The Silver Fern

Fuck Owen Farrell, fuck the RFU, and fuck that bloom of a disciplinary panel.

Farrell has a long and ugly track record of this kind of horror tackle. He's been to tackle school, and obviously flunked it because he's learned nothing and has no remorse. His only defence is that he's been allowed to get away with it for so long, why should he take it seriously now?

The RFU's decision to appeal and presumably pay a small fortune for a KC to hypnotise the rubes on the panel into imaging they saw some mitigation was a shocker. There might be no room for sentiment in elite sport, but there is room for integrity. The RFU is talking a big game about tackle safety in the community game, and this completely undermines that message and makes them look shameless. Just because they could, doesn't mean they should have. And of course it's backfired - now the whole debacle is running on longer, when they could have just put it behind them and planned for having Farrell back for the knock-out stages (pun intended).

And the panel has been made to look like a bunch of fools, accepting some mitigation that Blind Willie McTell could see is non-existent. A month out from the highlight of the rugby calender, they've made a mockery of the whole process, undermined a ref and TMO who made a correct decision, undermined the whole bunker review process, undermined the message that WR take dangerous tackles seriously, and given the impression that any union who can afford top, top lawyers can write their own rules.

Fuck the lot of them. I hope WR's appeal succeeds, Farrell gets the substantial ban he deserves, and everyone can learn from this sordid affair and avoid it happening again.

(Bloom is the collective name for jellyfish)

Llongyfarchiadau Kiwis. Your team is quite good.

But is there any better marketing hook in world sport than this one that Wales have going on? One day the Welsh will beat the All Blacks again. Probably. Fuck knows when, but when it does happen it'll the most momentous day since Owain Glyndwr routed the Saes at the Battle of Bryn Glas in 1402.

Imagine being the fan who missed it because you decided this year not to spend the money. Unthinkable. You'd be mad not to buy one more, what if the next one is the golden ticket? So it's another full house, and another £5m knocked off the WRU overdraft, just on the off-chance your blokes get 2 men red carded early and our reserves play out of their skins to grind out a sketchy 2-point win.

When it happens, it's going to go off like never before. It'll be the kind of party (and hangover) that will make a noticeable dent in the nation's GDP. You'll be able to hear it in NZ. When it's done, it'll leave Cardiff looking like Newport.

But not this year. So the ruse rolls on, until the ABs' are next in town to collect their share of the gate takings in exchange for delivering us our favourite gubbing.

Obviously every Welshman & woman will be ecstatic when we finally win one, but I can't help thinking that the bods in the WRU finance department would be less happy about it than most. Imagine if we beat you a couple of times in a row (stop sniggering in the back), how are they going to sell 75,000 overpriced tickets to the All Blacks vs a Welsh regions select XV after that?

Anyway, well played, looking forward to next time.

@KiwiMurph said in RWC 2027 in Australia:

I can't believe we've got to wait 2 more years to find out who else Wales, Fiji and Australia have in our pool.

Commiserations Kiwis. That was a great final, and a great effort from your team. Very unlucky in the end.

r.e. the cards - my view (from watching in real time in a very busy pub, so I might change my mind when I've watched it back) is that they were all correct, except possibly Frizell's which seemed harsh, didn't seem to me that he did much wrong.

Cane's red and Kolisi's yellow - I reckon they were correct decisions, but it does suck.

Two things:

We're all sick of talking about it, but the inconsistency is killing us. When the TMO intervenes, which offences are which colour, etc. There's no excuse for it.

And while I think Cane's was a RC offence and Kolisi's was a YC due to mitigation, it really highlights that while difference between a red and yellow offence can be very marginal, the differnce between the punishments is massive - especially for an early red. I wasn't a fan of the 20 minute rule when it was first suggested, but I've come around to thinking it would help.

@Higgins said in RWC Week 3: Wales v Australia:

@mariner4life said in RWC Week 3: Wales v Australia:

40?!! From Wales? This is sad

Imagine what it could have been like if Welsh URC rugby was in better order than it is. Come to think of it weren't Wales rather average in the last 6 Nations as well?

