The Nigel Owens incident

First topic message reminder :

Just wondered what opinions there are on this matter. For me it was clear Foley obstructed Farrell as the replay proved conclusively. What game was Owens watching? I think he clearly has a problem with Farrell and perhaps England in general. On the whole not a bad referee at all but perhaps allows personal prejudices to impinge his judgement particularly when the old enemy are involved?

Gooseberry wrote:

Presuming Ed wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:England were in their own half and he thought there was foul play. Top quality ref.

No they weren't.

Oh typical arrogant England, think they own both ends of the pitch.

Of course we do.  Now please fetch me my wine, then get back to work and clean the loo.

Presuming Ed wrote:Unless I'm going senile, Foley made contact with Farrell near the Australian 10 meter line if not a bit beyond and the ball even further in to the Australian half. Can anyone else vouch for my sanity?

Yup true, but the game wasn't stopped at that momennt.

No 7&1/2 wrote:England were in their own half and he thought there was foul play. Top quality ref.

If England were in their own half then it would have been a brilliant penalty by Farrell.

Of course it wasn't. I was a fairly routine kick from well inside Australia's half.

Exiledinborders wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:England were in their own half and he thought there was foul play. Top quality ref.

If England were in their own half then it would have been a brilliant penalty by Farrell.

Of course it wasn't. I was a fairly routine kick from well inside Australia's half.

The original point was that Owens flags and the game is stopped with England in an attacking position. The camera doesn't show Owens flag and you can't hear the call but the game was stopped after the Aussie had cleared the ball with a kick. Now England were running it back but still within their own half when the game was stopped for suspected foul play. Its a stretch to say it was an attacking position.

LondonTiger wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah, the 11th commandment, thou shalt not rule against the All Blacks.

Well they are the best team in the world so any decision against them is probably wrong. I am always confused as to how the country that is so devoted to rugby, only country where it is the national sport and continually produces such good players can also continuously produce the worst referees.

With the referees now having to be neutral, New Zealand referees never get to perform at the highest level of the game.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah, the 11th commandment, thou shalt not rule against the All Blacks.

Well they are the best team in the world so any decision against them is probably wrong. I am always confused as to how the country that is so devoted to rugby, only country where it is the national sport and continually produces such good players can also continuously produce the worst referees.

With the referees now having to be neutral,  New Zealand referees never get to perform at the highest level of the game.

Steve Walsh had the chance when he had issues NZ didn't want to help with.

How is Steve these days? What business did he get involved with? That was all the talk back then, leaving rugby for a business venture.

I think the less we hear about Steve Walsh, the better. Seriously, I think he was (is?) pretty messed up. Anything which puts him even slightly in the limelight is probably bad for him. Whatever his personal demons, I am sure they are best dealt with in private. Business venture may be true, but is probably an excuse to make an exit from the scene without going into personal stuff. I think that is OK.

Didn't hear too much about the personal stuff. So what I felt was a light subject becomes perhaps a darker tale so we'll leave it there then.

So, have we concluded there is no 'Nigel Owens Incident'? Rather simply an Assistant Referee doing his job? Seems like it to me.

Yep I think Nigel was just doing what he was meant to do. Glad Joubert reacted properly though - my heart sank for a minute when Nige flagged..

doctor_grey wrote:I think the less we hear about Steve Walsh, the better.  Seriously, I think he was (is?) pretty messed up.  Anything which puts him even slightly in the limelight is probably bad for him.  Whatever his personal demons, I am sure they are best dealt with in private.  Business venture may be true, but is probably an excuse to make an exit from the scene without going into personal stuff.  I think that is OK.  

I thought we agreed that his business was a small hair salon in Slough?

No? Just me then.

I thought Joubert handled it very well. He had a very good game.

Nige always wants to be in the limelight but I think it's just enthusiasm and a bit of an ego rather than anything sinister

Re. Walsh I think it's a bit odd that NZ didn't really support him very well when he had his problems whereas they fully back their players over drinking issues and criminal matters.

I think they didn't support him because they knew he was an embarrassing Cnut... And they didn't want him.

Australians have no problem with one-eyed egomaniacs so they signed him up.

Owens is a very good ref, if as has been said, one who is a little lenient at the breakdown. He's especially popular with the all blacks down the years due to his mccaw myopia.

Bit harsh lads??

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Bar Wayne Barnes. Think he's neck and neck at the mo laurie. Liked the look of the young Kiwi guy in the SA game.

yes but Barnes missed a forward pass about nine years ago, so that rules him out...

He made up for that by "finding" one two Saturdays ago.

But only after missing an earlier one