Australia 35, Scotland 34

We were robbed!

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
We were robbed!

maybe not. But credit to the Scotland team.

Stepped up to the mark and gave a performance that I did not think they were capable of. Confounded the bookies who had then losing by (at least) 15pts

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
We were robbed!

how can we not win our own line-out? seriously, for goodness sake, we know the code and the play? We robbed ourselves, awesome game, was there to be won.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
how can we not win our own line-out? seriously, for goodness sake, we know the code and the play? We robbed ourselves, awesome game, was there to be won.

The last penalty was not offside. Great game though, proud to be Scottish today (as if i need a reason)

From the BBC

"What happened next will be the source of bitterness and rancour until the end of time. Craig Joubert is now, to Scots, the rugby equivalent of Butcher Cumberland.
It wasn't just the fact that he got his call hopelessly, and head-wreckingly, wrong in giving Australia the match-winning penalty. It should have been a scrum, not a chance for Bernard Foley to drive a dagger into the heart of the Scots.
It wasn't just the fact, either, that before the fateful line-out that led to the fateful penalty Joubert had missed a late tackle on Stuart Hogg and then, inexplicably, declined to go and check it on the big screen. Why would he not check it? It's the dying seconds of a World Cup quarter-final. You check it.
Joubert was a catastrophe for many reasons. A sin-binning for Sean Maitland early in the second half was another ludicrously harsh call. Australia would have had their own gripes, no question. They, too, had plenty of cause for protest, but winners don't protest. Winners advance and say nothing.
The South African's piece-de-resistance came right at the end, though. Not the Hogg incident or the penalty that should have been a scrum, but his sprinting from the field on the full-time whistle, like a scalded cat, without having the respect to stand and shake hands with two monstrously brave sets of players and, yes, take the heat of the crowd into the bargain.
Joubert ran away. On a day that contained so many heroic performances, his last act was to turn on his heels and disappear."

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
From the BBC

"What happened next will be the source of bitterness and rancour until the end of time. Craig Joubert is now, to Scots, the rugby equivalent of Butcher Cumberland.
It wasn't just the fact that he got his call hopelessly, and head-wreckingly, wrong in giving Australia the match-winning penalty. It should have been a scrum, not a ch ...[text shortened]... hat contained so many heroic performances, his last act was to turn on his heels and disappear."

As a fan. I thought that the final penalty was given because the bouncing ball hit a Scottish hand (or other body part!), bounced forward , then was grabbed instinctively by another Scottish player.

It is very very harsh, but by the rules he was 'in front', so it was a penalty.

I totally agree that the sin binning was a ridiculous call. Again, instinct means that your winger will try to grab the ball and go for an interception try. It was not a deliberate knock on.

I think the Aussies got a couple of rough calls at scrum time though, although I will concede they don't balance the sin binning!

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
It wasn't just the fact that he got his call hopelessly, and head-wreckingly, wrong in giving Australia the match-winning penalty.

Joubert had missed a late tackle on Stuart Hogg and then, inexplicably, declined to go and check it on the big screen.

A sin-binning for Sean Maitland early in the second half was another ludicrously harsh call.

Christ. Just know, I hate the wallabies and was cheering for the Scots all the way. Seeing Australians cry on any sports field gives me goosebumps.
Now I wish I didn't, because I have never seen sour grapes like this turn so bitter in a show of unsportsmanlike behaviour.

Late tackle? Referees miss things ALL the time. That is why he has 2 assistants and the TMO to help spot foul play. No-one did. Can't remember seeing that so I can't comment.

The call of the penalty was fair. Every single international ref would have made the same decision. He IS NOT ALLOWED TO REFER that call to the TMO. Looking at it in super slow-mo makes it easy now in hindsight to see the touch from an Aussie hand a millisecond after the knock on from Strauss.
The point is the ref IS NOT ALLOWED TO REFER that call to the TMO.

The sin binning was fair. It was instinctive, but negative play, with the possibility of a try, so is a sin bin. He never had a chance to intercept, as he was on the back foot. The TMO agreed, so why is Joubert the devil incarnate now?

The BBC has now lost all credibility for sports reporting. Did they actually have any to begin with?

Originally posted by Crowley

The call of the penalty was fair. ......... Looking at it in super slow-mo makes it easy now in hindsight to see the touch from an Aussie hand a millisecond after the knock on from Strauss.


The sin binning was fair. ......... He never had a chance to intercept, as he was on the back foot

The BBC has now lost all credibility for sports reporting. Did they actually have any to begin with?[/b]

I would disagree with (at least) 2 of your points.

