Bernard Foley has booted the NSW Waratahs back into Super Rugby’s top six on a night of comedy and melodrama at Allianz Stadium.
Two second-half penalty goals from Foley and a late try to replacement Peter Betham saved the Waratahs’ blushes in a drab 23-11 victory over the winless and last-placed Blues.
But there was no saving face for referee Jaco Peyper on Saturday night.
Disgruntled fans jeered and booed Peyper after the South African spent the last five minutes of the first half relentlessly re-setting scrums as the Waratahs camped themselves on the Blues line.
Peyper then drew the big thumbs down and further mocking from the Waratahs faithful after rather unnecessarily waiting for security guards and police to escort him from the field to the sheds for the halftime interval.
Peyper’s reception was in stark contrast to that which his countryman Jacques Potgieter earned.
Five days after being fined $20,000 by the Australian Rugby Union for making homophobic slurs in the Waratahs’ heated derby win over the Brumbies, Potgeiter received a standing ovation after a typically wholehearted display.
Skipper Dave Dennis, who finished the game in the blood bin after copping an illegal high shot from Blues captain Jerome Kaino, and barnstorming lock Will Skelton also draw rapturous applause after the NSW forwards edged their New Zealand counterparts in a bruising encounter.
There was no sign of the dour spectacle to follow when Waratahs halfback Nick Phipps scored under the posts in the eighth minute after a polished set move and lovely short ball from Kurtley Beale to Michael Hooper from a lineout win.
Hooper’s last pass to Phipps looked a touch forward but the TMO cleared it and Foley’s conversion made it 7-0.
Israel Folau and Beale, in particular, were looking sharp, the forwards were carrying and hitting with venom and the Waratahs appeared up for the contest.
Wingers Taqele Naiyaravoro and Rob Horne were denied further tries in opposite corners in the space of 15 minutes after video replays confirmed Folau had spilt the ball in heavy traffic in the lead-up to both efforts.
As the hosts lost their sparkle and intensity, journeyman five-eighth Dan Bowden – in his first Super Rugby start in five years – slotted two penalty goals to reduce the Tahs’ lead to just a point at the break.
The Blues briefly snatched a four-point advantage 15 minutes into the second half when powerful centre Francis Saili crashed over.
But Foley had the final say, his two penalties and the conversion of Betham’s strike enough to secure NSW’s fourth win from six outings in their title defence.
Mike
Guest
Hooper is running faster than Phipps when he releases the ball.
somer
Guest
pjm, lets face it, Kaino is a blues player so whatever he did is illegal in your eyes. How an accidental head clash in the context of a physical and fast-paced game like rugby can be construed as pre-mediated head targeting is pretty ridiculous.
Colin Fenwick
Guest
Relying solely on the relative position of the passer/receiver in determining whether the pass was forward or not is only relevant if the velocities of both players in the goal line to goal line direction are comparable. IMO they aren't. Hooper is running on an angle at the time of passing and therefore may have to pass forward (out of the hands) to hit a straight running Phipps.
Colin Fenwick
Guest
It's not tiddlywinks.
PeterK
Roar Guru
ClarkeG I totally agree on answering that simple question. I also agree camera angles can be very important but other means can be used to determine what the initial direction was.
ClarkeG
Roar Guru
To Pete. I can assure you I am not being willful. This is far more complicated than it needs to be. You gave a swimming analogy. I could give you a horse racing one but that would add to the complication. To summarise my position: Simple question that a referee must ask himself. What was the direction of the ball when it left the hands of the passer? Camera angles are very important when adjudicating on forward passes.
grapeseed
Guest
Jack, momentum depends upon the variables mass and velocity. In terms of an equation, the momentum of an object is equal to the mass of the object times the velocity of the object. Momentum = mass x velocity In physics, the symbol for the quantity momentum is the lower case p. Thus, the above equation can be rewritten as p = m • v where m is the mass and v is the velocity. The equation illustrates that momentum is directly proportional to an object's mass and directly proportional to the object's velocity. But yes, the pass was indeed forward.
ClarkeG
Roar Guru
To Mike; - If you read the posts between Pete and myself you will see that the comparison of events to the 22m line is his stance on the issue not mine. His criteria, not mine. The concept of a pass drifting forward due to the momentum of the ball carrier is fully understood by me. We agree on this.
Colin Fenwick
Guest
PeterK, I completely agree with you in everything you say in regards to the change in momentum of the ball before and after the pass, but after viewing the pass in question several times, it certainly looked forward out of the hands. Also, the tackle by Kaino looked to be unfairly judged by the ref.
