Rugby: France and Beyond

[The Anti-Targ]

Shoot! I couldn't stop myself and I tuned in for the last 3 minutes. Savea's pass would have worked if I hadn't been watching

[ljkeane]

12 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Choke city for New Zealand on kicks. 

Neither of those kicks were chokes. They were both tough kicks.

Good game. Bit of a weird one though, South Africa were probably the better side in the first half but the All Blacks were pretty clearly the better side in the second half after the red for Cane. 

Actually, it was a bit of a weird run overall to winning the World Cup as a whole. Lost to Ireland in the group stage, on the back foot for large parts of all the knock out games against France, England and New Zealand but just stuck in there. Sheer refusal to give up seems to be the main quality which got them through.

[Darryk]

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

[The Anti-Targ]

There's only one country I don't mind getting 4 wins before us, and they won today.

But 7 of 10 RWCs being won by two teams is getting a bit repetitive, 5 in a row being shared by NZ and SA. Aus needs to do a lot of work in the next 4 years before it can compete. England isn't far off. Ireland and France need to be able to step up for the big games. France must win it at some point, but this should have been their time.

[williamjm]

1 hour ago, ljkeane said:

Actually, it was a bit of a weird run overall to winning the World Cup as a whole. Lost to Ireland in the group stage, on the back foot for large parts of all the knock out games against France, England and New Zealand but just stuck in there. Sheer refusal to give up seems to be the main quality which got them through.

Winning the quarter final, semi final and final all by a single point is impressive.

[Consigliere]

Nerve-wracking three games in a row. Still can't believe that the Springboks managed to pulled this off.

The ABs were superb even down a man and were the better side overall. The game was there for the taking for the ABs but poor kicking ultimately cost them.

Turning down three chances to go for the posts ended up being poor decisions in hindsight. Probably made sense to go for the corner at the time though - with Bongi off, SA's lineout was substandard and having to play a flanker in the front row made the scrum less effective too.

The Boks rush defence was immense for the second WC final in a row. 2019 and 2023 WC finals are among the best defensive performances I've ever seen from Springbok sides.

[ljkeane]

Eddie Jones has resigned as Australia manager.

He’s such a dick. They sacked a good coach in Rennie to draft him in at the last minute, he basically fucked their World Cup by picking a squad that in theory was supposed to be building towards the next World Cup and now he’s jumped ship. Presumably to go back to Japan given all the reports.

[BigFatCoward]

18 hours ago, williamjm said:

Winning the quarter final, semi final and final all by a single point is impressive.

I'm conflicted. I can see it both as impressive resilience, but also 3 'toss of a coin' games in a row hardly makes them hugely deserving winners. 

In their 4 hardest games they had a point deficit. 

[Darryk]

1 hour ago, BigFatCoward said:

I'm conflicted. I can see it both as impressive resilience, but also 3 'toss of a coin' games in a row hardly makes them hugely deserving winners. 

A win is a win.

[Makk]

A frustrating game to end a frustrating period of rugby for All Blacks fans. South Africa were very impressive and were generally winning the collisions even when the numbers were even, I feel they could have gone up a gear if they needed to.

It was a brave effort from NZ but I do not want to see games ruined by red cards. I think having the red card be twenty minutes with a player down and then a replacement can come on, which was trialed in various places around the world, is the much better way to do it. At a time when the authorities changed the rules around any contact to the head and increased video influence it is going to continue to ruin games. Canes tackle was probably a red card by the rules, but it wasn't egregious. The player turned into him and he tackled instinctively rather than changing his body position and it wasn't a high speed collision. At least the rulings were mostly consistent at this world cup, over the last couple of years they have been all over the place.

