FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Refereeing Decisions in New Zealand

Refereeing Decisions in New Zealand

Started by clevermike72 REPLIES1,040 VIEWS· 12 May 2015, 07:44
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 07:44
#1
12 May 2015, 07:44#1

The following article from Rugby365:-


"While there was a definite improvement in all facets of the Shark's play against the Hurricanes on Saturday, Director of Rugby GaryGOLDfeels hard done by with some dodgy referee calls.

 Despite a very frustrating loss in a game that could well have gone the other way, there was no faulting the team’s commitment and positive attitude.  "Obviously we’re massively disappointed with the result,"GOLD said from the team's training base in Sydney. "After a very poor performance against the Highlanders, I thought the guys worked extraordinarily hard during theCOURSE of the week and I was impressed by the commitment from the players and management in terms of getting the situation sorted. The Sharks were denied a try in the 61st minute, which they appeared to score after Marcell Coetzee dotted down following a powerful driving maul close to the Hurricanes try-line. Referee Chris Pollock referred the decision upstairs and eventually disallowed the try for what he called "changing lanes".  "We crossed the Hurricanes line four times and bizarrely one of the tries wasn't allowed at a critical time of the game,"GOLD explained. Had the try stood, the Sharks would have been in a commanding position and may well have reversed the final outcome. "I thought we had driven well for very little reward before that,"CONTINUEDGOLD.  "They [the Hurricanes] had conceded a couple of penalties before half-time from the drives and I think they were very close to conceding a yellow card at that stage. "We unleashed what I would deem a textbook quality drive which led to an emphatic try - which was disallowed.  "That was a hugeMOMENTUM shift."   Gold continued to rage about Pollock's calls after another decision went against the Sharks. "Then a few minutes later the late charge in the air on Odwa [Ndungane] was again another momentum shift.  "Not only was it not a yellow card, not a penalty, it ended up being a lineout to them.  "I’m just staggered as to how you ’re allowed to compete with no arms in the air let alone being late.  "It’s important that I’m not seen to be moaning about it but those things didn't seem to go our way.  "At that stage, even though the try wasn't allowed Frans [Steyn] still had an opportunity to kick at goal. It’s disappointing, but I’m proud of how the guys fought until the bitter end." The Sharks mentorCONFIRMED that there were a few niggles in the camp including concussions and concerns for Bismarck du Plessis and Marco Wentzel.  "There are three or four concussions and we have to look at Bismarck’s [Du Plessis] knee while Marco [Wentzel] played with what seems to be a fractured rib or cartilage,"GOLD said.

CONCLUSION

There can be no doubt that the home teams in New Zealand has a massive advantage playing other teams.   In the main this is based on the approach of the local referees.   In the case of one of the tries scored by the Hurricanes - the ball was seen being clearly on top of the maul formed over the line and was actually grabbed at by a Sharks player - before it vanished completely from sight.  There was no evidence the ball was actually grounded - no one could see the ball at all, definitely not the TV monitor.  In that case there should have been a 5 meter scrum given - not a try.

The over-riding principle in NZ is that if an opposing team scores a try - find a reason why the try should not be awarded.   That leads to wrong decisions being taken that favours the home team.   The other way around is to give NZ team a free hand and ignore illegal play and passing errors and award dubious tries to local teams.

The same things happened in two matches between the Hurricanes and opponents, and it is not a thing that should happen.   It leaves a bitter taste in the mouths of many genuine rugby supporters outside of New Zealand and place a serious question mark over the honesty of NZ refereeing structures.   

TT
The_TruthClub Pro471 posts
12 May 2015, 10:25
#2
12 May 2015, 10:25#2
1. Marcell Coetzee was never bound to the original lineout (which never was a maul in any case) as the ball was given directly to Coetzee away from the lineout.

2. Three Sharks players were ahead of Coetzee (no. 7, 19 and 20), when the single Hurricanes player made contact with the players ahead of the ball carrier (Coetzee).

