RugbyFirst

[smartcooky]

You can change you vote at any time until approx 12:45 GMT on November 7

[smartcooky]

Wales will be fired up for this., but they are missing key players, Lee Byrne, Adam Jones and Mike Philips, and other key players are playing out of position (e.g. James Hook at fullback.

I also hear that Martyn Williams was a doubtful starter but he's OK now??

New Zealand by 10



Also, Sale Sharks have refused to release Dwayne Peel as a replacement for Phillips... bastards!!
If I was in Warren Gatland's position, I would stand Peel down for the rest of the International season. make a point, and a stand. Tell him that he is either available for the whole season, or his season is over before it starts. Put the onus on Peel to pressure his club into releasing him, or finding another club that will.

[JovialJim]

Also, Sale Sharks have refused to release Dwayne Peel as a replacement for Phillips... bastards!!

If I was in Warren Gatland's position, I would stand Peel down for the rest of the International season. make a point, and a stand. Tell him that he is either available for the whole season, or his season is over before it starts. Put the onus on Peel to pressure his club into releasing him, or finding another club that will.

I dont see it that way at all. Remember it was only back in August when the Welsh clubs were talking about taking the WRU to court due to forced to release players for this test which falls outside of the agreed IRB window, and so doesnt come under the usual release laws by all accounts. That dispute has been resolved, but whatever financial deal the WRU has made does not cover the English clubs and so Sale have every right to expect their player to turn up for club duty.
Now you can hark on back to the old SH argument of central contracts etc but the fact is we have a different system in the NH and seeing as our clubs have put in the graft in the early years of professionalism, then i dont see why they cant expect to be treated fairly with regards their players release. The RFU/PRL & WRU/RRW have been through hell to sort our agreements and get where they are, but unless those agreements cross borders then this situation will always arise. And lets face it, the Welsh knew a year in advance it would happen:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_u ... 745575.stm

The RFU have a similar situation with the French based players and they all got a warning well in advance of their moves to France.

I agree with your assessment that this is down to the player. Peel wants to play for Wales:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_u ... 323511.stm

but he should of thought of that before he came to England as Gatland gave the Welsh players warning of where his selection policy would be.

[kiwilinzi]

Here are both teams

Guildford gets his chance . Couple of changes in the forwards with kaino stepping in for Thompson and Eaton getting a start . Read to start at no 8 ..

Look to be pretty much pre planed changes .. Beats me how Eaton has earned his spot He has hardly played any rugby over the last 3 months even to judge form by ..

I think you are right about Rodney S C ,, He has been punted altogether .. I think he might get the Captains Band against Italy .. He is nowhere near the same player he was and on the way down the ladder I think ..

I have gone for an All Black win . Not by much .. maybe 10 or 12 ..

New Zealand: 15 Mils Muliaina, 14 Cory Jane, 13 Conrad Smith, 12 Ma'a Nonu, 11 Zac Guildford, 10 Dan Carter, 9 Brendan Leonard, 8 Kieran Read, 7 Richie McCaw (capt), 6 Jerome Kaino, 5 Jason Eaton, 4 Brad Thorn, 3 Neemia Tialata, 2 Andrew Hore, 1 Wyatt Crockett.
Replacements: 16 Corey Flynn, 17 Owen Franks, 18 Tom Donnelly, 19 Adam Thomson, 20 Jimmy Cowan, 21 Stephen Donald, 22 Ben Smith.

Wales: James Hook; Leigh Halfpenny, Tom Shanklin, Jamie Roberts, Shane Williams; Stephen Jones, Gareth Cooper; Gethin Jenkins, Matthew Rees, Paul James, Alun Wyn Jones, Luke Charteris, Andy Powell, Martyn Williams, Ryan Jones (capt)

Replacements: Huw Bennett, Duncan Jones, Bradley Davies, Dafydd Jones, Martin Roberts, Jonathan Davies, Tom James

Date: Saturday, November 7
Kick-off: 17:15 GMT
Venue: Millennium Stadium
Referee: Craig Joubert (South Africa)
Assistant referees: Mark Lawrence (South Africa), Stuart Terheege (England)
Television match officials: Graham Hughes (England)
Assessor: Bob Francis (New Zealand) vs Steve Hilditch (Ireland)

[exeter]

Tell him that he is either available for the whole season, or his season is over before it starts

He is available for the whole season. Wales chose to play this match outside the agreed international calendar, so they can't complain when players are unavailable.

