This is a good initiative by World Rugby to explain rules and calls made in a recent game. Especially coming from such a reputable ref like Nigel Owens. More of this kind of videos, please.
Such a great initiative to get a referee’s perspective on the game. So many people and players for that matter are so quick to blame referees without actually understanding the law
@@gavinhay6627nothing gets me going more than an intercept against the run of play and a footrace to the line , the law decentivises(disincentivivess?)players from going for the intercept so if anything makes it more boring to watch . I mean if you knock it on its still an opposition scrum and they get another chance to attack from a set play. So not really sure about this making it better to watch , maybe to people who don't really like or appreciate rugby union
My humble opinion…. It was the greatest weekend of rugby ever. Consecutive matches that would have graced any World Cup final. Breathtaking skill and athleticism. HEAVEN! ❤❤❤❤
I don’t understand rugby laws but Nigel explains stuff so simple and so easy. Unlike premier league football referees.. international rugby union refs are top class. Just saying, I’ve never seen them make an absolute mare of a decision. TMO and onfield are top class and communicate clearly
Look what happened in the Liverpool game - chaos reigned & points were at stake. I recommended that the soccer management look at the Rugby system & copy it. Our refs are precise in what they want looked at, there is no misunderstanding. Our system works.
I'd argue the penalty given (shown in the video) against France for holding on to the ball on the floor was a shocker - the South African player is clearly supporting his body weight with his right arm at 4:23, which as Nigel says, is not allowed. It's a game changer, you could argue France lost because of this call (v late in the game, went from ahead to behind with the penalty).
@frogmanant I don't agree at all. World Rugby is introducing laws and ways to interpret them which are creating a lot of confusion. Instead of re think their laws, they are adding new layers which are creating even more confusion. For sure, I am talking about the ruks. When a player is contesting the ball, as soon as he puts the hands on the ball, then the referee should give a penalty. But some are giving a little more time than others and it changes everything. Allowing the other team to get back the ball and creating many heads contact. This is what happened between France and South Africa. After introducing this law, the side effects was the head contact. Then they added a layer with a red card, then a new layer with a yellow with a review to check if the yellow should become red and it's now a real mess. If you look at the comments under the highlights of every match, you'll see many fans furious after the referees and everybody agreed to say that from the beginning of this world cup, it was a complete mess while the referees are still the same. It shows that many are not understanding the decisions any longer. Plus, referees from North and South hemisphere are not united on how to take decisions which creates even more confusion. The deliberate knock on is another good example depending if the ball is going forward or backward and finally we cannot be sure because of the mouvement of the ball and the player. If you could only grab the ball but not hit it whatever the direction the ball is going, then things would be more clear!
There's never been a world cup with so many questionable decisions. If you don't see people infringing, you probably need to brush up on the laws. E.g. Wales multiple yellows not given Vs Fiji including Biggar cynically handling the ball in the ruck between the posts, Ireland getting away with collapsing a maul on the try line at the end of their game with SA, England getting away with a yellow for a no arms tackle by Curry against Fiji... If I can see all of them, so can the TMO, and they need to bring it to the refs attention. Mind you, that last one was, and Gauzerre lied and said he wrapped his arms, which Curry definitely didn't. You won't hear that in any World Rugby media though.
@@johnpollock7952 Totally agree. "you won't hear that in any World Rugby thought": Another good point. I don't know where you from and how it works in your country. I'm from France and THE rule is : Rugby is not football, we never talk about the referee. I agree during the match, but after, it is the job of the journalists to point out the mistakes a referee might have done, or, to correct bad interpretation of the rules from the fans. Why did I end up here? I watched the match between France and the boks, I was disappointed and that's it. Then, on the day after, I saw all the comments from RU-vid channels or websites stating that the referee stole our victory. I was surprised but also immediately thought that as French media's, they were probably not objectives and I wanted to see what was the analysis of medias who were neutral. This chanel is not because it's the world rugby, so, they just show 2 actions (That I don't contest) but there are others so, I will continue to look at english, Welsh, Irish, Scottish etc media to see their analysis of the match.
