Are you sure you want to report this post?
Re: A Health Warning
Posted by: Blessing
Date: 04/08/2008 07:02
Dear Dr Bod,
Thankyou for your kind support and for your latest free diagnosis. It really has been a tremendous help to me in these difficult times. As for mr Wineman, my sincere aoplogies for indeed no doubt boring you, but my thread is entitled "A Health Warning", as I know my rambling style does not entertain everyone if anyone but myself, so I keep my comments, if I may, on one easy to avoid thread on this, the most illustrious, diverse, informed, literate and populated of rugby sites, with thanks to Coochie Coo, Bod, Gareth, Annie and oh so too many to mention...I hope this isn't going on too much like an Oscar awards speech.
However, regarding the refereeing and interpretion of the Elvs, and the use of the phrase in ERE's website name is "Every time ref, every time" giving us a clue as to their significance, a poster on the Saracen's site makes some well judged comments to my posting there.
I think it really is important in all seriousness that SKY consider giving us sub titles as to what ELVs are in force depending on the game and what leads to free kicks and what leads to penalties and sin binnings.
He writes, describing me as a "polemicist" which is an improvement on a simple "nutter" I believe.....
Re: Oz vs ABs
by TonyTaff Date: 04 August, 2008 00:31
The polemicist is right that illegal clearing out by the ABs went unpunished.
The farce with the line-out award was down to a Fijian being given his first two outings at this level - back to school.
Also, Lawrence, the South African referee, paid only partial lip-service to the edict of allowing a fair contest at the breakdown, both teams often got away with a bloke flopping down to 'seal off' the ball - though, occasionally, Lawrence DID ping it, and both sides were caught.
He also gave two full penalties (one each) when this version of ELVs mandate only the non-deterrent free kick, unless it is deemed intentional offending - Smith may have been guilty of this, but it wasn't clear that the ref had so decided, and there was even less excuse when the Blacks were so sanctioned.
What stood out, in this game, was the AB's ability to disrupt the Oz line-out. It seems the combination of two ELVs (both of which will be in use in the NH), no need to match numbers, and permissible pulling down of the maul have made a big difference. Not only is the defending team able to put as many guys in as they see fit, the emasculation of the driving maul as a threat has emboldened them to actually compete - some teams, with the throw in, seem to have forgotten how to win their own ball, during the years of mainly uncontested line-outs. I'm warming to these two ELVs.
You may optionally give an explanation for why this post was reported, which will be sent to the moderators along with the report. This can help the moderator to understand why you reported the post.