Bookmarks

Yahoo Gmail Google Facebook Delicious Twitter Reddit Stumpleupon Myspace Digg

Search queries

golf club grace before meals, golf graces before meals, seymore butts ass hunt tylene buck, katharine mcphee ugly vagina, dinner grace at golf club, grace for golf club dinner, stephen a smith intro song, tylene buck interview, Tina fey anal, hqpron

Links

XODOX
Impressum

#1: Matfield Yellow was a penalty try

Posted on 2006-07-16 12:16:27 by Michael Thompon

The Boks drop the ball in the backs and Gitteau toes it 50m down field.
Ndungane tries to clean up, gets tackled, stacks on the mill, ball pops
out, George Smith swoops and suddenly the Wallabies are shifting the ball
to the let.

The Wallabies have four players lined out left. On that side, there is NOT
A SINGLE BOK player on-side. Not one. Not even one close. They are all
still running back on-side - most are tight forwards.

Matfield, running back and off-side, is the Bok closest to the ruck and in
desperation he sticks his hand and body in the way and kills the movement.

It was certainly a yellow for Matfield - a professional foul - but,
further, it should have been a penalty try. There was not a SINGLE Bok
player on-side on that side of the field. It was completely impossible for
the Boks to stop the try unless one of the off-side players infringed -
like Matfield. It was a certain try otherwise.

Should have been a penalty try.

And, yes, given the score, I'm being an ungrateful bastard, but it's just
that professional fouls are horrible and cynical and deserve the full
amount of punishment available.

And talking of punishment, I wonder if Januarie (?sp) will be cited?

--
Mike

Report this message

#2: Re: Matfield Yellow was a penalty try

Posted on 2006-07-16 14:32:36 by Apteryx

&quot;Mike Thompson&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:I&#64;dontthinkso" target="_blank">I&#64;dontthinkso</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:44ba11fa$0$22123$<a href="mailto:afc38c87&#64;news.optusnet.com.au..." target="_blank">afc38c87&#64;news.optusnet.com.au...</a>
&gt;
&gt; The Boks drop the ball in the backs and Gitteau toes it 50m down field.
&gt; Ndungane tries to clean up, gets tackled, stacks on the mill, ball pops
&gt; out, George Smith swoops and suddenly the Wallabies are shifting the ball
&gt; to the let.
&gt;
&gt; The Wallabies have four players lined out left. On that side, there is
&gt; NOT A SINGLE BOK player on-side. Not one. Not even one close. They are all
&gt; still running back on-side - most are tight forwards.
&gt;
&gt; Matfield, running back and off-side, is the Bok closest to the ruck and in
&gt; desperation he sticks his hand and body in the way and kills the movement.
&gt;
&gt; It was certainly a yellow for Matfield - a professional foul - but,
&gt; further, it should have been a penalty try. There was not a SINGLE Bok
&gt; player on-side on that side of the field. It was completely impossible for
&gt; the Boks to stop the try unless one of the off-side players infringed -
&gt; like Matfield. It was a certain try otherwise.
&gt;
&gt; Should have been a penalty try.

Yeah, because Honiss just hates giving penalty tries :)

I know that's what the Australian commentators said, but in fact it was not
impossible for SA to stop the try. Outside Greagan on the left there were 4
Australian and 5 SA players with a chance to be involved, and one from each
team too far back to be likely participants in that phase. Three of the
South Africans are closer to the goal line than the Australians they are
marking (including Matfield, counting him as marking the first Aussie, Paul)
although offside at the time the ball comes from the ruck. That's OK,
there's plenty of time and space for them to be onside before they need to
make any tackles. The last Aussie on the left has no one in front of him,
but two South Africans just behind him.

Given that Matfield's action took him out of play, there may well have been
a likely try if Greagan's pass had been to Paul. Had he received it he would
have had no one in front of him. But it looks to me as if Greagan figured
that Matfield would have Paul covered and wees trying to get the ball as
quickly as possible to the unmarked Aussie on the far left (although offside
when the ball came out, and still offside when he interfered, Matfield was
closer to the goal line than Paul). So I think his pass was going further
out to Gerard. Even with Matfield knocking the pass down, the ball still
made it out as far as Gerard. Gerard had Smith in front of him, and Smith
would have been onside before he had to make a tackle (he was in fact onside
when he snaffled the loose ball as Honiss played advantage, and had the pass
gone directly to Gerard he would have been onside and almost on top of
Gerard as he received it).

A try was certainly on, but definitely not certain, or even more likely than
not.

--
Apteryx

Report this message

#3: Re: Matfield Yellow was a penalty try

Posted on 2006-07-16 14:45:30 by Apteryx

&quot;Apteryx&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:apteryx&#64;xtra.co.nz" target="_blank">apteryx&#64;xtra.co.nz</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:e9dbkl$j3d$<a href="mailto:1&#64;nntp.aioe.org..." target="_blank">1&#64;nntp.aioe.org...</a>
&gt; made it out as far as Gerard. Gerard had Smith in front of him, and Smith

That would of course be John Smit.

--
Apteryx

Report this message

#4: Re: Matfield Yellow was a penalty try

Posted on 2006-07-16 19:02:55 by marknewsgroups

Mike Thompson wrote:
&gt; The Boks drop the ball in the backs and Gitteau toes it 50m down field.
&gt; Ndungane tries to clean up, gets tackled, stacks on the mill, ball pops
&gt; out, George Smith swoops and suddenly the Wallabies are shifting the ball
&gt; to the let.
&gt;
&gt; The Wallabies have four players lined out left. On that side, there is NOT
&gt; A SINGLE BOK player on-side. Not one. Not even one close. They are all
&gt; still running back on-side - most are tight forwards.
&gt;
&gt; Matfield, running back and off-side, is the Bok closest to the ruck and in
&gt; desperation he sticks his hand and body in the way and kills the movement.
&gt;
&gt; It was certainly a yellow for Matfield - a professional foul - but,
&gt; further, it should have been a penalty try. There was not a SINGLE Bok
&gt; player on-side on that side of the field.

I haven't rewatched the match (would I want to?) so I don't know if
that's true, but from my imrpessions watching the game live, yes I
think it should have been a penalty try.

&gt; And, yes, given the score, I'm being an ungrateful bastard, but it's just
&gt; that professional fouls are horrible and cynical and deserve the full
&gt; amount of punishment available.

Agreed.

&gt; And talking of punishment, I wonder if Januarie (?sp) will be cited?

I hope so. It didn't look too serious, but it was dirty slimy play. You
don't go for someones face like that.

Report this message