replays always make it look worse.  To the letter of the law it was a red, but I think not every ref would have given that as a red.  There was a similar one, if not worse, in Maori game and that only got yellow. 

The Aussie TMO trying to steer Garces away from red was very questionable as well.

It had to be a red, there's no question there and the base for that sort of offence is 2 weeks, the choice to classify it as mid-range and up to up weeks is the bit that I'm not sure about

As I said, by the letter of the law it is a red card, but again don't think every ref would have given it one.  This is the one from the Maori game that only got yellow (thing to remember, which the ref obviously didn't, is that IRB stated before this season that it didn't matter if a player was falling):

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WBliowXjzHg

[taylorsworkrate]

Unchanged team for the final test.

Really surprised that Mako keeps his place despite having been a massive liability in the second test. Lawes should really have come in for Wyn Jones also

[Jon Crofts]

Unchanged team for the final test.

Really surprised that Mako keeps his place despite having been a massive liability in the second test. Lawes should really have come in for Wyn Jones also

AWJ selection is baffling, it's like it's the AWJ testimonial series FFS.

[paul_e]

I hadn't expected any changes, he'll see that they won and the bench all made an impact and think that was enough.  I've given up being offended by the inclusion of AWJ, the guy is nowhere near good enough to be keeping Launchbury out of the squad let alone being the first choice lock but Gatland has decided he can't pick the team without him.

[peter w]

Been up since 6 my time (4am UK) just waiting for the game. You can't see past the All Blacks but you just never know.I think it'll be a big win for them - 30 or 40 points. I'd like Teo in but we go with what we've got. I hope we start the game and get into them early, force the kick and then return by targeting Barrett (is that his name? the full back?). Anyway, the start is crucial and we can't let them take the initiative. Shame that I can't watch it here so will be looking for streams.

[Risso]

Oh dear. From a great position for the Lions to conceding the first try. This isn't going to end well.

[Risso]

Fair play though, back to a point in it.