robdylan

Rasta, are you blind?


Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :Cheetahs, Original Content, Sharks, Super Rugby on 21 May 2012 at 10:03
Tagged with : ,

They say sometimes a picture speaks a thousand words, so we won’t waste too many on this one.

The thing that worries me most about this one, though, is not the fact that there was a clear foot in touch from Riaan Smit ahead of his pass to the ball that set up Adriaan Strauss for the only Cheetah’s try of the weekend. I mean, the Sharks players clearly all saw it, hence the opening up, for once, of the solid wall of defence that kept their opponents at bay for the rest of the match. The Sharks knew that Paul Jordaan had bundled Smit out and stopped playing.

No, the thing that worries me most about this is that AR Rasta Rashivenge WAS LOOKING RIGHT AT THE FOOT AND STILL COULDN’T SEE IT!

Time for a visit to Mark Lawrence’s optometry clinic, Mr Rashivenge!



47 Comments

  • when you watch the video, you can actually see the puff of grass exploding from where Smit’s foot touched the turf… well outside the line of touch

  • Comment 1, posted at 21.05.12 10:07:11 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • And the fact that he was watching so closely was precicely why I thought he got the call right at first!!? Shows u never to take the word of a ar or ref…check for yourself! :lol:

  • Comment 2, posted at 21.05.12 10:21:15 by Ice Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    IceTeam captain
     
  • The quality of assistant reffing has been extremely poor this year

  • Comment 3, posted at 21.05.12 10:23:52 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • When I saw that happening I was far away from the tv but I was sure his foot was in touch, then they replayed it and it was obvious his foot was in touch but not one of the commentators mentioned it and how the ass ref didn’t see it given that he was right there is beyond me.

    Can you imagine if the Sharks had lost the game because of this.

  • Comment 4, posted at 21.05.12 10:31:48 by lostfish Reply
    Valued Sharksworld SupporterCompetition Winner
    lostfishSuper Rugby player
     
  • If he wasn’t looking at the foot then what the hell was he looking at?

    At the very least it must have looked very close to him, and he should’ve suggested looking at the TMO for “any reason not to award the try”

    Do refs get disciplined for that kind of clearly negligent performance?

  • Comment 5, posted at 21.05.12 10:34:56 by CS Reply

    CSCurrie Cup player
     
  • @CS (Comment 5) : I’m not sure the current protocol would allow the TMO to have a look at that one. It wasn’t “in the act of scoring the try” so therefore outside of his jurisdiction… I think? KSA?

  • Comment 6, posted at 21.05.12 10:38:36 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 6) :

    Correct.

  • Comment 7, posted at 21.05.12 10:40:05 by Morné Reply
    Administrator
    MornéTeam captain
     
  • I,too, wonder why the commentators did not say anything. Maybe they were flabbergasted as well. Brosnihan wouldn’t say anything nice about the Sharks, even though he played for us!!!! :twisted:

  • Comment 8, posted at 21.05.12 10:59:59 by markm Reply

    markmUnder 21 player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 6) : A Ridiculous protocol.

    I think they’re looking to change it next season though, something like it were mentioned the rule change that is coming up, but there’s no real clarity on how much the TMO would be able to do now.

    1. A trial to extend the jurisdiction of the TMO to incidents within the field of play that have led to the scoring of a try and foul play in the field of play to take place at an appropriate elite competition in order that a protocol can be developed for the November 2012 Tests.

  • Comment 9, posted at 21.05.12 11:01:19 by Letgo Reply
    Author
    LetgoTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 1) : Very clear! And the blooper of sending Bissi back on and then calling him off again shows the class of refs this weekend.

  • Comment 10, posted at 21.05.12 11:02:53 by KILLER SHARK Reply
    Valued Sharksworld Supporter
    KILLER SHARKSuper Rugby player
     
  • It’s a joke that teams/coaches/captains can’t query calls. This would have been the perfect time for Keegan to pull out a “black card” or whatever and tell the ref he wants to use one of his challenges. In this case he would have kept all his challenges, if a captain makes an incorrect challenge he will lose one challenge – just like many other sports now use it.

  • Comment 11, posted at 21.05.12 11:03:49 by Letgo Reply
    Author
    LetgoTeam captain
     
  • I must say the refs are overdoing the tip tackle thing too. I thought that if you lift a guy and then put him down (not dropping him), it is a legal tackle.

