Sorry, this story is unavailable
Thank you! It is very nice to read comments from someone that is actually doing a open and fair minded honest bit of analysis.
It's a shame that the 2 commentators couldn't be the same but as new_j4a indicates maybe they simply don't want to be.
Having read some of your explanations of the laws for a few years now I can quite believe you do indeed know more than those 2
Posted 12:00 02nd August 2012
@RiverBlues77, Thank you for providing a reference. This episode of The Breakdown will go down in rugby history as the most dishonest piece of Ozzie-Irish propaganda. It has been discussed many times and in my view the claims cannot be put down to mere ignorance on the part of the commentators. Like many, I believe that they purposefully set out to deceive their audience....not great journalism, just sensationalism and a massive disservice to rugby....but then the perennial losers are often the spoilers, aren't they.
And before a whole lot of conspiracy theorists start asking how come I think I know more than the "exalted commentators," I do, but that is beside the point. Craig Joubert's performance has been minutely scrutinized and applauded by the IRB. He does make a mistake. It's at min 4:30. This piece of tape is constructed (jumps around from incident to incident with no boundary) to confuse and blow smoke....it is dishonest.
@jamesliveinhope, thanks for the analysis. I assume that you are right. This camera angle makes any claim to be better positioned than the ref a bit absurd...
BTW, my memory fails me, can anyone remind me of the names of the commentators....especially the sanctimonious Australian prat?
Posted 04:36 02nd August 2012
No one ever mentions the wc 95 semi final France v Sa where france looked as though they had scored in the dying seconds , but the referee disallowed the try , Sa go in to final . Louis Luyt who worked for the Sa union then gave the ref and both touch judges gold watches . He did not give gold watches to any offical in the finals . Why can any one tell me . The food poison theory has merit in conjunction with major betting that went on Sa in the final .
Posted 02:43 02nd August 2012
@riverblues and @new_j4a - juts watched the link with the sound off (I find that commentators make the situation even worse)
Kanu came through the ruck (on-side as far as I can see) and lost the ball as he fell forward. It could be open to interpretation but it could be argued that the counter ruck was good and he had every right to pick the ball up.
The ref, although very close would not have seen the knock-on as his view was obstructed by a Frenchman. The player "coming in at the side" was not therefore coming in at the side because, in the ref's opinion the ball had left the ruck.
I'm not sure exactly what happened next (sound off) but the French took the ball back into the ruck which would not be a scrum France - I wonder therefore whether a linesman had called the knock on.
This is all with the benefit of TV replay in close up and slow motion - we can all be experts after the event in these situations but the ref relies heavily on the quality of his positioning and his line judges - Henry noted 40 penalty infringements apparently - can anyone remember 40 penalties ever being given in a match at that level? 30 maybe between the teams but never 40 to one.
Posted 14:52 01st August 2012
Here's the footage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XBqetaCfgo
Posted 09:25 01st August 2012
@RiverBlues77 who says.."Just ask Kano, after he went off his feet over the top of the ruck in the 2011 RWC final, spilled the ball forward," Your description doesn't make sense: If Kano ends up spilling the ball forward, then he was the ball carrier, right? If he was the ball carrier, then how could he go off his feet over the top of the ruck, bearing in mind that the ball has to be on the ground for a ruck to exist? In this little fantasy scenario of yours, were you playing with 2 balls? Was Jar Jar Binks the ref? It might interest you to know that Craig Joubert reffed the real RWC final we all saw....and he understands and plays advantage. Post the exact minute if you really think that you have a case to make rather than an incoherent whinge.
Posted 05:58 01st August 2012
Latin I think what you mean is Henry has lost respect and support , he is selling his book , but i,m sure if you wait long enough you can pick it on sale , personally would not bother reading it.
The rest of NZ had long gotten over it .
Posted 23:42 31st July 2012
@ RiverBlues77 - Yes, and it was a good thing that the match officials, citing commissioner and IRB did nothing about Rougerie eye gouging McCaw.
Same the year before when Dylan Hartley elbowed him in the face and Andy Powell tackled him the face on consecutive weekends.
Good thing I'm not a conspiracy theorist like P Divvy or I'd think there was bias against the All Blacks.
Posted 21:47 31st July 2012
No! The reff was South African!
Posted 19:22 31st July 2012
No I certainly did not miss the point of your speech where you clearly indicated NZ get special treatment from the officials against every other country.
I pointed out that I have heard the same said about Munster. In fact many other teams as well when they are winning. Yes and loads of times we here the cry "Fix"
South Africa/Australia in the 2011 WC being just one example.
Rather rich of you to lecture Henry while at the same time have a big moan about the NZ/Irish game of which rucking kiwi as answered your complaints in the other article.
