| Strange decisions [message #1072356] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 12:31 |
|
We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt go
back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a different
viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to see consistency
with refs from week to week
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072358 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 12:52 |
|
"willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt
> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>
> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>
> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to see
> consistency with refs from week to week
Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise from the
safety of your armchair?
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072362 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 12:57 |
|
"Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
news:44b8c918$0$22362$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt
>> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>>
>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
>> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>>
>> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
>> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to see
>> consistency with refs from week to week
>
> Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise from
> the safety of your armchair?
>
Foot in mouth award to Mr Bully
I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
the whistle
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072365 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:01 |
|
"willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:44b8ca00$0$22385$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
> news:44b8c918$0$22362$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>
>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt
>>> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>>>
>>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
>>> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>>>
>>> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
>>> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to
>>> see consistency with refs from week to week
>>
>> Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise from
>> the safety of your armchair?
>>
>
> Foot in mouth award to Mr Bully
>
> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
> the whistle
And you always got every decision correct?
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072368 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:13 |
|
"willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> writes:
> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
> news:44b8c918$0$22362$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>
>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt
>>> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>>>
>>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
>>> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>>>
>>> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
>>> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to see
>>> consistency with refs from week to week
>>
>> Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise from
>> the safety of your armchair?
>>
>
> Foot in mouth award to Mr Bully
>
> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
> the whistle
You blow with your mouth not your calf muscle : and I'm sure you are/were good at it....
ps, As a ref, if you get every decision right throughout your entire
career as you plainly did do you automatically earn the right to be an
obnoxious blowhard who does nothing but criticise refs?
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072370 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:24 |
|
"Walter Mitty" <mitticus [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:87k66f15q7.fsf [at] mail.com...
> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> writes:
>
>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>> news:44b8c918$0$22362$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref
>>>> didnt
>>>> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>>>>
>>>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the
>>>> Aussies
>>>> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>>>>
>>>> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
>>>> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to
>>>> see
>>>> consistency with refs from week to week
>>>
>>> Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise from
>>> the safety of your armchair?
>>>
>>
>> Foot in mouth award to Mr Bully
>>
>> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
>> the whistle
>
> You blow with your mouth not your calf muscle : and I'm sure you are/were
> good at it....
>
> ps, As a ref, if you get every decision right throughout your entire
> career as you plainly did do you automatically earn the right to be an
> obnoxious blowhard who does nothing but criticise refs?
Sorry but I am not like you so that obnoxious comment doesn't apply.
But apart from attacking me can you post something constructive about the
points I raised ? Or is it that you were born a blowhard and don't know
anything else ?
btw: I did not abuse Honiss in any way just raised a couple of points but
lets not let the facts get in the way of your pathetic posting in this group
oh, by the way...fuck off jerk
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072371 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:27 |
|
"Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
news:44b8cb3e$0$25276$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:44b8ca00$0$22385$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>> news:44b8c918$0$22362$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref
>>>> didnt go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of
>>>> the post
>>>>
>>>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the
>>>> Aussies collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>>>>
>>>> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
>>>> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to
>>>> see consistency with refs from week to week
>>>
>>> Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise from
>>> the safety of your armchair?
>>>
>>
>> Foot in mouth award to Mr Bully
>>
>> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
>> the whistle
>
> And you always got every decision correct?
>
>
mate, I got a heap wrong but I didnt get paid big dollarsto blow the whistle
now, I will put the same question as I did to that fuckwit Mitty... can you
comment on my points in the original post or are you like him ?
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072372 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:33 |
|
"Will_S" <spam [at] ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:4hs1q1Fvd7mU1 [at] individual.net...
>
> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
> news:44b8cb3e$0$25276$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>
>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:44b8ca00$0$22385$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>>> news:44b8c918$0$22362$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref
>>>>> didnt go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of
>>>>> the post
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the
>>>>> Aussies collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>>>>>
>>>>> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
>>>>> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to
>>>>> see consistency with refs from week to week
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise from
>>>> the safety of your armchair?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Foot in mouth award to Mr Bully
>>>
>>> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing
>>> of the whistle
>>
>> And you always got every decision correct?
>>
>>
>
> mate, I got a heap wrong but I didnt get paid big dollarsto blow the
> whistle
>
> now, I will put the same question as I did to that fuckwit Mitty... can
> you comment on my points in the original post or are you like him ?
Er, I did comment. Refs are human, humans aren't perfect. Get over it.
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072373 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:35 |
|
"Will_S" <spam [at] ozemail.com.au> writes:
> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
> news:44b8cb3e$0$25276$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>
>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:44b8ca00$0$22385$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>>> news:44b8c918$0$22362$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref
>>>>> didnt go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of
>>>>> the post
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the
>>>>> Aussies collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>>>>>
>>>>> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
>>>>> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to
>>>>> see consistency with refs from week to week
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise from
>>>> the safety of your armchair?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Foot in mouth award to Mr Bully
>>>
>>> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
>>> the whistle
>>
>> And you always got every decision correct?
