Also what is the point – break down every decisioning you will have an enormous amount of decisions which ‘could’ have been given one way or the other. Add to that the amount of times a players makes a wrong decision, drops a ball or a coach makes the wrong sub.
It’s a human game and it’s literally composed of human moments, imperfect choices and moments of brilliance and failure.
The ref is part of the game and they aren’t perfect – just as the other 30 blokes aren’t either.
Complaining that the game wasn’t reffed perfectly in your favour is pointless. Reffing is always imperfect – its much more useful to think how you can learn and react for next time.

Also the game is over and World Cup won – there isn’t a lot of use in crying over spilt milk – but then again there isn’t much else to write about for a couple of months either.

Energy might be better spent asking question around how we make the reffing at super rugby level closer to test standards so that Australian and All Blacks teams stop collecting (entirely legitimate) red and yellow at such incredible rates.

A focus in tougher reffing requires teams to be much more accurate in their skill execution – esp at breakdown – which has also been a consistent issue for the ABs and Wallabies (more so Wallabies but it’s there in the ABs game as well).

Or we can just spend time moaning about how the All Blacks got cheated and live in a world where we just pretend the fact they went from putting a record score on the boks to losing by a record margin in the space of a few games (think about what says about the ability of coaching teams to adapt), that the All Blacks won 1 game of high intensity at this world cup – Ireland, and that despite knowing that elite level games need elite level focus and discipline they managed to have 3 players absent for large portions of the game through what is basically carelessness.

Agreed 100% – ultimately the reffing is just another factor that you need to be good enough to rise above – weather, your opponents, rest times it’s all part of the challenge and ultimately the best team always wins.

Oh it was just
1. The decision was completely legitimate and there isn’t actually any reasonable grounds for debate. Same re the Cane red card and Kolisis yellow – subjectively you can ‘feel’ they weren’t fair but objectively those decisions are clearly correct.
2. Regarding Swain you can consider him to have be a grub if you like but then you can’t logically consider Frizell hard done by or complain if others view his actions as cynical- or you can say in both cases the laws were applied and the outcome was appropriate and move on. It’s a double standard to say one was appalling cynical foul play and the other a gross injustice – esp given the enormous advantage ir potentially gave the ABs given SA’s risky selections (even if Fouries performace completely vindicates Nienabers trust in his ability).
Of course it’s a game having a personal and emotional response to it is part of the reason most of us enjoy it.

Weirdly I think a lot of teams got dudded – but that said if the other side had won then they would probably feel dudded as well.

The way the game is at the moment it’s incredibly tight at world cup level – and that means refs calls which are always subject to debate are basically the difference.

That and your own errors – Ireland, England and NZ all lost basically because of their own errors at key points. The Boks won because of they have a game plan and focus on discipline that other sides couldn’t match.

The draw was somewhat a factor as well – NZ made the final and basically won 1 significant game against Ireland in the Qrt (while losing the other 2 games against France and SA). Boks played 4 incredibly tight games and found a way to come out ahead in all of them so they are definitely the best team at the cup on that metric alone.

Subjectively you can make that argument, and I can see your point – objectively he wraps am arm around the hookers neck and attempts to roll him out of the ruck before his full weight lands on the hookers leg while he is still in contact with the neck.

My point i suppose is you can be subjective – his action is the same offence as Swains. To say Swain is a grub and a bad person but Frizell is just unlucky is make a lot of assumptions about something that happens quickly. We can’t know the intent here so either Swain is a bad guy and equally Frizell is or Swain made an error of technique under pressure and Frizell did too.

20. B

A player may lever the jackler out of the contest at the ruck but *must not drop their weight onto them* or target the lower limbs

That’s the law Frizell broke, by the way its also the same law Swain broke. Please note that intention is not mentioned (which means if he meant to or not is irrelevant).

Laws also state that foul play can be a penalty, yellow or red card.

So the Frizell card is simple.

He entered a ruck, moved well past the offside with basically a minimal bind then went off his feet which brought the full weight of his body down on the green players leg.

So Frizell has dropped his weight onto a player at a ruck – which has resulted in that player leaving the field. Its clearly foul play- the sanction is up to the ref but given its led to a player being injured to the extent they can no longer participate he must have felt it was sufficiently reckless to justify a yellow card.

The process is pretty simple and the card isn’t even slightly controversial. It can’t have been considered deliberate otherwise he absolutely would have been sent off.

John Kirwan and Geoff Wilson in particular love a whinge – they are paid to do it – there has been just as much general carry by the NZ media as any of the other teams. NZ is no different in that respect to any other team. Even Foster joined in by questioning the reffing decisions (most of the other world cup coaches have also done this).

Your right there – All World Cup as well basically – a team/your teamloses and there is fuss.

The French insist they got dudded, the Irish felt that got dudded, the English are sure they got dudded, the Argies felt they got dudded, Samoa insists they got dudded, Fiji say they got dudded, the list goes on.

Players and coaches haven’t been to bad but the general complaining and insinuating that the result was unjust has been the common media response.

Funny that – it’s different when an AB does it ‘honest mistake’, ‘he’s a good bloke he wouldn’t do that’.

You guys got pretty nasty towards darcy swain – but that’s because if someone else who’s not all black it open season.