My own take of 2007 like many others is that while there may have been some poor officiating and the penalty stats may have been odd NZ still had chances to win that game but didn't. And yes credit has to be given to France for their effort on the day.
Any disproportional comments here has come from you.
Posted 19:17 31st July 2012
@Golden_statenba. just for fun, and with no reflection on your comments regarding GH and the ABs (with which I agree), do you think USSR deserved to win that infamous 1972 olympics final?
(judging by your screen name, you might have an informed view!).
Posted 16:05 31st July 2012
Of course match fixing happens in every sport EXCEPT rugby. This is a totally rational and logical presumption - after all, the rugby referee has about 500 opportunities in each game to shift momentum or affect the outcome of the match. He'd never do that.
Just ask Kano, after he went off his feet over the top of the ruck in the 2011 RWC final, spilled the ball forward, and an All Black player came from the side to tackle the scrum-half - all directly in front of Craig Joubert, who awarded.. a scrum. Good thing France didn't get a penalty 30 odd meters out in the final quarter with New Zealand under pressure, that would just have been cheating.
Posted 15:22 31st July 2012
I think the only thing GH has done is give many bitter fans a chance to vent at the ABs and AB fans. Stupid move but what does he care he has a book to sell.
Funny thing is Steve Hanson has said that he thinks the whole thing should be laid to rest and France were the better side on the day in 2007 which they were. They won and that's that like the ABs were last year.
Anyway I don't think the bleating of a few PR armchair critics sitting at their PC eating potato chips(crumbs all over the keyboard) slurping on their 1l bottle of coke is going to worry the ABs or their fans. Fact is this is one mans thoughts just as every post on this site is. Darthbok when you team start playing decant rugby and beating the ABs and Australia and England with regular consistancy home and away the podium will be all yours. Right now you have Jack.
Let's see the results at the end of the year for bragging rights aye
Posted 14:10 31st July 2012
you missed the entire point of my post. I didnt say that this is why NZ win. My point was that other teams never go around saying its a fix when NZ get all their dubious decisions. But suddenly when the decisions swing the other way the fix must be in, NZ needs to grow up. They act like spoiled children when they lose. Don't go looking for some ridiculous match fixing route. Human error did come into it as it does in all matches. And lets not forget an excellent defensive display by the French might have been a small factor in the loss.
Queue a disproportionate response full of vitriol from some NZ fans because i dared to not bow and tug my forelock to the mighty ABs.
Posted 13:37 31st July 2012
Really! So that is why they win most of the time!
Funny I have heard the same said about Munster
Posted 08:33 31st July 2012
@new_j4a. hehehe, as a rule I try to only bet with other people's money (and charge 2 and 20 for it), but a little "fun money" has been known to flutter from time to time....
And by the way, you're spot on with the love/hate thing methinks. A world of rugby without the French wldn't quite be the same. (I imagine the Argies will come to occupy a similar place in our collective hearts as we get to know them better over the next few decades).
Posted 16:05 30th July 2012
@Rosbif, I enjoyed your post more than any in a long time! Picking up nickles....LOL. My guess is that we love (and sometimes hate) the French for exactly the same reason....because they are so gloriously French....and life would be so much poorer without them. You are a gentleman and a scholar...and a betting man it would seem.
Posted 14:35 30th July 2012
You know, when that bloodgate business happened in England ( was it 2008? or 2009?) that was a pretty blatant attempt to cheat. You never would have believed it if they hadn't been caught redhanded.
When the cricket fixing scandals started, who would have believed that?
Look at the measures adopted to prevent doping at the Olympics.
Other sports, football, boxing, tennis, baseball, horse racing all have had their corruption problems.
It would be naive to believe that it couldn't happen in rugby.
So the IRB should get its act together and set up a structure to deal with the risk.
Even worse, the IRB has to deal with inaccuracy of its match officials which can give rise to potential suggestions of corruption
Posted 13:14 30th July 2012
I guess now GH knows what its like for every other country when they are playing the ABs. Offisdes by the ABS get overlooked, the opposition gets pinged for everything, you only have to look at the recent Irish match to see the lifeline thrown to NZ in the second test. Terrible call in the scrum which penalised a dominant Irish pack (no, you read that right, I almost didnt believe it myself) and allowed the ABs posession in the last minute to go down and get 2 drop goal attempts to win the game. NZ always get the 50/50 calls and the benefit of the doubt, no one more so that Mr McCaw. Take this as the one where the roles were reversed.
Bees don't cry too loudly when they get stung and neither should you Graham!
Posted 11:47 30th July 2012
'Independent Review of the 2007 Rugby World Cup Campaign' - commisioned in NZ and available online is probably a more accurate picture of what happenend.
Posted 10:54 30th July 2012