PRO12 has new Managing Director and he isn't Irish :D :yahoo:

First topic message reminder :

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Or maybe, just maybe everyone decided to pitch their hat into the ring and see what happened

Are all teams eligible?

Well considering they were all asked to tender for it that would mean they were

Marty, because the criteria has never been made public, none of us will never know.

Sure if we had facts then we wouldn't have these conspiracy theories. Where would be the fun in that?

Munchkin wrote: Pay the ref.

O'fixed

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:SS, I didn't see the Williams one but Ill take your word on that as Williams is a liability, there was also one missed from Shingler on Gilroy as he broke up the wing

I'm going to re-watch it tonight as it is on s4c (22:00) and maybe I will see things that I missed form the stands both ways.  And who knows I may decide that 12:12 on pens and 3:0 on cards was a fair call (but don't count on it).

I think where the penalties were conceded determined the refs actions, most of Ulsters were between half way and their own 22 compared to Scarlets in the red zone. The ref had already warned and carded Scarlets before giving them another warning leading to the 3rd card

The full game is already on youtube, which by the way is something the league need to crack down on in regards to tv revenue etc

Got a link save me having to go to bed late tonight

Funny enough I just posted this on a different thread (which re-reading it will probably be used to retaliate at my 12 pen issues)

"Not commenting on this game in particular, but a penalty count in favour or against a team does not show a bias, it is whether or not pens were awarded where they should be or not. For example a if I were a bias ref I would be willing to ping the side I am favouring in the opposition half, however I would turn a blind eye to infringements on their own try line, or and likewise I would possibly allow the odd offside by the opposition side when they are in defence around the halfway line, and then ref them extra harsh in their own 22m."

Munchkin wrote:The Williams no arms smash that had the Scarlets fans screeching 'cheat cheat cheat'? It was slightly late, by a nano second, but it wasn't a no arms smash, and it didn't deserve any penalty.

It was literally in front of me, it was definitely late as Parkes did not have the ball, and it was definitely no arms. And not in the chop tackle sense, but in the shoulder to the chest sense. It did have the crowd up in arms, and it had the Ulster lad near us sucking his teeth, and saying 'oh no'. Maybe it looked more innocent on the TV (it didn't on the big screen though), but it was unarguably a pen, and in 90% of games it would be a card.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:The Williams no arms smash that had the Scarlets fans screeching 'cheat cheat cheat'? It was slightly late, by a nano second, but it wasn't a no arms smash, and it didn't deserve any penalty.

It was literally in front of me, it was definitely late as Parkes did not have the ball, and it was definitely no arms.  And not in the chop tackle sense, but in the shoulder to the chest sense.  It did have the crowd up in arms, and it had the Ulster lad near us sucking his teeth, and saying 'oh no'.  Maybe it looked more innocent on the TV (it didn't on the big screen though), but it was unarguably a pen, and in 90% of games it would be a card.

Do you know what time it was at? I looked for it but couldn't find it. It wasn't a no arms smash. It wasn't a smash at all.

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:The Williams no arms smash that had the Scarlets fans screeching 'cheat cheat cheat'? It was slightly late, by a nano second, but it wasn't a no arms smash, and it didn't deserve any penalty.

It was literally in front of me, it was definitely late as Parkes did not have the ball, and it was definitely no arms.  And not in the chop tackle sense, but in the shoulder to the chest sense.  It did have the crowd up in arms, and it had the Ulster lad near us sucking his teeth, and saying 'oh no'.  Maybe it looked more innocent on the TV (it didn't on the big screen though), but it was unarguably a pen, and in 90% of games it would be a card.

Do you know what time it was at? I looked for it but couldn't find it. It wasn't a no arms smash. It wasn't a smash at all.

Maybe this is the good old semantics thing again, what is a 'smash'? It was definitely in the second half, and I am thinking it was before the try, but don't quote me on that.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:SS, I didn't see the Williams one but Ill take your word on that as Williams is a liability, there was also one missed from Shingler on Gilroy as he broke up the wing

I'm going to re-watch it tonight as it is on s4c (22:00) and maybe I will see things that I missed form the stands both ways.  And who knows I may decide that 12:12 on pens and 3:0 on cards was a fair call (but don't count on it).