PeterK
Roar Guru
Mike I agree. I am using the 22 line to provide the correct angle only to measure between the ball carrier and the ball where it is caught. If at that angle the ball carrier is line or ahead of the ball there is no need to look at the hands or anything, it makes it easier. I am NOT referencing if the ball is in front of the actual 22 line which it will be in front of, it just provides the correct angle to measure forward of that.
PeterK
Roar Guru
ClarkeG - I do not know if you are being willful or not. I would use the 22 line to look at where BOTH Hooper and Phipps are just as the ball is passed. Then how do the players travel after that, ie does the ball carrier continue running. Obviously if he is tackled then it can't be. If he does keep running where is the ball in relation to him at the time it is caught. If it is line or behind btween where the ball carrier is now having moved forwards and where the ball is caught there is no need to look at the hands or anything else.When I say in line or behind, the 22 line which is now 1 metre or more behind him is used to provide the angle to measure if it is line. It is like at swimming where they place the moving imaginary line in the water, the 22 line provides the correct angle to measure the player and the ball travel hence not needing to know the camera angle.
Mike
Guest
ClarkeG, why would a TMO be told that, when it goes against the IRB's consistent position on this since at least 2011? The direction of the ball relative to the ground is not relevant. At the speed Hooper was moving it is virtually inevitable that the ball will move forward relative to the ground, but since that isn't the issue, we don't need to waste time on it. The only thing that matters is how the ball moved relative to Hooper, and since Phipps was behind him when he passed and took the ball cleanly, it is just about impossible for it to have been a forward pass.
ClarkeG
Roar Guru
Peter if I am a TMO and I am told in this instance that I must base my decision on the position of the ball in comparison to the 22m line then my decision becomes much easier. The pass is forward. If the 22m line did not exist then what would be your stance.
PeterK
Roar Guru
the line provides a reference point of what is straight ie if the ball initially travels backwards compared to the line and it did. He was right on the line hence its value. The camera angle does not matter since the line provides the reference point of what is straight as long as the angle shows the hands and the line at the time of release. Imagine a player has his back to the line so is facing his goal line so he is 180 degrees. I can easily pass a ball that looks forwards from my hand in this situation and the ball not travel forwards towards the goal line if you just look at the hands. Anyway it clearly went backwards from his hands.
soapit
Guest
nup clearly backward. best guide is if the player who passes is still in front of the ball when it is caught (assuming the passing players velocity stays the same as it was before it was passed). the ball is caught behind where hooper is at the same point in time (ie when its caught), therefore accounting for the two being equal velocity before the pass (and assuming hoopers velocity doesnt change) hooper has passed it backwards.
ClarkeG
Roar Guru
Peter, as I have said in the past in this forum, there is only one question the referee needs to ask himself. Was the direction of the ball from the hands forward? Yes or no. Any other consideration is irrelevant. It’s just silly to say that the camera angle does not matter because we have the 22m line as reference. If we are going to use television technology to judge on possible forward passes then camera angle matters very much.
ClarkeG
Roar Guru
Jack I highly recommend that you watch the you tube video that 'jeznez' has noted below.
Mike
Guest
Of course "the ball went forward over a metre" - relative to the ground. It could hardly do otherwise at the speed Hooper was travelling when he released it. But it is direction relative to the passing player that matters. With both players running full pelt, Phipps clearly behind Hooper, and a short pass cleanly taken, the pass cannot be forward. I agree there is some doubt as to whether Kaino should have been a penalty instead of a yellow. I disagree that the game was average - Blues put in a first class defensive effort. Unfortunately, you can't play most of the rugby on the defensive at the wrong end of the field and expect to get up at this level. Despite the Tahs' handling howlers.
Harry Jones
Expert
Jack, a pass can end up in front of where it was started and not be "forward" for purposes of rugby union. Obviously if it ends up behind the passer, it was clearly not a "forward" pass. Also, a pass that terminates ahead of the passer could be "forward" (a term of art) or flat or legally "back out of the hands." If Bryan Habana is running at full speed with Jean de Villiers on his left shoulder, and passes the ball 1-2 degrees back out his hands, the ball will touch de Villiers' hands several metres ahead of where the pass was initiated. But not be ruled "forward." At slower speeds, that outcome is more rare.
HarryT
Guest
Agree Nick, and I thought Phipps had a good game too. Got his running game back.