@booboo said in Springboks v Italy II:

But because they deliberately infringed 9.7(a) should apply.

That was exactly my thoughts, same deal as intentional knock on. Except quite a bit worse as it's so deliberate and obviously cooked up by the coach with the whole team involved.

Gives Rassie something to cry about when they do it next time and get penalised.

@Bones said in Springboks v Italy II:

Gives Rassie something to cry about when they do it next time and get penalised.

Exactly that thought occurred.

As I mentioned above, rulings and interpretations are constantly being reviewed and clarified.

I fully expected the appropriate branches of the WR bureaucracy to clarify the fuck out of that one.

@Snowy I assume they were.absolutely dealing to thier scrum, otherwise I can't see why.

Maybe Rassie thinks it is a.dumb rule and thought let's highlight it so WR change it now we used it....

@taniwharugby said in Springboks v Italy II:

@Snowy I assume they were.absolutely dealing to thier scrum, otherwise I can't see why.

Maybe Rassie thinks it is a.dumb rule and thought let's highlight it so WR change it now we used it....

No doubt they believed their own press, but they clearly don’t watch enough rugby to know that even a dominant scrum is no guarantee of possession.

@taniwharugby said in Springboks v Italy II:

@Snowy I assume they were.absolutely dealing to thier scrum, otherwise I can't see why.

Maybe Rassie thinks it is a.dumb rule and thought let's highlight it so WR change it now we used it....

It was the match kick off! Didn't see the game last week, so assumed they must have been absolutely annihilating the Italian scrum in that game.

It was pretty funny when you looked back at how pumped the players and Comms were, only to go nowhere and concede a FK.

The way they were carrying on you would've thought the Italian scrum was going to turn to dust.

Rassie coaching staff include an international ref. Paul Roos u19B coach surely would ticked all the boxes before trying it.

@OomPB surely.

@OomPB said in Springboks v Italy II:

Rassie coaching staff include an international ref. Paul Roos u19B coach surely would ticked all the boxes before trying it.

I know the South African translation of the WR Law consists solely and entirely of "Whatever Rassie says". But if you can find the clause in the law book that nullifies Law 9 FOUL PLAY, UNFAIR PLAY 7. A player must not a. Intentionally infringe any law of the game I'd be appreciative.

BTW have no issue with the "lineout" move. Just seems a little unnecessary to me.

@booboo said in Springboks v Italy II:

BTW have no issue with the "lineout" move. Just seems a little unnecessary to me.

Yeah I was just talking shit on that one, no issue, bloody good for a laugh though.

Rassie just showing the world how "innovative" he is. A GENIUS I am told.

I am not sure why the All Blacks are bothering planning to pick a team for the games against the Springboks in September. Rassie is such a bold and innovative GENIUS that he is certain to win.

What a very clever Rassie that Rassie man is!

@booboo said in Springboks v Italy II:

BTW have no issue with the "lineout" move. Just seems a little unnecessary to me.

I think the element of surprise was the biggest facror here. Plus it adds to the legend of Rassie the innovator even though it sounds like it was done by a school team

@booboo You cant blame us. We suffered for a very long time under coaches. The fact that Rassie and his coaches are prepared to scan u19C schools games for new ideas are remarkable. Luckily in South Africa all our main schools sport are covered by Super Schools, from u14A-u19H teams.

Imagine the collective meltdown amongst New Zealanders if Rassie decided to take a B-side over during the Rugby Championship. Ultimate fuckery, striking while the iron is hot.

@Mr-Fish said in Springboks v Italy II:

Imagine the collective meltdown amongst New Zealanders if Rassie decided to take a B-side over during the Rugby Championship. Ultimate fuckery, striking while the iron is hot.

It’s only New Zealand….

Looks like both moves are soon to be outlawed after discussion with URC head of referees:

@PN said in Springboks v Italy II:

Looks like both moves are soon to be outlawed after discussion with URC head of referees:

View embedded content

The stupid thing was, the South African player was well off side when they kicked-off and forced a scrum. It should have been a penalty on halfway for Italy.

@Canes4life said in Springboks v Italy II:

@PN said in Springboks v Italy II:

Looks like both moves are soon to be outlawed after discussion with URC head of referees:

View embedded content

The stupid thing was, the South African player was well off side when they kicked-off and forced a scrum. It should have been a penalty on halfway for Italy.

Yeah that's pretty much what all the referees have said on review. The thing is though, the kicker will just kick the ball out on the full to get the same result, and that will be much harder to police whether intentional or not. Even then, with a perceived scrum advantage, is it that big of a deal? Just give the team the option of starting the game with an opponent scrum feed on the 50, or standard kickoff. (Variation in our game is good, I reckon)

The lifting pod in general play had more of a chance of becoming mainstream if untouched with how effective it is.

Will be interesting if we see either move again before the wording is amended.

It was pretty arrogant to make it so obvious. As you say they could have just kicked it out on the full

@canefan said in Springboks v Italy II:

It was pretty arrogant to make it so obvious. As you say they could have just kicked it out on the full

What's the law if it goes out on the full?