I think where the penalties were conceded determined the refs actions, most of Ulsters were between half way and their own 22 compared to Scarlets in the red zone. The ref had already warned and carded Scarlets before giving them another warning leading to the 3rd card

The full game is already on youtube, which by the way is something the league need to crack down on in regards to tv revenue etc

Got a link save me having to go to bed late tonight  

Funny enough I just posted this on a different thread (which re-reading it will probably be used to retaliate at my 12 pen issues)

"Not commenting on this game in particular, but a penalty count in favour or against a team does not show a bias, it is whether or not pens were awarded where they should be or not. For example a if I were a bias ref I would be willing to ping the side I am favouring in the opposition half, however I would turn a blind eye to infringements on their own try line, or and likewise I would possibly allow the odd offside by the opposition side when they are in defence around the halfway line, and then ref them extra harsh in their own 22m."

Full game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrsMTCEujBU

I don't think the ref had much chance to penalise Ulster inside their own 22 hence the discrepancy in cards

I think the ref missed plenty on Saturday but the result was the correct one

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
LD maybe you'd like to watch the Ulster Ospreys game from last week when the ref kept penalising Ulster and Herbst at the scrum when it looked like on at least two occasions the Ospreys LH was pulling the scrum down. Refs make judgements at all levels and allow them to continue through a game because they don't know whats going on at the scrum

Looked like to whom?

Do you have a time for these scrums as we may be able to get gifs? Thanks.

I keep a load handy just in case you ask

Feel free to scroll through to the scrums and judge for yourself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOQa-476nHw

I can't scroll through the scrums to address your opinion until you answer the two questions I asked of you.

Do you think that you could actually explicitly answer those questions? No trying to turn the question around, or no kind of evasion, just a simple answer to each question would be a starting point.

Go.

The truth is, that the crap referees are turning people away from our league. Also, the issue of potential bias is causing a massive issue in our league.

Munchkin wrote:

PhilBB wrote:https://vine.co/v/eFDj5WqUHev

This isn't a yellow card offence.

In the Scarlets game it was, and the reason it was is because of repeated infringements. The ref had very clearly warned against committing the same offence. Play the ref.

What infringement?

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:
Got a link save me having to go to bed late tonight  

Funny enough I just posted this on a different thread (which re-reading it will probably be used to retaliate at my 12 pen issues)

"Not commenting on this game in particular, but a penalty count in favour or against a team does not show a bias, it is whether or not pens were awarded where they should be or not. For example a if I were a bias ref I would be willing to ping the side I am favouring in the opposition half, however I would turn a blind eye to infringements on their own try line, or and likewise I would possibly allow the odd offside by the opposition side when they are in defence around the halfway line, and then ref them extra harsh in their own 22m."

Full game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrsMTCEujBU

I don't think the ref had much chance to penalise Ulster inside their own 22 hence the discrepancy in cards

I think the ref missed plenty on Saturday but the result was the correct one

Like I said if I were a crooked ref I would do that, as that way it is only 3 points lost to my side rather than 7

But thanks for the link I shall watch it when I get home.

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:The Williams no arms smash that had the Scarlets fans screeching 'cheat cheat cheat'? It was slightly late, by a nano second, but it wasn't a no arms smash, and it didn't deserve any penalty.

It was literally in front of me, it was definitely late as Parkes did not have the ball, and it was definitely no arms.  And not in the chop tackle sense, but in the shoulder to the chest sense.  It did have the crowd up in arms, and it had the Ulster lad near us sucking his teeth, and saying 'oh no'.  Maybe it looked more innocent on the TV (it didn't on the big screen though), but it was unarguably a pen, and in 90% of games it would be a card.

Do you know what time it was at? I looked for it but couldn't find it. It wasn't a no arms smash. It wasn't a smash at all.

Is this it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrsMTCEujBU#t=1h11m58s

Why is this now just a three page thread?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:The Williams no arms smash that had the Scarlets fans screeching 'cheat cheat cheat'? It was slightly late, by a nano second, but it wasn't a no arms smash, and it didn't deserve any penalty.

