Jump to content

Lions Tour 2017


skygod

Recommended Posts

Sorry, but comparing this to Hoggs sending off is nonsense. Hogg hit the guy late with his shoulder in the air, an act of complete stupidity (as he's said himself). Vunipola on the late hit both players were on the ground and he made sure he bumped into him. Equally stupid but nowhere near as dangerous. The forearm / shoulder to the head of a prone player (the one he was carded for) was deliberate stupid and dangerous, and having set the tone that he would protect players Garces messed up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Jonboy said:

Sorry, but comparing this to Hoggs sending off is nonsense. Hogg hit the guy late with his shoulder in the air, an act of complete stupidity (as he's said himself). Vunipola on the late hit both players were on the ground and he made sure he bumped into him. Equally stupid but nowhere near as dangerous. The forearm / shoulder to the head of a prone player (the one he was carded for) was deliberate stupid and dangerous, and having set the tone that he would protect players Garces messed up.

 

Sorry but both of Dan Biggars feet were on the ground. The rules of the game make no mention of the tackler having to have their feet on the ground while attempting to tackle. In fact that would prevent many of the great tackles we see in every match. The rules do however specifically mention tackling without using your arms, charging into a tackle with the shoulder, hitting above shoulder height and lays out the punishments a referee should consider; including a yellow or red card. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Higgs weren't though, he thew himself at Biggar with both feet off the ground and a shoulder direct to the head. Dangerous stupid and deliberate. Vunipola followed through after kick and bumped Barrett to the floor. Just as stupid and deliberate but nowhere near as dangerous due to the (lack of force in the impact. The two are miles apart. The forearm smash a few minutes later was deliberate and dangerous and he should have gone then, but the 1st one, a yellow would have been harsh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Zorro said:

What a ridiculous claim to make. If a team has more of the ball and does most of the attacking, it stands to reason they'll get more fouls and be given more penalties. Whereas if you're never in your opponents box, the chances of getting a penalty are reduced to nil. That's statistics not preferential treatment or bias. 

O'Brien was cleared to play in the next test, despite the panel feeling his challenge was reckless but unintentional, but you think SBW deserves a red card and a four match ban because his challenge was reckless but unintentional. Seems fair. 

However, despite your many attempts to ignore my argument about the context in which the match was refereed; my main complaint remains that if SBW's deserved a red, MVP deserved to be sent of twice in this test and O'Brien should be facing a minimum four match ban. The IRFB should also be taking a long look a MVP's conduct on this tour; two dangerous assaults in the 2nd test, grabbing Owen Franks by the balls during a scrum in the first test, a tip tackle in the game against the crusaders and conceding more penalties than any other player, and decide if this is acceptable behaviour for a professional player. IMO his actions will result in a career ending injury for an opponent. If the IRFB won't take action, hopefully someone wrecks him before he has the opportunity to destroy someone else's career. 

I've really enjoyed Murray's recent performances. Queens was hilarious, as was the first test for the All Blacks against the lions. The celebrations from the lions after sneaking a win, after playing 60 minutes against 14 men was quite funny too. I suspect it will come back to bite them on the arse, and I'll laugh my arse off then too. 

So presumably if Ayr are the better team and beat Killie at Somerset Park you'll be laughing fit to burst on the way home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Wrangodog said:

So presumably if Ayr are the better team and beat Killie at Somerset Park you'll be laughing fit to burst on the way home.

What an idiotic thing to say. IMO it shows the inherent weakness in your argument. You've been unable to provide a coherent counter-argument, demonstrated your lack of knowledge on the rules of the game and resorted to ad hominem attacks to try and "win" a discussion. 

I can respect that different people will have different perspectives on a multitude of incidents or beliefs. As long as they can back up their points with actual examples or facts, I'm happy to debate with them. You've done none of these things. Your input has been worthless. Go and waste someone else's time, with your childish interjections please.

