That kick: James Hook
This week we'll mostly be concerning ourselves with all things World Cup.
That the back pages of most countries - the exceptions are Wales and New Zealand, Wales wholly understandably and New Zealand because of the referee this incident involves - are not full of headlines calling for official reviews over James Hook's allegedly missed penalty speaks volumes about both the Welsh team's determination to be introspective about their other missed chances and about the uncertainty over the validity of the 'penalty that never was'.
There are a couple of points worth making: Wayne Barnes apparently told Hook that he was not allowed to refer the decision to the TMO. This is wrong. Law 6.A.6 (b) includes the following sentence: "The official (TMO) may be consulted in relation to the success or otherwise of kicks at goal."
It does seem odd that Barnes did not know this though - and it's also worth asking: why refer it when all three officials were in agreement the kick was not successful?
Secondly, we looked hard, but could find no defining text to explain what happens should a ball go over an upright. In the era of kickers who can goal from 60m and balls that fly and fly, is this not something that needs to be addressed?
While on the subject of balls, there's been more and more mutterings over the weekend from observers about the new Gilbert Virtuo ball which has been drawing mixed results from the kicking tee - most notably giving Jonny Wilkinson his worst-ever kicking performance.
The ball's been available since June to the teams, who were each also given 30 on their arrival to train with, so it's not for the want of familiarity.
The ball has also been available to the rest of the rugby world since June, so a few questions asked around some clubs have revealed that most players feel the same: the ball passes better from the hand but exacerbates even the slightest of errors on the kick.
It not only has a smaller sweet spot, but should you hit the outer ring of the bullseye, as it were, you run a far greater chance of having the flight of the ball subsequently deviating significantly more than the usual Gilbert balls.
So the IRB has approved and introduced a ball that passes better but kicks worse. Will they stop at nothing to ensure we get more tries?
A handy coincidence in the USA this week, with NFL and the Rugby World Cup kicking off at the same time - although the rugby was buried in the late late hours of Saturday night: 2am Sunday in New York and 11pm Saturday in Los Angeles.
But then after a quirky little feature from the BBC comparing the two sports earlier in the week, NFL drum-beaters might have felt a little relieved that rugby's value for money was not given greater exposure.
The feature revealed that the average NFL player outweighs the average rugby player by 50 pounds (that's a shade under 23 kg) and the strongest can supposedly bench press some 50 per cent of rugby's strongest.
But rugby's fastest (Bryan Habana? Still?) is still said to be 0.2 sec quicker over 100m, and here's the fun bit: rugby players run nearly 23 times as far as NFL players during the average match, racking up 4.35 miles on average to the NFL's 0.19.
Not bad value that, particularly when you take into account that rugby's best-paid (without endorsements) is paid some 32 times less...
What price a minnow victory at this World Cup? Not one team has yet broken 50 points, in a round that included perceived mismatches such as France v Japan, New Zealand v Tonga, Fiji v Namibia and Scotland v Romania.
Japan had France on the ropes at one point before the soft fourth try steadied the ship, while Scotland found Romania's physicality almost too much of a challenge. Neither Namibia nor Tonga subsided under the pressure as they have in World Cups past against their illustrious opposition.
Scotland, who face the even more physical Georgia on Wednesday, are now favourites to come a cropper while we await the Wales-Samoa clash with interest. Further down the radar, we're betting the Italy-USA clash might be closer than expected too, given the Americans' game display against Ireland.
Back to generalities though: the technical and tactical proficiency and the fitness of the lesser-known/lauded teams has been nothing short of fantastic to behold.
You will find this column occasionally moaning about the large numbers of imports to Europe's domestic leagues, which from the usual standpoint of growing local talents for the home nations is a little shameless at times, but for the next seven weeks we can also sit back and enjoy the reaped benefits of the cross-pollination to players and coaches of their stints abroad. This World Cup is already proving that the gap, finally, is narrowing between the best and the rest.
While you expect the top league clubs and provinces of various countries to be caught a little short by the absence of all their elite during a World Cup, spare a thought for the little guys as well.
Nottingham, of England's Championship, are labouring into the new season shorn of no fewer than four of their best (a Tongan, two Americans and a Japanese), while the Villager club in Cape Town, competing in the provincial league below Currie Cup, are also without four, including two props, handed over to Namibia.
Neither side has been exactly left in a winning position, but it's a little window onto the fact that players come from far and wide to play their rugby in as good a developmental climate as possible and that - having received emails from both clubs in question speaking of their pride - it means a heck of a lot for a smaller club to have players at the World Cup.
Loose Pass compiled by Richard Anderson
Comments
Storm says...
Billymutt; if the NFL teams back rugby like they did Major League Soccer then maybe one day it might happen.