It was literally in front of me, it was definitely late as Parkes did not have the ball, and it was definitely no arms.  And not in the chop tackle sense, but in the shoulder to the chest sense.  It did have the crowd up in arms, and it had the Ulster lad near us sucking his teeth, and saying 'oh no'.  Maybe it looked more innocent on the TV (it didn't on the big screen though), but it was unarguably a pen, and in 90% of games it would be a card.

Do you know what time it was at? I looked for it but couldn't find it. It wasn't a no arms smash. It wasn't a smash at all.

Is this it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrsMTCEujBU#t=1h11m58s

That is the boy.  There was an arm, but lets face it that arm was not there to wrap around the man as per standard tackling procedure

Edit: listening to the audio, it was the Welsh touch judge that said it was fine.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:The Williams no arms smash that had the Scarlets fans screeching 'cheat cheat cheat'? It was slightly late, by a nano second, but it wasn't a no arms smash, and it didn't deserve any penalty.

It was literally in front of me, it was definitely late as Parkes did not have the ball, and it was definitely no arms.  And not in the chop tackle sense, but in the shoulder to the chest sense.  It did have the crowd up in arms, and it had the Ulster lad near us sucking his teeth, and saying 'oh no'.  Maybe it looked more innocent on the TV (it didn't on the big screen though), but it was unarguably a pen, and in 90% of games it would be a card.

Do you know what time it was at? I looked for it but couldn't find it. It wasn't a no arms smash. It wasn't a smash at all.

Is this it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrsMTCEujBU#t=1h11m58s

That is the boy.  There was an arm, but lets face it that arm was not there to wrap around the man as per standard tackling procedure

That's harsh, both arms were wrapped as you can see from the second angle and it was actually one of Williams better tackles

PhilBB wrote:Why is this now just a three page thread?

Looks like it over-ran the 1,000 comment limit so has been split from the original thread.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

That is the boy.  There was an arm, but lets face it that arm was not there to wrap around the man as per standard tackling procedure

What you can see here is the ball moving away from Parkes. It has already bounced off him, and Nick Williams is still to decide whether to make a tackle or not. He then decides to hit the player late. And between the referee and the touch judge they decided that he was committed, and this didn't deserve a look at the replay.

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:The Williams no arms smash that had the Scarlets fans screeching 'cheat cheat cheat'? It was slightly late, by a nano second, but it wasn't a no arms smash, and it didn't deserve any penalty.

It was literally in front of me, it was definitely late as Parkes did not have the ball, and it was definitely no arms.  And not in the chop tackle sense, but in the shoulder to the chest sense.  It did have the crowd up in arms, and it had the Ulster lad near us sucking his teeth, and saying 'oh no'.  Maybe it looked more innocent on the TV (it didn't on the big screen though), but it was unarguably a pen, and in 90% of games it would be a card.

Do you know what time it was at? I looked for it but couldn't find it. It wasn't a no arms smash. It wasn't a smash at all.

Is this it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrsMTCEujBU#t=1h11m58s

That is the boy.  There was an arm, but lets face it that arm was not there to wrap around the man as per standard tackling procedure

That's harsh, both arms were wrapped as you can see from the second angle and it was actually one of Williams better tackles

Still not convinced.

(please note I did edit that last post, as the Welsh touch judge said it was acceptable, not the ref).

PhilBB wrote:Why is this now just a three page thread?

Evidence remO'ved.

The tackle was absolutely fine. He had both arms around the player. It was a nanosecond late, but he was already committed.

Well done, Nick Williams

Chunky Norwich wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

That is the boy.  There was an arm, but lets face it that arm was not there to wrap around the man as per standard tackling procedure

What you can see here is the ball moving away from Parkes. It has already bounced off him, and Nick Williams is still to decide whether to make a tackle or not. He then decides to hit the player late. And between the referee and the touch judge they decided that he was committed, and this didn't deserve a look at the replay.

That nanosecond between the ball bouncing off and the tackle really means it was late

Maybe you want to to the 64th minute and see a Scarlets player attempt to trip Scholes or the 77th minute when Shingler hits Gilroy in the back with no arms?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:The Williams no arms smash that had the Scarlets fans screeching 'cheat cheat cheat'? It was slightly late, by a nano second, but it wasn't a no arms smash, and it didn't deserve any penalty.

