Winning the World Cup would be bittersweet for Australians

sheek Roar Guru

By sheek, sheek is a Roar Guru

Tagged:
 , ,

316 Have your say

Popular article! 5,661 reads

    So Aussie rugby fans, here’s a moral dilemma: World Rugby (former IRB) tells us that referee Craig Joubert erred in awarding the Wallabies a 78th minute penalty goal against Scotland.

    It should have been a scrum. We’ll come back to the moral dilemma soon.

    Now with the scrum, there are so many things that need to go right before you can even think about your options.

    The forwards would have required a stable platform, with the ball being channelled back through the centre under control, then perhaps a quick, flat delivery from Nick Phipps to Bernard Foley for a drop goal attempt.

    Was the drop goal on? Considering the timeframe, and the score, most definitely.

    By the time the ball got to Foley, time would most certainly be just about up (considering how long it can take to set a scrum properly) and the defenders would be charging directly at him.

    Assuming he received a good pass from Phipps, and was able to set himself correctly, Foley would then have had to hit the ball sweetly and accurately.

    Again, that’s a lot of things to get right in a compressed timeframe. And if not the drop, would the Wallabies have tried to run the ball for a try?

    Perhaps, even probably, considering they had already scored five good tries against the Scots. And with a potential try in the offing, they could build momentum through numerous rucks, while the drop goal is usually a one-off option.

    Anyway, so much for the ‘what ifs’.

    World Rugby’s statement that referee Joubert made a mistake means that the rest of the world now see Australia as illegitimate contenders. In short, we shouldn’t be there.

    Someone, I think it was fellow Roarer Red Kev, made the point that the Wallabies can say goodbye to any 50-50 calls in their favour in their next two matches.

    So what do Wallabies supporters think? Is there a sense of unease about the Wallabies progressing under such fortuitous circumstances?

    Or is the attitude a philistine one of the end justifying the means?

    Let’s forget about the Wallabies playing the more enterprising rugby in the quarter-final against Scotland. The brutal fact is that at the 78th minute of the match, the Wallabies were out of the World Cup and were going home.

    Only a miracle could save them, and the miracle came, not by their own skill and daring, as in 1991, but by a botched decision from the ref in their favour.

    Here’s the second moral dilemma for Aussies. We pride ourselves on the ‘fair go’.

    Ask most Aussies what they like about their country, and the idea of a fair go would be at the top of the list, along with things like mateship, tolerance, egalitarianism, innovation, independence, hard work and a sense of humour and fun.

    So how do we feel about progressing from a referee’s poor judgement? Where’s the Aussie fair go in that?

    The sad thing is, having dispatched England and Wales bravely, and now Scotland in highly contentious circumstances, the rest of the world are probably going to let us know at every opportunity that we are pretenders, and not deserving contenders.

    What kind of reaction do you think Stephen Moore will get if he steps up to the podium to lift the William Webb Ellis Cup as world champions?

    If the Wallabies win the final through scintillating rugby against either the All Blacks or Springboks, the rest of the world might forgive us. Maybe.

    But if there’s any sense that we’ve ridden our luck beyond what is reasonable, then I think the Wallabies will be the most unpopular and disliked world champions in history.

    Should we care?

    I know I do, but I get the impression many Aussie Roarers, from their writings, won’t give a toss.

    Here’s your opportunity to tell me if you have a soul, or not.

    I’m on record as saying the World Cup champions ought to be someone that brings credit to the game, and right now no country deserves that honour more than New Zealand.

    The All Blacks have effectively been the best rugby nation on earth for the best part of a decade. And they have only got better.

    A recent study by The New Zealand Herald showed that while the All Blacks won 71 per cent of their matches in the amateur era, they have increased their winning ratio to 83 per cent in the professional era.

    This upward trend has cut against most pundits’ predictions (including me), that New Zealand’s small population and economic base would work against them in the professional era.

    In addition to this, New Zealand have arguably the game’s greatest ever player in Richie McCaw and greatest ever flyhalf in Dan Carter.

    McCaw has played 146 Tests and is the fourth most winningest player in history (89.04 per cent), of those who have appeared in more than 50 Tests.

    The three marginally ahead of him are all fellow current All Blacks Sam Whitelock (tops at 90.14), Conrad Smith and Ma’a Nonu.

