Craig Joubert is a bloody disgrace

This fkn blind technocrat missed so much in this game it's beyond belief and from the start he was calling Oz. even that last ball came off an Aussie player.

I didn't see the game, but by the sounds of it, I'll only be enraged if I do. Poor Scots, really wish they could have pulled it off. 

The yellow was absurd. Thee was the call the ball went backwards on a clear knock....and then in the tackle of a Scottish ball carrier, the ball shoots 10 metres towards the Scottish like and he doesn't call an Australian knock.
After the last Scottish try We were all saying that  Joubert was going to penalize Scotland if he possibly could.

I r ecall a game like that against the British Lions, it was Argentina who were robbed that day. It ruins the whole spectacle. Like I say, if you give everything but are beaten by the better side, you can live with that. 

 The TMO was strangely silent on the last penalty & Joubert didn't ask him. One of the most critical calls in the game & no check with the TMO or the assistant refs. Strange.
Beeno, is Joubert a bent SA ref? I know he did a good job in the 2011 RWC but since then I have had a few questions

 Perhaps the fix is working as it was planned?
Never ever thought much of Joubert after his handling of the final in the last WC.
Scotland were robbed by his poor call.

 i have never rated joubert and since the rwc 2011 where is was by far the most bent ref..seeing that he gave the ab's the game in 2011 the all blacks owe us one since the whole bryce incident.
the aussies got lucky and to be frank i think in the context of the game joubert should have gone to the tmo....you know its a big moment in a game so rather make the right call.....
joubert is a disgrace i agree 100%

 What I saw was the ball coming forard off a sctots player and the ball being caught by a Scot. Looked like the right call. No one seemed to think otherwise?maitland deliberately knocked the ball down to prevent Mitchell getting past him. Hard but correct?
Craig was very bad in the last RWC final but nowhere near as bad as bent ref supremo brycy lawrence. NZ ref of the year and fired by the IRB.
As Lewis Moody said the Scots should just have thrown the ball to front of  the lineout secured possession and won the game.Its a hard luck case but then on the other side OZ deserved a win just as much. Scots got two lucky intercept tries and OZ missed a number of conversions. Stats I guess would favour OZ?
What was the value of our win over the Scots? 

The scots should have thrown the ball to the front of the lineout. But when the ball came back, it clearly hit an Aussie on its way to the Scottish player. There is no debate I looked at it in slow  mo several times. A  grandstand call....but tragically for theScots...a wrong one.

 yeah moz joubert is a con artist in the byrce lawrence sense of the word....i feel for the scots they were conned big time but i am sure much like in 2011 old joubert will be handed the final as his reward for this 

Jislaaik Moz, that's the first vloekwoord I've ever seen from you . Lift your game, next you'll be adopting the ouDawie style comb-over as well. Sounds like Joubert's now definitely a fully fledged member of the Bryce Lawrence Rogue Refs gallery . Looking forward to Kaplan's review . Heard him on the radio yesterday praising his big mate Craig .

 Here is some informed info ex supersport

A last-minute penalty kick by flyhalf Bernard Foley clinched a 35-34 victory for Australia against Scotland in their World Cup quarterfinal on Sunday. But should it have been given?

An errant lineout from Scotland saw a host of players scrambling for the ball, and when Scotland replacement prop Jon Welsh finally gathered, referee Craig Joubert deemed he was deliberately offside and awarded the kick at goal.

Scotland captain Greig Laidlaw saw it differently, as did a host of pundits and the thousands of Scotland fans and neutral rugby supporters that crammed into Twickenham.

Replays indicated that Australia's replacement scrumhalf Nick Phipps got the final touch on the ball before Welsh instinctively grabbed it. That should have been an accidental offside and a scrum-down Australia.

"I asked him (Joubert) on several occasions to (go to the television match official), I don't know what the protocols were...He was certainly looking at the big screen," a visibly shaken Laidlaw told reporters after the match.