>>
>>
>
> mate, I got a heap wrong but I didnt get paid big dollarsto blow the whistle
>
So you admit that you would be for sale? Typical Aussie cheat. BTW, good
display by the Aussies.
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072375 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:44 |
|
"Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
news:44b8d2b4$0$22361$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Will_S" <spam [at] ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4hs1q1Fvd7mU1 [at] individual.net...
>>
>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>> news:44b8cb3e$0$25276$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:44b8ca00$0$22385$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>>>> news:44b8c918$0$22362$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref
>>>>>> didnt go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of
>>>>>> the post
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the
>>>>>> Aussies collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
>>>>>> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to
>>>>>> see consistency with refs from week to week
>>>>>
>>>>> Why don't you give it a go then Will? Or do you pefer to criticise
>>>>> from the safety of your armchair?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Foot in mouth award to Mr Bully
>>>>
>>>> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing
>>>> of the whistle
>>>
>>> And you always got every decision correct?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> mate, I got a heap wrong but I didnt get paid big dollarsto blow the
>> whistle
>>
>> now, I will put the same question as I did to that fuckwit Mitty... can
>> you comment on my points in the original post or are you like him ?
>
> Er, I did comment. Refs are human, humans aren't perfect. Get over it.
>
>
>
Well you answered my question Mitty
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072376 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:53 |
|
"willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message news:44b8ca00$0$22385
>
> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
> the whistle
You should try blowing the whistle with your mouth - seems to work for
everyone else.
cheers, aMtt
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072378 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:58 |
|
"Neilsons" <matt.neilson [at] paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:44b8d72a [at] clear.net.nz...
>
> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message news:44b8ca00$0$22385
>>
>> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
>> the whistle
> You should try blowing the whistle with your mouth - seems to work for
> everyone else.
>
> cheers, aMtt
>
well Matt I can say that your method of shoving it up your arse is not too
be recommended but if I typed that sure enough Matua would come sniffing
around
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072380 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 13:57 |
|
"willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt
> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>
> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
The SA dropped his bind and pulled the scrum down, I assume the ref got a
call from the touch judge but it looked fairly obvious on TV. Same thing
happened in the 2nd 1/2 with the SAs right on the attack, put it down to
stupidity by the SA frontrow
>
> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to see
> consistency with refs from week to week
>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072382 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 14:01 |
|
"Will_S" <spam [at] ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:4hs3ilF11nf6U1 [at] individual.net...
>
> "Neilsons" <matt.neilson [at] paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
> news:44b8d72a [at] clear.net.nz...
>>
>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message news:44b8ca00$0$22385
>>>
>>> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing
>>> of the whistle
>> You should try blowing the whistle with your mouth - seems to work for
>> everyone else.
>>
>> cheers, aMtt
>>
>
> well Matt I can say that your method of shoving it up your arse is not too
> be recommended but if I typed that sure enough Matua would come sniffing
> around
Quit when you're behind, fella...
CP
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072385 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 14:04 |
|
"Chris Parslow" <wolsrapc [at] tensutpo.moc.ua> wrote in message
news:44b8d902$0$22363$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Will_S" <spam [at] ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4hs3ilF11nf6U1 [at] individual.net...
>>
>> "Neilsons" <matt.neilson [at] paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
>> news:44b8d72a [at] clear.net.nz...
>>>
>>> "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message news:44b8ca00$0$22385
>>>>
>>>> I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing
>>>> of the whistle
>>> You should try blowing the whistle with your mouth - seems to work for
>>> everyone else.
>>>
>>> cheers, aMtt
>>>
>>
>> well Matt I can say that your method of shoving it up your arse is not
>> too be recommended but if I typed that sure enough Matua would come
>> sniffing around
>
> Quit when you're behind, fella...
>
>
> CP
matua ?
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072388 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 14:10 |
|
willsutton wrote:
> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt go
> back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
But did the first offense take place in front of the posts? My
recollection is that while that was where the ref was standing when he
said advantage the actual infringement was the SA backline being up
offside on the far side.
> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
They may not have wanted to do it but that doesn't mean they didn't
offend. Given how the Aussie scrum was moving back at a rate of knots it
is possible that the SA prop fucked up and pulled the thing down with a
slip or loss of grip. But since there was no replay and we couldn't see
it's a bit harsh to bag the ref.
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072391 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 14:20 |
|
"JimP" <yeah [at] right.co.nz> wrote in message
news:e9aluk$56v$1 [at] lust.ihug.co.nz...