    Pick an all-time, best-ever XV and there’s a very good chance that at least a third of the team will be All Blacks. They are to rugby what the Selecao (Brazil) are to football, or the baggy greens (Australia) are to cricket.

    My view of Australia as a country is that we have changed perhaps for the worse.

    As a society we have become more self-centred and materialistic. Ripping each other off, especially in the major cities, is now an industry in itself.

    Most sporting fans, I’ve observed, are also selfish.

    It’s all about their enjoyment. And the best way to maximise your enjoyment is when your team wins. How they win is a trifling matter often quickly dispensed with. All that matters is that my team won.

    As journalist Greg Baum once said: “Winning needs no explanation, losing has no alibi.” That could be the motto of Wallabies fans?

    I’m uncomfortable about what has transpired. I’m still going to root for the Wallabies. I have enjoyed the fact they have rediscovered their love of the gold jersey, their enterprise, their self-belief, their love of rugby.

    But there will be a bittersweet feeling if they triumph in the World Cup.

    Perhaps the last word should go to former Labor leader Arthur Calwell: “It is better to be defeated on principle than to win on lies.”

    The All Blacks will win the World Cup, the Wallabies will be worthy runners-up (if lucky to have got there), and all will be good with the world of rugby.

    A former rugby lock, cricket no.11 bat and no.10 bowler, and surfboat rower. A fan of the major team sports in Australia.

    Have Your Say



    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (316)

    • Roar Guru

      October 21st 2015 @ 3:20am
      taylorman said | October 21st 2015 @ 3:20am | ! Report

      Good one Sheek, I can see you’ve been struggling with this one for a while now.

      Thing is with a World cups, nothing is guaranteed and every tournament seems to throw up some totally unforeseen event, or upset. This ones no different.

      For McCaw, he has one, maybe two weeks left as an All Black. Same with several others. It IS big for these guys and they’ll need no motivation to get up for these two games. They will want to go out on the biggest blaze of glory possible, and their team know it.

      It must be getting very emotional for them but if you saw McCaws face in the press conference the other day you wouldn’t want to have crossed him he was that focussed.

      Wallabies are on the up, have played strongly in pool play and have their fortune. I think Argie will be close with an Argie win but mainly because of the physical and mental toll on the a Wallabies. They’ve done it tough where Argie have rolled on the momentum gained from pool play. the Ireland win was impressive.

      • Roar Guru

        October 21st 2015 @ 3:21am
        taylorman said | October 21st 2015 @ 3:21am | ! Report

        Sorry…wouldn’t allow the typo edits…

      • October 21st 2015 @ 8:08am
        Noodles said | October 21st 2015 @ 8:08am | ! Report

        Tosh. The only way this idiocy by world rugby could be taken seriously is if they now review EVERY match and ref decision. What they have done is wreck the basic premise of the game. Every one of us knows that much of the game is a 50:50 call. Tampering with the outcome in this way brings a whole ethos undone.

        • Roar Guru

          October 21st 2015 @ 9:18am
          sheek said | October 21st 2015 @ 9:18am | ! Report

          Unfortunately Noodles,

          This is the way the world is going. We might indeed end up having to review everything.

          When I was in my teens & 20s playing rugby, we accepted the ref’s decision. We mightn’t have liked it, or even agreed with it, but we accepted it.

          There was an underlying respect that the ref was doing the best he could, & even he, from time to time, might get something wrong.

          I’ve often marveled how rarely refs got it wrong operating in real time like the rest of us.

          But that respect has gone. Spoilt by technology, fans demand to see every replay from every angle before satisfying themselves grudgingly that the ref got it right, most times!

          My argument now, is that if the fans can see every replay, but the ref can only send some things to the TMO, then he ought to be given the same opportunity to send anything to the TMO he is unsure, in order to get it right.

          Sure, it will interrupt the flow of the game but then, we the fans, are the ones who have created this situation.

          Finally, reading Spiro’s post, I’m amazed that so many people can watch the same incident in slow time from so many angles, & still disagree as to what actually happened.

          • October 21st 2015 @ 9:29am
            Lancaster Bomber said | October 21st 2015 @ 9:29am | ! Report

            Scots didn’t lose because of that decision. They lost because they let in 5 tries. Every other bit of luck just kept them close enough to whinge about the result.