Clear obstruction
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 10:32
#3
12 May 2015, 10:32#3
 The Trooth Fairy
Obstruction was not given as a reason for not giving the try - the excuse was changing of the lane - so your comment is already BS.
TT
The_TruthClub Pro471 posts
12 May 2015, 10:50
#4
12 May 2015, 10:50#4
 Idiot,

Changing lanes is just another term used for obstruction at a maul. In this case the lane changed even before an original maul could have been formed... The same thing, a different description.
MO
moolaaPro2,380 posts
12 May 2015, 12:29
#5
12 May 2015, 12:29#5
 Is all this just opinion Mike or another lie?...
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 13:27
#6
12 May 2015, 13:27#6
 
After I saw the refereeing debacle in the game between the Hurricanes and the Stormers - I am afraid it is neither of the two - but unfortunately factual.   I do not normally moan about refereeing - but I think that the referees must take care not to make interpretations that favour home-town teams.   
The referee for the Stormers - Brumbies game was severely criticized for being soft on the Brumbies - maybe because he did not want to read about his refereeing in the newspapers the next day.   I think the refs should show impartiality and apply the rules strictly - that is all that is required.
I did post the above as a discussion topic and that was all it was meant to be.
     
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
14 May 2015, 07:46
#7
14 May 2015, 07:46#7
 Mike nz approach to the game, their blatant cheating( Players trained to cheat) and the bent ref that support them is totally disgusting.
The international rugby community should protest and action should be taken against them ASAP. Its reaching absurd proportions against us.
Well done Gold for speaking out. We need more men not afraid of being called moaaners to stand up and be counted.Oregan Hoskins was protesting against the bias of the tribunal. He must now launch a Crusade against nz cheating and bent refs.
One still hopes the going North option becomes available. In a sense we are propping up nz with our money. It feels unethical to do so in the circumstances.