Welsh rugby is in a pretty shocking state - not as bad as Australian, but it is an utter mess from the WRU down.

The fact that Gatland is able to get a team playing at a decent competitive level despite the chaos is very much to his credit.

@barbarian said in Wallabies v France 3:

@gibbonrib said in Wallabies v France 3:

The nonsense from the commentators was disappointing, I thought we might have left behind the "I'm all for player safety, but when it impacts my enjoyment of the game it's gone too far" nonsense when they got rid of Fox Sport, but unfortunately not.

You make a few good points here. But just on this one for a second - there was a wider context here that non-Aussies may not pick up.

This was a huge game for the code. The series had picked up quite a bit of momentum, it had been shifted to the main FTA channel, and there was a big audience and more anticipation for a rugby game here than there has been for a few years.

There was a lot riding on a Wallaby win, and/or an entertaining game that gets a big TV audience and keeps them.

So to have a red card that could be described maybe as marginal in the 5th minute to the Wallabies best (and arguably most recognisable) player, it just took the wind out of everyone here, myself included. It's not surprising that frustration bubbled over a bit.

Yeah I understand the context - I'm Welsh, but I've been living in Australia for 18 years, so I've been following it closely. I'm really hopeful the big reset will help stabilise rugby here and give it a platform to grow. The relationship with Fox had clearly gotten toxic, so hoping that having FTA on 9, Super AU, change to the classic gold shirts etc. will give it a huge lift.

So the frustration and disappointment is totally understandable. But it was totally misdirected. They could have talked about how Marika got it wrong, or it was just a bit unlucky / a great shame, but instead they all piled onto the officials for basically correctly applying the laws.

It's deeply worrying to me, because they seem to be determined to make exactly the same massive mistakes that Fox did. I'm going to make a huge generalisation here, but Australian rugby fans are far less knowledgeable about the game than, say, the Kiwis or Welsh. So the commentators have a responsibility to help explain stuff. But instead they're choosing to go for the easy outrage option, just like Fox.

Do you remember in the last world cup when Gareth Davies picked off Genia's pass to score an intercept try? It looked to everyone like he was a mile offside, but the ref allowed it. The Aussie commentators all went into absolute meltdown because he didn't even go to the TMO to check. Turns out Davies was absolutely onside, he just read and timed it perfectly. When you see the replay from the right angle it's not even in doubt. But the Aussie TV never showed that angle, even during the HT / post match analysis (and Cheikas presser) they just kept banging on about the outrageous injustice. To this day most Aussie fans think they were robbed. Fox could have taken the moment to educate and highlight a good bit of skill, but preferred the "we were robbed" and "incompetent officials are killing the game" outrage.

I'm just praying that 9 / Stan don't follow that same tack. I'm hopeful they won't, 9 actually want rugby to succeed. For the last few years it felt like Fox were negging rugby at every possible opportunity. (Trying to reduce the value ahead of negotiations? Or maybe they knew they had no future and were just trying to tarnish it for whoever took it over next).

And in the end it all worked out pretty well - an amazing match, an amazing series, and a win for the Wallabies against the odds.

@Catogrande said in RWC Week 1: Wales v Fiji:

@GibbonRib said in RWC Week 1: Wales v Fiji:

@stodders said in RWC Week 1: Wales v Fiji:

@MiketheSnow as red as they come these days. Even Sam said so

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/i-should-have-been-sent-off-admits-sam-warburton-l7w00hfmrk9

IIRC, Sam was pretty magnanimous about the RC even immediately after the game. Many Welsh fans weren't and were screaming blue murder, but he refused to complain about it

Yeah, he’s a class act. English you know.

Which is it? Make up your mind

Well this was out of leftfield.

Seems very unlikely they'd use ½p at 10. But he'd be a great guy to have around as a squad player, mentor for younger guys etc.

And I believe he has coaching ambitions, so presumably there'll be some arrangement in place for him to get involved in that side of things.