            • October 21st 2015 @ 11:09am
              Jameswm said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:09am | ! Report

              Exactly. Australia deserved to win.

              • Roar Guru

                October 21st 2015 @ 12:47pm
                ClarkeG said | October 21st 2015 @ 12:47pm | ! Report

                It does not really matter does it that any team ever deserves to win or not.

                Being deserving is not factored into the scoreboard.

            • October 21st 2015 @ 11:33am
              Denby said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:33am | ! Report

              That is bang on. The Wallabies scored 5 tries to 3. The last of their tries was a complete brain explosion by Slipper. Sure this can’t be taken away from the Scots as they did not force him to throw that terrible pass but that luck kept them in the game. They hardly scored that try through enterprising rugby.

              • October 21st 2015 @ 3:55pm
                vic rugby said | October 21st 2015 @ 3:55pm | ! Report

                You wouldn’t describe that intercept enterprising?

            • October 21st 2015 @ 11:48am
              Highlander said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:48am | ! Report

              It was only 5 tries to 3 hardly a massive outperformance.

              The 1959 British Lions out scored the ABs 4tries to 0 and still lost 18-17 ( tries worth a lot less then)
              But I remember reading, history books, not old enough to be at the game, a poem that was in the press after the game and have never forgotten it to this day, and worth recalling for its cleverness I think, and as a nice aside from today’s arguments.

              There was an All Black team that lived in a boot
              Ringed round by Lions with tries absolute
              But having the boot was the one reason why
              They won the first test without scoring a try.

              The great Don Clarke was the kicker if I recall correctly

          • October 21st 2015 @ 11:54am
            Noodles said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:54am | ! Report

            I don’t accept that Sheek. Seems to me that World Rugby made a disgraceful decision. First because they second guessed the decision. Second because they did not review any other decisions. As I said if this is the new standard then every single decision has to be tested. This might be technically possible but it will ruin the game.
            This is a failure of leadership and these are decisions that hold the game back.

            • October 21st 2015 @ 12:56pm
              Paul said | October 21st 2015 @ 12:56pm | ! Report

              Exactly. Why is only the last mistake open for scrutiny? How about picking the ball up from an offside position for try 1. Or the accidental offside that led to scrum and Chargedown try that should have being a penalty touchfinder out of the half. Or Slipper being penalised when the Scot tightness dropped his bind and didn’t take the weight in the 76th min which was also in a kickable position? Or perhaps that the Scots should never have been in the quarters had Laidlaws try against Samoa gone to the TMO to show how he blatantly knocked it on? Japan should have advanced.

              • October 22nd 2015 @ 10:52pm
                Internal Fixation said | October 22nd 2015 @ 10:52pm | ! Report

                Exactly. Many bs scrum calls against the Wallabies front row that resulted in points for Scotland. What goes around can come around and the NH whingers need to suck it up. I’ll be celebrating if we win but that seems a remote possibility given current form.

          • October 21st 2015 @ 1:02pm
            DT said | October 21st 2015 @ 1:02pm | ! Report

            Hey Sheek
            I think that’s the nub of the problem with technology. So many people viewing the incident so many times, and still a variety of opinions about what actually happens.
            That ambiguity is what makes World Rugby’s statement yesterday so appalling. What better way to erode a “look at me” public’s already declining respect for authority than by undermining Joubert like that.
            I think the fact that the England v Fiji opener went for 90+ minutes due to the TMOs involvement set the tone for this tournament…in a negative way.
            Cricket has had problems with Hawkeye etc, now rugby and the insidious creep of technology.
            But you’re right. We asked for it.
            I, for one, have moved on. In no way will (an unlikely) Wallabies win in the final be tainted. I support Joubert in his decision and in the future.
            PS: IMO, Phipps is bracing for (and then making) contact with Strauss’s shoulder, which is why it appears he flings the ball back. His arm movement was involuntary due to the force of the contact.
            In slo mo, everything assumes a different perspective….and everything is open to interpretation due to our prejudices, conditioning and personal perceptions.

