OT - Rugby World Cup - Page 7

Growltigger · #61 November 21st, 2003, 05:21 PM

Oleg, that is actually not a bad idea. If you say that within the 22 line, any penalty gives the attacking side the option of the penalty or a scrum 5 yards forward from where the penalty occurred, then you probably would find more teams going for the try and the bigger points.

Nice idea, has anyone got Clive Woodward's email address?

oleg · #62 November 22nd, 2003, 06:12 PM

What a game !!!!
I eat my words about England being boring.

In fact been adventurios almost cost a title ! 3 points up, 3 minutes to go, why not keep the ball and kill the time ? By no, Johny does for glory

It turns up well in the end though

gravey101 · #63 November 22nd, 2003, 07:05 PM

yes, it was a good game. England let the Aussies back in in the second half through mistakes rather than poor play in general. I still can;t work out what that penalty was for at the end of normal time...

oleg · #64 November 22nd, 2003, 07:17 PM

I am even more puzzled why referee took the ball out the hand of Wallabies just before that ! Sure, the guy was down but Jessus Christ !!! how could anyone think this way - "I was pushed to the ground and instead of pushing up I must play dead and release the ball" That ruling was against the very human nature and as such should promote SOME change in the rules. If I was Aussie, I would justifiably complain of Referee bias. It might be right according to rules but IMHO a blow to the very concept of sport.

All being said, England was far better team. Just MHO again

Baron Grazic · #65 November 24th, 2003, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by oleg:
I am even more puzzled why referee took the ball out the hand of Wallabies just before that ! Sure, the guy was down but Jessus Christ !!! how could anyone think this way - "I was pushed to the ground and instead of pushing up I must play dead and release the ball" That ruling was against the very human nature and as such should promote SOME change in the rules. If I was Aussie, I would justifiably complain of Referee bias. It might be right according to rules but IMHO a blow to the very concept of sport.

All being said, England was far better team. Just MHO again

I've gotta agree with Oleg, that call was very strange.
Full credit goes to the English on the result, who, not counting the first 5 minutes of play, played better rugby most of the match.

For those people who missed the suspencefully match, this is how I saw the end game.

A minute before Full Time, with Australia 3 points down, a 'so-so' umpire call looses Australia the ball just short of the Goal line.
Australia steals the ball back and with about 30 seconds to go, kicks a Goal to tie the match.

OverTime sees the ball go from one-end of the field to the other, with England in the lead again.
A minute and a half before the end of OverTime, Australia kicks another Goal to tie the match.

With only 30 seconds to go, England gets the ball down their end of the field, the entire Australian team know the ball will be passed to Jonny Wilkinson, the English 'kicker'.
The ball pops out of the scum, and an English player (Oleg will supply a name), starts running forward with the ball, with half the Australian team already running towards Jonny Wilkinson, away from the ball.
After looking like the English could score a try, he is just taken down, after gaining 10-odd metres.
The scum forms, the Australians know, the English know, the crowd knows that Jonny will get the ball this time.
The ball pops out, its passed to Jonny, the Australian team bears down on him, he kicks a drop goal, the whistle blows and England has won the match by 3 points.

A very nice ending. Personally I would have liked it to hit the post but still a fitting end to the Rugby World Cup hosted by Australia.

gravey101 · #66 November 24th, 2003, 05:31 AM

>I've gotta agree with Oleg, that call was very strange.

I don't think it was stange, but I think it was marginal. The rule states that if you are tackled to the ground you must release the ball. Whether or not you (or the referee) or Oleg thinks it is a 'good' rule or not is irrelevant. That's the way it is. The referee adjuged that the player was tackled to the ground and called the penalty. Could have gone either way as the guy certainly sustained some momentum through the tackle, but I don't believe it was a strange call.

>A minute before Full Time, with Australia 3 points down, a 'so-so' umpire call looses Australia the ball just short of the Goal line.
Australia steals the ball back and with about 30 seconds to go, kicks a Goal to tie the match.

I think you competely overlook a much more so-so umpiring call which actually gave the Australians the penalty for what looks to me like both teams collapsing the scrum. The English commentators could not work out what the penalty was for, and nor can I. This was a HUGE call and nearly cost England the game. To me it looked like petulance from the ref as he was heard a few seconds r(rigthly I might add) admonishing an England player for trying to tell him how call a decision. I have watched the incident a couple of times and I still have no idea what the infringment was supposed to be. Unlike his decisoins earlier in the game he made no effort to explain what the call was.

[ November 24, 2003, 03:40: Message edited by: gravey101 ]

Baron Grazic · #67 November 24th, 2003, 05:41 AM

It wasn't much of a tackle, if he could get up and continue running forward.

I'll agree that I don't know what that call was about either, but then again, I don't know all the rules. From what the Ozzie commentators said he was warned and 2 seconds later did the same thing in the scrum again, whatever that was.
In the end, it was an exciting game and it came right down to the wire...

[ November 24, 2003, 03:46: Message edited by: Baron Grazic ]

Growltigger · #68 November 24th, 2003, 11:13 AM

Great match - the Australians played fast and hard rugby and played against our weak spots. The Aussie try was beautiful, and showed our tactical error at placing 5'8'' Jason Robinson against their 6' plus backs

My personal view was that the Aussies were playing with 16 men in extra time, including that damn referee!!

My take on "that" penalty decision is as follows:

1 the England forwards were far too strong for the Aussie pack (bringing on their 3rd and 4th choice props) and it looked to me that the stronger pack were being penalised when the Aussies were raising up and breaking the scrum. This is a schoolboy error and England should have been awarded free kicks/penalties

2 Martin Johnson had been badgering the ref to penalise the Aussie number 3, who in particular, was breaking up the scrum

3 the ref took umbrage at this (rightly so in my opinion, players should not "influence" the ref) and at the next break in the scrum, awared the penalty to England, although it was the Aussie number 1 who broke it.

4 Elton Flatley proves he is the class act he is by equalising.

5 England play to their strengths (to quote Gregan, if you have the best fly-half, you use him), played for position, powered forward and got the ball to Jonny who did what he does best, and have practised countless times.

6 In summary, poor referreeing still led to the result.

Australia deserved their chances for playing hard against us, that being said, I am pleased to the Aussie media are now silenced as we scored the same number of tries as Australia, and they kicked as much as we did. Poetic justice (especially following that voodoo doll incident!!) that Mr Wilkinson delivers the coup de grace.

Great match. Great for World Rugby, great for everybody