Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

P14 R6) Us V Ulster - TP - Saturday @ 5.15 - Eir and Premiersports

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Murphy is from cork and is afraid that he does not want to look biased towards Munster. Yes I get it. He played more for Connacht than Munster but still from Munster none the less. Can Munster just request that he refs Munster no more in the pro 14. It’s a conflict of interest and it would have just make more sense to give the match to a mitrea. Berry or even Whitehouse.

    the Heineken cup does not allow a ref from one country to ref a home country team. Why not the pro 14. ? Also giving Owens the pro 14 final v scarlets was another joke. No need for it.
    Last edited by BigLad; 10th-November-2019, 23:26.

    Comment


      Originally posted by BigLad View Post
      Murphy is from cork and is afraid that he does not want to look biased towards Munster. Yes I get it. He played more for Connacht than Munster but still from Munster none the less. Can Munster just request that he refs Munster no more in the pro 14. It’s a conflict of interest and it would have just make more sense to give the match to a mitrea. Berry or even Whitehouse.

      the Heineken cup does not allow a ref from one country to ref a home country team. Why not the pro 14. ? Also giving Owens the pro 14 final v scarlets was another joke. No need for it.


      No.
      Not Whitehouse.
      Ever.
      Ever.

      Comment


        Originally posted by Talking Sense View Post

        Offside there Lawrence
        There is no offside in Cork apparently.

        Comment


          Originally posted by BigLad View Post
          Murphy is from cork and is afraid that he does not want to look biased towards Munster. Yes I get it. He played more for Connacht than Munster but still from Munster none the less. Can Munster just request that he refs Munster no more in the pro 14. It’s a conflict of interest and it would have just make more sense to give the match to a mitrea. Berry or even Whitehouse.

          the Heineken cup does not allow a ref from one country to ref a home country team. Why not the pro 14. ? Also giving Owens the pro 14 final v scarlets was another joke. No need for it.
          Mitrea is underrated, I always seem to think he refs a good game. Berry has improved since his first season in the pro14. Whitehouse is tolerable until there is some big call to make, then he usually overthinks and bottles it.

          Comment


            Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
            why bother discuss refs here then. I do defend them and get unfair criticism for doing it but only do because of all the one eyed bull spread by far too many here on refs and their decisions. Every game is the same with offside. Every ref. No reffing team between ref and assistants will pull offisdes like ye here want because majority are not material, necessary because not going to impact ball/ball carrier.
            offsides are not always material.
            I have watched game back now. Was there one or two offisdes that could have been penalised. Yes. But from the ****e talk here you would think every tackle/ruck had players miles offisde. When they didn't

            What would you consider a "material" offside.

            1st, 2nd, 3rd, player out from a ruck offside? The player who is offside but is the player who tackles the first receiver? These were ignored on Saturday night by the officials.

            Comment


              Originally posted by Paddy Whac View Post

              What would you consider a "material" offside.

              1st, 2nd, 3rd, player out from a ruck offside? The player who is offside but is the player who tackles the first receiver? These were ignored on Saturday night by the officials.
              PW, i,m not sure there is much point in pursuing this, OL has very firm views on the sanctity of referees.

              personally I think the “material” issue is highly problematic and actually makes life more difficult for referees. I would hope that what we used to call linesmen should be up with the play, and standing in line with the rear most foot etc, they can then easily indicate to the referee that an infringement is taking place, allowing him to warn the offending side, if they fail to adjust, he penalises. For higher level games where there is audio connection between the officials this is easily done, raising a flag etc would cover games where this isn’t available. The officials make clear before the game starts that there is zero tolerance of offside, and will penalise accordingly. The behaviour will soon change when it is clear this is being adhered to. In a fast moving game, where the referee has so much else to do, requiring them to make a more complex decision (is the offside ,material,) rather than a simpler one, are they still off side post warning, is much less likely to result in poor or erratic decision making.

              Comment


                Originally posted by Paddy Whac View Post

                What would you consider a "material" offside.

