News:

Author Topic: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ  (Read 6668 times)

0 Members and 15 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #135 on: »
Possibly that's how it's supposed to work. But it's not exactly something you see often is it. The ref called it held up. He didn't say 'anyone got a grounding?'
Erm... yes - every week.
Sure, the touch judge might suggest he has a look, but I've never seen him overrule and change the question. The onfield decision was always likely to stand, given the speed at which it all happened and the mechanics involved.
I don't recall the AR over-ruling the ref. My memory is that the ref asked his assistant, and received an answer.
I am happy to suggest that the touch judge didn't have a grounding, at all, as the slow mo camera didn't pick it up.
None of the cameras had the same angle as the AR. Different angles show different things.


TBH, your clarification sounds even more like "a try was scored against Quins and I don't like it" than the original post did.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #136 on: »
says "no conspiracy implied".
Immediately implies a conspiracy.

And to answer your question at the end: "No"
Happy now? Or do you still think there should be a fine for Quins, for... allowing a player to listen to the official?


The scenario I described was not a conspiracy. What I described was cheating. You clearly don't understand what conspiracy means.

However, sweeping any cheating by Quins under the carpet and blaming it on an error by the official instead would be a conspiracy.
Dumb Dumb x 6 View List

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #137 on: »
Possibly that's how it's supposed to work. But it's not exactly something you see often is it. The ref called it held up. He didn't say 'anyone got a grounding?'

Sure, the touch judge might suggest he has a look, but I've never seen him overrule and change the question. The onfield decision was always likely to stand, given the speed at which it all happened and the mechanics involved.

I am happy to suggest that the touch judge didn't have a grounding, at all, as the slow mo camera didn't pick it up.


The Lynagh try came directly from an offside penalty against Bath that was in fact a Harlequins knock-on.

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #138 on: »
Erm... yes - every week.I don't recall the AR over-ruling the ref. My memory is that the ref asked his assistant, and received an answer.None of the cameras had the same angle as the AR. Different angles show different things.


TBH, your clarification sounds even more like "a try was scored against Quins and I don't like it" than the original post did.

OK mate. I mean it's pretty clear from my posting that isn't what I'm saying, but you go for it.

'every week'...

By the way, the live camera angle was exactly behind the touch judge. For some reason they didn't use that one for the replays. Makes you think.

Oh and your recollection is completely wrong.

But apart from that, thanks for your rather weird forensic analysis of my post.
Disagree Disagree x 1 Funny Funny x 1 Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #139 on: »

The Lynagh try came directly from an offside penalty against Bath that was in fact a Harlequins knock-on.

So what?

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #140 on: »
So what?


TJ missed it. TMO ignored it.

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #141 on: »
Oh no we’ve got two of them now. Both squirming in their team’s defeat this weekend.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #142 on: »
article
X (formerly Twitter) · twitter.com



This is looking worse the more detail that comes out.

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #143 on: »
Load of hearsay in that Tweet but it’s still very clearly an issue with the team of officials however you take it. They’ll probably face some kind of retraining and be taken off duty for a week or 2. Well not Carley, he’s like Teflon.

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #144 on: »

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #145 on: »
The officials really messed up in the game yesterday. In many ways. Doesn’t change the result.
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #146 on: »
Or rather than idiotic speculation, from the Telegraph

“Telegraph Sport understands the controversy stemmed from a time-keeping error by fourth official Charlie Gayther and that there was no pressure from Harlequins to have Herbst return sooner than permitted. At the time of the lock’s reintroduction, the hosts had also just had wing Louis Lynagh sent to the sin bin.”

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #147 on: »
Yes. What on earth was going on with that team of officials? They didn't let the ref make a decision all game. Ref call ls it held up, touch judge says he had a grounding. So infield decision is try. Absolutely no way that is awarded if the ref is allowed to referee.

It's a common occurance for the ref to check with an assistant on a grounding, and it makes sense as well.
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #148 on: »
It seemed a lot more like supervision than consultation yesterday. In the first half Carley was playing a much bigger role than your typical touch judge.
Agree Agree x 4 View List

Re: TEAM v Bath Saturday 30th March.....#COYQ
« Reply #149 on: »
You are very silly.

An understatement IMO. I admire your diplomacy.