If a money-spinning test against New Zealand was so important to them, they could have compensated Sale adequately for Peel's services.

[smartcooky]

Tell him that he is either available for the whole season, or his season is over before it starts

He is available for the whole season. Wales chose to play this match outside the agreed international calendar, so they can't complain when players are unavailable.

If a money-spinning test against New Zealand was so important to them, they could have compensated Sale adequately for Peel's services.

They tried, Sale refused.

The least important Test Match is more important than the most important domestic/club match.

Playing Test Rugby is the the highest calling in rugby; Playing Club Rugby is just a job.

[Valleyboy]

I can't see Wales winning but you never know.
I am a bit fed up of the media (nothing unusual there) here in Wales. They keep on banging on about the fact that this is the best chance Wales have of beating the All Blacks. I wish they would shut up. How many times have he Welsh press said that? Lots and it annoys the hell out of me because it never happens.

Peel knew what the circumstances were when he left the Scarlets. I think he'll be back after his contract with Sale runs out. It's a shame but there are plenty of promising youngsters waiting in the wings.

[smartcooky]

halftime 6-6

Wales are really fronting up bigtime, but their forwards are looking more tured than the All Blacks

And what's the story with the playing surface. What a mess?

[Bcubed]

Good D from Wales.

Close but not quite there.

AB's will need to step it up a gear for the remaining games.

[smartcooky]

A test match for the ages. A genuine, uncompromising, arm-wrestle.

Wales fought bravely, and came oh so close to snatching a draw at the end.

IMO the best Wales v All Blacks game since the the AB's 26-25 victory in 2004.

Oh. and just in passing, the alleged high-tackle by Dan Carter... bollocks. First contact was with the ball

Welsh crowd....

[Bcubed]

Cookie.....

Its DC......

he can do no wrong.........

Agree with the analysis on the tackle (but then I'm a Kiwi & tend to feel we are all a bit precious these days with the high tackle thing anyways).

Good game though.

[smartcooky]

Cookie.....

Its DC......

he can do no wrong.........

Agree with the analysis on the tackle (but then I'm a Kiwi & tend to feel we are all a bit precious these days with the high tackle thing anyways).

Good game though.

Its ain't tiddlywinks BCubed.

No matter who the player was, if those sorts of tackles start getting called high, then you'll have a dozen or more per game, and players in the bin all over the place. Rugby is a game for players not poofters.

[Bcubed]

Cookie.....

Its DC......

he can do no wrong.........

Agree with the analysis on the tackle (but then I'm a Kiwi & tend to feel we are all a bit precious these days with the high tackle thing anyways).

Good game though.

Its ain't tiddlywinks BCubed.

No matter who the player was, if those sorts of tackles start getting called high, then you'll have a dozen or more per game, and players in the bin all over the place. Rugby is a game for players not poofters.

Hmmmmm who came up with that one again......?????

Thought the Welsh played well and tackled well .........just thought it was a shame that often they arrived before the ball.

Not trying to take anything away from their Defence (just observed it a couple of times is all)

[smartcooky]

Hmmmmm who came up with that one again......?????

Our mate Tana of course (the Devil incarnate if you ask any of the NH scribes)

Thought the Welsh played well and tackled well .........just thought it was a shame that often they arrived before the ball.

Not trying to take anything away from their Defence (just observed it a couple of times is all)

I agree. I thought there were several early tackles not penalised, particularly one on Conrad Smith when he was in the clear, but I thought we got away with going off our feet a few times at the ruck.

Things have a way of balancing themselves up BCubed.

The idiots booing in the Welsh crowd weren't so quick to boo James Hook after he kicked Brendon Leonard in the head, and act which caused Leonard to have to leave the field. That as a far more serious offence IMO and dangerous play - Law 10.4 (c)

I recall Colin Meads being sent off for doing EXACTLY the same thing in 1967 against Scotland at Murrayfield.

[kiwilinzi]

Excellent match ..

Good hard test match . Both sides were playing rugby and looking to create opportunities ..

Defence from both sides great and not a lot between the sides really . Neither side really dominated to the extent they were going to run away with things .

The All Blacks created more on attack , but Wales held them out with superb defence .