1 hour ago, Jonboy said:

Higgs weren't though, he thew himself at Biggar with both feet off the ground and a shoulder direct to the head. Dangerous stupid and deliberate. Vunipola followed through after kick and bumped Barrett to the floor. Just as stupid and deliberate but nowhere near as dangerous due to the (lack of force in the impact. The two are miles apart. The forearm smash a few minutes later was deliberate and dangerous and he should have gone then, but the 1st one, a yellow would have been harsh.

There is nothing in the rules of the game which states a player must have his feet on the ground while tackling. Hogg wasn't sent off for being in the air. He was sent off for a reckless challenge, where he didnt use his arms to tackle, led with his shoulder and hit his opponent above shoulder height. Exactly the same offences MVP committed in his charge down attempt. 

Having watched both challenges again this morning, there's an argument that Hogg actually jumps to try an avoid Dan Biggar, but Biggars forward momentum makes the collision inevitable. But with MVP there's no doubt about his intent, he comes from Barrett's blindside and deliberately targets him in a reckless manner. 

On the clearout, it's as clear a red card as you're ever likely to see. I have no idea why it wasn't given, especially with the TMO chirping in his ear to have another look. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Zorro said:

I'm beginning to question whether you even watched the game or are basing your opinion on the British medias reports of the game. MVP wasn't yellow carded for the charge down, although he should have been at the very least. He was yellow carded for an off the ball clearout moments later. Japan had a player sent off against Canada in the last World Cup for a lot less dangerous challenge trying to clear a man at a ruck. You simply can't challenge a player in that way. 

The clip of the ball grabbing at the scrum is widely available on YouTube. MVP's family even tweeted him a link if that helps. 

Stuart Hoggs challenge wasn't on a player in the air either. Dan Biggar had both feet on the ground as Hogg came across the front of him. Shoulder to the head, yellow card shown immediately. Changed to red once the ref saw a replay. Again, this is widely available on YouTube. 

The challenge on Farrell was a late tackle. You do understand the difference between a tackle and a deliberate shoulder barge to the head, right? I can explain the difference if it helps. 

Edited to add: looking at the three man "expert" panel- three Australians. One a lawyer. Two former forwards, neither of whom have played in almost a decade. One who spent a considerable part of his career playing in Ireland. I'm sure they'd have been impartial in their decision towards the All Blacks star and the Irish forward. It's not as if the Australians have a huge rivalry with New Zealand. And I'm sure there was mitigating evidence why O'Brien wasn't punished for an offence several other players have been pinged for. 

its funny that earlier on in this thread you have stated "i dont watch much rugby" and "i am no expert" but 3 pages later you are the fount of all knowledge about dangerous challenges. You have not posted a single positive post about the lions, and have reveled in their defeat.

so excuse me for not taking anything you say about the lions seriously.

SBW was as definite a red card as you will see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎26‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 5:46 PM, Zorro said:

Fingers crossed for the next test. 

I'm no rugby expert but the first test showed the obvious limitations of Owen Farrell. Looks great playing behind a dominant forwards pack, anonymous when under pressure.

 

the fingers crossed for the next test was a response to a post about wishing the lions had lost by more!

just say you are supporting the ABs for whatever reason.

Edited by Bhamkillieken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I'm the only person revelling in this Lions squads defeats. Warren Gatland is an arse and I don't think he picked a squad which is in keeping with the Lions ethos. Ideally they'd have been beaten in every game. 

When I said I wasn't an expert in rugby, I meant in the context of club form. I played rugby into my mid twenties, watch the six nations, four nations, World Cup and the occasional Glasgow or Edinburgh games. I'm aware of the rules and recent changes. I keep up with the directives issued to refs so I can understand the game. I can see when players are deliberately targeting a player and when someone has just been unable to stop due to momentum or already being committed to a challenge. Sometimes a collision is due to a player choosing to protect themselves first. None of this makes me an expert or the font of all knowledge, but it does allow me to have an informed opinion. 

