Our "cousins" signed another fine win... 23 - 20 in the dying minutes, thanx to a nice try of Mauro Bergamasco. But this will probably be controversial stuff, understatement, for the Welsh. Wales were given a penalty just around one minute after the Bergamasco's try. Hook goes rather for a touch in the italian 22 than a penalty kick (which could have mean a draw). The ref seemingly and clearly gave Hook his OK to play the lineout afterwards. And the same ref finally blows for full time... Welsh logically furious...
Otherwise, a quiet ordinary game, Italy producing their usual powerful and predictable rugby. Wales showing their usual glimpses of brilliance and usual collection of errors...
(PS : Complimenti raggazzi italiani, pero mi piacerrebe un' giocco piu stimolando... Il rugby un' spettacolo anche
"Ben L" <bjlongman@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1173553451.694539.78150@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com... ...
But, behind the presumption that White robbed them of the win is the
presumption that the lineout would have led to a try - quite a tall
order IMHO.
By no means a given. Them there Eyeties can maul!
When everyone calms down, the bottom line is that Wales were naive in
not going for the draw in the first place.
You've got to admire them for having a go; assuming the final whistle hadn't blown, better to go down fighting, surely?
In a way, I see their point. On the other hand, when I were a lad, the ref wouldn't tell you the time. You had to guess or get the coach to pass the word.
In message <1173553093.904158.320990@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>, "Mark (newsgroups)" <marknewsgroups@yahoo.com> writes
On 10 Mar, 18:39, "Ben L" <bjlong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 10 Mar, 18:06, "Donnie" <don...@bla.com> wrote:
Our "cousins" signed another fine win... 23 - 20 in the dying
minutes, thanx
to a nice try of Mauro Bergamasco. But this will probably be controversial
stuff, understatement, for the Welsh. Wales were given a penalty just
around one minute after the Bergamasco's try. Hook goes rather for a touch
in the italian 22 than a penalty kick (which could have mean a draw). The
ref seemingly and clearly gave Hook his OK to play the lineout afterwards.
And the same ref finally blows for full time... Welsh logically furious...
Not especially controversial in my book. It was player naivety above
all. Even if Wales had the time for the line out, it was the wrong
decision to take - the odds were well against them scoring a try.
And it takes away from another strong Italian performance. Well done
then.
Chris White was ambiguous and not especially helpful to the Welsh -
from what I tell the two questions were:
- How long have we got left? 10 seconds
- Can we kick the ball out for a line out? Yes
Now, is it White's duty to tell them they've got about 6 seconds to
form up the lineout? Possibly, given the paternalism of modern
reffing.
But I couldn't believe, regardless of what the ref said, that the
Welsh forwards ambled over to the touchline as if there were all the
time in the world when White had clearly indicated just 10 seconds on
the clock - was there the expectation he was going to let the clock
run for them?
I'm not a Welsh supporter, I was hoping for an underdog win (Italy I
suppose) in this game, but I regard that incident as very poor
refereeing. I'd really like to see what the laws have to say about
this. Even if he was techincally correct, he infuriated the Welsh
players and millions of fans around the world (not only Welsh fans).
With just a few more words, a little better refereeing, we wouldn't
even be talking about this.
Perhaps he just agrees with Anne Robinson.
It looked as if one of the TJs said something (probably about the time) to him over the reflink as the players were forming the lineout. He seemed to blow the whistle in response to that.
Had he actually awarded the lineout? Law 5.7 (e) says: 'If time expires and the ball is not dead, or an awarded scrum or lineout has not been completed the referee allows play to continue until the next time that the ball becomes dead. If time expires and a mark, free kick or penalty kick is then awarded, the referee allows play to continue.'
Lots of room for interpretation there. You could say he was justified in blowing for no-side because the ball was dead; or he wasn't correct because the lineout he awarded had not been completed. OTOH it hadn't started either.
Or, as I predicted in another thread, he was wrong, and always will be wrong, because he is English. See the usual biased vitriolic posters for details. -- Peter
It looked as if one of the TJs said something (probably about the time)
to him over the reflink as the players were forming the lineout. He
seemed to blow the whistle in response to that.
Had he actually awarded the lineout?
Law 5.7 (e) says:
'If time expires and the ball is not dead, or an awarded scrum or
lineout has not been completed the referee allows play to continue
until the next time that the ball becomes dead. If time expires and
a mark, free kick or penalty kick is then awarded, the referee allows
play to continue.'
Lots of room for interpretation there. You could say he was justified in
blowing for no-side because the ball was dead; or he wasn't correct
because the lineout he awarded had not been completed. OTOH it hadn't
started either.