It was literally in front of me, it was definitely late as Parkes did not have the ball, and it was definitely no arms.  And not in the chop tackle sense, but in the shoulder to the chest sense.  It did have the crowd up in arms, and it had the Ulster lad near us sucking his teeth, and saying 'oh no'.  Maybe it looked more innocent on the TV (it didn't on the big screen though), but it was unarguably a pen, and in 90% of games it would be a card.

Do you know what time it was at? I looked for it but couldn't find it. It wasn't a no arms smash. It wasn't a smash at all.

Is this it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrsMTCEujBU#t=1h11m58s

Thanks, Chunky. Much appreciated.

marty2086 wrote:
Maybe you want to to the 64th minute and see a Scarlets player attempt to trip Scholes

Doesn't even make contact. He's losing his baance and turns round in mid air. Nowhere near a trip.

or the 77th minute when Shingler hits Gilroy in the back with no arms?

What are those things wrapped around him?

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

That is the boy.  There was an arm, but lets face it that arm was not there to wrap around the man as per standard tackling procedure

What you can see here is the ball moving away from Parkes. It has already bounced off him, and Nick Williams is still to decide whether to make a tackle or not. He then decides to hit the player late. And between the referee and the touch judge they decided that he was committed, and this didn't deserve a look at the replay.

That nanosecond between the ball bouncing off and the tackle really means it was late

Maybe you want to to the 64th minute and see a Scarlets player attempt to trip Scholes or the 77th minute when Shingler hits Gilroy in the back with no arms?

You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler? Yeah that is comparable.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
LD maybe you'd like to watch the Ulster Ospreys game from last week when the ref kept penalising Ulster and Herbst at the scrum when it looked like on at least two occasions the Ospreys LH was pulling the scrum down. Refs make judgements at all levels and allow them to continue through a game because they don't know whats going on at the scrum

Looked like to whom?

Do you have a time for these scrums as we may be able to get gifs? Thanks.

I keep a load handy just in case you ask

Feel free to scroll through to the scrums and judge for yourself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOQa-476nHw

I can't scroll through the scrums to address your opinion until you answer the two questions I asked of you.

Do you think that you could actually explicitly answer those questions? No trying to turn the question around, or no kind of evasion, just a simple answer to each question would be a starting point.

Go.

Marty?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Maybe you want to to the 64th minute and see a Scarlets player attempt to trip Scholes

Doesn't even make contact. He's losing his baance and turns round in mid air. Nowhere near a trip.

or the 77th minute when Shingler hits Gilroy in the back with no arms?

What are those things wrapped around him?

Funny he kicked him in the thigh that's hardly no contact,

And theres no arms wrapped in that pic, one is under his own chest and the other is hanging down

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

That is the boy.  There was an arm, but lets face it that arm was not there to wrap around the man as per standard tackling procedure

What you can see here is the ball moving away from Parkes. It has already bounced off him, and Nick Williams is still to decide whether to make a tackle or not. He then decides to hit the player late. And between the referee and the touch judge they decided that he was committed, and this didn't deserve a look at the replay.

That nanosecond between the ball bouncing off and the tackle really means it was late

Maybe you want to to the 64th minute and see a Scarlets player attempt to trip Scholes or the 77th minute when Shingler hits Gilroy in the back with no arms?

You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler?  Yeah that is comparable.

So Shingler was just standing there minding his own business?

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler?  Yeah that is comparable.

So Shingler was just standing there minding his own business?

What I mean is that it is not illegal to allow someone to run into you. You are not in any way required to move out of their way.

Gilroy jumps and twists in the air as well. Short of Shingler teleporting himself elsewhere, there's not a great deal he could have done.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler?  Yeah that is comparable.

So Shingler was just standing there minding his own business?

What I mean is that it is not illegal to allow someone to run into you.  You are not in any way required to move out of their way.

Shingler attempted a tackle though, I think it would have been harsh because Gilroy tried to spin past him and Shingler couldn't readjust but could have easily gone against him

I was pointing it out because of some peoples obsession with the idea that Ulster get all the decisions

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler?  Yeah that is comparable.