"I thought there was an Aussie arm. We are not the type of people to blame little things and if we'd tightened up in other areas we might not have been in that position."

Whether Joubert was right or wrong with the initial decision it seems he was right not to refer it.

Referees were criticised early in the tournament for wasting time with unnecessary video reviews but quickly found a way to speed up the process, often discussing replays with the TMO while play continued

Fans chanted their disapproval at Joubert's decision not to have a second look at the incident, but a World Rugby spokesman said the South African had been right and that such an incident did not fall under the protocols for involving the TMO.

Nevertheless, instead of waiting for his touch judges and then shaking hands with the players at fulltime as is the norm, Joubert ran from the pitch immediately after the final whistle. A fan lobbed a water bottle that narrowly missed him.

"If I see referee Craig Joubert again, I am going to tell him how disgusted I am. It was disgraceful that he ran straight off the pitch at the end like that," said former Scotland captain Gavin Hastings.

"The referee is not expected to make the right decision all the time. That's what the TMO system is in place for. This is the quarterfinal of a Rugby World Cup. This is the highest end of our sport and they have to get these decisions right."

Scotland coach Vern Cotter took a more pragmatic view.

"We will take the emotion away from it. We are going to sit back and take a look at the game again and we will be reviewing it," he said.

Australia are unlikely to bother.

Well Craig is clealry vindicated and absolved from some scandalous atatcks. 

His call on maitalnd was correct and Sctoland cant really complain.

This match was in no ways like the disgracefull effort he put in to hand the wee abs the wo rld cup after France had soundly outplayed them.

 @CM,

"i am sure much like in 2011 old joubert will be handed the final as his reward for this"

I think today's incidents are going to be negative for Joubert,.... and Nigel Owens will be given the final,...... which would be the right call IMO, Owens is the current best ref,...... but we'll see,....

So he was vindicated because he missed what happened, and never consulted with his linesmen. And if he wanted to check with the TMO on a call that decided the WC QF, who would have objected?
This is nonsense. It was a flawed performance on many levels and in the end a cowardly one.

  Mr. Been,

the whole tournament they've been saying that the TMOs were going to check everything,...... they've been stopping all the games many times,..... and when most important is, when a QF match is going to be decided,...... there's no TMO,...... Joubert don't call for him (which is correct by the protocols according to the article but they don't say why,... because it was just a penalty or what) and the TMO keeps mute which is quite incredible given the times they have interrupted and stopped all the games.
May be it's not Joubert's fault but the TMO's (no idea who he was) and it's very clear that the scotts were unfairly damaged by a ref decision

 

Beeno1
 
Status: Hall Of Fame 
Posts: 17508RE: Craig Joubert is a bloody disgrace
October 18, 2015, 21:08:00

 What I saw was the ball coming forard off a sctots player and the ball being caught by a Scot. Looked like the right call. No one seemed to think otherwise?

 Are you sure that that was what you saw or was it what you thought you saw? My guess it was the latter. The golden rule about refereeing is that you only blow  what you see. Never what you thought you saw. Seems like you would have made the same mistake that CJ made.

 Desert Fox, when did the British Lions ever play Argentina???Thought they only ever played Boks, Oz and the ABs.

 They played the Br Lions in May 2005 and it was a 25 all draw.

L ions: G Murphy; D Hickie, O Smith, G D'Arcy, S Williams; J Wilkinson, G Cooper; G Rowntree, S Byrne, J Hayes; D O'Callaghan, D Grewcock; M Corry, L Moody, M Owen (capt).
Replacements: S Thompson, J White, B Kay, L Dallaglio, C Cusiter, R O'Gara, S Horgan.

Argentina: B Stortoni; J Nunez Piossek, L Arbizu, F Contepomi (capt), F Leonelli; F Todeschini, N Fernandez Miranda; F Mendez, M Ledesma, M Reggiardo, P Bouza, M Sambucetti, F Genoud, M Schusterman, J-M Leguizamon.
Replacements: E Guinazu, L de Chazal, M Carizza, S Sanz, F Bosch, L Borges, L Lopez Fleming

Referee: S Dickinson (Australia)

 Thanks Seb,Must have played them on way to/from NZ. 

