@Gunner said in Super Smash 2018/19:
Knights murdering the Stags.
Knights scored 230, Stags now 88/9.
Nethula has figures of 5-14Knights must be almost unbackable favourites to win the whole thing.
They should have been! Bad days happen but that loss could be seen as a massive choke!
@booboo said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@hydro11 said in Blues vs Crusaders:
I'm okay with the outcome. Seems like a strange reasoning. Intent doesn't normally matter.
You referring to Mataele's deliberate knock on?
If so, I can't quite see your logic ...
He was obviously trying to knock it backwards, thus he wasn't deliberately knocking it on ...
I'm saying that isn't how I normally see it refereed. Normally the only question is whether the player has a genuine chance to catch the ball (which Mataele didn't). I like the ref's interpretation - I just don't think it is consistent.
@booboo said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@Billy-Tell said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@Justin Marshall
A penalty try is awarded between the goal posts if foul play by the opposing team prevents a probable try from being scored, or scored in a more advantageous position. A player guilty of this must be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off. No conversion is attempted.
In news other than Justin Marshall's somewhat rusty knowledge of the laws of the game - thought the end of year tour, and England's start to the 6N, show that forwards need some power. In that regards, thought Shannon Frizzell stood out in his wee cameo for the Highlanders, while in this game Ioane and to a lesser extent Robinson, showed good moments.
Watching the Blues, you sort of thought they had a charity spot in the team for a local kid with special needs. This week's lucky winner was Michael Collins. For the Crusaders, Braydon Ennor went pretty well.
Think the Blues have potential, that was a respectable enough loss against last year's champions.
It's weird, Justin's continued ignorance of the laws. Mextedesque.
However, why was noone YCed for the second PT?
It's just the same as Friday night with Marshall. He doesn't know the law and only knows the layman's perspective but he sort of has a good point.
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@hydro11 said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@hydro11 said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@Bones said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
Not a deliberate knock on? WTF is the clown smoking?
It's not a deliberate knock on. How many penalties are we gonna have if we start penalising people for accidental knock ons?
It is deliberate because it didn't go backwards and he didn't catch it. That removes any "judgement".
Under that ruling, every knock on is deliberate.
You might want to learn the laws. A player in possession can knock on ffs.
Right but if a player in possession loses it they didn't catch it and the ball didn't go backwards. So if those are the only two criteria, every knock on is deliberate.
The matter in hand is defenders knocking the ball on interfering in passes to players in space. This isn't difficult to understand.
If you include possession as a third criteria you still have every knock on not in possession as a penalty (which seems stupid).
It's only stupid to stupid people who think that outcome with Mataele simply throwing out a hand to interfere with the pass isn't deliberate.
But you literally said in your earlier post: 'It is deliberate because it didn't go backwards and he didn't catch it. That removes any "judgement".' Now you are saying people are just stupid for not agreeing with your judgement. So actually you are in favour of judging intent. It's just you think in that situation (and perhaps, in most situations) intent is trivial to judge.
Most referees don't judge based on intent. They judge based on whether the player has a genuine chance of regathering the ball. Mata'aele didn't so should have been penalised based on precedent. However, if you do judge on intent then I think the call was correct as he was trying to knock it backwards. If that makes me stupid, whatever.
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@hydro11 said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@Bones said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
Not a deliberate knock on? WTF is the clown smoking?
It's not a deliberate knock on. How many penalties are we gonna have if we start penalising people for accidental knock ons?
It is deliberate because it didn't go backwards and he didn't catch it. That removes any "judgement".
Under that ruling, every knock on is deliberate.
You might want to learn the laws. A player in possession can knock on ffs.
Right but if a player in possession loses it they didn't catch it and the ball didn't go backwards. So if those are the only two criteria, every knock on is deliberate. If you include possession as a third criteria you still have every knock on not in possession as a penalty (which seems stupid). Good passing shouldn't give the opposition a chance. Going for intercepts is an important defensive tool and part of the balance of rugby (IMO).
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@Bones said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
Not a deliberate knock on? WTF is the clown smoking?
It's not a deliberate knock on. How many penalties are we gonna have if we start penalising people for accidental knock ons?
It is deliberate because it didn't go backwards and he didn't catch it. That removes any "judgement".
Under that ruling, every knock on is deliberate.
@Machpants said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@hydro11 said in Blues vs Crusaders:
I'm okay with the outcome. Seems like a strange reasoning. Intent doesn't normally matter.
Intent does matter with "deliberate" knock on, Without assessing intent, how can you call deliberate or not?
It's generally refereed if a player has a genuine chance to catch the ball. So it isn't generally about intent.
@antipodean said in Blues vs Crusaders:
@hydro11 said in Blues vs Crusaders:
I'm okay with the outcome. Seems like a strange reasoning. Intent doesn't normally matter.
How can you be ok with the outcome?
I don't really think deliberate knock ons should be penalties (generally). I would say it should have to be a slap down for a penalty - that isn't how it tends to be refereed though.
I'm okay with the outcome. Seems like a strange reasoning. Intent doesn't normally matter.