            • October 21st 2015 @ 3:18pm
              Morty said | October 21st 2015 @ 3:18pm | ! Report

              Spot on DT, it’s a disgrace how they have treated Joubert. I ref and play the game and I still think he was right to award the penalty. He had to make the call in a split second and in all the replays I’ve seen I can’t see Phipps playing the ball. Was it a split second 50/50 call that went Australia’s way because the previous scrum penalty went to Scotland and maybe after awarding it he thought he got it wrong. We’re never going to know but yes as a ref that does happen from time to time. Refereeing decisions are often 50/50 calls and they usually go both ways so it’s unfair to just pick on one at the end of the game. Please don’t let the TMO intrude into our game any more than it is at the moment. Only change might be a captains review like in tennis.

              • October 21st 2015 @ 7:55pm
                Mango Jack said | October 21st 2015 @ 7:55pm | ! Report

                I can see it from 1 angle, but that’s not the angle Joubert had, nor did he have the benefit of slow motion. It’s absolutely ridiculous to publicly denounce his decision, and appallingly gutless to do so straight after the game, when tensions are running high.

                Shame, World Rugby, shame.

          • Roar Rookie

            October 21st 2015 @ 1:21pm
            Die hard said | October 21st 2015 @ 1:21pm | ! Report

            “When I was in my teens & 20s playing rugby, we accepted the ref’s decision. We mightn’t have liked it, or even agreed with it, but we accepted it.”

            Very true with myself Sheek, but there were two things that kept things fair.

            First, none of us were ever certain enough, but were certain enough we lied a lot, to be positive the ref wasn’t right in the first place.

            Second, if we were quick enough we could let down his tyres in the carpark.

            • Roar Guru

              October 21st 2015 @ 2:23pm
              sheek said | October 21st 2015 @ 2:23pm | ! Report

              Very good die hard.

              I remember a guy from Subbies back in the 70s & 80s. Already looked 100 even then!

              He was super pedantic but fair. You just knew when he was reffing your game, to be on your best behaviour to save everyone the trouble of losing their mind.

              No backchat either. Even if you said, “oh crap” to no-one in particular, he’d march you 10 metres straightaway.

          • October 21st 2015 @ 3:50pm
            Simon said | October 21st 2015 @ 3:50pm | ! Report

            Question – has anybody heard any bleating from the Japanese about the Scottish knock-on in the lead-up to the winning Scottish try (against Samoa?)? The knock-on that should have ruled out that Scottish try and therefore lost them that game, and therefore knocking them out of the tournament, with the Japanese going through instead?
            Key point is that yes, it was a tough penalty decision against the Scots at a key point in the game. As were numerous other decisions in this game both for and against each side, as are numerous decisions in every game.
            To my mind, Cheika has got his response spot on (doesn’t he seem to, on most things?) that, while yes it’s a tough call on Scotland, but you win some, you lose some

          • October 21st 2015 @ 6:25pm
            Timmy O'toole said | October 21st 2015 @ 6:25pm | ! Report

            We as a nation and a rugby team cannot be held responsible to “World Rugby’s” pathetic and ideological call about the decision. This in turn has cast that eye of “oh, do they deserve to be there”. No doubting the All Blacks are a wonderful team and have been, for, oh you know, forever, but World Cups are won in a 6 – 7 week allocation, otherwise the All Blacks would have already been handed the Cup. Sometimes, I think you;re Green with envy Sheek. Carn’ you Wallabies, do us proud and show the world that Aussie spirit

      • October 25th 2015 @ 4:34pm
        Mike said | October 25th 2015 @ 4:34pm | ! Report

        “Winning the World Cup would be bittersweet for Australians”

        Nah, just sweet.

        “So how do we feel about progressing from a referee’s poor judgement?”

        Okay thanks. It happens all the time.

        In cricket its even worse, and cricket is far more popular with Australians than rugby. You get the occasional unusual player like Gillie or the late Stan McCabe who believed in walking when you know you are out, but our biggest hero is Bradman whose philosophy was “Never walk”. He figured that for every decision that was wrongly in his favour, there were one or more that were unfairly against him, so just accept whatever comes and get on with the game.

        I have lived through the Deans era when we lost two tests against New Zealand by only 1 point, and other tests by 5 points or less. Some of those tests could have been turned by a referee’s decision, but I don’t spend time agonizing over that. The fact is, we lost those tests. That’s the way it goes.

        If we win this RWC then we will deserve it.

        “Here’s your opportunity to tell me if you have a soul, or not.”

        Yes I do. Agreeing with you is not the criterion for whether one has a soul. 😉

        Enjoy the next couple of games. Or not. Its entirely up to you.