Plus, after his 3 year stand-down period, he should be eligible for the ABs for the next world cup.

A few rambling initial thoughts, after not much sleep, and before rewatching any of it... (I reserve my right to contradict myself and change my mind without notice)

Argentina were deserving winners. But they were pretty limited, and didn't do much - just were better than Wales. We were pretty poor all game. Hugely disappointing, after we'd put in some really solid performances in the pool - but this kind of level is where we've been for a while, so given how we looked 6/12 months ago it's no shock.

Wales' best period was the first 20, where we managed the game well. But so many mistakes - handling errors mainly - meant that we only scored 10. Felt like we missed the chance to score more in that period (although to be fair so did RG). After that, we couldn't get any control for pretty much the rest of the game. Our kicking, which had been really smart and well executed against Australia, was pretty poor. Handling errors, crap line outs etc. So many of our senior players had really poor games.

Honestly can't think of much to say about Argentina. They played well enough, and smart enough, to get past Wales, but that was a low bar today.

Game was enjoyable enough, but quality was so far below the other match - the semi will be a formality if both teams play like they did today.

Still dumbfounded about the decision that it wasn't even a penalty for the hit on Tompkins. I need to watch it again before I whinge too much, but my impression at the time was that it was reckless - although Tompkins was falling at the time, so certainly some mitigation. I get what MtS says, it could have changed the outcome. But that's true of many reffing decisions during a game. If it had been a high quality, high intensity, knife-edge match then I might be furious about it. But there are so many reasons we lost that were within our control that it doesn't seem right to just focus on one that wasn't.

Not an AB exit, but a memory from the 1999 WC that some of you might appreciate:

I was living in London at the time, so I went to watch the NZ-Scotland quarter-final with my Kiwi girlfriend and a couple of her Kiwi mates in a Scottish pub (can't remember the name, somewhere near St Pancras I think). Very rowdy but good natured Scottish crowd as you'd expect, we were the only non-Scots there as far I could see.

TV was in the corner of the room, up high. There was one bloke sitting at the front on his own, drinking his pint and watching the build up. Quiet guy, tall and skinny. Just as the Haka is about to start, he gets up and walks over to corner and stands under the TV, turns to face the entire pub, takes off his shirt and lets out a huge roar. Proceeds to do the full Ka Mate, fully synchronised with the ABs on TV above him.

The whole pub goes nuts, cracking atmosphere all game, and the lone Kiwi isn't allowed to buy another drink for the rest of the night.

Reckon some of you guys watch too much league. (Being Welsh, I'd say that any league is too mich league). The NH is starting to take brain injury seriously, but I'd say the SH - and in particular Oz - is a little behind. NRL seems to allow hits to the head that to my unconcussed mind should be consigned to history, and maybe that influences union watchers too.

My immediate impression was that it was a perfect tackle, but after seeing all the replays I don't think Marika can have too many complaints. Malice and intent are totally irrelevant for head contact, have been for a few years. Thr tackler has to avoid the head, and Marika's tackle involved head contact, which is a straight red unless there is sufficient mitigation to downgrade.

Agree that the French guy might have been hamming it up, but it didn't influence the decision. He did dip, but only a very small amount and just a natural adjustment to brace for the impact. I wasn't sure if the first contact was head, even after all the replays, but if it was shoulder or chest first it was so marginal as to not affect the outcome.

Another ref on another day might have said that was enough mitigation to downgrade to a yellow, but that's your best case outcome. The Wallabies have known that for a few years, and they need to adjust for it. Accidents can happen, they want to play on the edge and it's hard to get it right every time, especially when you're a massive unit like Koroibete travelling at Mach speed. But that's a skill that has to be practiced like any other.

The nonsense from the commentators was disappointing, I thought we might have left behind the "I'm all for player safety, but when it impacts my enjoyment of the game it's gone too far" nonsense when they got rid of Fox Sport, but unfortunately not.

@Stargazer I think WR do have some responsibility, because this is not a one-off aberration. This process regularly hands out inconsistent / opaque / nonsense findings, which says something is very broken. The panel should be independent, but WR need to fix the process they operate under.