 I must stand up for Mr Craig Joubert. He is a Gentleman and he is still a Top Referee. Maitlands knock on prevented a certain Wallabies try (I cant believe I am defending the Walabies) and the Scotts Forward caught the ball in an offside position.

 Look, I don't like Craig, but he made an error. He blew as he saw it and applied the rules/laws. He is, like we all are, a bit bias, but just to the extent that it is humanly impossible to be 100% objective. He is no crook. My main gripe with him is his snotty attitude, but lots of refs are like that.

 Joubert is charging with all the blame and he probably doesn't deserve so. As it's been said here he just applied the rules.
In the first case, Maitland's knock-on, it's not so clear. I wouldn't say that it was deliberate (Maitland was trying to catch the ball and he didn't tap the ball down) but it's true that it's what usually all the refs do applying an stupid rule.
The deliberate knock-on shouldn't be penalised with a yellow. If it's very clear that the player taps the ball down (now it's very usual that any tapping of the ball is considered deliberate) the call should be just a penalty and if the deliberate knock-on prevents a try, penalty try. And that's it.
Applying this nonsense rule many players have been yellow-carded in dangerless and insignificant plays when they were trying to catch the ball.
With the current rules Joubert could also have opted for calling just a penalty which is what other good refs, Owens e.g., would have done IMO (don't apply the rules strictly) and he himself has done many times when he was considered the best ref.

Seems that in the last penalty, Joubert couldn't go to the TMO according to the protocols for being just a penalty. So he cannot be blamed for it.
As i said before, the whole tournament they've been saying that the TMOs were going to check everything,...... the TMOs have been stopping all the games many times,..... and when most important is, when a QF match is going to be decided,...... there's no TMO. He should have interrupted the game, as they did in every other games, and show the footage where is clearly sheen that the penalty wasn't so.

 Incidentally, I heard there were no TMO referrals in the SA/Wales match. Don't ask me to confirm that. I was sressed out way too much to even bother to remember such a minute triviality.

According to World Rugby’s Laws of the Game, the offside call cannot be looked at by the TMO.
Rule 6.A.7 outlines what the referee may consult the TMO about and the late penalty doesn’t fall under the six circumstances.
So Joubert was correct in not consulting the TMO but this make me wonder if the rules need to be changed to cover critical calls. We don't want the game to flow so there has to be balance about this. 

 JW,
instead of changing the rules what they have done is to give the TMOs the right to interrupt the game whenever they consider that something important has happened (foul play, punches,...) and this is what they have been doing the whole tournament.
What it's inexplicable is that when it was more important, when a QF was being decided that the TMO kept mute.

 The TMO has been used all the time during this Tournament; they have been given carte Blanche to intervene at will. The standard if Joubert's performance yet again was awful, regardless of a TMO referral, this was not a Penalty, it was a scrum to Australia if he thought Strauss was the guilty party. 
As for running off the field at the end of play, like a coward.....says it all.

 They were starting to throw things at him Becs. What was he supposed to do? Stand and see what happ ens? How was he a coward? By not wanting to face a mob of tens of thousands? He had the balls to call it like he saw it, regardless of the crowd... A coward would have please the crowd. That's more courage than pleasing the crowd. Much less controversy here than what some would like to make out.  If you want to blame someone,  blame the TMO.

 They were starting to throw things at him Becs. What was he supposed to do? Stand and see what happ ens? How was he a coward? By not wanting to face a mob of tens of thousands? He had the balls to call it like he saw it, regardless of the crowd... A coward would have please the crowd. That's more courage than pleasing the crowd. Much less controversy here than what some would like to make out.  If you want to blame someone,  blame the TMO.