    • October 21st 2015 @ 3:42am
      The Electronic Swagman said | October 21st 2015 @ 3:42am | ! Report

      There is no discredit for the players to accept a bad decision, if indeed they knew it was a bad decision. It’s not like cricket when you know you have nicked a ball and stand your ground.

      I feel we have a team that is clearly attempting to change its attitudes and culture. Their stand against the Welsh was heroic. Their quality against the host nation England at Twickenam was all class. Their addressing of the scrum deficiencies has been extraordinary.

      Rugby is a continuum played over 80 minutes with a range of good decisions, 50/50 decisions and bad decisions. That an apparent bad decision was so critical at the end pf the game makes it a standout, and fits a tabloid narrative perfectly. IMO a wider analysis of the quarter final, and sport in general, is that one decison shouldn’t be viewed in isolation or neccessarily have deeper moral implications.

      It is possible to hold that view and not be a selfish consumer of sport. To be honest, part of me wanted the Scots to win not only because they played with such spirit but because, after a recent heart attack, and after the Welsh game, I wasn’t sure I could take much more of this drama at 3am in the morning.

      • Roar Guru

        October 21st 2015 @ 4:00am
        taylorman said | October 21st 2015 @ 4:00am | ! Report

        Take care then Electronic, it’s only a game. Perhaps watch the replays after getting someone reliable to confirm it’ll be safe to watch. 🙂

        • October 21st 2015 @ 4:05am
          The Electronic Swagman said | October 21st 2015 @ 4:05am | ! Report

          That’s a good idea Taylorman. I might have a nurse on hand. No wait a minute, that may not work either.

    • October 21st 2015 @ 3:51am
      SpongeBob said | October 21st 2015 @ 3:51am | ! Report

      New Zealand will win anyway.

      However, from memory Scotland had their fair shake of the sauce bottle in the group stages so it’s hardly befitting to cry foul (not that anyone in the actual team has complained I’ve seen, more the 4yr old supporters who can’t move on).

      • October 21st 2015 @ 10:12am
        Boz said | October 21st 2015 @ 10:12am | ! Report

        Scotland were lucky to get out of the pool stage. They were blessed with playing Japan four days after the Japanese had beaten South Africa and one of their tries against b Samoa was preceded by an undetected knock on, them winning the game by three points. The article could equally apply to them.

        • October 21st 2015 @ 11:10am
          Jameswm said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:10am | ! Report

          Exactly, call it karma, swings and roundabouts, whatever. Scotland had more than their fair share of the 50/50 calls that game.

        • Roar Guru

          October 21st 2015 @ 12:54pm
          ClarkeG said | October 21st 2015 @ 12:54pm | ! Report

          You can’t be sure it was a knock on.

          • October 21st 2015 @ 8:19pm
            Phil said | October 21st 2015 @ 8:19pm | ! Report

            If that wasn’t a knock on then in all my years of watching rugby,I have never seen one.It was a blatant knock on.

            • Roar Guru

              October 25th 2015 @ 12:44pm
              ClarkeG said | October 25th 2015 @ 12:44pm | ! Report

              Oh no I’m sure you would have seen some.

              I’m also sure you would have seen some where you could not be sure that they were knock on’s.

              I imagine we have seen the same coverage. I can’t see where it is clear and obvious that the ball was knocked on.

              Unless we are talking about different events I think you are assuming it was a blatant knock on.

    • October 21st 2015 @ 4:06am
      tvwatcherIntheweehours said | October 21st 2015 @ 4:06am | ! Report

      These psychological peregrinations are really just stuff to entertain the birds. May I roar?
      I don’t buy them. Sport is a competition, there are usually 2 sets of contenders, a referee or 4, all are human creatures and errors are essential to the game. The rest… just gossiping.
      The real question is now, how can we beat the Argies who have appeared really fit (both psychologically and physically) and strong in the scrum and ruck, not mentioning the backline and the consistency of the bench.
      I fear that the Aussies are really exhausted by these 3 last tough games, in a row. Viewing a second time the Scotland game, the team appears often on its knee, like in the first try by the Scots… where was the composed defense? wide open.
      How little impact has had the bench. Seeing the game again was really painful. Well, well, well.
      This team has a massive challenge to overcome. It has shown it was courageous, hope the energy will still be there.
      Dread the coaching has already depleted all available gas.

