The thing is, it's not two carries, Blue. A carry ends when the player carrying is either a) stopped and can't continue or b) dispossessed. Louw was never dispossessed and not stopped until the ruck formed. He was moving forward all the time. It's one carry.
This is the typical diversion Mike always employs. He accused me of misrepresenting the carry. That was the claim. I provided a video that proved him wrong. That's where an adult debate would end, with one party saying either "sorry, I was wrong" or "I still disagree, but I see your point" or even "fine, but Louw still sucks and the carry is insignificant". I can happily live with the last one, everyone is entitled to an opinion.
But now Mike has to save face. So he starts nitpicking and lying about distances. About one or two carries. About the player's movements. About hypothetical penalties. Even called it a ref error.
None of that changes the fact that Louw did carry the ball for 15m as I described. That's the beginning and the end of it. But by casting as much (fake) doubt as possible he diverts attention from the fact that he yet again accused me of lying and his accusation was yet again blown out of the water. Another example of this was the recent Fleck/Kayser incident, where he got it hopelessly wrong, but instead of admitting such he immediately starting latching onto insignificant details like the distance from the tryline the tackle took place, the ball spilling over the tryline, etc.
This is deeply dishonest behaviour by an operator skilled in the art and it drags debate on this site down into a quagmire of tediousness as we're stuck on fending off one lame accusation and bogus claim after another, nothing of which adds any value to proceedings.