Posted 14:31 14th September 2011
Pastorius says...
As a Wales fan I've got to say, I've not met many people who are blaming the penalty TMO debacle for our loss!
Mostly seems to be other nations deciding that we think that's the only reason we didn't win. Not the case. The vast majority of Welsh fans are saying that it's largely irrelevant given that we had plenty of time, and manafactured plenty more chances, to finish the game off.
Posted 13:20 14th September 2011
lorenz78 says...
I discovered that TMO it in last November test Italy-Australia (Orquera's penalty hit the crossbar and went beyond, in the end it was awarded), but I cannot remember if the touch judges had made a decision before the referee asked for review. That could be a parameter for the referee in order to ask or nor the TMO.
Regarding rugby-American football comparison, they are just two great and completely different sports: in my opinion it all starts with the fact that rugby laws give an incentive to continuity of play, while football is based on short bursts. From that comes the difference in players' size - a 140kg offensive lineman needs to push away his opponnent for a few seconds, not to follow the action 70 meters downfield.
As far as I know rugby is developing in the US, not necessarily counting on college football leftovers. By the way there are plenty of multi-sports athletes at college level, and if a guy can compete in basketball and football he can do it also in rugby and football.
Posted 11:45 14th September 2011
Storm says...
Billymutt: was comparing athletes not sports.
Having said that rugby and more so league administrators have been copying the NFL model for decades. Why wouldn't you mimic a model that has 32 teams, plays a 16 game regular season and generates $US7 billion in annual revenue and growing.
I loves it.
Posted 15:15 13th September 2011
malkhut10 says...
WC1969 .... Whilst I agree that it would be a terrible thing for rugby to slide down the slope towrad the chaotic disrespect we see at football, in fairness to Hook and the rest of the Welsh team, they didn't make a big issue of the matter on the pitch. There was no grouping around the ref, no angry remonstrations. Hook signalled a question about the video ref and left it at that. He thinks even now the ball went over but it seems to be an opinion not a gripe. But, I still agree that there is otherwise, a growing trend to argue - and continue to argue - with the ref. A bit of enforced discipline would see it stop.
Posted 09:22 13th September 2011
StunTheMullet says...
For a change I'm with Wayne on the penalty kick as that was the Assistant Referees domain as to whether it was over. Wayne seemed hesitant but both ARs kept flags down so would be hard for him to question them.
The main gripe with Wayne that is being overlooked is where he is running through the middle of play and being used as a blocker by players running with him which is holding up defence long enough to make a gap.
That happened twice during the AB vs Convict 3N game and once during Boks vs Wales. All ending in tries.
@ irishzimbabwean - WRT 2007 the real issue is the 17 missed penalties against France in 40 minutes of rugby with not a single one awarded rather than one missed forward pass and dubious yellow card.... See if you can find out if that has ever occured before or after in a test match (with neutral referees)....
Posted 09:01 13th September 2011
sandal says...
Interesting comparisons with American football.
But how can anything be 32 times less? It's a contradiction in terms.
Posted 02:24 13th September 2011
Sasquatch says...
There might be a way to ascertain whether that kick was good or not; take the footage from behind and from the side and sync them. You can then tell at what moment the ball is in line with the try line and henceforth the line at which the ball is relevant to the outide pole. I don't have that footage.
Posted 19:49 12th September 2011
NHsaints says...
Okay so in all fairness there should be a rule about balls going over the upright and Nfl is a very different ball game to rugby...it's fine to carry 300-350 lbs on you for one sprint and then a rest and then maybe the same again once or twice later in the game but with rugby it's not ok...however fit you are it's tough to carry a good 200-300lbs for a full 80mins even if it is muscle...
Posted 18:48 12th September 2011
nemolithic says...
With regards to the Hook penalty, I have not come across any article or blog suggesting that the posts should have been be higher. So many kickers these days clear the top of the posts, that it must be logic to raise the height of posts for test match venues at least. The technology to make posts higher has existed for a good few decades now. New Zeeland had 8 years to prepare for this event. They claim it is the last time that they will ever be allowed to host it. Its the most fanatic rugby country in the world. How could they not know that this might happen? If there was uncertainty from the linesmen and it went upstairs, then at least the video evidence would have been conclusive.
Posted 18:29 12th September 2011
GoWalesGo says...
I dont know why the IRB always have to mess around with the balls for the world cup. I think they should use a different ball, perhaps Adidas or Web ellis
Posted 15:21 12th September 2011
WC1969 says...