It will be interesting to see if NZ can step back up once the most successful ever super rugby coach replaces the least ever successful super rugby coach. Fozzie has done my head in at times. The one team his short kicking game plan can actually be good against is South Africa, to break their blitz defense, and its the one time the team decides to play possession rugby. In theory the only player Robertson should be missing is Mo'unga but the other notable feature of Fozzies period in charge (aside from the lower win percentage) is the fact that so few new players coming from super rugby were unable to excel on the world stage. This could be a problem with Fozzies selections and general game plan, but it could also point to the fact that super rugby is becoming less competitive with the South Africans gone. I guess we will see over the next couple of years.

[lessthanluke]

2 hours ago, Makk said:

A frustrating game to end a frustrating period of rugby for All Blacks fans. South Africa were very impressive and were generally winning the collisions even when the numbers were even, I feel they could have gone up a gear if they needed to.

It was a brave effort from NZ but I do not want to see games ruined by red cards. I think having the red card be twenty minutes with a player down and then a replacement can come on, which was trialed in various places around the world, is the much better way to do it. At a time when the authorities changed the rules around any contact to the head and increased video influence it is going to continue to ruin games. Canes tackle was probably a red card by the rules, but it wasn't egregious. The player turned into him and he tackled instinctively rather than changing his body position and it wasn't a high speed collision. At least the rulings were mostly consistent at this world cup, over the last couple of years they have been all over the place.

It will be interesting to see if NZ can step back up once the most successful ever super rugby coach replaces the least ever successful super rugby coach. Fozzie has done my head in at times. The one team his short kicking game plan can actually be good against is South Africa, to break their blitz defense, and its the one time the team decides to play possession rugby. In theory the only player Robertson should be missing is Mo'unga but the other notable feature of Fozzies period in charge (aside from the lower win percentage) is the fact that so few new players coming from super rugby were unable to excel on the world stage. This could be a problem with Fozzies selections and general game plan, but it could also point to the fact that super rugby is becoming less competitive with the South Africans gone. I guess we will see over the next couple of years.

This is just a bad take on the red card.
He had him in his line of site for a few seconds then clotheslined his head. It was a blatant red card.

[Makk]

3 hours ago, lessthanluke said:

This is just a bad take on the red card.
He had him in his line of site for a few seconds then clotheslined his head. It was a blatant red card.

I did say it would be a red based on the rulings this tournament, but just to be clear it was less than half a "seconds" between Kriel starting to completely change direction and contact. The referee seeing it in real time right in front of him didn't even stop play for a penalty.

[baxus]

12 hours ago, lessthanluke said:

This is just a bad take on the red card.
He had him in his line of site for a few seconds then clotheslined his head. It was a blatant red card.

Today in our semi-regular "explaining shit to a newb", I'd like to ask a question. Why was New Zealand player shown a red card for his hit on opponent's head and South African captain (Kolisy, was it?) got a yellow for head-butting an opponent in the face? I am aware of the difference between hitting with the shoulder and head-butting, but I didn't get the impression either was deliberate, and luckily there were no serious consequences to either hit.

[ljkeane]

36 minutes ago, baxus said:

Today in our semi-regular "explaining shit to a newb", I'd like to ask a question. Why was New Zealand player shown a red card for his hit on opponent's head and South African captain (Kolisy, was it?) got a yellow for head-butting an opponent in the face? I am aware of the difference between hitting with the shoulder and head-butting, but I didn't get the impression either was deliberate, and luckily there were no serious consequences to either hit.

With all the concern about the long term consequences of concussion, both for players and rugby authorities in terms of getting sued, there's been a big focus on reducing head contact in tackles over the last few years. Basically now if you make contact with the ball carriers head as the tackler it's assumed to be a red card and then there's various factors that can mitigate it down.

It terms of the two incidents in the final for Kolisi he'd bent at the waist, which is one of the big mitigations, there was a change in height from the ball carrier and there was shoulder contact first. For Cane there weren't really any of the official allowed mitigations, he was always upright, first contact was straight to the head and Kriel didn't really change height. They were the right decisions under the current rules.