> willsutton wrote:
>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt
>> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
> But did the first offense take place in front of the posts? My
> recollection is that while that was where the ref was standing when he
> said advantage the actual infringement was the SA backline being up
> offside on the far side.
Could be but I thought he forgot about the original penalty
>
>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
>> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
> They may not have wanted to do it but that doesn't mean they didn't
> offend. Given how the Aussie scrum was moving back at a rate of knots it
> is possible that the SA prop fucked up and pulled the thing down with a
> slip or loss of grip. But since there was no replay and we couldn't see
> it's a bit harsh to bag the ref.
Scrums are like rucks....a very grey area
Well one more for you....on the quick throw in where Australia scored in the
2nd half it was so crooked how did he miss that ? I would hate to lose a
tight match on that call
All things aside I think he could have pinged SA a lot more for offside but
he was lenient in Australia in the tackle area ie. not releasing
All up he had a fairly decent game . What is your opinion ?
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072397 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 14:36 |
|
Will_S wrote:
> "JimP" <yeah [at] right.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:e9aluk$56v$1 [at] lust.ihug.co.nz...
>> willsutton wrote:
>>> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt
>>> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>> But did the first offense take place in front of the posts? My
>> recollection is that while that was where the ref was standing when he
>> said advantage the actual infringement was the SA backline being up
>> offside on the far side.
>
> Could be but I thought he forgot about the original penalty
>>> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
>>> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>> They may not have wanted to do it but that doesn't mean they didn't
>> offend. Given how the Aussie scrum was moving back at a rate of knots it
>> is possible that the SA prop fucked up and pulled the thing down with a
>> slip or loss of grip. But since there was no replay and we couldn't see
>> it's a bit harsh to bag the ref.
>
> Scrums are like rucks....a very grey area
>
> Well one more for you....on the quick throw in where Australia scored in the
> 2nd half it was so crooked how did he miss that ? I would hate to lose a
> tight match on that call
That was inexcusable. Particularly because there was a SA player right
there who would have got the ball had it been straight. Was it Walsh's
touch because he didn't say boo about it either?
> All things aside I think he could have pinged SA a lot more for offside but
> he was lenient in Australia in the tackle area ie. not releasing
>
> All up he had a fairly decent game . What is your opinion ?
I thought he was good too. Mainly because he was fairly unobtrusive
while still managing to keep a lid on the dirty stuff that could have
boiled over quite easily. Some good calls on those held up in goal but
the TMO could have been a safer / wiser option.
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072399 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 14:39 |
|
snip
>> All up he had a fairly decent game . What is your opinion ?
> I thought he was good too. Mainly because he was fairly unobtrusive while
> still managing to keep a lid on the dirty stuff that could have boiled
> over quite easily. Some good calls on those held up in goal but the TMO
> could have been a safer / wiser option.
He seemed in very good position in all 3 of the held up calls, if he feels
he can make the call he should and only call on the TMO if he is unsighted.
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072407 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 15:17 |
|
willsutton wrote:
> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt go
> back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>
> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>
> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a different
> viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to see consistency
> with refs from week to week
It's those bloody refs, isn't it William? They all have it in for
Australia. You would have won by 70 or 80 with a decent ref, eh?
-- rick boyd
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072412 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 16:09 |
|
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 20:57:04 +1000, "willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>I have reffed for years until a dodgy calf muscle curtailed my blowing of
>the whistle
Bizarre. Most refs I know use their lips.
Charlie
--
Remove NO-SPOO-PLEASE from my email address to reply
Please send no unsolicited email or foodstuffs
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072423 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 21:39 |
|
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 21:17:59 +0800, rick boyd <boyd [at] comswest.net.au>
wrote:
[...]
>
>It's those bloody refs, isn't it William? They all have it in for
>Australia. You would have won by 70 or 80 with a decent ref, eh?
>
>-- rick boyd
Yes indeed, and may I be first to say "Kaplan had a shocker".
--
greig
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072454 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 03:01 |
|
rick boyd wrote:
[...]
> It's those bloody refs, isn't it William? They all have it in for
> Australia. You would have won by 70 or 80 with a decent ref, eh?
huh? He was criticising the ref for awarding a decision *to* Australia.
|
|
|
| Re: Strange decisions [message #1072525 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 01:58 |
|
"willsutton" <wlsutton [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:44b8c40f$0$1205$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
> We had an advantage ( penalty ) but when SA offended again the ref didnt
> go back to virtually under the post...result missed penalty of the post
>
> Why would an attacking scrum that is pushing the shit out of the Aussies
> collapse it ? Result penalty to Australia and a try
>
> I just cant understand refereeing any more but I guess they have a
> different viewing angle then what we see on TV . I would just love to see
> consistency with refs from week to week
>
>
>
The ref replies to SA coach :
http://www.rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/articles/2006/07/16/115298 8403581.html
|
|
|