                1st, 2nd, 3rd, player out from a ruck offside? The player who is offside but is the player who tackles the first receiver? These were ignored on Saturday night by the officials.
                varies hugely depending on situation and I watched game backs gain there. It seriously wasnt that bad. Certainly not to the point where so many here are whining about it.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by jagawayagain View Post

                  PW, i,m not sure there is much point in pursuing this, OL has very firm views on the sanctity of referees.

                  personally I think the “material” issue is highly problematic and actually makes life more difficult for referees. I would hope that what we used to call linesmen should be up with the play, and standing in line with the rear most foot etc, they can then easily indicate to the referee that an infringement is taking place, allowing him to warn the offending side, if they fail to adjust, he penalises. For higher level games where there is audio connection between the officials this is easily done, raising a flag etc would cover games where this isn’t available. The officials make clear before the game starts that there is zero tolerance of offside, and will penalise accordingly. The behaviour will soon change when it is clear this is being adhered to. In a fast moving game, where the referee has so much else to do, requiring them to make a more complex decision (is the offside ,material,) rather than a simpler one, are they still off side post warning, is much less likely to result in poor or erratic decision making.
                  it doesnt make refereeing harder. If you just penalise players all the time for infringements then the game isnt as good. There were 17 penalties Saturday. Do as you suggest and there would be many more than that. ARs do keep play and do tell refs of infringements and at levels below this the touch judges cant make calls to same degree as they are touch judges and dont have power to make calls.
                  The sport isnt going to change how its referees because of this. You have to look at materiality. Its same philosophy in all areas of the game. Players enter rucks in side/off their feet all the time. Are they penalised all the time. No because you cant just penalise every infringement of the law.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                    varies hugely depending on situation and I watched game backs gain there. It seriously wasnt that bad. Certainly not to the point where so many here are whining about it.
                    So you can't or won't give a specific example of what you class as a "material" offside but you persistently use it as an a way to say the ref was correct and anyone who disagrees is a moaner.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                      it doesnt make refereeing harder. If you just penalise players all the time for infringements then the game isnt as good. There were 17 penalties Saturday. Do as you suggest and there would be many more than that. ARs do keep play and do tell refs of infringements and at levels below this the touch judges cant make calls to same degree as they are touch judges and dont have power to make calls.
                      The sport isnt going to change how its referees because of this. You have to look at materiality. Its same philosophy in all areas of the game. Players enter rucks in side/off their feet all the time. Are they penalised all the time. No because you cant just penalise every infringement of the law.
                      You penalise offside a couple of times early on and it stops. You don’t need to continuously penalise teams all game.

                      Some refs do it and it works. Not sure why you’re so keen to see illegal tactics, which that stifle open attacking rugby, being ignored.

                      Not policing the offside line is more damaging to the spectacle than giving a couple of extra penalties in the first quarter.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Munsterboy View Post

                        You penalise offside a couple of times early on and it stops. You don’t need to continuously penalise teams all game.

                        Some refs do it and it works. Not sure why you’re so keen to see illegal tactics, which that stifle open attacking rugby, being ignored.

                        Not policing the offside line is more damaging to the spectacle than giving a couple of extra penalties in the first quarter.
                        It really is that simple, I don't know why OL thinks teams will persist in being offside if they gain nothing from it, in fact, they forfeit field position by being penalised.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Munsterboy View Post

                          You penalise offside a couple of times early on and it stops. You don’t need to continuously penalise teams all game.

                          Some refs do it and it works. Not sure why you’re so keen to see illegal tactics, which that stifle open attacking rugby, being ignored.

                          Not policing the offside line is more damaging to the spectacle than giving a couple of extra penalties in the first quarter.
                          it doesnt stop. Which refs officiate in the way you describe?


                          Comment


                            Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                            it doesnt stop. Which refs officiate in the way you describe?

                            Well Angus Gardner (and his team) penalises offside even when the team in Green is not offside. Confirmed afterwards by World Rugby as incorrect calls.

                            But generally the better refs tell the teams in advance what they will be looking out for. If there is a transgression the ref will blow and remind them of such (Nigel Owens is a case in point). Following that the teams behave a bit more. Now if a ref warns and does not blow then it is fair game.

                            it is not an easy job as a ref in rugby but refs can and should do better. TMOs can help with messages to the ref guiding him or her on transgressions such as offside etc. While keeping the flow of the game.

                            Comment


                              Any thoughts on the match lads? Can we send the redundant law interpretation arguments to the laws thread?

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                                it doesnt make refereeing harder. If you just penalise players all the time for infringements then the game isnt as good. There were 17 penalties Saturday. Do as you suggest and there would be many more than that. ARs do keep play and do tell refs of infringements and at levels below this the touch judges cant make calls to same degree as they are touch judges and dont have power to make calls.
                                The sport isnt going to change how its referees because of this. You have to look at materiality. Its same philosophy in all areas of the game. Players enter rucks in side/off their feet all the time. Are they penalised all the time. No because you cant just penalise every infringement of the law.
                                Of course it does, given that ‘materiality’ is at best a judgement call it must be more difficult than a decision which relies less on judgement. I can happily relay information on which brain structures are involved in each case, what the effect of sleep loss, time zone travel etc, if you’d like.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X