    Albert’s tackle look pretty legal to me

  • Comment 12, posted at 21.05.12 11:04:45 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 1) : Yeah, there was actually a mark left across the touch line where he could have double checked his decision. I don’t know how we could still let calls like this just go by. I don’t like it at all.

  • Comment 13, posted at 21.05.12 11:06:44 by Letgo Reply
    Author
    LetgoTeam captain
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 11) : Now that is an idea I like! Like cricket’s UDRS. Just don’t tell the Indians

  • Comment 14, posted at 21.05.12 11:07:50 by Die Kriek Reply

    Currie Cup player
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 11) : Did they not trial such a system in the Varsity cup last year / year before?

  • Comment 15, posted at 21.05.12 11:09:26 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • @Bokhoring (Comment 12) : The guys hips never went over the 90 degrees, this is what determines a tip tackle in the first place. He picked the guy up and brought him down horizontally, admittedly they are very strict on this and had the Cheetahs player’s support runner not held on to him it may have been more dangerous, so I thought the penalty was in the fairish range.

    The Bismarck arms thing was ridiculous. The first one wasn’t shoulder, he went in with his whole body as Botes already had Adriaan wrapped up, trying to wrap your arms around both of them would have been stupid. His arms clearly goes into the tackle though and his shoulder doesn’t connect with the player alone, it was his shoulder and his upper arm and chest. And the second one, he barely touched the player as he was tackled before he could get to him and he also clearly held his arms out in an attempt to make the tackle.

    They’re blowing this whole shoulder no arms thing out of perspective. You have to remember that the way you’re taught to make a tackle is by step one, leading with you shoulder and then wrapping your arms around the player, so your shoulder will always be a part of the tackle.

    If I’m trying the do s shoulder charge I’m not going to stretch my arms out in front of me at all.

  • Comment 16, posted at 21.05.12 11:14:14 by Letgo Reply
    Author
    LetgoTeam captain
     
  • @Bokhoring (Comment 15) : A few years ago I think, I thought it worked pretty well. Nothing ever came of it though, I don’t know why. Refs embarrassed to be corrected right there on the field?

  • Comment 17, posted at 21.05.12 11:16:11 by Letgo Reply
    Author
    LetgoTeam captain
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 11) : The big question would be as to how many phases back the query could go. I would hate someone to query something 15 phases back. While i agree 100% with the use of tech to improve the game and reffing decisions, I also think it might slow the game down a bit. Just a thought :lol:

  • Comment 18, posted at 21.05.12 11:20:00 by Scott B Reply
    Author
    The HobbitVodacom Cup player
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 16) : In my mind not even worth a penalty, but I will give Kaplan the benefit of the doubt as he does not have the replay when he has to make the call.

    Yeah – there was no charge in that. Bismarck joined the maul thing and bumped into Strauss from a semi-stationary position

    The real dangerous shoulder charges are the ones where the arm is back and the shoulder used like a spearhead

  • Comment 19, posted at 21.05.12 11:24:21 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 6) : Nope the TMO would not have been allowed to rule on that.

  • Comment 20, posted at 21.05.12 11:25:25 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©Head Coach
     
  • Oh c’mon guys, take the Sharks coloured shades off. The law states that if a players lifts another player in the tackle and he tips him (not sure of the exact wording) then it is the tackler’s responsibilty to bring that player safely to ground.

    Alberts didn’t bring him down safely. If the Cheetah didn’t go through 90 then how did his shoulder touch the ground before his arse did?

    Kaplan was clear when he issued the penalty, it was not malicious Alberts was just unlucky.

  • Comment 21, posted at 21.05.12 11:32:56 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©Head Coach
     
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 21) : I would feel the same if that happened to a Sharks player. I don’t recall him going through 90 degrees – hips above shoulder

    Thought it was a bloody good driving tackle

  • Comment 22, posted at 21.05.12 11:35:47 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • My point is I don’t like dangerous and dirty play, but I think the wheel has turned a bit too far, and in some cases rulings are becoming pretty silly

  • Comment 23, posted at 21.05.12 11:38:50 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 21) :
    What would have counted as bringing him down safely?