 I also read somewhere that at least one (re-tarded) of the crowd threw a bottle to Joubert,...... the best, and the only logical , in these cases is to get out as quick as possible from there

So he us the only Ref to have faced anger/wrath of " tens of thousands " is he ? And why was there such vehemence ? No-one has the right to throw things and, it seems, it was one plastic bottle that was no-where near him and had not even been thrown when he turned on his heels and ran.He ran like a total coward because he knew damned well what he had done. What a brave boy.
And World Rugby have investigated his performance. The conclusion is that it was the total and utter WRONG decision to award the Penalty. So those of you saying otherwise can take that up with the Governing body ! 
For the record, I gave no great love for the Scots and had tipped Australua to oer gaps win this thing. So no skin off my nose either way. But I abhore ineptitude like this, especially when it is someone who has been so poor in the past. 

i disagree with most here, theres nothing wrong with joubert, one of the worlds best refs and heres my two rand on the situation.

maitlands yellow card
i thought this call was a bit harsh, but one that could have gone either way.

the yellow card was a 50/50 call, and whether u agree with jouberts yellow card decision or not, it was one that was made after consultation with the TMO and more importantly, the TMO agreed with jouberts call

we have all seen similar incidents like this in the pass, some were rightly yellow carded, others were not.
not too sure why there was as much of a fuss being made about this TBH.

the last penalty
now i agree that joubert made the wrong call, but if u watch that at normal speed, it simply looks like joubert made the right call.

peeps need to remember that while it would have been nice if joubert referred it to the penalty, joubert was not allowed to do so.

"The TMO, can only be used to determine on acts of foul play, ruling on an infringement in the build-up to a try and to check both grounding of the ball and kicks at goal "

if anyone is at fault it was the TMO, as he could have che3cked the incident and then advised joubert about his error giving him the chance to reverse the call.

the calls bagging joubert on these incidents are more biased than based on anything factual.

joubert is a great referee who made an error at a crucial time which cost the valiant bravehearts a match.
IMO u could name any referee in the world, and they would have made the exact same call if they were in that situation.

I have watched many of Joubert's games....often wrong, never uncertain describes his style. And it caught up with him. A little humility and willingness to explore Scotland's obvious indignation would have saved him from looking like the villain of the WC, which right now he does.

As for that school teacher Skene, leaping in to ding Scotland on several occasions....his silence on the Mitchell late hit should have him removed from TMO duties permanently.

A massive miscarriage of justice. 

I'm afraid that's the price people sometimes pay  in positions of responsibility. It will pass but Joubert will never again  be the admired figure he was before the game. 

 

LAW DISCUSSION: FINAL NAIL FOR SCOTLAND; Rugby 365

IN THE SPOTLIGHT: RUGBY365'S LAW GURU PAUL DOBSON LOOKS AT THE MOST CONTENTIOUS DECISION OF THE 2015 WORLD CUP.

After a controversy-free 2015 World Cup, we have returned to refereeing controversy - following the match between Australia and Scotland.

It follows the 21st century trend - England's anger in 2003 when André Watson penalised their scrummaging, Wayne Barnes missed a forward pass that contributed to France's victory over New Zealand in 2007 and the 2011 anger at Bryce Lawrence for what was seen as his tolerance of Australian shenanigans at the tackle.

Now we have the 79th minute penalty against Scotland for offside that enabled Australia to win 35-34.

The Scottish anger this time is as furious and passionate as it was in 2003, 2007 and 2011.

However, it does not change the outcome.

But let's look at the incident and the law.

Australia are penalised and Scotland throw into a line-out. They throw deep and Dave Denton just manages to get a hand to the ball, knocking it to his side untidily. Players from each side make for the ball, among them Josh Strauss and John Hardie of Scotland and Nick Phipps and Greg Holmes of Australia. In the turmoil Hardie is closest to the ball and then Phipps. The ball strikes Strauss on the shoulder and travels quickly to Jon Welsh of Scotland, who plays the ball just in front of Scott Fardy.

