Wallabies v Pumas II
-
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
-
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
-
Hodge is podge.
@old-samurai-jack said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
Hodge is podge.
Hodge is the player we wish Bridge could be.
-
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
Yeah but the try was awarded. The disparity you're pointing at I get, but that's a vagary of the law. You'd hate to see everyone YC just because they were last in defence and gave a potential penalty away while still being scored against.
-
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
Was a discussion point among refs here for these situations where it is close to the line - how do you stop their forward momentum without going over the shoulder?
-
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
Yeah but the try was awarded. The disparity you're pointing at I get, but that's a vagary of the law. You'd hate to see everyone YC just because they were last in defence and gave a potential penalty away while still being scored against.
@antipodean who the fuck do you think you are. I would love to see every wallaby carded.
-
@kiwimurph said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
Wallaby bench pretty average tonight.
Not helped by Petaia breaking. Again.
-
Hooper is a cracking player but I wonder if he'd come up through the NZ system if he'd have ended up as an international 12 or 13.
@l_n_p said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
Hooper is a cracking player but I wonder if he'd come up through the NZ system if he'd have ended up as an international 12 or 13.
We made a scrumhalf a fullback/ five-eighth...
-
Hooper is a cracking player but I wonder if he'd come up through the NZ system if he'd have ended up as an international 12 or 13.
-
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
Was a discussion point among refs here for these situations where it is close to the line - how do you stop their forward momentum without going over the shoulder?
@nta said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
Was a discussion point among refs here for these situations where it is close to the line - how do you stop their forward momentum without going over the shoulder?
I don't really like the reasoning that because I can't stop a player by legal means then I can turn to illegal means. So weak scrums should be allowed to collapse? Defending teams can pull down mauls? Etc
-
-
Hooper is a cracking player but I wonder if he'd come up through the NZ system if he'd have ended up as an international 12 or 13.
-
Can see why Arnold & Skelton are coming back into the fold , Matt Philip just does get any gain line, honest footballer but nothing more.
Wallabies will be disappointed they did not completely shut the Pumas out. -
@nta said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
Was a discussion point among refs here for these situations where it is close to the line - how do you stop their forward momentum without going over the shoulder?
I don't really like the reasoning that because I can't stop a player by legal means then I can turn to illegal means. So weak scrums should be allowed to collapse? Defending teams can pull down mauls? Etc
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@nta said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@antipodean said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
@bones said in Wallabies v Pumas II:
So if Argentina hadn't scored, surely it's PT and YC? So why does that cancel out the YC?
Jaco said penalty only for the tackle.
Take away that tackler and it's a walk in...
Was a discussion point among refs here for these situations where it is close to the line - how do you stop their forward momentum without going over the shoulder?
I don't really like the reasoning that because I can't stop a player by legal means then I can turn to illegal means. So weak scrums should be allowed to collapse? Defending teams can pull down mauls? Etc
Not saying that at all.
If a player is driving low and hard that you're going to end up with a seatbelt situation in a lot of cases. Happens a lot around the field on the pick n go but, like a lot of things, isn't analysed as much as a TMO review in pro games.
At amateur level i.e. the refs I'm talking about, it is mostly going to go unpenalised