No no and no. Stop blaming the ref for your loss. Rugby used to be better than this. The ref and assistants say it didnt go over, so it didnt go over. This fantsatic game is in danger of sliding down the slippery slope of football with the players arguing with the ref all the time. From the first few matched there has been more back chat to the refs from non-captains than I have ever seen before. We cannot leave to the players to ask for a referral, this is utterly different from cricket with its history of 'Howzat!'
Posted 14:54 12th September 2011
Storm says...
A delayed NBC telecast of the USA vs Ireland game did indeed go head to head with the opening games of the 2011/12 NFL season on Sunday 9/11 in the US. Future US RWC 2011 games will be given the same treatment. This is huge for USA Rugby which is riding a wave of growth and popularity from the inclusion of 7's at the Rio Olympics in 2016.
There are a few players in the NFL who grew up playing rugby. Not suprisingly they are of Polynesian heritage. One prime example is Holoti Ngata (6' 5' 150 kgs of poly muscle) a Tongan American who plays for the Baltimore Ravens. At perrenial National Champions, Highland High School in Utah he played rugby at # 8. He is an impressive specimen who would walk on to the ABs side much like SBW. He is that good.
The fact that Ngata, and others, make millions for exerting 5% (PR stats) of a pro rugby players gameday workload is not suprising and will ensure that the super elite football athletes will be drafted by the NFL. The good news is that there are thousands of college football athletes that can be recruited by USA rugby. When this happens the US will be a top 10 rugby nation.
Posted 13:52 12th September 2011
APV1 says...
@ BackingLeinster
I appreciate what you're saying and, to an extent, agree. I wouldn't and don't want the players given the ability to question every decision the ref makes.
How about a "Challenge" system, similar to Tennis or Cricket? If the ref calls it one way and doesn't refer to the TMO, then a team can refer it to the TMO. Food for thought.
I suppose, on reflection, that does go against my belief that the ref's decision is final. Now THAT is a philosophical debate for me to have with myself..!
Posted 12:22 12th September 2011
gungehammer says...
@BackingLeinster is right. The law states the ball must go over the crossbar, the posts aren't part of that and therefore a ball passing over the posts did no go over the crossbar. No need for further clarification.
Posted 12:18 12th September 2011
BackingLeinster says...
The posts are there to mark the two points the ball must pass between i.e. the inside of the post. If they don't pass between these two points as far as the ref and touch juges can see then its not a score no matter how high. And there's no need for philosophical debate. Its fortunate if they hit the post and go in. Some might argue that they shouldn't count if they hit the post. But they do, its simple the ball has to pass between those two points.
@APV1
I agree that Hook's an honest player. But do you think therefore that the law should say a Ref must refer a try decision to a TMO if the team says they scored it. Once they're sure of what they've seen they shouldn't be going anywhere near the TMO even if they got it wrong. Imagine the game stopping for the TMO for every missed dropped goal or penalty.
Posted 11:25 12th September 2011
APV1 says...
With regards to the Hook / Barnes kicking incident, the IRB stated that, "Under protocol, the referee may consult the assistant referees or the television match official if he is unsure as to whether a penalty kick, drop-goal or conversion has been successful." It really should read, "Under protocol, the referee MUST consult the assistant referees or the television match official if he is unsure as to whether a penalty kick, drop-goal or conversion has been successful." - end of story. Especially if the players insist that it's gone over. Hook's a clean player and is unlikely to claim it went over if it clearly didn't. If there's an element of doubt - check it. And the IRB need to make their mind up about this, as it's happening more and more. How tall do we need to make the posts, before they become unstable..?
NFL is a daft game, if you ask me. Any game which has more than one team for each side, is daft. An Offensive Team. A defensive Team. A We're About To Kick Team. An It's Sunny Today Team. A We're On Astroturf Team. An It's Tuesday Team. Just have a team. One. Which has to adapt to the game as it is at the moment. And not just for the few seconds that attack becomes defence. Pah!
That said, it's quite fun to watch 50 stone American meat-heads clattering seven shades out of each other!
"Minnows"..? No more. Some great scares for the "bigger" teams and a fantastic way to start the tournament. And where are those people now, who want a two-tiered tournament?!
Posted 10:57 12th September 2011
redrosemark says...
Re: "no defining text to explain what happens should a ball go over an upright"
As uprights vary in height (above the legal minimum) why not consider them as continuing ad infinitum into the sky? Thus, a ball going over the upright would be deemed to have hit it. After all, many kicks at professional/international level have struck far enough up the post to have cleared the upright at many lower level grounds. We would then be left with the question - would the angle of the presumed strike have been enough for the ball to deflect inside for a score...as we explode in a puff of academic debating logic...!!
Posted 10:50 12th September 2011
olepete says...
Wayne Barnes strikes again?
Posted 10:24 12th September 2011