    • October 21st 2015 @ 4:08am
      linz22 said | October 21st 2015 @ 4:08am | ! Report

      To feel conflicted about this win is to see that one penalty in isolation. both teams got the rub of the green at different points in the game, the wallabies were just unlucky to get theirs in the final minutes. if the ref had been more accurate at other points in the game, namely the scrum, we would have been ahead by a lot more. i am just upset that people are placing so much emphasis on that one wrong penalty when there were many others that went the scots way. move on, don’t feel conflicted about it at all as the better team won despite playing like crap against a team playing their best rugby in years.
      besides, the scots only got to the finals by getting away with a knock on try against Samoa and they managed to sweep that under the rug and out of memory pretty quickly, so really not conflicted by this at all.

      • October 21st 2015 @ 5:11am
        Adam said | October 21st 2015 @ 5:11am | ! Report

        +1

        • October 21st 2015 @ 5:32pm
          Minz said | October 21st 2015 @ 5:32pm | ! Report

          +2

      • Roar Guru

        October 21st 2015 @ 7:09am
        eagleJack said | October 21st 2015 @ 7:09am | ! Report

        Yep, I couldn’t careless about the incorrect penalty. To focus solely on a 78th minute penalty as a deciding factor is terribly simplistic. A lot happens over 80mins that shapes the outcome of a match.

        Australia won because they knew how to handle those final minutes.

        Let’s look at the last few moments. The Scots panicked. We kicked the ball downfield into touch. They should never have allowed that to happen. Their hooker then threw long. Who does that? Panic was everywhere. The scrambling of their players to then retrieve the loose ball. The whole thing was a blur. The Scots played poor rugby at the death.

        If the scrum was correctly awarded I have no doubt that a composed Wallabies side would have marched up the field and scored. The Scots were a mess. Not even they could believe their luck that they were in front at the 78min mark. We showed this character against the Boks in Brisbane to steal the game at the death.

        Sorry Sheek no moral dilemma for me. The Scots were brave and did their country proud. But they panicked at the death, unsure how to close out a game of that magnitude. Simple rugby would have won it. They didn’t know what to do and their captain admitted as much. Penalty or no penalty they were there for the taking.

        • October 21st 2015 @ 8:42am
          TB said | October 21st 2015 @ 8:42am | ! Report

          I agree whole heartedly eagle jack. We’ve all had these calls go against us. Accept it and move on.

        • Roar Guru

          October 21st 2015 @ 11:47am
          ClarkeG said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:47am | ! Report

          You say Australia won because they knew how to handle those final minutes.

          Ok so let’s take a look at that.
          Firstly Australia did not kick the ball downfield into touch.

          73m Australia leads 32-27. Raining heavily.
          They attempt to move the ball wide from a ruck with 2 decoy runners up and no cover behind.
          Scotland score converted try from intercept. Scot leads 34-32.

          74m37 Aust knock on from kick off.

          77m10 Aust pushed into touch. Throw in to Scot.

          Whilst I agree Scotland made some poor decisions I disagree Australia won because they handled those final minutes. It was a poor decision to attempt a play that got them into the difficult situation in the first place.

          What was handled well though was Foley was able to kick the penalty.

          Now you say that if Australia had been awarded a scrum rather than that final penalty you have not doubt they would have scored.

          So I guess then you would have been happy had Australia chosen to scrum rather than attempt the penalty goal or even if they had chosen to take a tap kick

        • October 21st 2015 @ 9:01pm
          Cole said | October 21st 2015 @ 9:01pm | ! Report

          I couldn’t agree more. I hope the Wallabies squad realise that too. A scrum in their half with a minute left on the clock, this squad would have worked their way down into the red zone and ground out a win.

      • Roar Guru

        October 21st 2015 @ 10:19am
        ClarkeG said | October 21st 2015 @ 10:19am | ! Report

        But regarding the alleged knock on in the Samoan game you are assuming it was a knock on. You’re talking about the try from the scrum I assume.

        How can you be sure it was a knock on? I have seen no coverage of that incident that shows a clear and obvious knock on.

        • October 21st 2015 @ 7:58pm
          Mango Jack said | October 21st 2015 @ 7:58pm | ! Report

          Maybe WR should officially review that as well?!