In the semi-final, the Boks should largely dominate the English. But with the spectacular rebirth of the New Zealanders, the Argentinians and the English, we must swear by nothing. I see all the Bok supporters boasting since their victory against France. Against the English, they will perhaps realize that at the head of international rugby board, there are mainly English people and that this referee, as impartial as he may be, is a Kiwi, necessarily a supporter of his national team. And more or less consciously, he must prefer that NZ plays the English rather than the Boks in the final. Not to mention the fact that he may not have forgotten that in 1995, the players on his team were poisoned. We will see at the end of the match what the Bok's fans think of his interpretations...
@@phillipsugwas I give 3 reasons to show that the referee MIGHT choose to take decisions in favour of the English team and you point out 1. Many Jewish were not born during the ww2 but lost some grand parents. Do you believe they forgive what happened? Is this exemple more easy for you to understand or do you want another one with black people and the apartheid?
@@LeSaff Since the 2011 Bryce Lawrence disgrace, kiwi refs have actually been very good. BOK is excellent although my personal favourite is Glen Jackson, who played Super Rugby before retiring, so had a bit of an edge and applied the rules brilliantly.
This is the best video idea. Hope we could see more of this. There are so many nuances that are difficult to understand how a Referee might have interpreted a situation.
Regarding the Etzebeth "knock back" - it is really clear from the higher camera angle that although Etzebeth is on-side, and can be given the benefit of the doubt that he was indeed trying to claw the ball back towards his own line, he first makes contact with the ball on the 5 yard line, and PSDT falls on the ball at least a metre further out. So unless both sides were in fact playing in the wrong direction at that time, the ball has clearly *moved forward* so clearly Etzebeth has knocked on. It's not a difficult call, and to say otherwise is a cop out. Given where and when this happened, it should have been reviewed, closely, which would have revealed the knock-on. Indeed, since there was no cover beyond Etzebeth, France would probably have scored a try, so it should have been a penalty try and a yellow card. Likewise, a replay of the Kolbe conversion charge-down shows him setting off towards Ramos *before* Ramos moves towards the ball. The conversion should have been re-taken. Of course, it's not certain Ramos would have been successful in his attempt, but given his kicking form it is likely he would have been. This is so clearly an error on the part of the officials, should I be surprised that Nigel doesn't mention it? Lastly, had Etzebeth been yellow carded for the knock-on, then, had he still committed the head-contact foul play later in the game, it would have been an automatic red card (IMO it should have been red anyway, since otherwise the only conclusion you can come too is that Etzebeth was excused for not dipping low enough because he is too tall to have done so, either that or Antonio has the agility of a winger and it was his sudden, late change of direction what did it - both are laughable excuses in the extreme). In which case he wouldn't have been on the field to score his try later in the game. Poor refereeing that definitely affected the outcome of the game. France were hard done by. Let's hope O'Keefe has a better game this week.
Not mentionning that Etzebeth is clearly supporting his bodyweight by his hands applying pressure to the ground with both hands simutaneously to Block his forward movement. Easy call for a non biased TMO too.
Etsebeth never knocked the ball forward. I watched the video clip of Kolbes charge down and I defy anyone to say with any certainty that he started his charge down too early. If the TMO had ruled in Frances favour I would have accepted it because I believe it was inconclusive and could have gone either way.
I didn’t see any footage good enough to make a statement about Etzebeth, but I do for Kolby, no any doubt about that, even World rugby recongnized this error. And we could have better footage so you could see better. That what TMO is supposed to be, resolve tought situation. In football they can resolve situation for inches, here Kolby is several feets ( 1-2m at least) inside when Ramos lift his foot completely.@@gordondwyer3641
Regarding Etzebeth's "knock-back": No-one was in a better position to make that call than the ref - check where he is - directly parallel to the where it happened. Camera angles are deceiving...
