Argies versus Poms

Can't see Argies winning this but this is sport. 

Another surprise waiting around the corner?

Great cross kick by Argies and May carries ball over England's line. Argies on attack but England's ball. 

Three infringements by Poms. Get a warning. 

Argies lead 3-nil.

Blikkies anything can happen but it would be a surprise if England don't win. 

England score out wide via May. 

Nigel Owen's is a sensible ref. 

Ag nee kak. That is not worth a red card.

Red card. Farrel did dip down. Harsh call. 

Match ruined by stupid call. 

Take back my comment re Nigel being a sensible ref. 

Off to watch the cricket. 

What a load of BS. These moronic idiots don't mind ruining a match. What a let down.

Didn't see it, but if we can trust Blikkies' judgement...and I do...Plum might be right...the fix is in.

Nope, Blik, I saw it, that's a red, but the Poms were naughty too and got away with it...THE FIX is still in.

Farrel can't kick for sh!t...LOL.

PS, Argies doing some stupid stuff, their own worst enemy. 

Just saw it on the half time discussion. Shoulder to the head, no attempt to wrap, to tackle like that in this day and age is just stupid.

Well Owens gives the Argies a penalty when the Argie over the ball was resting on the ground with his forearms right from the start , i.e. off his feet.

Comey 

There is a question mark about the tackle.   Farrell was going down and virtually onto his knee when he was tackled.   It is very difficult for a tall guy in the process of tackling when the opposing player goes down in the tackling process and certainly not intentional at all on the part of the tackler.  

Be it as it may I believe under the circumstances it should have been a yellow card - not a red.

The wonderful English team even in a scrum after the removal of Lavanini went backwards.

Comey 

There is a question mark about the tackle.   Farrell was going down and virtually onto his knee when he was tackled.   It is very difficult for a tall guy in the process of tackling when the opposing player goes down in the tackling process and certainly not intentional at all on the part of the tackler.  

Be it as it may I believe under the circumstances it should have been a yellow card - not a red.

The wonderful English team even in a scrum after the removal of Lavanini went backwards.

Trad2D2, for once we agree. Fantastic man. Keep up the sensibility...you'll be amazed at the positive strides you can make in your life. 

If Lavanini made an attempt at a proper tackle he may only have got a yellow. His intention was clearly putting in the shoulder, so if you then get a guy dipping down a bit you're in trouble.

Absolutely Mike. Farrel went down and that made the tackle high. Secondly, played in real time there was nothing Lavini could do to adjust. 

Pathetic decision by Owen's. Didn't watch the rest of the game after the Red. Bet millions switched off.

What a farce!!!! 

Absolute crap Hasbeeno. That was a red card all day!!

If you support a team, you are completely blind to any fouls that team commits you plonker....

Congrats to the Poms. They are now probably one of the favourites to win the WC.

That tackle was probably worth a card, but I still claim it should not have been more than yellow. Arms were out and if Farrel did remain at normal height, a neck tackle should not have been a possibility.

Comey

Any excuse would help in this case so as to justify the red card.   Anyway a red card was given and the sole reason for the Argentine loss.

Your soulmate Strzok criticized the win of the Springboks over Italy by referring to the red card as the sole reason for the win.  I will add to that in the English game he would not justify the English win in the same way.   Want to have a bet on that?  In the Ityalian game they played for 37 minutes with a 14 man team - in the case of the English win Argentina played for 63 minutes with 14 players.

In the Italian game no Springbok player bar Kolbe  was given any credit for the win by Strzok.   Watch out what will inevitably happen in the England-Argentina game.  

Moo moo you pathetic prick there other posters here saying the CA was wrong.  Did you ever play rugby you absurd halwit! These things happen in a split second. What don't you understand you hatter!

HAHAHAHA ou moo mooooo is sure a confused nutjob. 

The whole match was ruined by Owen's. Again we ask is the RWC being rigged. 

Unfortunately we have some folk not wanting to give the Boks any credit. The extreme is wee cc the kiwi wannabe. 

But true Bok supporters remain strong 

Players, fans, everyone knows there is no consistency with these calls. So, here's a wild idea: why not just do your best to play within the laws of the game, rather than doing something idiotic like this below, leading high with a shoulder and a wide swinging arm and hoping that you only get the yellow and not the red? Make a proper tackle instead of an illegal tackle and you don't risk spoiling the game for your team and your fans.

Thanks Monster. Ou Mooo moo feels the EGG landing. 

The shoulder is the problem:

Red card - If a shoulder charge makes contact with the head or neck, it is by default a red card in the new framework.

The only sanction here would be the drop in height of the player, but I don't see it as being dramatic. At best he has bent his knee bracing for impact. Had Lavanini's shoulder hit Farrell's shoulder, slid up and made contact with the neck or head, he would still have been in red territory.

Again, if he made a legal tackle without that shoulder out front and that swinging arm drawn back, I'm pretty sure he would have got away with yellow either way. The player chose to employ an illegal tackle right from the outset. He let his team down.

Pakie stop talking bull. Farrel is at least two feet lower if not more!

Your analysis is pure drivel.  Best listen to your betters and zip it.

Thanks