The second south African try should not have been awarded. There was no contest from Samoa in that rolling maul and as a result its a blatant obstruction everyday of the week. This referee must not be used to seeing this tactic, poor refereeing. A job well done to South Africa for the win.
Seb Reni No contest is fine, but there was no contact either - standing off a maul doesn't mean anything but it does allow a player to shoot through and score a try. Completely legitimate. Its not truck and trailer, as there was no one in front of the try scorer, and its not obstruction as there is no contact. Samoa had no chance either way, with a grounded South African try being disallowed earlier in the game, effectively making the actual score 47 - 8. Not even a contest.
Mark Nettmann Could have been a penalty to SA for leaving the lineout(NZ got penalised in the 2nd game vs. SA last year when they got away with it in the first), no contact and no one in front so legitimate try, Seb Reni clearly don't understand the laws and I think the commentators in this game was completely biased towards Samoa which caused fans to misinterpret or they were also useless at the laws of the game. He made another stupid call when he said one lineout should have been awarded to Samoa when the South African was cl early outside when he touched it, biased commentating at it's best.
Mark Nettmann When the commentator said truck and trailer I knew he doesn't know what he's talking about, clearly he doesn't even understand what truck and trailer is.
Cybernum2 in my years of playing rugby that was obstruction every day and when it wasn't called we asked the ref and they'd say I've never heard of that before. You claiming I don't know anything about is a bit off.. I know the rules very well. It was a truck and trailer simple as that. The scoreline wasn't even close but we need to fix these calls.
9 ปีที่แล้ว
Nice to see South Africa wearing something that looks like a real rugby jersey, in that it actually has a collar, like all rugby shirts used to have back in the day not all that long ago, before England's muscle T shirts were worn in that WC final in Australia in 2003. What I don't understand is the shirt tails out. Now those can be grabbed by tacklers. So let me get this straight: normal old fashioned rugby shirts aren't worn any more because the sleeves or collar or any other part of the shirt could be grabbed. So these tight-fitting stinky polyester shirts, usually with no collars and really weird designs, come into vogue, because it's hard for a tackler to grab any part of the jersey, but the players don't tuck them in, and the tails can be grabbed, and I've seen it happen. Stupid.
Looking forward to the SA vs AUS game :)
Does anybody know the name of the commentator who interviewed Hanro Liebenburg at the end? I am desperately trying to find his name.
The second south African try should not have been awarded. There was no contest from Samoa in that rolling maul and as a result its a blatant obstruction everyday of the week. This referee must not be used to seeing this tactic, poor refereeing. A job well done to South Africa for the win.
Seb Reni No contest is fine, but there was no contact either - standing off a maul doesn't mean anything but it does allow a player to shoot through and score a try. Completely legitimate. Its not truck and trailer, as there was no one in front of the try scorer, and its not obstruction as there is no contact. Samoa had no chance either way, with a grounded South African try being disallowed earlier in the game, effectively making the actual score 47 - 8. Not even a contest.
Mark Nettmann Could have been a penalty to SA for leaving the lineout(NZ got penalised in the 2nd game vs. SA last year when they got away with it in the first), no contact and no one in front so legitimate try, Seb Reni clearly don't understand the laws and I think the commentators in this game was completely biased towards Samoa which caused fans to misinterpret or they were also useless at the laws of the game. He made another stupid call when he said one lineout should have been awarded to Samoa when the South African was cl early outside when he touched it, biased commentating at it's best.
Mark Nettmann I think du Preez knocked that ball on (the one where he said held up.)
Mark Nettmann When the commentator said truck and trailer I knew he doesn't know what he's talking about, clearly he doesn't even understand what truck and trailer is.
Cybernum2 in my years of playing rugby that was obstruction every day and when it wasn't called we asked the ref and they'd say I've never heard of that before. You claiming I don't know anything about is a bit off.. I know the rules very well. It was a truck and trailer simple as that. The scoreline wasn't even close but we need to fix these calls.
Nice to see South Africa wearing something that looks like a real rugby jersey, in that it actually has a collar, like all rugby shirts used to have back in the day not all that long ago, before England's muscle T shirts were worn in that WC final in Australia in 2003.
What I don't understand is the shirt tails out. Now those can be grabbed by tacklers. So let me get this straight: normal old fashioned rugby shirts aren't worn any more because the sleeves or collar or any other part of the shirt could be grabbed. So these tight-fitting stinky polyester shirts, usually with no collars and really weird designs, come into vogue, because it's hard for a tackler to grab any part of the jersey, but the players don't tuck them in, and the tails can be grabbed, and I've seen it happen. Stupid.