MO
moolaaPro2,380 posts
14 May 2015, 07:55
#8
14 May 2015, 07:55#8
 We'll need a heap of your currency to hold us up Hasbeeno given the current rate of exchange....Probably explains why the "Luyt" Louis Luyt offered gold watches as bribes to referees in the 1995 RWC rather than rand !
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
14 May 2015, 08:01
#9
14 May 2015, 08:01#9
 Prove that nonsense moooooo la or forever hold your peace. No gutter nonsense here please. no ref would risk his job for a gold watch and neither would self made business tycoon Luyt risk his reputation for that. 
A quick solution would be to ban all OZ and Nz refs till they clean up their act together with a warning that all refs favouring nz sides risk being banned for life.
Lets see some action! Rid the game of this malignant curse.
The Hurricanes aslo were handed the game to them when pla ying the Mighty Stormers pack!
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
14 May 2015, 08:24
#10
14 May 2015, 08:24#10
 This is turning into a discussion which I thought would be more professional.   Here we have the Trooth Fairy making a statement which means that a respected ex-referee is talking tripe.    Wonder how many refereeing courses that idiot passed.
Beeno went overboard because he described all decisions of NZ referees - even those made in error - as crooked when they favour NZ rugby teams.  Like all human beings I think NZ referees make mistakes that is being thrown at them in too big a way.  We  know there were the outright crooks as referees like Paddy O'Brien and Bryce Lawrence.   However, I would not put most of the present NZ referees in the "crooked" category.  I think some of them are inexperienced and some makes some genuine errors in their reffing - but to classify them as crooks is a bit harsh.
There is one problem in New Zealand and that is with the TV Monitors.   They have time on their hands and they have the right to notify the on-field referee of obvious mistakes made by players.  However, their interpretations are so weird that it raise serious question marks about their honesty.  They do not get any blame for their weird decisions - all the blame rests on the often-enough innocent on-field referee.  The same problem applies to some of their line-judges - and that could also stem from inexperience and not necessarily being crooked.
There are some cleaning up to do - but I would start with removal of the present TV monitors and by constant follow-up courses for the referees of the referees concerned.
Moolaa is raking up a story about Louis Luyt, which is obvious BS.   Luyt handed watches to the match officials in the evening function after the WC final and that could not remotely influence the decisions of the match officials during the preceding match.   This is another equivalent of the Suzie story - just as much BS.  Incidentally I knew Louis Luyt quite well and he never was a cheapskate insofar as gifts are concerned.  Furthermore the Rand was much stronger in 1995 - not the toilet paper it is now.               
MO
moolaaPro2,380 posts
14 May 2015, 10:15
#11
14 May 2015, 10:15#11
 He specifically gave the ref for the Final a gold watch which was disgraceful conduct from a man in his position!
MO
moolaaPro2,380 posts
14 May 2015, 10:28
#12
14 May 2015, 10:28#12
 Hasbeeno, how do you risk a shocking reputation; by being nice??
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
14 May 2015, 12:13
#14
14 May 2015, 12:13#14
Moolaa 
That was after the final - not before it - so it could not have impacted  on decisions during the match.   I know NZ was trying to find all kinds of excuses for not winning the WC - but there were no substance in any of those.
The Trooth Fairy 
Do you think Kaplan did not study that incident repeatedly before making his comments?  Do you think you are a better in application of the laws of rugby than Kaplan is?  I know their are egocentric people here - but you are aiming to get into that disgusting category as well.    
PO
polyboyClub Pro601 posts
14 May 2015, 12:25
#15
14 May 2015, 12:25#15
OK SA posters watch the 3rd test in 1976 tour to SA AB vs Bok and then tell me the SA ref there didn't rob the ABs of a test.  And you guys have the nerve to complain about  NZ and Oz refs.  SA pioneered the cheating refs. 
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
14 May 2015, 17:13
#16
14 May 2015, 17:13#16
 Moolaa
Before the professional era and even during the early professional era use was made of local referees and they consistently favoured the local teams - that happened everywhere in the world - not only in SA or NZ.   After they brought in neutral referees the situation did improve, and there was very little to complain about during the subsequent years.
However, there was a number of referees that did not walk the straight and the narrow and Paddy O'Brien was one of those - he was as crooked as hell.  The position took a nasty turn when Bryce Lawrence's father wrote an e-mail to the head of the Australian Referees Association  to the effect that they must make sure SA teams do not get a fair deal in games involving Australian and NZ teams.   When that scandal broke there was a lot of red faces all over the scene - and a situation of  distrust of NZ referees became a permanent fixture in the mind of many SA supporters.   Bryce Lawrence soured the situation further by his conduct in the WC match between Australia and SA in 2011.
I tried to say above that many of the decisions are not taken by the on-field referees and that mistakes made by referees are not necessarily the result of crookedness  on their part.   Even Joubert - who are probably the top referee in the world at present - make mistakes and admit to it afterwards.  So that support my point I am trying to make.   What Kaplan suggested is regular refresher courses even for top referees - and especially for the younger referees starting to referee games.   
My norm is always - the best referee is the one whom we forgo t within a month after a game, because his role was so good that nobody noticed much of him during matches.             
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
14 May 2015, 18:02
#17
14 May 2015, 18:02#17
 What is the minimum qualification needed for being a professional referee? How often do they get evaluated and tested on their competency? How competent are their bosses? I think it is high time that there is a standard compulsory exam and internship of a few years implemented by World Rugby. There should be a transparent standard, not "Give Johnny a go and see what happens"
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
14 May 2015, 21:21
#18
14 May 2015, 21:21#18
 ou maaaike and Draadie we are not here concerned with with occassional mistakes by the bent down under refs. We are concerned about blatant cheating and cheating consistently game after game against SA sides. Very, very seldomly do we get a fair deal.Ban all down under refs should be the immediate response to all this.
The bent kiwis are a huge blight on the game! The ozzies are not much better. 
Beeno keeping it real and calling a spade a spade. Lets not beat about the bush oaks lest the villanious kbbs ruin the beautiful game.
This is a superb piece of writing and worthy of full acceptance by all honest oaks!

The over-riding principle in NZ is that if an opposing team scores a try -find a reason why the try should not be awarded.   That leads to wrong decisions being taken that favours the home team.   The other way around is to give NZ team a free hand and ignore illegal play and passing errors and award dubious tries to local teams.

The same things happened in two matches between the Hurricanes and opponents, and it is not a thing that should happen.   It leaves a bitter taste in the mouths of many genuine rugby supporters outside of New Zealand and place a serious question mark over the honesty of NZ refereeing structures.  

Man this is great writing I couldnt have done better myself!! 