Smith and Niunu were superb on Defence against the Welsh midfield

The Tackle count will be interesting on both sides . This was a hard slog defensively from both sides .

The All Blacks have played a lot of hard matches together against the Yarpies and the Wallabies recently and the Welsh have had little tough test rugby together as a unit going into this , so when you look at that aspect Wales look to be in pretty good shape .

I don't think either side will come up against any better defensive effort and structure than what we saw here in this match so for both sides fine tuning their attacking game will be the areas to work on ..

Carter to me looked to be caught in two minds re the tackle .. hold back slightly and go for the man and tackle or take the chance of going for the ball etc ..

I will have another look later

[kiwilinzi]

S C

At this level and intensity , there is such a fine line between getting things right or not quite right re everything .. Timing , eagerness from all the players the minute they sopt any opportunity to snaffle the ball and gain possession or effect a turnover .. The pace of the game , the timing of the pass and the eagerness on defence are all such that split second decision and even slight hesitation is such that the Ref's and players are all having to contend with split second actions ..

The Ref's might well have been given the message here to maybe look to keep the matches flowing in these 50 / 50 areas where the margin of right and wrong is so close rather than pull up every little suspect contest ..

Provided there is consistency is the key ..

[Valleyboy]

Ref: High tackle by DC. It was. DC even said so himself and apologised to the Martyn Roberts for it. It was not malicious I admit but there should have been a penalty atleast. I was more pissed with the ref/officials for not picking it up. The crowd were wrong to keep on booing I admit but the officials should have seen it. Anyway it didn't make a difference to the outcome.

Wales ran out of steam in the second half. The first up tackles were getting missed and the ABs capitalised on that. I am disappointed to be honest. Especially after the first half performance. The ABs were too strong for us in the end.

[Bcubed]

Wales ran out of steam in the second half. The first up tackles were getting missed and the ABs capitalised on that. I am disappointed to be honest. Especially after the first half performance. The ABs were too strong for us in the end.

To be fair I thought that they ran well towards the end. OK it was an intercept that made the match look close near the death but you have to be in the hunt to get those and I thought that they tackled the AB's to a standstill and denied us at least two tries in the process.

Respect for that.

[smartcooky]

Ref: High tackle by DC. It was. DC even said so himself and apologised to the Martyn Roberts for it. It was not malicious I admit but there should have been a penalty atleast. I was more pissed with the ref/officials for not picking it up. The crowd were wrong to keep on booing I admit but the officials should have seen it. Anyway it didn't make a difference to the outcome.

Wales ran out of steam in the second half. The first up tackles were getting missed and the ABs capitalised on that. I am disappointed to be honest. Especially after the first half performance. The ABs were too strong for us in the end.

So VB, what did you think of James Hook's kick to the head of Brendon Leonard? Did you think that it merited a penalty?

[ncadario]

It was a good match, nothing special, but good. Either team could have won and the last minutes were very exciting. The Welsh had a good defense and I saw very well defense and attack of the Kiwis. Carter implacable in his penalty kicks, but imprecise in two or three tactics kicks. Also, he commited three infractions, and not is his habit. (Principally a high and dangerous tackle not sanctioned). Wales needs solve the theme of the full back.

A little question: What thing is the sort of red-purple flower showed by the ABs in the right sleeve of their jerseys?

[exeter]

Kicking Brendon Leonard in the head did the All Blacks a favour. He's rubbish.

The All Blacks were in third gear in the first half, and kicked nearly everything. Kicked everything very well, thanks to Carter.

Second half, they decided to keep the ball in hand, went up a gear, Wales soon tired, and they crossed the whitewash four times.

Wales's last ditch defence was brave, but they couldn't cope with New Zealand at the breakdown, especially McCaw.

As long as New Zealand keep Carter and McCaw fit, they can compete with anybody, even if they fielded 13 chimps alongside them.

[Valleyboy]

I'm sure James Hook intended to kick the man in the head SC. To me it looked like Hook went to flyhack the ball down field but your guys head appeared at the same time. Both players were trying to play the ball IMO. Unfortunate but not a penalty. That happens all the time in Rugby as you know.

[Bcubed]

A little question: What thing is the sort of red-purple flower showed by the ABs in the right sleeve of their jerseys?

Nestor it is a poppy.