  • Comment 24, posted at 21.05.12 11:39:03 by Big Fish Reply
    Administrator
    Big FishTeam captain
     
  • The fact that not one replay was shown after that, focusing on the foot in touch and not one commentator mentioning it is also disturbing to say the least. (Is there some negativity towards the Sharks from the general rugby public??? – Seems that whenever a 50/50 call goes against the Sharks – which in most cases they do – no questions are asked)
    Call me a bad loser, but if this was the Stormers or the Bulls, about 20 replay’s would’ve been discussed in depth by the commentators!

  • Comment 25, posted at 21.05.12 11:45:10 by SharksRTB Reply

    SharksRTBCurrie Cup player
     
  • @Scott B (Comment 18) : I would say if the captain had a way of informing the Ref right away, when the wrong decision occurred, like an assistant ref putting out his flag, by example, throwing a flag on the field it could go back a number of phases, or the TV ref can check while play continue’s and stop the ref if the captains call was correct and let play continue of the captains call was incorrect and remove one of his challenges, so that I Captain won’t just throw out a flag to distract a team, (maybe even as few as 1 or 2 calls per half for each team).

    If the captain does not through out a flag and uses his card after a try was scored there should be a few different criteria that determines how far back the TMO can go.

    1. Anything inside the 5m line should have no limit on it.

    2. Anything inside the 22m should have the following limits:

    2.1. Time – like 1 min or 1:30 min (something like this, maybe less), but a minute is not to much, as I have seen AR flagging foul play way longer back than that and play being called back & in this instance the clock will be reset to where the error occurred. (Injuries and stoppages has increased recently, if they start to cut down on this a min or two here and there won’t be so bad).

    2.2. Phases – I would say 5 within the time limit, so if only 3 rucks took place in 1.30 min then only 3 rucks.

    3. Distance – I think distance and phases should be combined. So if the error occurred 100m away, but there was no phases in between and the try was scored within the time limit then you can go back that far. I think however if a certain amount of time and a certain amount of phases occurred after an error outside the 22, then it should not be reviewed.

    So anything outside the 22 should have separate limits.

    3.1 Time limit – Lets say 30 sec
    3.2 Phases – 3

    Something like that, it should obviously be tested in smaller competitions, but it can only improve the game if implemented correctly.

  • Comment 26, posted at 21.05.12 11:54:38 by Letgo Reply
    Author
    LetgoTeam captain
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 24) : stopping the follow through of the tackle as he did.

  • Comment 27, posted at 21.05.12 11:55:00 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©Head Coach
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 26) : Just to follow up on this, usually the calls we want to check that caused a try to be scored aren’t as far back. Basically it happens within 30 seconds or so of the error occurring.

    I like how coaches and AR’s in American football can flag a play right away, for review after play stops. If you flag something right away you would have to be very sure of it, because you don’t know what’s going to happen after that. The opposition might knock the ball directly after that, but the play will still be reviewed and if you’re wrong you will lose a challenge.

    I also think there’s an opportunity here for the TV ref to look at a call as play continues. The captain or coach (who ever will get to flag the call) won’t be able to say what he saw, but the TMO can look for any infringements and stop play as soon as he sees one. If play stops and he did not pick anything up without clarity from the Captain on his call, then there will be an allotted time again 1 or 2 minutes wherein the captain can pinpoint the error he saw and the TMO can look for the specific error.

    If an error is found play will go back to the infringement if not play will continue and the Captain will lose a challenge.

    If the ref doesn’t make a mistake this will only happen 4 times a game, if he does however make mistakes and there’s a lot more challenges than that and the game gets dragged out, won’t this give a clue as to how this game would have been decided before a challenge system.

    Also, maybe after a certain amount of correct challenges a team should have the option to ask for the back-up Ref – lets say 3 errors that accounted to points for the opposition. (so if he missed a mistake before a try or gave a penalty to a team on an incorrect call).

  • Comment 28, posted at 21.05.12 12:07:50 by Letgo Reply
    Author
    LetgoTeam captain
     
  • haven’t red all the comments but here’s my opinion
    Bismarcks yellow was a joke, and Albert’s was very lucky as that should have been a yellow….

  • Comment 29, posted at 21.05.12 12:09:27 by Franshark Reply
    Author
    FransharkTeam captain
     
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 27) :
    Very vague.

    Are you saying that he SHOULD have stopped the follow-through but didn’t?