Surely it didn't take ten seconds to kick the ball into touch? The moment the ball crossed the line, the ball became dead but with time still on the clock, and a lineout awarded. Why wouldn't it have been completed?
Either way, sheer incompetence by the ref not to indicate his resulting decision clearly when asked, regardless of whether he's English, a New Zealander or Vulcan.
Is he a full time ref? Or does work in IT support.
It seems his reply was completely accurate - but sadly not to the question
the dumb users^W^W Welsh *thought* they asked.
And not the question the ref knew full well they were asking. Should the team bring a lawyer onto the pitch for every exchange with the ref just in case there's some loophole he can wriggle out of making a common sense decision?
The Green Phantom 11 March 2007 04:29:55 [ permanent link ]
Rob Stradling wrote:
Uncle Bully wrote:
Or perhaps just make you're ahead at the 79:50 mark so you never have
to worry about it.
This kind of thing is always trotted out by a non-aggrieved party, isn't
it?
In Dully's case it's the sort of thing he would say - but there's also a sense in which he's right as well. The scoring system in rugby is such that it's possible to have a loss that you think you should have won or, alternatively, to feel more than a little lucky that you held out for the win.
In this case we have the "two bald men fighting over a comb" syndrome.
The argument seems to go, "You allowed the scoreline to be within one
score at the end of the game: Therefore, if you lost the game through an
injustice - no matter how extreme - you are solely to blame."
I don't think he was saying that particularly, just that if you want to be certain of a win then you should make certain you're two scores clear of the opposition with a minute to go.
The Italians, with a three-point lead, conceded a kickable penalty in
the dying seconds; strangely, no-one here seems to be arguing that they
therefore didn't deserve to win.
But they're not complaining are they? And why should they?
What I find a bit dispiriting about the situation is that, in refereeing terms, there has been a degree of ineptitude shown. In "what if" terms though there has been an assumption, in some quarters, that the lineout would have led to a catch and drive (or fast delivery and run in) and Wales would have snatched a victory in the last second of the game.
The likeliest outcome - if the lineout had taken place, is that an offence or turnover would have occurred and the game would have been over. Same result.
That Wales should have kept the ball alive, and that they had earlier
opportunities to be ahead, are fair comments, but irrelevant to the
matter in hand.
White's mistake *decided* the result. If that had happened to any of
your teams, you'd be spitting feathers, and you *all* know it.
It wasn't solely White's mistake though. Wales had the chance to land a penalty kick for the draw. Sure they wanted the win, but listening to what was said and viewing the actions of all concerned Wales played their part in the fiasco.
There was certainly some inept refereeing on show, though more from the TJs. I was amazed at the Troncon stamp that he got away with.
Or perhaps just make you're ahead at the 79:50 mark so you never have to
worry about it.
This kind of thing is always trotted out by a non-aggrieved party, isn't it?
The argument seems to go, "You allowed the scoreline to be within one score at the end of the game: Therefore, if you lost the game through an injustice - no matter how extreme - you are solely to blame."
The Italians, with a three-point lead, conceded a kickable penalty in the dying seconds; strangely, no-one here seems to be arguing that they therefore didn't deserve to win.
That Wales should have kept the ball alive, and that they had earlier opportunities to be ahead, are fair comments, but irrelevant to the matter in hand.
White's mistake *decided* the result. If that had happened to any of your teams, you'd be spitting feathers, and you *all* know it.
No, hog breath, simple common sense would have sufficed. Even six year olds understand why a penalty is kicked to the touch line.
Why are you bothered, it wasn't England sneaking a win, or your precious
AB's who lost.
Oh dear, I'm sorry, was I expressing an opinion? Can you send me the form for being allowed to have an opinion Your Highness, so I can submit it for your approval?
On 10 Mar, 18:06, "Donnie" <don...@bla.com> wrote:
Our "cousins" signed another fine win... 23 - 20 in the dying minutes, thanx
to a nice try of Mauro Bergamasco. But this will probably be controversial
stuff, understatement, for the Welsh. Wales were given a penalty just
around one minute after the Bergamasco's try. Hook goes rather for a touch
in the italian 22 than a penalty kick (which could have mean a draw). The
ref seemingly and clearly gave Hook his OK to play the lineout afterwards.
And the same ref finally blows for full time... Welsh logically furious...
Not especially controversial in my book. It was player naivety above
all. Even if Wales had the time for the line out, it was the wrong
decision to take - the odds were well against them scoring a try.
Even so, I thought it was the right decision (given that they thought they had time for the lineout).
What would a draw have achieved? Given that they had nothing else to play for, going for the win rather than attempting to avoid a loss was a positive tactic.