This a thousand times. The idea that he didn't know what he was doing and who was on his shoulder when he played the ball is so stupid it doesn't bear mentioning. He may be a giant lump of a man but he's not stupid. He can read the game and he knows how to intercept a pass without risking a second yellow in a knock out game in the World Cup!
Brilliant. Eben intention was backward and it did not do forward. Kwaggas hand may touch the ground. Sorted. Was hoping to see opinion on Cheslin charge down
It doesn’t matter anyway. France got rattled by those weird ref decisions and argued too much with him during the game. We lost the game by losing the ref and also by doing a handling error leading to Kolbe’s try. Apart from that, both teams had different strategies that cancelled each other out. 1 point difference overall, just a hair between two great teams. Could have gone our way but it didn’t.
Disappointed at how the channel seems to deliberately avoid Nigel commenting on ruck infringements and the timing of Kolbe's knock-down charge in the FR SA game which i think are more difficult to explain away. Anything to make world rugby look good
It has been explained...Kolbe can start his run once the approach to kick starts. Approach to kick is not about taking a step in any direction but about when the kickers exits from their static loaded position (concentration) and start the kicking process. Thus, it could mean swinging arms, bending hip etc. Kolbe also explained post match that he knows Ramos kicking approach so well as he played with him for many years and thats how he timed it perfectly.
@@RenierKapp World rugby ended up admitting that this was one of 5 reffereeing errors during the match. Kolbe started his run too early, and so the conversion should have been re-kicked.
he's also jumping forward quite far so the ball looks like its going backwards from his body position, if you use the lines, it's either flat or slightly forward, very hard to decide though. The big shame is that all penaud had to do was give it to alldritt as there was a massive gap between psdt and etzebeth and that would've been the game sealed. Because except for lucky bounces off high balls, SA did nothing that first half. That's the nature of the sport though, they were smarter in the second half.
@@leopoldberger9037 you can only judge it from his body position and how it leaves his hands otherwise you come up against physics. kind of like when you're running forward a backwards pass still goes forward relative to the static ground. Ill post a link to explain. As for lucky bounces off high balls, its amazing that the hundreds of times that the springboks do that they're successful. Its almost like they know what they're doing and are very good at it
Can we just appreciate the thumbnail for this video? That shot of Eben Etzebeth straining every sinew of his long, long limbs to claw the ball away really is a thing of beauty.
I miss Nigel so much. Greatest ref the game has ever seen. His humility is admirable. Notice how he doesn’t analyse plays and point out how he would have made the calls in question - he’s merely speculating on what the outcomes could have been in similar situations. Absolute legend.
French is crying saying it was a deliberate knock on, They started watching rugby this year and don''t know the rules so they make up there own, They thought they winning the Fifa World cup and lost same with rugby.
@@phillipsugwas there’s no official rule in place, apart from if it results in direct head contact or results in the player landing dangerously i.e. head or neck. the WRU and RFU are currently fixated on eliminating any tackles resulting in head injuries, maybe dangerous tackles like that will be next.
@@jamesxife123 Well lets hope they do because it is extremely dangerous. There are high risks of broken bones to the legs and ankles...of the person being "obstructed" in this way. It is therefore illegal when done like this because of the danger level. Curry is a much better player than that.
It never ceases to impress me that Nigel Owens manages to balance the expensive iPad on his knee while catching and playing the ball next to him and at the same time keeps informing/educating us on the finer aspects of the rugby rules. Thanks again, Nigel for putting this tireless argument of Eben's knock-on to rest.
Could someone clarify the two knock-on incidents please. Nigel says both Smith and Farrell deliberately knocked on and deserved the yellow card... but I don't recall Farrell being given a yellow card??
Why no discussion of the head butt on Marcus Smith that was supposed to have some sort of mitigation? No consistency whatever between that decision and the sending-off of Tom Curry in the first match where the Argentina player literally fell out of the air on to him. There was talk in the TV commentary of Marcus Smith having changed direction, which suggests that the actual collision was accidental, but that was the case with many similar instances in the early weeks of the competition. What happened to the idea that the tackler has a duty of care to the player being tackled?
