Sorry, this story is unavailable
If there's one thing the irish do well is dwell
Posted 17:40 20th June 2012
"If you go for a drop goal and miss then why should you get the ball back from a missed kick?" asked Kiss.
Is this guy really an International coach ?
Posted 17:17 20th June 2012
I don't remember laughing this hard the entire year. Just how ridiculous can a sore loser be. What an idiot.
Posted 16:40 20th June 2012
"@new_j4a - so the rule says it's disallowed if a hand deflects it through the posts, but you're giving 3 points and a restart if that happens?
I'm definitely hoping you aren't a referee!"
Read 9A.2 Special circumstances.
If after the ball is kicked, it touches the ground or any team mates of the kicker, a goal cannot be scored.
No mention of the opposition.
The first time I saw this was in a HC game, Llanelli v Gloucester.
Glos 9 kicked a scruffy drop, hit the flanker who legally came off the scrum, deflected the ball, over the bar between the posts.
Glos won the game because of it.
A few months later it happened in a game I refereed, poor kick, about knee high, defending player runs at the ball, hits his knee, goes over the bar, between the posts.
If I had not seen the Llanelli game, I would have struggled for a decision!
Deflected by a defender, goal stands.
Posted 16:33 20th June 2012
Both teams played the same rules. Had the situation been reversed and Ireland got the drop goal, how many posters here would be taking an opposite view to what they have posted here?
Get over it.
Posted 16:13 20th June 2012
slightly misleading editorial, Reddan didn't dot the ball down under the posts he ran it dead.
The issue comes from Kiss apparently suggesting that drop-goals are some sort of soft option. Carter's missed DG looked like it came from a period of sustained pressure on the Irish line and both DG opportunities had been properly engineered by the AB pack.
To talk about the "ifs" of the situation.
IF the Irish hand hadn't touched the ball then there is a reasonable chance that the goal would have gone over - advantage Ireland
IF the Irish hand hadn't touched the ball then the two New Zealanders following up would have been offside giving a penalty to Ireland - advantage Ireland
IF Reddan had failed to field the ball then it is a fair assumption that NZ would have scored - advantage Ireland.
I don't often defend the AB's but they earned the opportunity for both drop goal attempts.
Changing the rules to suit a one-off situation that went against you just sounds like sour grapes
Posted 14:27 20th June 2012
Wow no wonder the Refs get it wrong all the "experts" on here cannot agree on anything - lets just get on with it. The Irish were a touch unlucky but then what team isn't from time to time, I think it was just the sense of history that has them all tied up in knots, not to have beaten NZ in 109 years is a big monkey on the back and as an AB fan I would like them to do it soon, not at the 2015 WC though. Any call after one game to change the rules is a joke - Kiss cannot be a Kiwi can he? like someone on here suggested.
Posted 14:19 20th June 2012
It is indeed like a tackle,
You can tackle all you want, if you do not turn the ball over, NZ is allowed to continue attacking. play doesn't stop.
It is indeed not fair and we should change those rules:
After a tackle it is turn over ball, although maybe it is nice to allow the attacking team another 3 or 4 attempts before we turn the ball over.
Posted 13:55 20th June 2012
@new_j4a - so the rule says it's disallowed if a hand deflects it through the posts, but you're giving 3 points and a restart if that happens?
I'm definitely hoping you aren't a referee!
Posted 13:14 20th June 2012
Are you not whinging ?
Spot on, however your comments are wasted on the kiwis here.
Posted 13:09 20th June 2012
Wow, lot of vicious stuff here. I was planning on commenting that it was sour grapes blah blah blah, but the more I got to thinking about it the more I feel I'd be doing Mr Kiss (which has to be one of the best names ever!) a bit of a disservice.
First off, i can kind of see his point that it was an unfortunate state of affairs that led to the second opportunity but as has been stated by the previous posts, it was completely legal and completely right.
So, the second thing is when were these comments made? It's not like he called a press conference or anything. I'm guessing this was a sit down discussion with one or two reporters breaking down how the test went. This is what he thought about the ending which must have been difficult for anyone involved with the Ireland set-up.
Lastly, the timing... well of course he's going to mention it now. It maybe hasn't occurred to him before now, he maybe hasn't seen the situation play out like this.
So, in summary, all Mr Kiss is guilty of is expressing an opinion about the game and an area which may benefit from being looked at as it currently may not be a fair reflection of the effort put in by the defending team... Hardly worthy of so much vitriol... even for an Aussie!!!
Posted 12:52 20th June 2012
He is right I mean if you get charged down and the ball is touched in flight why should the other team be allowed to have another drop at goal having scuffed it. I mean when ever New Zealand doesent like a rule they and Australia go to the IRB to change it and the IRB does it's about time Ireland got its say. Look at the ELVS three years ago and the new laws the IRB brought in this year because New Zealand wanted them in. ( I am not Kiwi or Aussie bashing I have a mates who are both. But I think surely this should be looked at)
Posted 12:33 20th June 2012
DutchWing, that isn't what Les Kiss was suggesting at all. In fact, that would have worked against Ireland in this instance.
At no stage is he saying that the decision was wrong, he's saying that he think sthe IRB should look at the rule to see if should be improved. Sour grapes? Maybe. Out of line, not at all. Anyone is surely allowed to suggest improvements to the laws of the game, or that only if you win?
Posted 12:11 20th June 2012
He sdeems to be forgetting ,that it was touched /deflected in flight by an irishmen ,and then touched down by irishmen.Thus Ireland carried over the try line and grounded the ball ,as an irishmen was the last to touch the ball on field. of play.That in the laws is a attacking 5mtr scrum .Kiss has nothing to complain about ,and is being a bit of a prat to be honest.If Ireland hadnt touched down ,then there would have been no 5m scrum ,full stop.
Posted 11:59 20th June 2012
@markpat who asks "Regarding the comment about a hand deflecting it through the posts, how is that managed?" Fairly easily: 3 points is added to the team who drop kicked and the game restarts as usual on the 50 meter.
Posted 11:57 20th June 2012
In line with this article and some of the comments, I think some new laws seriously need to be put in place
1. If NZ are playing and score a try, and score a further try within the space of 10 minutes, the points are awarded to the opposing team.
2. If NZ are playing, any tries scored 5 minutes before and after the half time break are nullified.
3. If any team playing NZ lose, but feel that they played better than NZ, the win will be attributed to them.
I think these new rules will go a long way to eliminating all of whinging comments from opposing fans.
Posted 11:52 20th June 2012
Oh dear.. so many ifs and buts.. c'mon Les.
Posted 11:40 20th June 2012
@blametheref you gave your own answer "O'Brien got fingers to the ball" that's a charge down, hence all players are on site. That's why the 5m scrum came: carried over by Ireland and then forced down in-goal.
If Les Kiss gets his way: all charge downs that happen to go forward will be ruled as knock-ons, that's just stupid.
Posted 10:57 20th June 2012
...blametheref don't be an idiot, the AB players were put onside the instant O'Brien touched the ball in flight which applies to all kicks punts and drop kicks. The Offside laws for rucks, mauls, lineouts and general play are governed by the phase, set piece or player with the ball. Grasping at straws my friend
Posted 10:54 20th June 2012
All this "Ireland played better" nonsense. They started better and finished well - the rest of the game was the ABs' - especially right at the death where they constructed a win with fantastic control. Ireland played better than I think I have ever seen them play... it wasn't enough. Have another shot this weekend!
Posted 10:53 20th June 2012