Double standards much…

Respectfully the whinging from across most of the NZ media has been epic. To give then their due they always say congrats to SA but… and go on a epic sook about the ref, the head high tackle laws, SA playing too negative. NZ may be good at winning but they are just as bad at losing as every other team at this world cup had been.

Interesting to see your slightly different take on the reffing when it doesn’t go the ABs way…

The point was more to do with the reffing and its impact on the contest than it does the ABs. The same basic opinion I offered here has been given by much better qualified people than myself – ‘Please tell me where can Angus Gardner help the All Blacks more that what he is doing at present? Shocking refereeing’ – Schalk Burger, there is plenty more out there pointing out the reffing issues. I don’t begrudge the ABs their win – I was just hoping for a better game and I felt the reffing didn’t help make this any more interesting than training run. Fun to watch if your entire perspective of rugby is based on the ABs – not much fun for anyone else who is a fan of the game rather than just the All Blacks.

I’ll check back with you next week if the ABs lose – I’m sure you will in the event of thier loss you will have nothing but complementary things to say about the reffing 😛

If you read the post my point was the exact opposite. The ABs would win this game 8/10 times based on form and record. My general point was that unless you were an all blacks fan this was sad spectacle in which the general poverty of entertainment and contest was contributed to by the reffing. I love my rugby, pay to watch on TV and live, buy the odd jersey and generally take a lot of pleasure out of engaging with the game. I stopped paying attention to the game after the 50th minute as I’m sure any other spectator not wearing an All Blacks jersey did. The issue here is that for many people globally this might be their first (and quite probably last) rugby game viewed.
It’s not about the outcome it’s about the game itself. Any number of reasons it turned out this way, in particular the issue of the draw, but the reffing was also a part of the problem – the upside is that Gardiner certainly won’t be reffing the final (for a point of referencing on my issues around the reffing plenty of far more experienced and far more qualified individuals pointed out the same issues I had the quality of the ref).

Your smart enough to know it isn’t all about the number but the location and the timing – watch the first 20 again and ask if the game follows the same course if the first all blacks try is disallowed and a penalty given due to obstruction – which it should have been. Or if an all blacks player is yellow carded for dangerous play in the clash with boffelli which again based on many other instances this year probably should have been given, or if the holding the man past the clean is not given and a line break made, or more accurately if the numerous examples of the All Blacks doing the same thing more subtley before and after that penalty were given, there’s plenty of others. It’s not really sour grapes in that im not arguing the ABs would haven’t lost. It’s just the usual story of then being better *and* getting the rub of the green in the close calls. It just makes for a frustrating and boring experience as a viewer. It would have been nice to end the game feeling like a contest in which both sides could play thier game rather than the usual feeling of havibg watched a gane in which only one side understanding the laws and the other one looking as though they are playing the sport for the first time and not knowing or understanding why decisions are consistently going against them. Not a great look for a show piece game with a global audience.

Why even bother watching this?
Ref favoured the ABs by a crippling margin – ABs are too good a team not to flog you with that sort of margin in the pen count.
Waste of a morning.

Moral victories don’t get your name on the world cup…

Does ball in hand win tests? The modern test game rewards long kicking, maul excellence and organised aggressive defence for more than pretty counter attack.

Re ALB – the pass was nice but if you have a look at the rest of the match he didn’t contribute too much else – your probably better picking a straight line beast like Aumua and putting a play making centre at 13.

Two ball playing first 5’s in the close channels when your also using Beauden as first reciever from 15 at times seems like too many chefs and not enouhh cooks.

It may be better to use a proven crash ball 12 like Aumua to give bend the line and keep wider defenders more committed?

There are plenty of players ready to step up in NZ rugby and ergo the talent to play quite a different and maybe more competitive gameplan.

I think the ABs at the moment are playing 2019 rugby at the 2023 world cup.

Times have changed and the game plan doesn’t seem to have.

I would reckon Razors first AB squad might have quite a different look to the world cup group (excluding the obvious retirements and off shore moves).

I wonder if this has something to do with the anything goes Super rugby reffing. There is a big difference in how the rules are applied in Super rugby vs the other comps and it seems like the ability to make sensible disciplined decision under the pressure of test match rugby is an issue for the ABs and Wallabies.

The future for rugby if it wants to grow is to ref the breakdown as hard as possible – clean fast ball makes for more fluid and exciting games.
Peyper was tough on the pilfer – in particular leaning on bodies and reaching over ruck – it meant less turnovers and less messy ball. If NZ could have gotten their clean outs past the carrier with blow outs and built some momentum with carries they certainly could have worried France- instead they generally cut got cut down quickly and had mostly static ball and ergo were carrying against set organised defenders who worked in numbers to keep the next contact slow.
After that it was about kicking which NZ can’t do as well as France. There might need to be some line up changes or at least bringing Frizell in as soon as possible. Vaai, Jacobsen, Papalii and Savea simple don’t have the mass to hit the defenders and drive through the tackles with momentum. All of them are very good at different things but as a group they don’t have enough power 5 meters from the ruck to keep you competitive against France or SA – Frizell and maybe another power runner would boost the ABs pack greatly against these bigger/stronger packs.

He was also propping against arguably the toughest opponent he possibly could in world rugby.

Sometimes your opponent is better on the day – doesn’t make him a bad prop just means Atonio was better today.

Another day with different prep in the run in or a different ref and the scrum may well have held up better.