Rugby Thread

  • Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date

HeftyHacker

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 14, 2020
Messages
1,661
Visit site
Scrappy first half, a bit dull really. Was hoping that NZ would throw it around a bit more to stretch SA.

Red card? Law says yes, but I'm not convinced.

Hard to throw it about with the speed of that SA line in defence though, and their reading of the strike moves has been superb as well, they really do suffocate teams with it and force them to play it tight - which in turn plays to SA strengths.
 

AmandaJR

Money List Winner
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
13,299
Location
Cambs
Visit site
Agreed about the red. Not sure he can avoid the contact and the force comes from the ball carrier who is moving at pace.

It's the rules BUT it just isn't working, for me. We'll have players actually colliding to force dangerous contact...

I love rugby. I used to love football. I fear rugby will go the same way for me.
 

HeftyHacker

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 14, 2020
Messages
1,661
Visit site
I actually think the commentary team covered the Red card really well - Cane was too upright throughout and, although he was low, Kriel's height never changed whilst he had the ball or before he went into contact.

Not saying I agree with it but the laws have been applied correctly. The fact its a WC final is irrelevant.
 

SwingsitlikeHogan

Major Champion
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
33,233
Visit site
Truth is that even if Kriel hadn’t been dropping down slightly Cane’s tackle would have been very high on Kriel’s chest and that’s always going to be a risky thing to do.

Pity. Don’t think that rugby as a game copes that well when sides are imbalanced by a sending off.
 

Tashyboy

Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
19,746
Visit site
Ave got to say that watching that second half, listening to the commentators on the game. Their understanding of the rules is excellent. It was refreshing to see after some of the rammel bias we get from Football commentator.

Congrats South Africa, a game that could of gone either way.
 

WGCRider

Newbie
Joined
May 31, 2018
Messages
291
Visit site
Felt really bad for Kane. A year ago that maybe not even a penalty. That said Frizzel should have been red he's tried to hurt the player there.
Weird this about Kane going off is I think SA only score 3 points after he leaves the field, but NZ decision making was terrible once he was gone. Turned down 3 or 4 kicks at goal.
 

Grizzly

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
761
Visit site
It was a really odd game, partly because of the cards and partly because South Africa played most of it with a part time hooker (can't say I was too disappointed for Mbonambi, might have been a little moral payback for his conduct last week there) - there were a lot of big hits but very little actual rugby played, and you could reasonably say the least bad team won. I did think Cane could have been given the benefit of the doubt - the one mitigation that the current push on head contact doesn't allow for is contact in situations where the player is not expecting that contact (Freddie Steward's red against Ireland in the 6N was another example) but he will recognise that he put himself at risk by staying high.
 

Bunkermagnet

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
8,491
Location
Kent
Visit site
Having seen so many red cards given to English players, as much as it ruins the spectacle, I was glad the red was given to Cane and disappointed the SA yellow stayed yellow. Perhaps now the ruling bodies will revisit the tackle laws or it will make other teams actually start to do something about their players. Having watched most of the WC, I couldn't help but see the irony of our first match losing a man to a red for head on head, and in the final one team losing a player to head on head with the match ref'd by an Englishman (who actually had a very good game).
Too many instances in between went unpunished.
 

WGCRider

Newbie
Joined
May 31, 2018
Messages
291
Visit site
(can't say I was too disappointed for Mbonambi, might have been a little moral payback for his conduct last week there)
The English wonder why the rest of the sporting world is against them - that right there is why.
In this whole nonsense incident:
No issue at all with Curry - he did the right thing he thought he heard what he heard. He reported it, didn't take matters into his own hands. 100% did the right thing.
No issue with Bongi - There is no evidence he did anything wrong. He is totally innocent.
No issue with World rugby - they had a complaint, they looked into it like they should.
The people that need to look in the mirror here are people like this guy and the South African fans having a go at Curry. But worst of all in the RFU and the British press - putting out statements about abuse (not alleged) and the press effectively finding Bongi guilty without evidence. You are the villains here.
 

Grizzly

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
761
Visit site
The English wonder why the rest of the sporting world is against them - that right there is why.
In this whole nonsense incident:
No issue at all with Curry - he did the right thing he thought he heard what he heard. He reported it, didn't take matters into his own hands. 100% did the right thing.
No issue with Bongi - There is no evidence he did anything wrong. He is totally innocent.
No issue with World rugby - they had a complaint, they looked into it like they should.
The people that need to look in the mirror here are people like this guy and the South African fans having a go at Curry. But worst of all in the RFU and the British press - putting out statements about abuse (not alleged) and the press effectively finding Bongi guilty without evidence. You are the villains here.

Nope, can't agree with that; there IS evidence, in the form of Curry's statement (and note in that statement that this is not the first time that Mbonambi has racially abused the same player). Now, there may be another explanation (though to my mind such a possibility died when the South African team started putting out their ridiculous contrived social media videos trying to manufacture one) but the proper way for this to be handled would have been for a full investigation allowing Curry to be questioned etc - regardless of the outcome of that hearing.
 

WGCRider

Newbie
Joined
May 31, 2018
Messages
291
Visit site
Nope, can't agree with that; there IS evidence, in the form of Curry's statement (and note in that statement that this is not the first time that Mbonambi has racially abused the same player). Now, there may be another explanation (though to my mind such a possibility died when the South African team started putting out their ridiculous contrived social media videos trying to manufacture one) but the proper way for this to be handled would have been for a full investigation allowing Curry to be questioned etc - regardless of the outcome of that hearing.
As I said further up this thread. The Team whose fans sing the racist slave song and this week took 2 months to ban a racist official who abused a steward. Those guys now telling the world that cause Curry says he heard something with NO evidence - it must be true. The "fans" and RFU are the problem here.
World rugby took Curry's statement they then listened to all available audio and couldn't hear anything. Then the RFU turn up to the fire with their fuel and make statements about "abuse" and "voice not being heard".
 

WGCRider

Newbie
Joined
May 31, 2018
Messages
291
Visit site
World's moved on etc. But someone got round to asking Mbonambi's view on the Curry affair.

Bongi Mbonambi on his alleged racial slur to Tom Curry and the RFU’s reaction:"I think it is a very sad thing when you live in a first world country [England], you think the rest of the world speaks English," Mbonambi told BBC Sport Africa."It was unprofessional on their part. They could have gone on a website and looked for an English dictionary and looked for the word in Afrikaans."People understood [in South Africa] but obviously their side was misunderstood."He added: "I have never racially swore at him."
BBC article

I assume all of those who were calling for him to be banned from the final based on Curry's statement alone will now similarly demand action against the RFU and England management based on his. Right?
 
Top