They grow wide over the fields where much of the fighting during the two World Wars took place.

Because of this it has become the symbol of the rembererance of those killed.

The match was played on Remberance day which marks the end of WW1, so it was deemed appropriate to add the Poppy as a gesture to honor those that paid the ultimate sacrifice that we might be free to sit about and watch sports.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/sp ... Welsh-test

Does that about cover it for you?

[kiwilinzi]

Hook was careless V B Should have been a penalty ..

Carter by all rights should have been a penalty on reflection after I had a few looks again at it , Initially I thought not but that's the way things went ;; lets call it square ..

V B .. Wales return kicks were not as accurate and no one really chased to put any pressure on the A B back three .. When the A B's put the kicks up we had three and often four flying through to put your back three in all sorts of bother . That did result in errors and turning over possession ..

The Welsh close quarter defence was superb . Twice the All Blacks were held up over the line and had a try dis - allowed .. It was excellent "D'

However that efforts in the end resulted as you say in running out of puff . That told in the end as you rightly say ; falling off tackles and lack of concentration .

Leonard is more a running half .. A sniper . He needed game time . That's why he started . Normally he is brought on in the last 20 to snipe and exploit gaps around the fringes when the big forwards get a bit tired and don't get totally focused ..

Leonard is lightening off the mark and quick on his feet . You are actually lucky the Selectors started him and not the other way around . Had Cowan started and Leonard had been pitched in like normal in the last 20 you possibly would have just been watching him take full toll of exactly what you pointed out . Snipe right away like the wind from that tired and slipping off tackles .. and find one of the loose forwards on the inside with the line open ..

[kiwilinzi]

Carter will in all probability be cited anyway , and I guess they will give him a week off as a result .
That is the way it goes .. Not going to make a huge difference as he would not have been going to play against italy . As they plans go he would have been picked to be rested for that match along with the likes of Thorn and Mils , Hore and possibly McCaw

Ironic though things have a habit of coming back to bite . Gatland was pounding away in the media stating that Carter would not front against Wales .. No way is he fit mused Gatland hyping up the Welsh chances .. And what happens .. Carter fronts , Becomes the Brunt of all the fuss and angst re this tackle and the Welsh fury , Plays well and drives the All Black momentum , and to top it all off He gets named Man of the Match ..

Somewhere in this there is a message ..

[ohtani's jacket]

Argh! I came home drunk from a wedding and slept through my alarm.

Can somebody tell me how Kaino went and whether the lineouts were okay.

[Paul]

I missed the game unfortunately. No coverage of it whatsoever. I am looking at some highlights clips online right now. Wales are getting a lot of credit for being able to compete with the All Blacks as if to say they are a much better team than in previous years. I cannot help to question this logic tough. I feel that Wales are the same as they were a year ago but the All Blacks are not. New Zealand look like they are behind the level of 2008. Loses to France and South Africa this year certainly suggest New Zealand have not improved. Sergio Parisse has been vocal in saying the test vs South Africa not New Zealand will be the hardest.

In terms of Carter. That was a yellow card. I've seen players in the Top 14 get red cards for the same thing. As said by Kiwilinzi he could well get a one or two week suspension. Regardless of whether he does or does not he will not play 10 vs Italy in Milan next week. That would mean 4 games in a row at 10 as he will start the following two weeks vs England and vs France and so needs a break.

Yellow card?

[ncadario]

A little question: What thing is the sort of red-purple flower showed by the ABs in the right sleeve of their jerseys?

Nestor it is a poppy.

They grow wide over the fields where much of the fighting during the two World Wars took place.

Because of this it has become the symbol of the rembererance of those killed.

The match was played on Remberance day which marks the end of WW1, so it was deemed appropriate to add the Poppy as a gesture to honor those that paid the ultimate sacrifice that we might be free to sit about and watch sports.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/sp ... Welsh-test

Does that about cover it for you?

Thank very much Bcubed. As i began to see the match after the "previous concerns", I didn't know what is these symbol. Also, I didn't knew for whom was the homage made by a military band. I was surprised of see soldiers of some origins (the little flags in their sleeves), but I didn't remembered the date of end of the WW I, not the WW II, where the German rendition in 1945 was in June of these years, and I don't understand the English of the sports relators, I was totally "in a brain cloud of ....".