Having said all that as someone who's been on the receiving end of a lot of rugby tackles I'd far rather be on the end of the Cane one than the Kolisi tackle. In trying to set out clear steps for the officials to go through there's not really a lot of room for nuance anymore.

Edited October 30, 2023 by ljkeane

[Consigliere]

Ardie Savea named player of the year.

In this instance, I'm glad that they didn't default to giving it to someone from the WC winning side (kinda feel for Eben though) 'coz Ardie has genuinely been sensational over the past year and has been the best player in the world for around the past 3 years imo.

 

[lessthanluke]

2 hours ago, baxus said:

Today in our semi-regular "explaining shit to a newb", I'd like to ask a question. Why was New Zealand player shown a red card for his hit on opponent's head and South African captain (Kolisy, was it?) got a yellow for head-butting an opponent in the face? I am aware of the difference between hitting with the shoulder and head-butting, but I didn't get the impression either was deliberate, and luckily there were no serious consequences to either hit.

ljkeane explained far better than I could!

All to do with "mitigation" 

[Makk]

6 hours ago, baxus said:

Today in our semi-regular "explaining shit to a newb", I'd like to ask a question. Why was New Zealand player shown a red card for his hit on opponent's head and South African captain (Kolisy, was it?) got a yellow for head-butting an opponent in the face? I am aware of the difference between hitting with the shoulder and head-butting, but I didn't get the impression either was deliberate, and luckily there were no serious consequences to either hit.

People who have been playing the game for years don't understand it. They have a flowchart and checklist they go through which can be found here.

https://resources.world.rugby/worldrugby/document/2021/03/10/e597c9c8-e852-4e19-875f-18e02e7f7e24/Head_Contact_Process_EN_v1.pdf

For Canes card it was considered 1) Head contact - yes  2 ) Foul play - yes(Reckless, possibly intentional) 3)High danger (swinging arm, upright and dynamic) 4) No mitigation which upgrades to a red card.

Kolisi's was 1) Head Contact - yes, 2) Foul Play (Reckless) 3) High danger (Direct contact, lack of control, high speed, probably upright and dynamic, possibly leading head) 4) Mitigation - yes (a late change in dynamics due to another player involved in the tackle) - card not upgraded to red because of extra player in the tackle.

[lessthanluke]

6 hours ago, Consigliere said:

Ardie Savea named player of the year.

In this instance, I'm glad that they didn't default to giving it to someone from the WC winning side (kinda feel for Eben though) 'coz Ardie has genuinely been sensational over the past year and has been the best player in the world for around the past 3 years imo.

 

Yeah totally agree. I love Eben but Ardie 100% deserves it.

[Which Tyler]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/nov/30/rugby-union-concussion-high-court

Quote

 

Rugby players’ brain injury battle reaches watershed moment in court

Legal action brought by 268 players faces a day of reckoning on Friday while the sport continues to wrestle with the repercussions of head trauma

It has been 10 years since I first spoke to Peter Robinson about the death of his young son Ben, almost to the day. Ben had died of brain swelling after being hit in the head twice in short succession during a school rugby game on 29 January 2011. Peter’s grief was raw, but he wanted to talk because he had a story he needed to tell. It was a story about Ben and what happened to him that day, but it was about more than that, too. It was a story about a sport Peter loved, but which he believed was failing to protect its players from the risks of brain injury.

...

ARTICLE CONTINUES

 

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Which Tyler

[Which Tyler]

https://archive.is/4NiTb

Quote

Resolution in rugby lawsuit still seems years away with ‘gaping hole’ in evidence
Three years since the lawsuit was first launched, “blockages” have prevented the case from moving forward
It is nearly three years to the day that the law firm Rylands Garth announced that it was going to launch a concussion lawsuit on behalf of dozens of former players against rugby’s authorities. Sitting in Court 75 in some far away nook of the Royal Courts of Justice off the Strand on Friday morning and the ancient Chinese proverb of the wheels of justice turning slowly never rang truer.
...
ARTICLE CONTINUES