MichaelRobartes

45 minutes ago, phantom said:

How does a South African team get to enter a European competition?

Almost as confusing as Australia being in the Eurovision song contest :laugh:

Because they're part of the United Rugby Championship with the Irish, Italian, Scottish and Welsh sides. It's been fantastic for the league and a few new rivalries like Stormers and Munster have already grown. I think it'll have the same effect on Europe (if the competition lasts that long) and is worth persevering with.

Bad result for Bristol. I think the Bulls have a great chance to win the URC this season, but obviously the South Africans are weaker away from home and were down a few of their best players.

Have to beat Connacht now, who've had a tough group stage themselves but aren't playing too badly in the URC at all. Joyce has been a brilliant signing for them.

It's because Kelleher is back.

Clubs in the bag, if you like.

2 hours ago, clunes said:

What’s Jurgen Klinnsmann up to these days??

That's all we need. We already don't get penalties. Imagine our forwards Klinsmann diving all over the box.

Edit: @chowie beat me to it 

Found Jon's burner account:

Ah lads, no need. 

12 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

I thought they did alright tbh. The cards being upgraded or not is out of their control.

Barnes isn't my cup of tea as a ref but he got the big decisions spot on today. Delighted for Jean and RG but the Boks did their best to screw that up.

Compelling game. NZ pushed SA off scheme like they did to us. Boks did their best to throw that away but made up for Jean Kleyn and RG Snyman. 

Jean now has the distinction of being the only capped Irish player to win a world cup.

2 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

10 minutes into Scotland v SA back on Sept 10th! Didn't even go to the bunker...

That was a shocker. I think the reds in the first round of pool games spooked World Rugby and suddenly the head contact protocols weren't that important after all. It is frustrating.

Just now, Super said:

The problem is there have been incidents just as bad which weren't a red. No consistency. It's a joke.

A lot of reds have been bottled I agree. That was 100% red though. High, direct contact to head, no mitigation. Piss poor from Cane.

Just now, RedorDead BCFC said:

Wasn’t that deliberate by Ezebeth 

Yellow card for me. Cynical.

Another cheap shot. Glad to see the TMO not bottling it just because it's the final.

That's a ******* dog shot. No less than I'd expect from Frizzell.

Bongi gone. Filth from Frizzell.

Boks 27-21 

Looked forward to me alright. I'm sure the old law was that the TMO couldn't go back more than three phases when reviewing a try so that might explain it.

Did they get cocky and greedy, thinking they'd a great team and didn't need regular 50-over matches and could mess about with their stupid new format that nobody else plays instead?

21 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

Wayne Barnes to ref the final.

No idea who Luke Pearce has upset. The best ref around at the moment in my opinion and didn't even get a KO game. 

33 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Thanks for that. I wonder what the punishment would have been, if the Ref had heard ?

I think if a ref hears discriminatory language and they're in absolutely no doubt of what was said, it should be a red card and then any ban would be for a citing committee to determine. I know Marler eventually got two weeks for abusing Samson Lee but I can't think of any other examples where someone was banned off the top of my head.

The problem is probably that a lot of things are said, you sometimes hear the c-word over the ref mic and the ref would have to be absolutely sure of what the player said and possibly also how it was meant. That's tough when they have a million other things to look out for and unless something is said right next to them, they don't have much chance.

40 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Very significant, as he is their only specialist hooker in the squad.

What i find interesting, is when Curry asked the referee what "to do" after the alleged insult, the reply was "nothing". Are there no protocols in place for onfield racism? Not that long ago Joe Marler called a Welsh player a gypsy, or something similar. He was retro-spectively banned, so im surprised there are no rules for in play punishment

If the alleged comment was made and one of the officials had heard it, I'm positive that action would have been taken on the pitch. If the officials don't hear it, they can't do much other than include the complaint in their match report. The law on this (9.12) is pretty wide ranging:

A player must not physically or verbally abuse anyone. Physical abuse includes, but is not limited to, biting, punching, contact with the eye or eye area, striking with any part of the arm, shoulder, head or knee(s), stamping, trampling, tripping or kicking.

To be fair to O'Keefe, I'm certain he meant that Curry shouldn't do anything about it at the time (as in retaliate). As Curry reported it to the ref, it would have been included in his match report which can set a review in motion, as it has done in this case (taken from The Guardian) :

Curry can clearly be heard on a recording via O’Keeffe’s microphone making the allegation of a racist slur to the official in the 28th minute of the match. He said: “Sir, sir, if their hooker calls me a white *** what do I do?” The New Zealander responded by saying: “Nothing please.” He goes on to add, after a short pause: “I’ll be on it,” though it is unclear if he is referring to the specific incident.

If Bongi made that comment and it's been picked up somewhere, he's in deep shit.

9 hours ago, Ziderarmy said:

Anyone else feel Sinkler cost us sadly? 

Think that's a bit harsh. Ox has dominated better tightheads than him. Look at what he did to Furlong in the pool match.

I want SA to win the final. They have two Munster players and I could use that to annoy my Leinster mates.