About the dangerous tackle of Carter, I think that was not intentional, but I think that includes in these situation, must be sanctioned. Perpahps SC haves the answer. I think that Dan Carter is a truly gentleman

Than you and have a good Sunday.

[Bcubed]

Its ain't tiddlywinks BCubed.

No matter who the player was, if those sorts of tackles start getting called high, then you'll have a dozen or more per game, and players in the bin all over the place. Rugby is a game for players not poofters.

Er........ it appears that it is Cookie.

I see Carter has a date with the Judicary now.

Seems a tackle that slips up is worth a look .......whereas kicking someone in the head does not?????????????????

In my opinion, I thought at the time it was OK. On replay I can see that it slipped up and given the PC (not DC) world we live in I would have been OK with a penalty. But now this citing has me wondering if we need to get our armbands ready.

Looking at this sitation one wonders what the outcome will be. Anything longer than a week would be a joke given the bans handed out to Wookcock and Sitivantu. However as Linzi and nestoir have pointed out he was unlikely to play this Saturday anyway so giving him a week off would be a joke anyway and have no effect whasoever.

Its a scary world we live in these days folks.

[smartcooky]

BCubed & VB

James Hook's kick to the head of Brendon Leonard was serious enough to concuss him and have him go off. Accidental or not, it was reckless and dangerous play and should have been a PK and possibly a citing.

10.4 DANGEROUS PLAY AND MISCONDUCT
(c) Kicking. A player must not kick an opponent.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

Just as an unintended high tackle is still an offence, so is an unintended kick to the head. Its contact with the head and therefore under dangerous play protocols, is at the most serious end of the scale. A player at Hook's level should know better than to have a hack at a ball anywhere near a prone player's head. He has dodged a bullet through the TJ's incompetence.

[smartcooky]

Nestor

As BCubed correctly points out, the poppy, or more precisely the corn poppy, is a remembrance symbol.

In Europe, Remembrance Day is November 11, but in New Zealand and Australia, it is April 25th, ANZAC Day, where we commemorate a particular battle at Gallipoli peninsula in Turkey from 25 April 1915 to 9 January 1916, during the First World War, where a lot of Kiwi and Aussie soldiers died.

The corn poppy was one of the only plants that grew in the fields after battle. It thrived in the disturbed soil caused by the massive shelling that took place. During the few weeks that the plant was in flower, the fields were coloured blood red, not just from the poppy flowers but also from the actual blood of the dead soldiers strewn all over the battlegrounds.

[ncadario]

SC: Interesting and exactly explanation.

I didn't think in the Gallipoli Battle. I was thinking in fields in France, Belgium or Netherlands where are poppy flowers (of which is produced the opium), and were the scenes of bloody battles in 1st and 2nd WW.

Yours explanation contains a truly suggestive aspect that is, also, a some poetical and tragic remembrance. It inspired to me:

In Spanish: "Donde los soldados fueron muertos
flores rojas crecieron
como recuerdo de su sangre
derramada por el Reino y su gente

Amapolas, amapolas, no dejen nunca
de crecer "

(Métrica y rima libre).

(In English): Where the soldiers were killed
red flowers rise
in memory of his blood
shed by the Nation and its people

Poppies, poppies, not ever stop
to grow "
(Free meter and rhyme)

It appears at the work of a man totally ignorant in poetry, as I'm.

Appears also as a melancholic Tango, but is my homage to the Aussies, Kiwis and surely, others British and French that died or were wounded in these battle.

As a former Navy man, I know the horror of the War, yet I didn't had active participation in any.

Thank very much.

Rugby first is, also, a good mean of increase the general culture of anyone.

In the Americas Section I posted about the Uruguayan Rugby, and a few words about the friendship and similarities between they and us, similar to Aussies and Kiwis, in more aspects that one can imagine.

Have you a good Monday (the worse day of the Week). We are still, and for 7,30 hours ahead, in Sunday, for me the most melancholic day of the week. I prefer the Saturday.

Cheers.

[nimrod]

Nestor

Without wishing to run down the contribution from Australia and New Zealand the Turks suffered the biggest losses.

Total Allied deaths were around 21,000 British, 10,000 French, 8,700 Australians, 2,700 New Zealanders and 1,370 Indians. Total Turkish deaths were around 86,700 - nearly twice as many as all the Allies combined. New Zealanders suffered the highest percentage of Allied deaths when compared with population size, but the percentage of Turkish deaths was almost twice theirs.