100% agree, if we’re comparing the two incidents. Curry’s tackle there was a significant drop as he just caught the high ball and braced for his fall so the Argentine has obviously gone down a bit. The only mitigation for the Smith one was that he was “stepping” but surely that should be the Fiji defenders fault for not judging the game? He’s not set his feet or anything, just flew in recklessly.
He wrapped his hand around it to pull it back though so the correct call was made. I got the impression from the weekend that some France and Ireland fans thought the only way to win was playing against 14. Both sides are better than that and just weren't the best teams on their day.
@@fatShowPonyidk about ireland because i was watching the game as a neutral so i don't remember very well, but france certainly was the best team on the day against SA. Just because SA won at the end and qualified doesn't change the fact that they got completely outplayed for 60 minutes and the only reason they went into the second half trailing by 3 instead of 20 was lucky bounces and some french negligence on high balls. Congrats to SA but they were not better. Not at all
You should be. It was a knock-on - watch the replay closely and compare where Etzebeth makes contact with the ball with where PSDT falls on it, and you can see clearly the ball has moved forward. As there was no cover outside this point, it should have been a penalty try and a yellow. Then when Etzebeth later makes head contact with Antonio he would have received an automatic red. Also, Kolbe clearly starts his charge down run before Ramos moves towards the ball. Apparently he can run 100m in 10.7s in spikes on a track. For the charge down he had to cover 25m in under 2.5s in rugby boots on grass from a standing start. Do the math.
@@46paulbmany would agree with that - France did outplay the boks for large parts of that game BUT they cracked at the critical moments. Kicking a penalty backwards? Kicking balls out on the full from outside the 22? Those are not mistakes you can afford in a knockout game. Regardless, I was sure Faf De Klerk lost the game for the Boks when he kicked the ball away and gave it to France on the halfway line at 79 minutes on the clock 😂 what a dumb thing to do - i was sure France would work it up for a penalty and take the 3 pointer or try for the drop goal. A game with such fine margins and could have easily gone the other way. If France keep up this form, they will undoubtedly have that first world cup soon. Same goes for Ireland.
@@PeerAdderwatching the video of Ramos kicking the ball, I timed 3.64 seconds for Colbe to complete the charge down. This is enough time given that he could run 7-8 meters per second in rugby boots.
It has been explained...Kolbe can start his run once the approach to kick starts. Approach to kick is not about taking a step in any direction but about when the kickers exits from their static loaded position (concentration) and start the kicking process. Thus, it could mean swinging arms, bending hips etc. Kolbe also explained post match that he knows Ramos kicking approach so well as he played with him for many years and thats how he timed it perfectly.
Eben E - does the motion of the hands count here? For example, when passing, the ball can move fwd on the pitch if the hands movement is backwards bcos of the player own motion fwd. Is it the same for interception - is it possible that the ball moves fwd yet due to player own motion fwd and hand movement back, it is deemed as knock backwards?
The key thing here is for your own forward velocity to affect the ball you actually have to catch it, then you can pass it backwards relative to yourself but it can still be caught ahead of the point where you passed it, if you were running forward, carrying the ball with you, at the point you release it. Etzebeth does not catch the ball, he swats it, so his forward motion and the direction of his hand movement are irrelevant.
My question to Nigel: The saying goes, "dynamite comes in small packages", who was a "small" player you reffed in a match that completely surprised you with how they dominated their bigger opponent?
great explanations, although Teflon Farrell got away with 'another' punishable play - a deliberate knock on. He knew exactly what he was doing and then made it look like he was going in for a tackle. Embarrassing really, specially coming back from a ban and denying Ford of a game. Doesn't really matter though as England will get smashed by RSA
Was it later that Eben was Yellow carded for the head clash: which ( had he got yellow here) meant he would have been OFF with a red. ( Because 2 yellows = red) It shows how Vital it can be, in big games particularly, to get these calls right. PS French capt. was asked about refereeing in this game, and he was unhappy: But I have watched it twice now and think that O Keefe was very fair and had a good game himself. Interesting that Ben O keefe will apparently also referee South Africa vs England. This will be the 3rd game he has officiated this tournament where SA playing....