In #1, by your own admission, it wasn't 'fair'. It was a mistake. I will allow an understandable one, but a mistake none the less

In #2, I fail to see how a player 'on the back foot' (which I wouldn't say the player was anyway), cannot make an interception, accelerate forwards, and run clear

Originally posted by st dominics preview
In #1, by your own admission, it wasn't 'fair'. It was a mistake. I will allow an understandable one, but a mistake none the less

In #2, I fail to see how a player 'on the back foot' (which I wouldn't say the player was anyway), cannot make an interception, accelerate forwards, and run clear

In real time, the call looks fair. He does not have the luxury of referring everything to the TMO, neither that one.
Hence why I also said "every international ref would have made the exact same call there".

Let me clarify: He was not moving into a position to make the intercept = back foot = sin bin.

Originally posted by Crowley
In real time, the call looks fair. He does not have the luxury of referring everything to the TMO, neither that one.
Hence why I also said "every international ref would have made the exact same call there".

Let me clarify: He was not moving into a position to make the intercept = back foot = sin bin.

we will have to agree to disagree on #2. The Scottish lad didn't slap the ball down, he tried to grab it with one hand.

A harsh (but probably correct) penalty. A very harsh yellow.

Originally posted by st dominics preview
we will have to agree to disagree on #2. The Scottish lad didn't slap the ball down, he tried to grab it with one hand.

A harsh (but probably correct) penalty. A very harsh yellow.

You can't have your cake and eat it, boet.

If you agree it is a penalty, then you concede foul play.
Foul play in that instance, where the foul play is hindering the pass that would lead to a probable try, is a professional foul, hence automatic yellow.

Originally posted by Crowley
You can't have your cake and eat it, boet.

If you agree it is a penalty, then you concede foul play.
Foul play in that instance, where the foul play is hindering the pass that would lead to a probable try, is a professional foul, hence automatic yellow.

the ref can

he just has to say it wasn't a 'try saving' foul. Certainly not a 100% try scoring opportunity. it was quite a way out, there was cover coming across, if I remember?

if ALL penalties that hindered 'probable' trys were penalised with yellow cards, it would be 9 vs 10!

is EVERY collapsed rolling maul near the line penalised by a yellow card? penalty, yes. yellow card every time, no.

anyways. I see the Boks have just named the same XV that faced Wales, bringing big Victor onto the bench.

should be the first of 2 great semis

Originally posted by st dominics preview
the ref can

he just has to say it wasn't a 'try saving' foul. Certainly not a 100% try scoring opportunity. it was quite a way out, there was cover coming across, if I remember?

if ALL penalties that hindered 'probable' trys were penalised with yellow cards, it would be 9 vs 10!

is EVERY collapsed rolling maul near the line penalised by ...[text shortened]... V that faced Wales, bringing big Victor onto the bench.

should be the first of 2 great semis

That's actually quite a pet peeve of my own, about rugby refereeing.

We really need to get to a point where professional fouls are hit HARD with yellow cards. I feel offenders need to be penalised, no matter where on the pitch it happens. Very quickly this will be out of the game. Let the game turn into a sevens match for all I care, but let's get it out. The players will adapt.

Victor Matfield, ja... Was a great player, needs to be coaching lineouts, not running on in a WC semi.

Originally posted by Crowley
That's actually quite a pet peeve of my own, about rugby refereeing.

We really need to get to a point where professional fouls are hit HARD with yellow cards. I feel offenders need to be penalised, no matter where on the pitch it happens. Very quickly this will be out of the game. Let the game turn into a sevens match for all I care, but let's get it out ...[text shortened]... Matfield, ja... Was a great player, needs to be coaching lineouts, not running on in a WC semi.

I agree with that to a point. I still think the Scottish winger didnt slap the ball down as a deliberate knock on. Anyways , we can leave that....agree to disagree....

I think Victor is older than Brad Thorn was 4 years ago? Making him possibly the oldest to compete this far in a WC? Have to look that one up.

What are your predictions?

I go Blacks by 17 (sorry!)

Aus by 2 (typical Aussies, will squeak home!)

Originally posted by st dominics preview
[bI think Victor is older than Brad Thorn was 4 years ago? Making him possibly the oldest to compete this far in a WC? Have to look that one up.

What are your predictions?

I go Blacks by 17 (sorry!)

Aus by 2 (typical Aussies, will squeak home!)[/b]

I'm pretty sure there have been guys from the 'fringe' nations that have been older, not sure. The sides with more amateur players will definitely have had older guys competing.

I think the Wallabies got a wake-up call last week. Oz to win by 12.
I hope the boks can tighten up the game, then we have a chance. Boks by 4.