I hope that gives some perspective for you.

[ncadario]

Thanks Nimrod...I knew lightly these numbers of dead, but I was believing that French soldiers were participating also, in the Battle.

By it: I wrote: "and surely, others British and French that...."

My knowledge about the WW i is lower than the WW II. I was, fifteen years ago and for professional reasons,(1) studying in detail much concerns of the WW II, and the Gulf War of 1991.

Thanks again and I apologize If I didn't the real importance of the "Other British" in Gallipoli.

At margin, be a member of Rugby First, give me much knowledge about the U.K. and the former Colonies. You and others members are as an "Encyclopedia".

Cheers.

(1) I was a naval officer of the legal body of the Argentine Navy. In my course for Special and Logistics Staff Officer in the Naval War School, I had much study of the WW II, and the Gulf War of 1991, but not deep the WW I. In these times I was a Lt. Cmdr.

[smartcooky]

....the percentage of Turkish deaths was almost twice theirs.

That may be, but you'll have a hard time finding a sympathetic ear among old-timers as regards the casualties suffered by the Ottoman Empire, and it isn't what wer commemorate.

They were the enemy, although those who most ANZACs hold responsible for the the extensive Australasian casualties were not the Turks, but the British Commanders General Sir Ian Hamilton, and Field Marshal Herbert Kitchener, who used colonial soldiers as cannon fodder to spare his own troops, in much the same way that General Sir Douglas Haig (known among ANZACs as the "Butcher of the Somme") did later in 1916.

However, having been at ANZAC Cove in 1990 for the 75th anniversary, I can tell you that our group contained two Turkish people, a brother and sister, who were there for their grandfather. They were made most welcome to be with us.

[Bcubed]

BCubed & VB

James Hook's kick to the head of Brendon Leonard was serious enough to concuss him and have him go off. Accidental or not, it was reckless and dangerous play and should have been a PK and possibly a citing.

10.4 DANGEROUS PLAY AND MISCONDUCT
(c) Kicking. A player must not kick an opponent.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

Just as an unintended high tackle is still an offence, so is an unintended kick to the head. Its contact with the head and therefore under dangerous play protocols, is at the most serious end of the scale. A player at Hook's level should know better than to have a hack at a ball anywhere near a prone player's head. He has dodged a bullet through the TJ's incompetence.

Cookie, The real person to be looking at here is the Citing Commisioner. I can accept such an event being missed in General Play because it is damn hard to catch every thing, but enough replays of Hooks kick were shown for the Commisioner to become aware of the incident and ask to see it again.

It appears he did not and had it been the same with the Carter tackle I would have no issue.

However now the issue appears to be one where the media are driving the IRB judiciary. They have climbed all over the carter incident and totally ignored the more dangerous Hook one.

I will await with interest the outcome of the hearing, and as I outlined above it will be interesting to say the least to see where this all leads. Anything more than a week for DC would require armbands at the very least given the suspensions handed down after the Tokyo game. I can not see how this tackle (high though it was) is in any way worse than the incident involving Sivivatu (or Hook if your going to head down that road).

But given that he was unlikely to play against Italy a weeks suspension has virtually no effect on him whatsoever.

This being Rugby I would be dissappointed but not particularly surprised if he got off scott free or was suspended for 2-3 weeks.

It all goes to show what a joke the Judiciary are.

[ohtani's jacket]

There was nothing in that tackle. I don't even see why it got cited.

That quote from the Italian captain is amusing. You're going to lose both Tests, who cares which is harder?

[smartcooky]

That quote from the Italian captain is amusing. You're going to lose both Tests, who cares which is harder?

Do you have a link to that?

[ncadario]

I PERMIT MYSELF REPEAT SOME THAT I SAID many times: I believe that the high tackle of Carter was unintentional. I think that he didn't having intention of cause damage to the Welsh player or commit intentionally any infringement. For me, appears at a normally incident of the game and not deserves any hard punishment, only a lightly advertence.

About the kick of Hook over the head of an opponent player, I was far of the TV in these moment, preparing some coffee. By it, I cannot give opinion.

[Valleyboy]

Bcubed

The real person to be looking at here is the Citing Commisioner. I can accept such an event being missed in General Play because it is damn hard to catch every thing, but enough replays of Hooks kick were shown for the Commisioner to become aware of the incident and ask to see it again.