Officials completely missed the head on head against PSDT. Coaching staff even pulled him off for a HIA. Should have been a yellow with bunker review against Penaud.
4:45 but Kwagga would fall forward if his right hand wasn’t on the ground before he got both on the ball. He wasn’t supporting his own body weight initially.
And what does Nigel thinks of the headbutt of Dutoit on Danty? Pretty lucky not to get a red isn't it ? And what about Kolbe being on the 5m line while Ramos did not move yet to kick it? Pretty lucky isn't it? Well, it looks like a 2011 Craig Joubert all over again on the French side. Pretty unlucky isn't it
@@paulvanderkolf7986 that's right and I won't deny it. This said, south Africa did not steal the game and the game was close. If you play it 10 times, SA would win it 50% at least. But if the TMO did not change the way it works just before the world cup, I'm pretty sure the result would have been different.
@bastbe2764 and if french rugby didnt buy off the other rugby unions the night before the vote on hosting this world cup it would have been a home game for the boks( who would not have booed every decision they didnt like) but if ifs and ands were reality... just stop winging. There were bad calls that went against the boks in this game too. Its rugby. You lost, you will have a great side in 4 years, hopefully a little more mature too..
@@Profreegolfer I have not said anything against SA. I'm just disappointed that a game lost by 1 point is tainted by TMO not doing their job. SA always complain about the referee all the time. Erasmus talked about it before the match. Last time, he posted a webpage analysis after the loss in France which led SA fans to threat Wayne Barnes and his family, etc. There are RU-vidrs making constantly video complaining about referee decisions. So SA is not exactly exemplary, so understand I can be annoyed when we lose by 1 point. Here, my complain about this world cup is the lack of replay and slow motion that the public has available. You can barely watch 1 replay of a try. That's ridiculous. Regarding the world cup attribution, I admit I don't have knowledge about this but if France has cheated, I would not be surprised !
@@bastbe2764 I remember an interview with Alfred Sirvien some time ago. He explained that no World Cup, Olympic Games, big contracts (arms, real estate, etc.) were signed without a bribe. What to say about the World Cup in Qatar? And then at the sight of the World Cup in South Africa in 1995: Refereeing scandalously in favor of the Boks, NZ team victim of voluntary food poisoning. And adding the insecurity that reigns in this country, I dare to hope that they are not about to organize an international competition again.
Nigel, you’re a legend and a breath of fresh air. Wish the EPL could learn from this. Honesty and accountability is all we want in all sports. We understand that we’re all human.
As a neutral, I think Etzebeth knocked that on, if he'd been trying to catch a pass from his own team mate and done exactly that, then the ref would have given a knock for sure, so should be the same. Also it would have been a penalty try, not just yellow card, no cover in the corner, would have been a certain try. Would have seriously changed the dynamic of the 1st half! Amazing game though
Nige, you did it again, and I'm not saying that just as a Bok supporter! Sorted all the moans and groans very comprehensively as usual. And many thanks for the help you've apparently been giving to Jacques and Rassie about the laws. Frankly, as much as some whingers will try to negate it, I agree with you that the French game was awesome in its quality. I don't think many Bok or French supporters - while being upset at their team losing - would have moaned about the outcome either way. If you ever needed an advert for rugby union, that had to be it. BTW could you now use your influence to get the proposed 2016 breakdown laws, that the NZRU squashed, brought in?
Great stuff as always Nigel but Farrell wasn’t carded for the deliberate knock on (and per you should have been?) and why no review of the non card, non penalty for the Argentinian head contact with no arms on Tompkins?