      • October 21st 2015 @ 11:11am
        Jameswm said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:11am | ! Report

        Well said linz

      • October 21st 2015 @ 11:22am
        Denby said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:22am | ! Report

        +1

      • October 21st 2015 @ 12:24pm
        somer said | October 21st 2015 @ 12:24pm | ! Report

        linz22, I agree with your overall premise that no one penalty can be taken in isolation and that these things go in swings and roundabouts, but these claims about scrum injustices are taking on all the appearance of convenient karma-fulfilling myths with little foundation in reality.
        The Wallaby scrum was penalized because Sio was illegally taking it down, the ref and linesmen all saw it this way only meters from the action, an unfounded belief in the superiority of the the Wallaby scrum doesn’t trump these hard cold facts.

        • Roar Guru

          October 21st 2015 @ 12:33pm
          PeterK said | October 21st 2015 @ 12:33pm | ! Report

          somer – there were clear scrum infringements by Scotland that were not punished.

          Look at the scottish no 6 sliding onto the aussie prop, in one case onto fardy, before nay other penalty. Clearly illegal.

          Other ones analysed here.

          Rebut this

          http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/scrum-analysis-wallabies-vs-scotland/

          • October 21st 2015 @ 7:04pm
            somer said | October 21st 2015 @ 7:04pm | ! Report

            Had a read PeterK and it seems to agree that Scotland overall got the better of the Wallaby scrum
            “the Scots played the hand they had to perfection, using a manipulation of subtle angles combined with coordinated power through the Gray brother locks to generate an impression of dominance over the Wallaby scrum”
            The last part is just confirmation bias, the Scots did gain dominance because they outsmarted and manipulated the Wallaby scrum.
            It also states
            “What the Wallabies were missing in this match was the drive that had neutralised such shenanigans from England and Wales. Was the back five complacent?
            So the Wallaby back five were lacking the power the writer expected from them.
            Also, I think it’s disingenuous to try to imply that the Wallaby scrum doesn’t indulge in shenanigans themselves, on this occasion they just got beaten at their own game, the same game that every good scrum plays.

            • Roar Guru

              October 21st 2015 @ 11:34pm
              PeterK said | October 21st 2015 @ 11:34pm | ! Report

              bottom line there were clear scrum infringements by scotland that were not penalised.

              • October 22nd 2015 @ 10:56pm
                Internal Fixation said | October 22nd 2015 @ 10:56pm | ! Report

                Agree 100% and these resulted in points

    • October 21st 2015 @ 4:19am
      herecomesefficient said | October 21st 2015 @ 4:19am | ! Report

      I don’t think there should be absolutely any ill feeling if we do go on to win the RWC, and am surprised if anyone would think otherwise. That is sport; there are always human errors made in the form of umpiring calls – sometimes they are absolute howlers, other times they are not so bad. You would think that Joubert’s call was a howler the way the press have handled this (mainly the bitter British – the way they were carrying on, on BBC5 was pathetic), but the fact is it was a marginally incorrect decision. If that happened in the 20th minute of the game, no one would remember it. It’s simply because of the gravity of that particular decision there is a fuss. I’m sorry to say, that is rugby, that is sport, that is life. There were arguably many more obvious incorrect calls during the game, which impacted both Australia and Scotland – the scrum refereeing for a start.

      I equate this to incorrect offside calls in soccer – they happen all the time because they have to be made in a split second decision without consultation with replays. If a team scores a goal but is incorrectly called for offside in the 10th game of the season and they go onto draw it, no one remembers at the end of the season. If a team needs to win the last game of the season to win the league and has an incorrect offside call, everyone is up in arms about it. The point is, it is natural to have a more amplified reaction due to the gravity of the situation, but the fact is that these things always happen, and people need to accept that.

      • October 21st 2015 @ 2:58pm
        BBA said | October 21st 2015 @ 2:58pm | ! Report

        There was plenty of ill feeling directed towards NZ when they won the RWC in 2011.

        I hate to think what will happen in SA if such a call were to against them in the S/F or Final if they win their way through.

        I think you just have to let people vent, and get it out of their system and then they move on 3 to 40 years later.

        I do like the idea of a captain or coach challenges that can be used to call for a replay if a glaringly obvious error has been made as a compromise, but given the fluidity of rugby that could be hard to enforce compared to NFL when a coaches challenge does work well..

    Explore:
    , ,