The referee penalises Welsh for being offside.

The decision caused an outburst of booing in gracious Twickenham.

Bernard Foley goaled the penalty and Australia knocked Scotland out of the 2015 World Cup, causing a spate of European anger. All four of the semifinalists are from the Southern Hemisphere.

Those are sideshows. Let us return to our muttons, as the French say, and look to the laws of the game.

First of all, we are not dealing with a knock-on as the ball hits Strauss's shoulder. This is a straight forward case of offside.

Law 12 DEFINITION: KNOCK-ON
A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it.
‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball-line.

Law 11 DEFINITIONS
In general play a player is offside if the player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball, or in front of a team-mate who last played the ball. Offside means that a player is temporarily out of the game. Such players are liable to be penalised if they take part in the game.

Strauss played the ball. Welsh, who was in front of Strauss played the ball.

Definition
Played: the ball is played when it is touched by a player.

Welsh touched the ball.

But what if the ball had touched Phipps?

Law 11.3 BEING PUT ONSIDE BY OPPONENTS 
In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by an action of the opposing team. These three ways do not apply to a player who is offside under the 10-Metre Law.
(a) Runs 5 metres with ball. When an opponent carrying the ball runs 5 metres, the offside player is put onside.
(b) Kicks or passes. When an opponent kicks or passes the ball, the offside player is put onside.
(c) Intentionally touches ball. When an opponent intentionally touches the ball but does not catch it, the offside player is put onside.

If Phipps touched the ball intentionally, Welsh was onside.

But what if the ball had touched Phipps?

Then Welsh was offside.

What if Phipps had touched the ball in trying to grab it?

Welsh was onside.

What if Phipps had not touched the ball in trying to grab it?

Welsh was offside.

It is that complicated and it happened at speed, here and there.

Those people booing from the stand could simply not have been able to judge the situation. They were booing only because Scotland were penalised.

Later people had a chance to watch repeated slow-motion recordings of the incident, which the referee did not have.

There were queries as to why the referee did not refer the incident to the TMO.

The simple reply to that is that he was not allowed to by the protocol that applied in the World Cup. If he had have been refereeing in South Africa, he could have referred it as the TMO protocol is broader in South Africa.

But what about the TMO's input that led to the yellow card for Sean Maitland?

The World Cup allows for the TMO to have a say in the matter of foul play, a deliberate infringement which is an aspect of foul play and a possible infringement on the way to scoring a try.

Law 10.2 UNFAIR PLAY
(a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned that a send-off will result if the offence or a similar offence is committed, or sent off.
Sanction: Penalty kick

And what about the cancelling of Adam Ashley-Cooper's try because of Will Genia's prior knock-on.

From a line-out the Wallabies attacked the Scottish line. Drew Mitchell was tackled about a metre shot and Genia got the ball behind the tackle and threw a long pass to Foley who passed to Kurtley Beale who gave to Ashley-Cooper who dived over in the right corner.

The referee immediately referred the matter to the TMO and it was clear that Genia had knocked on in receiving the ball.

By the protocol for the World Cup, he was allowed to do that because a potential try had been scored.

Also, earlier in the match the referee had awarded a scrum to Australia when the ball made with a player in an offside position.

It was not the same situation.

Dave Denton raced down the left touchline and then passed infield to Stuart Hogg who gave a no-look pass over his shoulder. It fell to ground and was picked up by Michael Hooper who gave it to Kurtley Beal who gave it to Ashley-Cooper who kicked a low which struck WP Nel on the foot and the ball went straight to Finn Russell who was in front of Nel and facing him. Russell seemed to try to gather the ball.

The referee ruled an accidental offside, which mostly makes sense in such cases.

It's horrible when a player gives away three points for a minor infringement.

What one can say is that decisions should be based on the clear and obvious.

The Welsh case was clearly not clear and obvious.

By Paul Dobson