This gentleman should be brought back into our game in some way. Too smart to be put out to pasture with his cattle as much of a fan we are of his channel. I’ve learnt so much Nigel. ThNks. Love what you are doing for our beautiful game. Good luck to the boks
Off course, 3 meters in front of your line, that what all good players would do, right? knock the ball backward and see what happens... you're funny. He just tried to take the ball because he though he could and that's what many players would have tried in that position. What happen next then does not matter, i don't think he's faulty of anything. I am a fan of Etzebeth (I'm a Frenchman), but on this one I wouldn't go as far as praising his "backward knock-off" skill. Please be serious ;-p Wishing the best team to win tonight (Eng - SA). Cheers
@laurentleguyader you can clearly see his hand moving in a backwards, or in other words, a movement of try to collect the ball, not just trying to get his hand in the way, which is what you are talking about.
It has been explained...Kolbe can start his run once the approach to kick starts. Approach to kick is not about taking a step in any direction but about when the kickers exits from their static loaded position (concentration) and start the kicking process. Thus, it could mean swinging arms, bending hip etc. Kolbe also explained post match that he knows Ramos kicking approach so well as he played with him for many years and thats how he timed it perfectly.
The deliberate knock on law is VERY subjective. A player doesn't know if he can reach sufficiently far to intercept a pass until he tries and the referee doesn't know whether the player is capable of pulling it off on occasion. It's essentially a law against trying to intercept.
No, it's a law against deliberately knocking down a pass. But it is subjective as to whether it is a deliberate act. Etzebeth is clearly trying to knock the ball backwards, but he fails to do so. There is no cover outside him, so France were denied a probable try. Not "deliberate" but a penalty try and a yellow card?
What's the point of multiple video cameras (more than are used for the TV broadcasts) and a TMO plus assistants if things are allowed to just "slip by"?
To have one of if not the best refs in recent times break down the rules like this is an awesome addition to the rwc. Refs are such an important part of the game and I hope they keep doing this
Always a pleasure to listen to Nigel Owens, a top notch referee and a class act. Regarding Etzebeth, I agree with Nigel, it's very, very difficult to call. But why, then, didn't the ref ask for the TMO, knowing how marginal that call was? Maybe the footage would have been inconclusive, and he would have stayed with his initial assessment? But I, as I am sure many spectators, didn't understand why he didn't even ask for a review. Same thing for the charged down conversion. This is so, so rare, that it at least warranted a TMO review.
Different Rugby regions of the world play with different styles therefore making identifying certain infringements a lot easier or difficult. There are certain calls that had me as a rugby loving Saffa perplexed while watching them in real time while others made perfect sense even before any replay. Credit to World Rugby for this initiative although I do still think this wont prevent some salty fans blaming their losses on the refs.
does anyone know why they didn't review the conversion charge-down? Kolbe (brilliant player by the way) was clearly close to the 5m line before Ramos started his run up (seen from a crowd video that has been circulated since). Do they not have a camera that can see that?
I thought the refereeing in the 2 top quarter finals was excellent and look forward to the same standard in semis and thank you Nigel for explaining the rules .
Yeah same, Its just the salty fans looking for an excuse on why there teams lost because they must be the best if they are #1 and #2, Clearly avoiding all the mistakes there teams make and ref not blowing
Man also the way Dickson handelled the ARG-WAL game was world class. Just imagine…you have to substitute an injured ref 15 minutes into match as intense as this one was. Great job by him!
The Etzebeth 'interception' is close but it's definitely forward. He bats it down over the 5 metre line and it lands beyond the 5 metre line. TMO didn't even look at it - well certainly not in detail.
Etzterbeth wasnt lucky that it didnt go forward or called forward it was all skill hitting it back and he knew exactly what he was doing and it shows how class of a player he is
The ball went backwards - but from the camera angle it looks like it went forwards - that's called the error of parallax. From the line judges or refs pov it went backwards because they were in a better position. And Etzebeth's hand went backwards .
Dear @NigelRefOwens: In the past, a try was on the sheet once converted - often done quickly to stop interference if the team felt there were 50/50 calls in there. With the Samoa England game, one was reversed after the conversion. What is the new law regarding this, and how far in time do they then go to stop the try from counting?