So Shingler was just standing there minding his own business?

What I mean is that it is not illegal to allow someone to run into you.  You are not in any way required to move out of their way.

Shingler attempted a tackle though, I think it would have been harsh because Gilroy tried to spin past him and Shingler couldn't readjust but could have easily gone against him

I was pointing it out because of some peoples obsession with the idea that Ulster get all the decisions

Yes Shingler attempted a tackle almost a full body away from where Gilroy was when he ran into him. It is very different from the Williams issue (which as we said was a Welsh touch judge).

Anyhow the fact still remains, and it will always remain regardless of all of our Youtube analysis, that the ref awarded 12 penalties to both sides, and was not consistent with his cards.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler?  Yeah that is comparable.

So Shingler was just standing there minding his own business?

What I mean is that it is not illegal to allow someone to run into you.  You are not in any way required to move out of their way.

Shingler attempted a tackle though, I think it would have been harsh because Gilroy tried to spin past him and Shingler couldn't readjust but could have easily gone against him

I was pointing it out because of some peoples obsession with the idea that Ulster get all the decisions

Yes Shingler attempted a tackle almost a full body away from where Gilroy was when he ran into him.  It is very different from the Williams issue (which as we said was a Welsh touch judge).

Anyhow the fact still remains, and it will always remain regardless of all of our Youtube analysis, that the ref awarded 12 penalties to both sides, and was not consistent with his cards.

When you rewatch the game I think you'll change your mind on the consistency of the cards

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler?  Yeah that is comparable.

So Shingler was just standing there minding his own business?

What I mean is that it is not illegal to allow someone to run into you.  You are not in any way required to move out of their way.

Shingler attempted a tackle though, I think it would have been harsh because Gilroy tried to spin past him and Shingler couldn't readjust but could have easily gone against him

I was pointing it out because of some peoples obsession with the idea that Ulster get all the decisions

Yes Shingler attempted a tackle almost a full body away from where Gilroy was when he ran into him.  It is very different from the Williams issue (which as we said was a Welsh touch judge).

Anyhow the fact still remains, and it will always remain regardless of all of our Youtube analysis, that the ref awarded 12 penalties to both sides, and was not consistent with his cards.

The Williams issue isn't an issue. There was nothing wrong with his tackle. The only issue with Williams on the day, is the personal issue some Scarlets supporters have with him. That personal issue is distorting their view of what actually happened. The Welsh TJ was spot on, as the video analysis conclusively proves.

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler?  Yeah that is comparable.

So Shingler was just standing there minding his own business?

What I mean is that it is not illegal to allow someone to run into you.  You are not in any way required to move out of their way.

Shingler attempted a tackle though, I think it would have been harsh because Gilroy tried to spin past him and Shingler couldn't readjust but could have easily gone against him

I was pointing it out because of some peoples obsession with the idea that Ulster get all the decisions

Yes Shingler attempted a tackle almost a full body away from where Gilroy was when he ran into him.  It is very different from the Williams issue (which as we said was a Welsh touch judge).

Anyhow the fact still remains, and it will always remain regardless of all of our Youtube analysis, that the ref awarded 12 penalties to both sides, and was not consistent with his cards.

The Williams issue isn't an issue. There was nothing wrong with his tackle. The only issue with Williams on the day, is the personal issue some Scarlets supporters have with him. That personal issue is distorting their view of what actually happened. The Welsh TJ was spot on, as the video analysis conclusively proves.

To be honest if I saw Jake Ball do the same my heart would sink as I know it would have been a card. That's the truth.

I guess that I'll never get Marty to man up to his view on those scrums.

Oh well, I should have known better.

PhilBB wrote:I guess that I'll never get Marty to man up to his view on those scrums.

Oh well, I should have known better.

Sorry Im not rising to your childish goading Chunky..sorry I mean Phil

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:You mean when Gilroy ran into Shingler?  Yeah that is comparable.

So Shingler was just standing there minding his own business?

What I mean is that it is not illegal to allow someone to run into you.  You are not in any way required to move out of their way.

