Spoony got owned, Spoony got owned! hahaha, come on man! Sas has both your testicles in his mouth and he is chewing hahaha. Good on both of you however, not sure if your both unemployed or what but i really couldn't be arsed going to the lengths you guys do!
@spoony,
"Sasuke O Connor was obstructed from getting to Dagg as he blitzed. Obstruction. Illegal. Take off those bias glasses."
wrong, and this isnt even a case of ur opinion is valid and lets agree to disagree, ur just plain wrong.
ur one picture which dosent even show show dagg being obstructed, is nothing compared to the utube clip i provided with a time for ur convenience (www.youtube.com/watch at 40:05 - 40:22), which shows on two different replay camera angles, dagg passing the ball before running behind hore.
u will also see that oconner was never truly committed to dagg considering the wallabies were well short of numbers out wide.
tim horan on the night made a point that joubert didnt go to the TMO for a possible obstruction, after watching the same replay im referring too, u dont here a single thing from a former wallaby commentator other then complinets on a well worked try.
furthermore, i found this article on an oz website. where an aussie rugby analyst goes into detail over james oconners defensive performances that night.
http://www.theroar.com.au/2013/08/20/wallabies-video-analysis-perception-versus-reality/
hope u notice the number of times he points out this obstruction u conjured out of thin air, which for the record is zero times.
"Numbnuts? Is that what your dad called you."
witty retorts like that must have u as the king of the playground
"Firstly Latua was too injured to roll away but wasn't injured enough to complete the tasckle and to go roll over to his right side? He got a knock after he lied there by the aussie boot close to his head."
i have know idea why ur so eager to make shit up as u go along, none of that is fact.
1) too injured to roll away from what??? the ball which was a meter away from him???
2) he was injured during the tackle, its not a miracle for player to finish a tackle and get injured from it
3) he didnt have to roll over on his right side, the position he was in when he landed on the ground was him already saw him on his right side, it was only natural for him to end up in that position.
had he been knocked out in the tackle, he would have landed in a position that would have been favorably to the right.
4) luatua is injured during the tackle he makes mcmeniman, as he goes to the ground from the tackle he is already clutching his head. there was no boot involved.
here is the link and time to the whole incident -
www.youtube.com/watch 35:35 - 37:45
can u prove any of my facts wrong, or are u going to refer me to the two pictures again???
"Again Genia wanted to box kick. He is fucking right footed how the fuck can he kick with a player laying there?"
bullshit, he never once looked like he was going for a boxkick. this picture of urs proves my point
still dont see it??? tell me who in the world gets ready to do a box kick with their legs spread as far apart as genias are???
reed richards from fantastic four maybe, but no normal human sets up a box kick in poor mans chinese gymnast stance.
and just like the wrong scrum call, jouberts actions are not dictated by the All Blacks, they are his issues and his issues alone. meaning none of this bullshit of urs holds any water with the stupid jealous saffa mentality of the All Blacks cheating.
"AND IF LATUA WAS INJURED JOUBERT SHOULD HAVE STOPPED PLAY RIGHT THERE! So jog on"
is the first rugby u have watched??? it sure sounds like it, otherwise u would know that theres nothing strange about play continuing when a player is injured.
and how in the world was joubert to know that luatua was injured??? should joubert have stopped play and asked him if hes all right, or should joubert opt for the logical choice and continue play as he can clearly see that luatua is not impeding genias ability to reach the ball???
so u jog on, thats if the lies havent left u completely out of breath.
"AND again Genia is right fotted genia is right footed. He wanted to kick couldn't then flipped it to Lily that is why he was charged down. Look at the time 1 second!"
LMAO, :oD
look at the time one second, WTF??? look at the freaking utube clip and the time i mentioned
www.youtube.com/watch 35:35 - 35:55
no spoony, genia didnt once look like he was going for a kick
, not only cos his stance was all wrong, but aaron smith would have charged it down, does ur picture clearly show smith ready to charge it down??? no. does the utube clip i provided show it??? yes.
it really is that simple.
"And again repeated infringements are repeated infringements and should be binned. Are you trying to argue against the rugby laws now? Which is there provided for you? FFS you Kiwi's are stuck ups."
dont mistaken getting schooled for being stuck up, repeated infringements should be binned, but thats the refs job and for the record none of those points i replied to here and earlier were infringements as i have clearly proved,
ur pictures and lies are scissors, my video clips and facts are rock and rock ALWAYS beats scissors.
i dont care about peoples opinions, we all have one and are entitled to share them and i enjoy reading the fdifferent ones here. what i dont like is when people try to pass of complete and utter bullshit as fact like u clearly did, its something straight out of a fox news broadcast.
at least u saved urself the trouble of not trying to defend that stupid comment about the australian tackle assist. rolling away on his own accord due to the wonderful oz rugby spirit he has, pfffffffft maybe theres hope for u yet, LMAO, :oD
Spooney with that lame post, you just shot your own argument down. Pathetic. Shame as previously i considered your posts to be somewhat reasoned and not without merit, but that was a poor effort son. I had to keep checking your avatar to be sure it wasnt pedsman on one of his pubescent teenage girl hissy fits. The only incident you highlighted that needs any discussion would be the mcaw try in the 32nd minute. It may have warranted a review, but clearly it wouldnt have changed anything because hore didnt impede. It didn't help the wobblies cause having bieber come off his wing once again and attemp an ineffectual tackle. joubert had a clear and unobstructed view of it in real time and clearly saw it that way.
Back to basic's
So the Kiwi posters whom have tried everything in the book to deflect the issue here can i ask 2 basic questions. Do you think it is fair and in the spirit of the game :
1. That Steven Moores 'try' was not refered to the TMO ?
2. That 5 penalties for professional infringements when the opposing team is on your tryline should be allowed without even a warning ?
Should you say this is in the spirit of the game and is fair you should really stand up and he counted here. Please answer the 2 basic questions with a simple yes or no.
@rugganut,
here is a link which more then answers ur questions and shows u for a fool for asking question No2
www.sarugby.com/forum.cfm
it touches on the moore try and also goes into extensive detail about EVERY SINGLE penalty in the game.
its why the only question anyone can answer is the first one which is no. ur second question is like spoonys comments here, nothing but conjured up fairy poo and click on the link if u want to know why, o_O
Whine ,whine farking whine ! last time I heard whining like that was from anold Aussie holden going up the bloody Adelaide hills filled with drunken shearers and roust-a-bouts !with smoke pouring out of it !
Spooney ,I would rather have my head up my own Arse [ apparently it has a rather floral boquet or so I would think !} than up redsman or any other blokes arse thanks muchly !
Hey cloudy .Saru hakwa and Allblackandblue ,Justwin too !
Poi-e ,that picture is a dead ringer for my youngest brother when we were kids ! thats "Boy" innit ?