I was really waiting for this one. Thanks I would had love some clarification on Kolbe charge on Ramos. From what I read about the laws , there no exact definition of the movement needed to begin a charge. Is it any movement ? Or the feet? Would love to hear back from you about this one
It has been explained...Kolbe can start his run once the approach to kick starts. Approach to kick is not about taking a step in any direction but about when the kickers exits from their static loaded position (concentration) and start the kicking process. Thus, it could mean swinging arms, bending hip etc. Kolbe also explained post match that he knows Ramos kicking approach so well as he played with him for many years and that is how he timed it perfectly.
@@RenierKapp Plus he did not run 22m- because his point of contact was when airborne = 18m? Or less.? The Ball trajectory / height was low given where the try was scored...
@@blizzard6741 and a bottle will always stay half empty or half full. Ask yourself how many times in your life you wrote a comment saying something like: oh we have been so lucky, the referee clearly took decisions who helped us. Or Oh our player just got a yellow but it clearly deserve a red Absolutely never. As a fan you will never be objective. A least we should look what specialists from neutral sides said about this match and the decisions of the referee. Don't get fooled, world rugby will never post a video saying : the referee we choose made so many mistakes that we have decided to give him a second chance for the semi finals! And also because we like to introduce a referee with the team of his country still into the competition and because we don't give a f... of all the people who spent a lot of money in flights, hotels, tickets and end up very frustrated 🥴
absolutely not true@@blizzard6741... he had his foot on the line which is forbidden and leftslightly before allowed. every slow motion supports this. Kolbe is fast but not faster than a world-class sprinter...
Actually, the video doing the round is dodgy edit and misrepresentation of the laws. The law states can run once kicker moves, not steps forward, simply moves, Ramos's kicking movement routine starts way earlier than the video of the step forward implies. The charge down was entirely legal.
Nice explanation Sir, good to know that the Springboks won the game fare and square, indeed even a blind man can see that the ball was knocked backward just as the rule says.
I was hoping you'd take on the yellow card Etzebeth got for that tackle. He was virtually on his knees and the other guy bent down into him. The ref said he should have gone lower but unless he was lying on the ground, I don't see how he could have.
I’ve asked B4 so if you have answered, my apologies. Please explain why there appears ( to me at least) to be a difference between the precise location of where a penalty kick off the tee is taken from, AND where the penalty Punt from hand is ultimately taken from. Why is the variation permitted? Is it in the Laws of the game please?
you have to review the last minute steal by Sam Whitelock vs Ireland to win the quarter final! It was kind of tricky if he assisted in the tackle or not.
Love hearing a refs perspective on these things 😁 My question is, back in 2017 Sonny Bill Williams swatted a cross field kick backwards in touch, he was yellow carded and France received a penalty try. So is it legally to deliberately smack a ball backwards in the field of play, but not in goal? Or was it that it went out on the full in goal?
@@glombardster But what is(/are) the law(/s) there though? Can you point them out to me please? You can deliberately knock the ball back in the field of play like Eben, but not behind the try line, that's cynical, a card and a penalty try? Or was it because it was knocked back and out on the full? I'm genuinely curious, so many little nuances in the game 😅
@@ItsMe-fs4df Law 10.2 (c) Throwing into touch. A player must not intentionally knock, place, push or throw the ball with his arm or hand into touch, touch-in-goal, or over the dead ball line. So it doesn't matter where this is done, it only matters that the ball goes out of play from the hand or arm *and that it is intentional* which can be problematic, though not in the Sonny Bill Williams case you mentioned. Rio Dyer was yellow carded for this offence in Cardiff this summer in Wales's warm up game against SA. It was questionable that he "intended" the ball to go out of play, only away from the SA player.
Are we just going to let referees decide matches then? What’s the point of the sport if they can get away with that Etzebeth knock forward or the Kolbe sprint?
@@thomasshirrefs5331Ah, you're wrong on both fronts mate. If you just watched this video, you would have heard Nigel Owens saying he agrees with the on-field decision that it wasn't a knock on from Etzebeth. And as far as the Kolbe charge down, the full footage has been released showing categorically that he didn't run early. Don't let sour grapes blind you from reality. No need to be a poor loser. Sometimes the team we support loses. That's life.