    In other words, as soon as the tackled player’s little piggy-wiggies left the ground he should have stopped the drive and just put him down?

  • Comment 30, posted at 21.05.12 12:11:19 by Big Fish Reply
    Administrator
    Big FishTeam captain
     
  • @Franshark (Comment 29) : Definitely not a yellow. That was a driving tackle = not a tip tackle

  • Comment 31, posted at 21.05.12 12:15:19 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • @Bokhoring (Comment 31) : he lifted the player legs higher than his middle, the player went in arms and head first to the ground, if he then drive the player on top of that it should have been a red

  • Comment 32, posted at 21.05.12 12:20:08 by Franshark Reply
    Author
    FransharkTeam captain
     
  • @Franshark (Comment 32) : that’s my opinion….

  • Comment 33, posted at 21.05.12 12:21:41 by Franshark Reply
    Author
    FransharkTeam captain
     
  • @Franshark (Comment 32) : I recall the guy fell on his back / shoulders – not his neck / head. He lifted the guy as he drove upward but then he held onto him as they fell down together

  • Comment 34, posted at 21.05.12 12:23:14 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • “The Sharks knew that Paul Jordaan had bundled Smit out and stopped playing.” very dangerous to do this .. ALWAYS play till the whistle

  • Comment 35, posted at 21.05.12 12:28:50 by Zibbie Reply
    Competition Winner
    ZibbieSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Zibbie (Comment 35) : It just puts this split second of indecision in your mind

  • Comment 36, posted at 21.05.12 12:32:49 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • @Bokhoring (Comment 36) :

    It does . but it should not . You cant assume what a ref is going to decide ? The Lions conceded a try in this way against the Brumbies . and that was very bad .

    The ref is the ref . you have to go according to his interpretation

  • Comment 37, posted at 21.05.12 12:47:53 by Zibbie Reply
    Competition Winner
    ZibbieSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Zibbie (Comment 35) : yep, ask the Brumbies about it, they saw Morne knock-on and stopped while Akona picked up the ball & passed to Stander who carried on running…play to the whistle.

  • Comment 38, posted at 21.05.12 12:52:01 by Megatron Reply

    MegatronSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Zibbie (Comment 37) : I know, but invariably it will do that. It is just human.

  • Comment 39, posted at 21.05.12 12:53:30 by Bokhoring Reply

    BokhoringTeam captain
     
  • @Megatron (Comment 38) : And no one was more surprised by the ref (Jonker, of course) waving on play than Morne Steyn himself – he knew he’d knocked it and had also stopped playing.

  • Comment 40, posted at 21.05.12 13:03:56 by Salmonoid Reply

    Salmonoid the SubtleTeam captain
     
  • @Die Kriek (Comment 14) : It’s ok. They don’t play rugby.

  • Comment 41, posted at 21.05.12 13:12:14 by lostfish Reply
    Valued Sharksworld SupporterCompetition Winner
    lostfishSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 30) : That is what I’m saying, he should have stopped the follow through but didn’t, BUT only because he started going sideways. When he felt his body twisting he should have known he was busy tipping the guy over. If he had been going straight forwards and down into the ground nothing would have been wrong.

  • Comment 42, posted at 21.05.12 13:13:14 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©Head Coach
     
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 42) :
    Got it. Thank you.

  • Comment 43, posted at 21.05.12 13:15:54 by Big Fish Reply
    Administrator
    Big FishTeam captain
     
  • @Zibbie (Comment 35) : So true. I don’t know who the Boks were playing but Bakkies stopped playing and started asking the ref if it was a penalty and a try was scored against us.

  • Comment 44, posted at 21.05.12 13:16:20 by lostfish Reply
    Valued Sharksworld SupporterCompetition Winner
    lostfishSuper Rugby player
     
  • He was obviously looking at Beast’s foot :grin:

  • Comment 45, posted at 21.05.12 17:02:57 by vanmartin Reply
    Valued Sharksworld Supporter Author
    vanmartinTeam captain
     
  • Rhetorical question I assume. :)

  • Comment 46, posted at 21.05.12 17:05:57 by Ben Reply

    BenTeam captain
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 45) : it does kind of look like he’s staring most intently at the wrong person’s foot… :)

  • Comment 47, posted at 21.05.12 17:15:16 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.