I appeal to all kbbs to embrace the truth about themselves, look at themselves in the mirror and resol ve to mend the error of their ways.

MO
moolaaPro2,380 posts
14 May 2015, 21:46
#19
14 May 2015, 21:46#19
 Mike, do you have a copy of this letter that Bryce's father supposedly wrote? This is a serious question as everyone keeps bringing this up but I've yet to see any evidence.If it does exist then surely he would have been brought to account for attempted matchfixing.
Also, why would it make any difference with Luyt giving the watch after the game or before? It still smacks of bribery and corruption!
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
14 May 2015, 22:08
#20
14 May 2015, 22:08#20
Moola, it wasn't a letter, but an email, and the fool cc'd the SA ref in as well (by accident). The whole "get the Yarpies" debacle way back in 99. It's not fiction, but I can understand if you lot choose to rather forget that it happened.As for the gold watch, that was decided long before it was known who would be in the final and who the ref was going to be. Nothing wrong with that, but seeing that this is not the first reference by you and other NZders about that, tell me, why does it bother you? Was that ref bias or poor in anyway?  Was the watch given to him in secret? Was Suzi there when the watch was presented to him and how big was the cheque he received with it? Moola, how old are you(from what generation? Which decade did you start watching rugby? I started in the early 80's) are you a real New Zeelander, or do you only support the team?
MO
moolaaPro2,380 posts
15 May 2015, 01:45
#21
15 May 2015, 01:45#21
 Can't tell you either way about that ref Draad as I've never been able to bring myself to watch that 1995 Final again since the game finished!Yes, I'm a real Kiwi and have been watching International rugby in this country since the very first TV coverage of it. We used to see footage of the BOK vs ABs matches prior to that on newsreels at the cinema!It was way Luyt handed over the watch which got up the ABs noses as he appeared to be rubbing the loss in. I understand the ABs and their entourage then left the dinner to show their disgust. Either way, you must agree giving officials gold watches is a bad look; smacks of what's gone on in the Olympic movement in the last 20 years. Suzi apparently handed her watch back. Must have had pangs of guilt.....
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
15 May 2015, 06:24
#22
15 May 2015, 06:24#22
 We only got TV in 76 in SA. I was 4yo, but Currie Cup was the only Rugby we could watch until The Lions Tour over here and the Flower Bomb tour in NZ in the early 80's. The English team also toured here prior to the Rebel NZ team of 86.
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
15 May 2015, 06:40
#23
15 May 2015, 06:40#23
Moolaa: same for me, I have never watched that final. I was living in the US at the time & had not seen a rugby game in years until the 1995 RWC. It was not televised & we had not internet back then.
I saw the game against England was amazed how the game had changed, i.e. the ABs had fantastic skills across the board and forwards were also fast & powerful. I thought there was no way they could lose the final. But it was not to be.  I have never watched the movie either. It was the old style rugby vs. the new style brought by the ABs. As we have found in years since the old 10 man rugby can still beat 15 man rugby - it is a matter of execution .
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
15 May 2015, 07:25
#24
15 May 2015, 07:25#24
 It is common practice to give presiding referees and umpires a memorial gift after the final of every tournament.  In WC tournaments the gifts are quite expensive and could take a variety of forms.
In the WC the giving of a gold watch to the referee AFTER the match is no exception - and does not in any way constitute bribery or corruption - if it was BEFORE the match was played it would have been an entirely different issue.
That being the case it seems to me that with the walking out of the function in the evening after the final, the gold watch story and the Suzie saga, the team was sore losers - showing no sportsmenship at all.   That is not a nice way to behave.
However that happened 20 years ago and I do think that after that WC the game became a professional sport and the circumstances changed since then.   It is no good to live in the past and raise issues of the past on this site - unless it impacts on the present scenario.  
There are definite some reffing problems at present.  Referees are human - so mistakes will be made - whether it entails any referee from anywhere in the world.  However, when it involves NZ referees making mistakes in matches where  SA teams are involved, the "Get the Yarpies" e-mail saga and the Bryce Lawrence WC debacle in the 2011 WC match are always raised by  people who constantly criticize mistakes by NZ referees.
In essence I think that despite the neutral referees concept - there is still a tendency by some referees to pander to local spectators - as happened in the case of Poite in the 2013 Eden Park test between the AB's and the Springboks.   The fact that Poite was punished by the IRB for that debacle is not remembered by many and Poite was not a NZ referee in any event.  
My problem in essence is not with the on-field referees basically in charge of games - but with the TV refs and to a lesser extent with the line judges.   The TV refs have time on their hands and can have no excuses for making erroneous calls - but in a lot of cases they bugger up badly.   That is where the major problem is at present.  it happened constantly that the TV monitors gave weird decisions on tries being scored and the on-field referees get the blame for the real balls-ups made by them.  In SA TV refs extremely rarely make controversial decisions - in NZ is a regular problem.  That is why I mentioned that the TV monitors problem should be cleared up in NZ.             