@canefan said in Springboks v Italy II:

It was pretty arrogant to make it so obvious. As you say they could have just kicked it out on the full

I guess they didn't want it to be perceived as an error as I'm not sure anyone would have known it was intentional otherwise. Wouldn't be surprised if they do just that this weekend to prove a point.

Rassie may just be using this as a platform for calling out intentional skew scrumfeeds as being on par with 'against the spirit of the game' (which is why the fk -> pk) for undermining the contest at scrumtime.

@Toddy said in Springboks v Italy II:

@canefan said in Springboks v Italy II:

It was pretty arrogant to make it so obvious. As you say they could have just kicked it out on the full

What's the law if it goes out on the full?

Free kick or scrum? Did the Italians have the FK option to them in this instance?

@PN said in Springboks v Italy II:

Looks like both moves are soon to be outlawed after discussion with URC head of referees:

View embedded content

What a load of absolute fucking garbage.

The kick off shit is not "about to be outlawed": it already was.

Fucking typical play acting South Africans playing with language to feel "victimised".

They cheated (and knew it, but got away with it because the ref fucked up because is scared of the "innovation") and they're being call out on it.

Reminds me of some other headlines I see about sport recently where definitions are redefined to suit the narrative.

Fuck all the way off.

@PN said in Springboks v Italy II:

@Canes4life said in Springboks v Italy II:

@PN said in Springboks v Italy II:

Looks like both moves are soon to be outlawed after discussion with URC head of referees:

View embedded content

The stupid thing was, the South African player was well off side when they kicked-off and forced a scrum. It should have been a penalty on halfway for Italy.

Yeah that's pretty much what all the referees have said on review. The thing is though, the kicker will just kick the ball out on the full to get the same result, and that will be much harder to police whether intentional or not. Even then, with a perceived scrum advantage, is it that big of a deal? Just give the team the option of starting the game with an opponent scrum feed on the 50, or standard kickoff. (Variation in our game is good, I reckon)

The lifting pod in general play had more of a chance of becoming mainstream if untouched with how effective it is.

Will be interesting if we see either move again before the wording is amended.

Harder to execute so it looks "accidental".

Wording is not required to be amended. Deliberate offending is already covered.

@canefan said in Springboks v Italy II:

@Toddy said in Springboks v Italy II:

@canefan said in Springboks v Italy II:

It was pretty arrogant to make it so obvious. As you say they could have just kicked it out on the full

What's the law if it goes out on the full?

Free kick or scrum? Did the Italians have the FK option to them in this instance?

@PN said in Springboks v Italy II:

@canefan said in Springboks v Italy II:

It was pretty arrogant to make it so obvious. As you say they could have just kicked it out on the full

I guess they didn't want it to be perceived as an error as I'm not sure anyone would have known it was intentional otherwise. Wouldn't be surprised if they do just that this weekend to prove a point.

Rassie may just be using this as a platform for calling out intentional skew scrumfeeds as being on par with 'against the spirit of the game' (which is why the fk -> pk) for undermining the contest at scrumtime.

Yeah. OK. Yay Rassie. Hero of our time.

I am deliberately going to ignore debating the legality or "spirit" of each of the 2 new tricks the Boks put on show in this game.

What I am pleased about, is that a team that was derided for playing boring, structured (read: kick, chase, defend) rugby in 2019 has now reached a point where they try out all sorts of (granted sometimes a bit daft) stuff.
Fun to watch, but yes, not the be-all and end-all of what will win test matches.

@Billy-Webb i hear ya mate, and it's drawn the unhinged out of some of the older ferners...

Long may it continue.

@booboo said in Springboks v Italy II:

@PN said in Springboks v Italy II:

Looks like both moves are soon to be outlawed after discussion with URC head of referees:

View embedded content

What a load of absolute fucking garbage.

The kick off shit is not "about to be outlawed": it already was.

Fucking typical play acting South Africans playing with language to feel "victimised".

They cheated (and knew it, but got away with it because the ref fucked up because is scared of the "innovation") and they're being call out on it.

Reminds me of some other headlines I see about sport recently where definitions are redefined to suit the narrative.

Fuck all the way off.

There's a level of unhinged justification for obviously stupid shit.

Literally no requirement to bring to the attention of WR that something already sufficiently addressed within the laws needs further amendment.

To pretend after the fact that they're doing it as an act of guardianship of the game is ludicrous.

@antipodean we took over the guardianship from the All Blacks.

@PN said in Springboks v Italy II:

@Billy-Webb i hear ya mate, and it's drawn the unhinged out of some of the older ferners...

Long may it continue.

Calling out the unquestioning deification of Rassie is unhinged? Righto.

The collective online circle jerk here has been off the charts. Both of these "innovations" should have been called out by the ref at the time.

Even the ridiculous no lineout lineout fails a bunch of existing laws around pre-binding and the like.

Test match rugby is heading exactly the same way as test match cricket.

@Billy-Webb said in Springboks v Italy II:

I am deliberately going to ignore debating the legality or "spirit" of each of the 2 new tricks the Boks put on show in this game.

Good point. We're not on an internet rugby forum to discuss important sort of stuff affecting rugby.