This is exactly what I have been thinking. If Hooks attempted flyhack was deemed an offence then he would have been cited by the commissioner. Plain and simple. It was replayed enough not to be missed. The citing commissioner made the Carter call. Uncalled for IMO. A penalty would have been sufficient. Why was Hook not cited? I don't know. Personally I thought both players were trying to play the ball. Hook acted on instinct with no dangerous intent. It did look nasty to be fair. I am sure Cookie will find another law in his law book but where does it say that you cannot kick a loose ball that is in open play and on the floor? It's all about the interpretation of the officials. It does not matter what us forum goers think.

[ncadario]

Excuse me guys:

To whom you refer as Citing Commissioner?. Perhaps I'm wrong about the real interpretation of these words. Don't forget that my English is primitive, and I'm ruled by the Latin-German system of laws, not the "common law" of the anglosaxon countries.

[Bcubed]

Excuse me guys:

To whom you refer as Citing Commissioner?. Perhaps I'm wrong about the real interpretation of these words. Don't forget that my English is primitive, and I'm ruled by the Latin-German system of laws, not the "common law" of the anglosaxon countries.

All Blacks star Dan Carter has been cited for an alleged dangerous tackle on Wales scrum-half Martin Roberts during Saturday's Test match at the Millennium Stadium.

Carter will face a disciplinary hearing in Milan tomorrow, where the New Zealand squad has arrived to prepare for next weekend's clash against Italy.

He is due to appear before International Rugby Board-appointed judicial officer Jeff Blackett, who is also the Rugby Football Union's disciplinary chief.

Carter, who was not yellow-carded for the offence by match referee Craig Joubert, could receive a minimum one-week ban.

Anything more than that would put his participation against England at Twickenham on November 21 in jeopardy.

Carter, capped 64 times, kicked 14 points during the All Blacks' 19-12 victory. He was cited by Australian match commissioner Scott Nowland, who had until tomorrow evening to make a decision.

Seems it was an Australian who made the call.

Not sure what to make of that................. but still the majority of folks agree it was a penalty offence and nothing more.

Hopefully the IRB will see it the same way..........

[ncadario]

Bcubed:

Thanks for your information. Then, the Citing Commissioner is a man of the IRB and not an official under the UK government or local authority of Wales. That I understand. If I'm wrong, please tell me.

As for the alleged infringement of Carter, I saw the game on TV in alive and at that time I did not seem intentional, but now watching three times the video on youtube, maybe there was some lack of care from DC, who had been "launched" to the Welsh player, but I believe that he had no intention of hurting him.

I do not think Australians are pushing this issue for a tough sanction against Carter.

Thanks again.

[Bcubed]

Bcubed:

Thanks for your information. Then, the Citing Commissioner is a man of the IRB and not an official under the UK government or local authority of Wales. That I understand. If I'm wrong, please tell me.

As for the alleged infringement of Carter, I saw the game on TV in alive and at that time I did not seem intentional, but now watching three times the video on youtube, maybe there was some lack of care from DC, who had been "launched" to the Welsh player, but I believe that he had no intention of hurting him.

I do not think Australians are pushing this issue for a tough sanction against Carter.

Thanks again.

Ncadario.

The Citing Commisioner (or official) is the 5th Offical appointed by the IRB at each test. Theres the Referee of course and the 2 touch Judges or Assistant referees (whatever they call them these days). There the TMO to sit and look at replays (and decide on Tries the ref misses) and finally the Citing Official who has the power I believe to have any player he feels has commited foul play brought before the IRB judicary.

You might recall in 2005 that the Citing Commisioner (or Offical) during the 1st Lions test here in NZ was a South African and he left the country after deciding that there was nothing of particular interest in that game that caught his attention.

Lots of other folks thought differently and though a certain Irishman with the initals BOD "could have doid".

Such is the stuff of Rugby legends and yet another story is born.

Obviously this particular Offical thought Dan Carters tackle was worth a look and yet somehow the Kick to the head Leonard received was not.???????

As for my comment regarding our friends in Australia. Please forgive me, that was a comment aimed at Stu as a joke.

As neighbours we love to have these joke with each other all the time and we sometimes forget others have not got the same perspective.