Shingler attempted a tackle though, I think it would have been harsh because Gilroy tried to spin past him and Shingler couldn't readjust but could have easily gone against him

I was pointing it out because of some peoples obsession with the idea that Ulster get all the decisions

Yes Shingler attempted a tackle almost a full body away from where Gilroy was when he ran into him.  It is very different from the Williams issue (which as we said was a Welsh touch judge).

Anyhow the fact still remains, and it will always remain regardless of all of our Youtube analysis, that the ref awarded 12 penalties to both sides, and was not consistent with his cards.

The Williams issue isn't an issue. There was nothing wrong with his tackle. The only issue with Williams on the day, is the personal issue some Scarlets supporters have with him. That personal issue is distorting their view of what actually happened. The Welsh TJ was spot on, as the video analysis conclusively proves.

To be honest if I saw Jake Ball do the same my heart would sink as I know it would have been a card.  That's the truth.

I can believe that you believe that, but I don't believe that Ball would get a card. Why on earth would he? There was absolutely nothing wrong with Williams tackle. Some Scarlets supporters have the knives out for him. A bit like another Williams experienced (Liam), although not so much these days, as he has matured and put those cheap shot days behind him.

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:I guess that I'll never get Marty to man up to his view on those scrums.

Oh well, I should have known better.

Sorry Im not rising to your childish goading Chunky..sorry I mean Phil

Asking you to note which scrums you think were not properly officiated is hardly childish goading. What it is actually is asking you to justify your opinion.

If you have one, that is.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:I guess that I'll never get Marty to man up to his view on those scrums.

Oh well, I should have known better.

Sorry Im not rising to your childish goading Chunky..sorry I mean Phil

Asking you to note which scrums you think were not properly officiated is hardly childish goading. What it is actually is asking you to justify your opinion.

If you have one, that is.

I'm sorry asking me to man up is what? A mature and reasoned argument?

Unlike some I don't keep detailed notes on all games, I just recall a number of scrums the LH pulling the scrum down and Herbst being penalised and being perplexed at the decision he actually had to be pulled away from the Ospreys player at half time he was that annoyed at what was going on

You will find one scrum where Herbst had his legs outstretched behind him

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:To be honest if I saw Jake Ball do the same my heart would sink as I know it would have been a card.  That's the truth.

I can believe that you believe that, but I don't believe that Ball would get a card. Why on earth would he? There was absolutely nothing wrong with Williams tackle. Some Scarlets supporters have the knives out for him. A bit like another Williams experienced (Liam), although not so much these days, as he has matured and put those cheap shot days behind him.

Yippee, I knew it wouldn't be too long before his name got brought up.

I see that as a late tackle no matter who it was who put it in, and to be honest I see it as a bit of a cheap shot no matter who it was who put it in. That said I can not say that I would not have done the same thing myself, as it must be hard to resist a chance to put a hit like that in.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:To be honest if I saw Jake Ball do the same my heart would sink as I know it would have been a card.  That's the truth.

I can believe that you believe that, but I don't believe that Ball would get a card. Why on earth would he? There was absolutely nothing wrong with Williams tackle. Some Scarlets supporters have the knives out for him. A bit like another Williams experienced (Liam), although not so much these days, as he has matured and put those cheap shot days behind him.

Yippee, I knew it wouldn't be too long before his name got brought up.

I see that as a late tackle no matter who it was who put it in, and to be honest I see it as a bit of a cheap shot no matter who it was who put it in.  That said I can not say that I would not have done the same thing myself, as it must be hard to resist a chance to put a hit like that in.

In Nicks defence I think he was more focused on the players feet being on the ground than the ball which is an improvement for him, the thing happened so fast

LordDowlais wrote:The truth is, that the crap referees are turning people away from our league. Also, the issue of potential bias is causing a massive issue in our league.

LD please point me in the direction of said truth (as asked for many times before but as yet not forthcoming). Where is the evidence that "the crap referees are turning people away"?

BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias. Either something is biased or it's not, so are you saying the referees are biased - yes or no?

The Great Aukster wrote:
BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias.

Of course there is. That's why Nigel Owens doesn't referee Wales. The element of doubt is removed. This has been pointed out plenty of times.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:
BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias.