@@thomasshirrefs5331 Both were in line with the laws. If English is your second language I would understand that you may struggle to understand the rules, since they are specific and technical.
I think the position is more: we can't say clearly whether it went forwards or backwards so we'll just take the default decision. The default decision then being whatever allows them to not blow up a penalty. It's how they reffed all the forward passes in the competition too.
I've seen a number of videos and there is actually one in HD. As soon as he swings his arm (part of his routine kicking the ball) Kolby takes off. Perhaps WR can change the rules to say when a kickers feet move. You try Googling it and you won't find an answer.
That part is debatable. What isn’t is the turnover! Just play the second angle 4:22 back at 0.25x speed. You clearly see the weight transfer to his right arm and his muscles contracting…
I’d gladly listen to Nigel sitting on a hay bale talking about literally anything at all, but this is some top quality rugby content from a true legend of the sport. More like this please!
Nigel, thanks for all the insights. Do you have any comment on the shoulder hit to the head of Bundi Aki during the Ireland - AB game? Besides the huge difference this could have made to the game outcome, my bigger concern is that the vital need to really emphasise player safety is being sacrificed for the sake of 'not ruining the flow of the game.' Lots of early hits seems not to get pensalised. If safe tackling is not enforced, fewer European teenagers will be encouraged by their families to take up rugby.
It was something Aki tried to milk, the contact from Richie was with the chest and shoulder. It was an amazing tackle from a first five of his size and if he maintains his form the Allblacks will be hard to stop.
Greatest referee of all time (very little doubt). However, I want to know if anyone else spotted the mouse in the backround when the great Mr. Owen was discussing his approach to a test match? I would however like to know which referee Nigel would pick to blow the final. Im a South African fan and I think Barnes or Poite are probably the two best options.
What about the charge down on the conversion attempt??? wish you were still out in the middle 👍👍👍
11 месяцев назад
Come on Nigel, the work is not fully done here! It's not the first time key moments of games are not reviewed here, in that case Kolbe's charge would have definitely deserved your input.
It has been explained...Kolbe can start his run once the approach to kick starts. Approach to kick is not about taking a step in any direction but about when the kickers exits from their static loaded position (concentration) and start the kicking process. Thus, it could mean swinging arms, bending hip etc. Kolbe also explained post match that he knows Ramos kicking approach so well as he played with him for many years and thats how he timed it perfectly.
so there you have it: the penalty that gave SA the lead should have been against SA, Smith's right hand is clearly supporting his body weight before he grabs the ball.
Brilliant video. Thanks for this. The question I have re-Etzebeth knock back is in this situation is Etzebeth's forward momentum taken into account like in forward passes? He is clearly moving forward and to me the ball goes backwards from his hand. Or is it taken from an imaginary line parallel to try line/22 etc?
Nigel talks about having to support your own body weight while trying to jackle the ball, but the video clearly shows Kwagga Smith put his weight on his right arm as he tries to steal the ball with his left. If you slow the footage down you can see the muscles in his tricep flexing from the weight on his arm. I know Nigel doesn’t like to criticise the refs, but this was a clear mistake the referee or TMO should have picked up that lead to the winning penalty for SA. I know we don’t like to think one decision can turn a game, but this mistake clearly did.
The last few min SA was on the try line a french player was offside and Faf passed and hit him and a scrum was called for france , Even if kwagga supported his weight that was not the game winning mistake, Sa shouldve gotten a Penatly where the french player was offside and Should either scored or got 3 points.
@@whatthehellnomorebees6175 With tight games, things can go either way and I guess that to a point the winner is lucky. I totally agree that there would have been many other instances where the calls may have been wrong and went against SA.
@@whatthehellnomorebees6175 Exactly ... and a penalty 5m from the try line is worth a lot more than one in the middle of the field. How that was awarded as a scrum to France is beyond me.