The SBW collision is a borderline call. This is evident due to both touch judges asking for another look after the ref suggested a red. The commentators on sky also discussed it being a yellow card right up until the ref suggested red, then started backtracking stating it got worse every time  you look at it. To me, it looks bad at a close angle, however the wider picture shows SBW was very close and moving at pace as Watson sped towards him. He had no way of knowing  his opponent would be tackled, turning down and to the side. IMO that makes it an accidental collision where SBW first instinct was to protect himself.

The AB's demonstrated their class throughout the remainder of the game and afterwards. With their " no use crying over spilled milk" attitude. You didn't get the moaning you'd associate with Warrens boys or attempts to influence the ref. They just get on with the job of playing high intensity, physical rugby. They are a joy to watch compared to the Lions grinding, spoiling type of game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the two tests so far the Lions have ran the ball more than AB's their backs have been involved more often, catch and drive/maul far less and scored the most memorable try from inside their own 22 you'll see in many an international calendar but don't let that stop you creaming yourself over the joy to watch AB's. the Lions didn't complain about the first test defeat and admitted they'd been outplayed by the better side - cos they lost the breakdown and forwards battle. 

Playing for so long against 14 obviously helped them spread the ball wide, but that was the game plan in any case picking a lightweight and skilful backline at the expense of Te'os bulk and defensive quality. It turned out to be the right call and AB's missed Kaino's influence as he was sacrificied for a replacement centre. 

I don't like Gatland's persona, normal one out rugby style or squad selections but I'm still British not a New Zealander so support the team selected. I can't stand Levein either and thought Locke was a diddy but didn't root against Scotland & Killie when they were in charge. And talking of Warren's boys moaning, you've gret more than the whole of NZ since Saturdays result! Move on, everyone else has

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SBW defo. red card. MV was lucky to stop on the pitch there must have been something going on at the bottom or the rucks to wind him up (either that or he is an idiot).

As much as I want the lions to win on saturday i think we could be in for a walloping. it took, awful conditions with awful kicking and playing against 14 men to scrape a win on saturday. I think we could be facing a 28 point margin of defeat on saturday.

though still tempted to get on a plane to watch it in the off chance we win! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Zorro said:

I don't think I'm the only person revelling in this Lions squads defeats. Warren Gatland is an arse and I don't think he picked a squad which is in keeping with the Lions ethos. Ideally they'd have been beaten in every game. 

When I said I wasn't an expert in rugby, I meant in the context of club form. I played rugby into my mid twenties, watch the six nations, four nations, World Cup and the occasional Glasgow or Edinburgh games. I'm aware of the rules and recent changes. I keep up with the directives issued to refs so I can understand the game. I can see when players are deliberately targeting a player and when someone has just been unable to stop due to momentum or already being committed to a challenge. Sometimes a collision is due to a player choosing to protect themselves first. None of this makes me an expert or the font of all knowledge, but it does allow me to have an informed opinion. 

The SBW collision is a borderline call. This is evident due to both touch judges asking for another look after the ref suggested a red. The commentators on sky also discussed it being a yellow card right up until the ref suggested red, then started backtracking stating it got worse every time  you look at it. To me, it looks bad at a close angle, however the wider picture shows SBW was very close and moving at pace as Watson sped towards him. He had no way of knowing  his opponent would be tackled, turning down and to the side. IMO that makes it an accidental collision where SBW first instinct was to protect himself.

The AB's demonstrated their class throughout the remainder of the game and afterwards. With their " no use crying over spilled milk" attitude. You didn't get the moaning you'd associate with Warrens boys or attempts to influence the ref. They just get on with the job of playing high intensity, physical rugby. They are a joy to watch compared to the Lions grinding, spoiling type of game. 

why would you revel in the lions defeats? are you not supporting them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zorro said:

What an idiotic thing to say. IMO it shows the inherent weakness in your argument. You've been unable to provide a coherent counter-argument, demonstrated your lack of knowledge on the rules of the game and resorted to ad hominem attacks to try and "win" a discussion. 