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
16 May 2015, 10:22
#25
16 May 2015, 10:22#25
 Great post ou maaaikie and man are these kbbs sore losers. The Susie effect happen ed because they knew they had to face the mighty Boks in the final. It was just too much to handle! bwahahahhahahahaha 
Lets keep the pressure on where it belongs. Bent down under refs!
HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
16 May 2015, 15:17
#26
16 May 2015, 15:17#26
 Past Glory Beans
AB
ABasquefanPro2,549 posts
17 May 2015, 22:05
#27
17 May 2015, 22:05#27
  @mike,

when you write things like in the first post here, you are as hooligan as Mr. Been

"In the case of one of the tries scored by the Hurricanes - the ball was seen being clearly on top of the maul formed over the line and was actually grabbed at by a Sharks player - before it vanished completely from sight.  There was no evidence the ball was actually grounded - no one could see the ball at all, definitely not the TV monitor."

WTF were you smoking when you saw that match?
All the 4 tries of the canes were clearly grounded. In the 2 first (Jane and Smith) there  were little doubts but the next 2 (Goodes and Thrush) were also very clearly seen on the TV.  Very clearly.

So the rest of your comment deduced from this assessment mistake is utter BS.

Last friday Mike Fraser had a shocker which is not very unusual coz he has no f*cking idea. He's  a NZ ref who use to whistle against the NZ home teams, surely in the believe that this kind of actitude will handle him the reputation of a neutral and good ref. And the match Blues-Bulls was another example of this, specially in the last half an hour of the game.
He conceded the bulls and Serfontain's second try after a blatant forward pass from the same Serfontein to Basson. And he didn't even wanted to go to the TMO to have a look. After this, the rucks with bulls players going off their feet were countless untill the blues finally got the winning try and the deserved win but it was very close, the bulls almost win after a really awful performance thanx only to the ref.
But nobody came with the bizarre theory of the world conspiracy, including NZ refs, to harm the NZ teams as the saffa fans, and you yourself in this opportunity, do.
We could also begin to write things like (taken from your post and mr. Been's but changing NZ with SA):

"The over-riding principle in SA is that if an opposing team scores a try - find a reason why the try should not be awarded.   That leads to wrong decisions being taken that favours the SA  team.   The other way around is to give SA  team a free hand and ignore illegal play and passing errors and award dubious tries to local teams."