Of course there is. That's why Nigel Owens doesn't referee Wales. The element of doubt is removed. This has been pointed out plenty of times.

Really? Then how does Alain Rolland ref France and Steve Walsh the ABs?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:
BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias.

Of course there is. That's why Nigel Owens doesn't referee Wales. The element of doubt is removed. This has been pointed out plenty of times.

So if Owens is biased towards Wales - why is he allowed to referee Welsh teams?

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:
BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias.

Of course there is. That's why Nigel Owens doesn't referee Wales. The element of doubt is removed. This has been pointed out plenty of times.

Really? Then how does Alain Rolland ref France and Steve Walsh the ABs?

You know why. I told you last week.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:
BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias.

Of course there is. That's why Nigel Owens doesn't referee Wales. The element of doubt is removed. This has been pointed out plenty of times.

Who reffed the Leinster game? You only whine when its one of your Regions with either an Irish ref, sideline official or TMO....and you pick the one that suits your recurrent agenda everytime. If it's a Welsh ref you choose to find fault with the Irish guy on the side...that the Welsh ref didn't overrule - when Owens often does. Blame the guy on the side - he's Irish. If the guy on the side and the guy with the whistle isn't Irish...move on to the TMO...He's Irish.

We get it Chunky. You don't like us. We're disgraceful. We'll try to struggle on through your hatred.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:To be honest if I saw Jake Ball do the same my heart would sink as I know it would have been a card.  That's the truth.

I can believe that you believe that, but I don't believe that Ball would get a card. Why on earth would he? There was absolutely nothing wrong with Williams tackle. Some Scarlets supporters have the knives out for him. A bit like another Williams experienced (Liam), although not so much these days, as he has matured and put those cheap shot days behind him.

Yippee, I knew it wouldn't be too long before his name got brought up.

I see that as a late tackle no matter who it was who put it in, and to be honest I see it as a bit of a cheap shot no matter who it was who put it in.  That said I can not say that I would not have done the same thing myself, as it must be hard to resist a chance to put a hit like that in.

I wasn't trying to rub salt into an old wound. I think it was fair enough to make the comparison. I am a fan of Liams, and have defended him on these forums.

Williams tackle wasn't a cheap shop. If I thought it was I would say so, as I have done last season. Whatever way you look at it, it was a fair tackle. Slightly late, but slightly late tackles are not cheap shots. Williams often goes in with the aim of maximum impact. That's exactly what I want him to do, legally. He didn't go in as hard as he could but, barring that, he did what he was supposed to do. Williams was holding back in that game. I think he was being overly careful in avoiding picking up a card. As much as I don't want him to be a penalty machine, I do want him doing what he does best. Crashing through defence with ball in hand, and destroying his opponents in the tackle.

The Great Aukster wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:
BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias.

Of course there is. That's why Nigel Owens doesn't referee Wales. The element of doubt is removed. This has been pointed out plenty of times.

So if Owens is biased towards Wales - why is he allowed to referee Welsh teams?

In a perfect world he wouldn't be. However he doesn't have a day job working in Wales for the WRU as far as I know. Unlike Fitzgibbon in Ireland.

Can you see the difference?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:
BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias.

Of course there is. That's why Nigel Owens doesn't referee Wales. The element of doubt is removed. This has been pointed out plenty of times.

Really? Then how does Alain Rolland ref France and Steve Walsh the ABs?

You know why. I told you last week.

Yes you said because Walsh moved to the ARU but if Owens doesn't ref Wales to remove potential bias but how is there not potential bias then in a man from NZ reffing NZ and a man born in France to a French father reffing France?

You never told me that?

Does bias only exist when it suits your argument? When the unions are paying them?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:
BTW - there is no such thing as 'potential' bias.

Of course there is. That's why Nigel Owens doesn't referee Wales. The element of doubt is removed. This has been pointed out plenty of times.

So if Owens is biased towards Wales - why is he allowed to referee Welsh teams?

In a perfect world he wouldn't be. However he doesn't have a day job working in Wales for the WRU as far as I know. Unlike Fitzgibbon in Ireland.

Can you see the difference?

Is Owens not a full time ref? So his day job would be working for the WRU or are you saying someone else pays him?