I can respect that different people will have different perspectives on a multitude of incidents or beliefs. As long as they can back up their points with actual examples or facts, I'm happy to debate with them. You've done none of these things. Your input has been worthless. Go and waste someone else's time, with your childish interjections please.

There is nothing in the rules of the game which states a player must have his feet on the ground while tackling. Hogg wasn't sent off for being in the air. He was sent off for a reckless challenge, where he didnt use his arms to tackle, led with his shoulder and hit his opponent above shoulder height. Exactly the same offences MVP committed in his charge down attempt. 

Having watched both challenges again this morning, there's an argument that Hogg actually jumps to try an avoid Dan Biggar, but Biggars forward momentum makes the collision inevitable. But with MVP there's no doubt about his intent, he comes from Barrett's blindside and deliberately targets him in a reckless manner. 

On the clearout, it's as clear a red card as you're ever likely to see. I have no idea why it wasn't given, especially with the TMO chirping in his ear to have another look. 

You don't support Andy Murray because he isn't "Word Class", you don't support the British Lions because the All Blacks are the better team and you feel they were somehow harshly treated by the referee's interpretation of the rules, yet you presumably support Kilmarnock despite their inferior footballing skills compared to other teams in the league. Where is the logic in that ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrangodog - Don't forget that you are paranoid to think that the big football clubs get favourable decisions from referees, but it's okay for Zorro to think that the disciplinary panel are biased against NZ because they are Australian... or ex-forwards....or something.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are no rules in rugby - only laws.

Read all this - first off- SBW offence was a red card. He endangered the player and made no attempt to tackle legally - off he goes.

Vunipola was extremely lucky only to see yellow and his recklessness may cost him a place in the team on Saturday because i think the ref on the day may be keeping an extra eye on him.

Regards Biggar - watch him - in every game he ensures he takes the ball in the air with forward momentum. If he gets touched it is at least a yellow (ask Finn !). it is the way he has been coached and is no different to how Seymour, Maitland or Visser do it for Scotland. It's not illegal in anyway, just good coaching as it deems the tackle almost impossible.

Inconsistent refs - of course there are - any sport has them and it's why we debate it.

Edited by plunkit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wrangodog said:

You don't support Andy Murray because he isn't "Word Class", you don't support the British Lions because the All Blacks are the better team and you feel they were somehow harshly treated by the referee's interpretation of the rules, yet you presumably support Kilmarnock despite their inferior footballing skills compared to other teams in the league. Where is the logic in that ?

I don't support Andy Murray because I don't like him. I'm not supporting the Lions on this tour because I don't like Warren Gatland, his style of rugby or his squad selection. I have supported the Lions on previous tours. My support for Kilmarnock isn't based on the teams ability. My family were Kilmarnock supporters but had moved to the east coast to work in Seafield  pit. Kilmarnock were the team I was brought up to support. My first football game was watching Killie getting humped at Tynecastle. My first football strip was a killie strip ordered at intersport in Glenrothes. My dad took me to as many Killie games as his shifts would allow. By fourteen I was traveling alone all over Scotland by train to watch Killie. My support for Kilmarnock has nothing to do with logic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, skygod said:

Wrangodog - Don't forget that you are paranoid to think that the big football clubs get favourable decisions from referees, but it's okay for Zorro to think that the disciplinary panel are biased against NZ because they are Australian... or ex-forwards....or something.

 

Lol. I never had you down as a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist Skydog. If you think these "experts", who've made decisions that fly in the face of previous rulings, by other panels, did so in good faith, fair play to you. Ok Stuart Hogg only received a three week ban for his red card challenge, unlike SBW's four week ban.  And Tim Swinson received a four week ban for an identical swinging arm as O'BRIEN, but I'm sure there's a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why the wee team benefited from both the decisions put to the  "expert" panel this time. I'm surprised all these panels aren't made up of lawyers and ex-players from your closet rivals. We should take it on board in Scotland too. Imagine the Lolz if ex Celtic or Rangers players were allowed to judge the guilt of the other team. I think you're onto a winner with that idea mate. 

Edited by Zorro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...