@billy-tell said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:

@nzzp said in Springboks v British & Irish Lions II:

@kiwiinmelb @nta I get that perspective, but disagree. It's not flair filled, as the offense and defense are so fast to teh breakdown and supporting; technique is top tier. It is a massive tussle, decided by fine margins and occasional brain farts. I've really enjoyed it, love the intensity and the passion. But it's not one to draw in new viewers, that's for sure

If you think that was a good game of rugby you’re a one man band. First half was utterly dreadful. Stop start like gridiron with technical penalties and I hate the tmo protocols now so slow (“back to you on the screen. So just to summarise we have seen…). See soccer and VAR - game flows.

I loved it, but I think that was out of pure stubbornness. The Lions only comes around once every four years, and I'll be damned if I'll let a dull match cursed with hopelessly unambitious gameplans, shoddy refereeing and riddled with basic errors spoil my enjoyment.

@antipodean said in Aussie Rugby:

And predictably, a sports journalist demonstrating they know fuck all about the sport:

This is the same fuckwit who wrote that article a week or so back saying we should all be grateful for Eddie, because he selflessly gave up his shot at glory in 2023 in order to nurture the next generation in time for 2027.

Shameless clickwhore.

@MajorRage said in RWC Week 2: Ireland v Tonga:

Tonga have to be careful flying into the rucks.

Red cards waiting to happen.

Ireland, like all top rugby teams, are colossal cheats.

That's a bit unfair on Ireland, they've been doing it since long before they were a top team

@sparky said in NH International Rugby:

I like that. Can't see how anyone can say the first try was bogus after watching that.

@Tim

Yup, Owens is spot on here.

The whole business is a compete disgrace. Andy Farrell whinging about the effect on his family is bullshit IMO. Yes there has been an unedifying pile on and OF's taken a heap of crap from commentators. But it is 100% deserved, and 90% self-inflicted - first by his cynical & dangerous tackle, and then compounded by him and the RFU deciding to appeal, refusing to accept guilt, and paying a fucking KC to run rings around the panel. Anyone involved with that spineless disciplinary panel should be squirming right now, they got played, and hopefully it'll be put right on appeal.

The mitigation they came up with was nonsense, and as Nigel points out, even if there was any mitigation it can't be applied under the framework if the tackle was illegal from the start anyway.

Speaking of second time around, rumours are circulating that Woodward fancies another tilt at the job. I so hope that happens.

@stargazer said in Wallabies v France 3:

@gibbonrib said in Wallabies v France 3:

@steven-harris where did you find that?

Sadly that statement doesn't clarify the decision at all. I'd like to watch that video to see if that helps (fully expecting that it won't though).

@stargazer said in Wallabies v France 3:

@gibbonrib It's only the media release. Not the decision.

Oh, shit, I forgot that if a red card is dismissed, there won't be a written decision. Just the media release.
So the media release is all we get. It has been published on the WR website now, btw.

Forget getting a further clarification of the decision.

For those nerdy enough to care, WR have released a written decision:

https://resources.world.rugby/worldrugby/document/2021/07/21/231213a5-9cec-4fe5-9fbd-82ec2b9f40f9/HRM000.1.996-Decision-M-Koroibete.pdf

It's a bit wordy, but I've read it so that you don't have to. Key points it makes are:

• There was no contact to the head
• Initial contact was to the shoulder
• There was contact to the neck
• This means it is technically foul play
• The degree of danger was not high, so it should not have been a red

Things it doesn't clarify are:

• Whether the degree of danger was low (starting sanction: penalty) or medium (yellow card)
• Whether there was significant mitigation (it mentions both players dipping into the tackle, but doesn't rule on whether that was relevant to the decision)
• Whether the correct decision would have been a yellow, or just a penalty

Things it doesn't say, but strongly implies:

• Jelonch is a cheating git

@KiwiMurph I don't think it's controversial to say that omitting those 2 aren't the worst things RA HQ have done recently