Deysel Twin 1's cleanout on George Smith

Deadhead if there was a transgression the staff involved would have taken action.   I do not need to explain to idiots that the referee. etc. saw what happened and so did the citing commissioner - go and ask why they did not act since you idiots apparently believe that you know better what happened than the ref did.        

"I do not need to explain to idiots that the referee."

It's OK. I understand. It is not the first time that you have displayed your ignorance about the laws of the game.

Watch what the guy next to him does: bind and drive.

I am always amazed how the members of this site knows more about the game of rugby know  more than the coaches, referees and all other officials involved in the game combined,    They make up things that they regard as wrong or poor on the part of players and then come up with utter BS.   But then I should not be surprised that in  moment of complete rugby idiocy Mozart came up with the story that the rugby analysts om site see things that other analysts  fail to see.

This is just another example illustrating that ridiculous statement,   LMAO    

I am always amazed how the members of this site knows more about the game of rugby know  more than the coaches, referees and all other officials involved in the game combined,    They make up things that they regard as wrong or poor on the part of players and then come up with utter BS.   But then I should not be surprised that in  moment of complete rugby idiocy Mozart came up with the story that the rugby analysts om site see things that other analysts  fail to see.

This is just another example illustrating that ridiculous statement,   LMAO    

"They make up things that they regard as wrong or poor on the part of players and then come up with utter BS".

The laws that I quoted, straight from the law book, is utter BS, then?The offer stands though. Debunk us, using the laws of the game. Show us where we have the laws wrong in the incident involving Du Preez.

@Pakie, the guy next to him does exactly the same thing. He just does it with less pace and ferocity. 

If you make a tackle it is always good to turn your head to avoid headbutting your opponent or hurting your own head.

The guy next to him, however, has no effect and does not clear the player out of the ruck. He does bind the player, but I suppose if things are being done at such a low intensity/slow pace, it is easier to do so.

Ceradunce

A headless chicken has more thoughts than you have - the total idiot at work.   Nobody said anything about the laws - the problem is with what really happened  in this case.  Mozart, you and Pakie made up a concoction of BS to make the case that Du Preez broke the laws - while the referee and his assistants - as well as the citing commissioner - found that no law was broken.

You apparently do not understand anything about interpretation of laws - showing total idiocy - hell it is beyond funny.   LMAO 

.  

@Pakie, the guy next to him does exactly the same thing. He just does it with less pace and ferocity. [..] ...has no effect and does not clear the player out of the ruck

SB, he doesn't target the neck area, keeps his feet, gets a bind and drives. Du Preez's challenge had no effect either - had he also bound to the player and drove at him their collective effort may well have removed him.

Not really sure what you're trying to get at here. It's okay to do something dangerous and illegal if you see no way to achieve something legally?

I am always amazed how the members of this site knows more about the game of rugby know  more than the coaches, referees and all other officials involved in the game combined,   

Uhm, Mike? It is an international coach that highlighted this incident in the first place.

Here are just a few of your criticisms on refs in the past that I managed to track down:

Wonder how incompetents  like that gets to be refs?
You get incompetent referees and you get outright crooked referees.
There was a number of refereeing blunders made in games this weekend - and the Cane incident is one of those.
That indicates a serious deficiency by the referee...

Sounds like you also think you know more about the game than the referees ... when it suits you. Just like it suits you to champion them here, because you have no other way to justify your view.

No Pakie

I do not pretend to know more about rugby than the coaches and officials do - that I leave entirely to you and Mozart and the idiots who pretends they do.

Refs are human - they make mistakes - however, there are other people in the set-up that would correct mistakes made by refs - eg the other match officials and  the specific people dealing with different disciplinary issues,   Mistakes by refs are frequently corrected and actions taken - eg the Bismarck tackle on Carter years ago,

So there are reasons to criticize referees, but that need to depend on ha rd evidence - not manufactured incidents as was the case in this issue,   Mozart and AO - always supported by you - have been guilty of manufacturing many incidents to get at individual players.   There are loads of those and I take exception to that kind of dishonesty.   

So I suppose you will scream and shout that you  have never done that - but it can be easily prove that you have done exactly that in this case and numerous others.     .    

but it can be easily prove that you have done exactly that in this case and numerous others.

Go ahead.

"I am always amazed how the members of this site knows more about the game of rugby know  more than the coaches, referees and all other officials involved in the game combined,"

"This is where we are at the moment," Ryan wrote.

"Look at just how utterly sh*t and illegal this clear out is ... obvious but unpunished."

It was Ben Ryan who started this... So I logically deduce that Mike claims that he knows more about rugby than Ben Ryan?

"No Pakie

The Trooth Fairy

It is obviously another total misrepresentation by a proven birdbrain,  What si written in newspapers is often enough total baloney - but that is not the topic here,   Why take a newspaper report to attack a rugby player?

When no action was taken against the player it becomes obvious that only idiots will continue with the campaign - so as per normal your idiocy reigns supreme.

I am delighted to be accused of being a liar by a complete idiot who dioes not know the difference between lies and truths!!!!!!!!!!        

The Trooth Fairy

It is obviously another total misrepresentation by a proven birdbrain,  What si written in newspapers is often enough total baloney - but that is not the topic here,   Why take a newspaper report to attack a rugby player?

When no action was taken against the player it becomes obvious that only idiots will continue with the campaign - so as per normal your idiocy reigns supreme.

I am delighted to be accused of being a liar by a complete idiot who dioes not know the difference between lies and truths!!!!!!!!!!        

Answer to what I said in my post. Don't try to answer to the fantasy in your head... You are getting confused again!

No - deadhead - what was in your posts deserves the answer you got.    

Foeotog = dofdoos will keep repeating that BS over and over again.   He is to dim to find anything new and that is the real problem wit him - dimmest F#cker on site. 

Listen Dofdoos - I don't need to do any discrediting about ear Morne - he became a serial bench player or Stade and was a serial flop  for the Springboks,   So why should I restate the obvious?   

?

 
• ?
 
• ?
 
• ?
 
• ?

Deysel comes across as a little thick ...

I guess that proves it.

Draad's image clears it up, you can definitely see the contact to the neck area - it's the dark blob to the right of the tree .

Pakie

If there was nay contact - Smith did not move an inch from the position where he was - so the neck contact is at best a concoction by you and Mozart,   .  

His body folded almost double from the impact. Why would he move backwards in a strong position like that when someone dives downward onto his neck? The other guy actively driving at him hardly managed to move him.

Ou Mike, I've now said all I have to say about this incident. I'm not going to argue with you about it ad infinitum. You're not going to be swayed, I'm not going to swayed. Time to move on.

Thanks for the slow motion photos - amazing what you can see from them.   Still the referee and other staff did not find it unacceptable and e ven in the last photo it appeared hat the contact was with Smith's shoulder and not his head or neck.   Fact is Du Preez looked rather stupid when he landed on the grass next to the maul.