"SA approach to the game, their blatant cheating( Players trained to cheat) and the bent ref that support them is totally disgusting.
The international rugby community should protest and action should be taken against them ASAP. Its reaching absurd proportions against us."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now after some really poor performance of all the SA franchises, where all the 4 teams lost their matches, the national moaning and blaming against the ref has begun again, in this case against the ref of the sharks' match.
He made some mistakes but didn't affect the outcome of the game. And the saffa fans instead of wondering what's going wrong with their teams, blaming the ref as always
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
17 May 2015, 23:03
#28
17 May 2015, 23:03#28
 ABF
There is no way the TV monitor could see what happened to the ball after it was visible on top of the maul - so the decision as to whether the ball was grounded was not clear at all.   
However, that is not the main problem - if the TV monitor was convinced the pass you referred to was forward he or either of the line judges who are supposed to assist the on-field referee should have warned the referee that there may have been a problem and he should call for a TV review.
In many cases the on-field referee is made the scapegoat for the faults made by the people that should assist him.   It happened twice that  in the Hurricanes game a line judge advised the referee to review cases of the Stormers being guilty of illegal play and in the end nothing came of it - because there were no such play.  Yet the same line judge saw a deliberate knockdown of the ball by Conrad Smith five meters from the tryline and both Hoffman and the line judge pretended they did not see it.
There has been serious problems in the past because of the conduct of the NZ and Australian referees when reffing SA teams in the past and one case was in the Crusaders - Lions game where the referee caused havoc by his decisions as to scrumming.   The upshot was that because Crockett was scrumming illegally in that game and he should have been penalized and the referee concerned penalized the Lions constantly instead, Crockett was not included to play for the Crusaders the next game and has been phased into the team subsequently.
However, I think that most of the refereeing decisions where there is serious controversy is not entirely the fault of the referee concerned - they are human and can make mistakes - but of the line judges and TV monitor - who should effectively assist the referee.   
I must ask you - why are the SA referees rarely making refereeing mistakes and experts agree that there are serious mistakes made constantly by NZ and Australian referees.   I watched the Foxsport NZ rugby programme recently and when the two WC NZ referees were present - a number of refereeing decisions were shown and one of which was from the Hurricanes - Stormers game (which preceded the Barrett try) and both referees agreed that the referee made a balls-up in that case.
The SA supporters think the mistakes are made only when SA teams are involved - but the same referees buggers up week after week involving NZ and Australian teams as well.   My problem is that  there seems to be a deficiency in referee training renewal programmes -  which should be done as a measure to prevent mistakes - or that some proven incompetents such as Hofmann and the TV monitors in NZ should be shown the door.  
                 

AB
ABasquefanPro2,549 posts
17 May 2015, 23:50
#29
17 May 2015, 23:50#29
 The 4 tries:


AB
ABasquefanPro2,549 posts
17 May 2015, 23:57
#30
17 May 2015, 23:57#30
which of the 4 tries were you talking about?
the 4 are very clear
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 May 2015, 06:06
#31
18 May 2015, 06:06#31
 ABF
I tried to see the above and got a message that it is blocked and I could not view it.  Did you find it on Google and if you did what was the site reference?  
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
18 May 2015, 07:19
#32
18 May 2015, 07:19#32
Yes, the refs make mistakes, they are human & always have. Improvements can be made and there is a process for this.
The point SA posters don't want to face is the fact that poor SA teams will get in the finals in spite of weak performance.
Example: Bulls are 7 and 4, a mediocre record but they are still a conference leader and based on the conference system would go through to the finals - SA has a weak conference. While kiwi teams with a record of 8 and 4 fight it out for the wild card spot. This is a much more significant fact than a few bad calls by the ref.
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
18 May 2015, 07:28
#33
18 May 2015, 07:28#33
 Good post ABF indisputable evidence, as you say "Grounded" but you could have used "pounded" also Some really weak tackling by the sharks and some real sk ills & ball handling but the Canes. No wonder they are top of the leader board.
HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
18 May 2015, 09:25
#34
18 May 2015, 09:25#34
 All the 4 Cane tries were well grounded
AB
ABasquefanPro2,549 posts
18 May 2015, 10:19
#35
18 May 2015, 10:19#35
 @mike,

I edited the video and uploaded myself.
I can watch it without any problem, still you cannot watch it?
HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
18 May 2015, 10:21
#36
18 May 2015, 10:21#36
 You have won the argument Abasquefan . Mike has conceded that you have a point .
AB
ABasquefanPro2,549 posts
18 May 2015, 10:26
#37
18 May 2015, 10:26#37
 And here's the bulls' forward pass before their try.
It couldn't be more clear, the pass is made a meter before the 22 line and the ball is taken a meter after the 22.
Even the blues players stopped thinking that the ref was going to make the call,..... it was so evident,..... but, no, the try was conceded and no mention of going to the TMO




HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
18 May 2015, 10:28
#38
18 May 2015, 10:28#38
 
AB
ABasquefanPro2,549 posts
18 May 2015, 10:29
#39
18 May 2015, 10:29#39
 But no one has begun to say that the refs are against the NZ teams, no one has begun a twitter campaign against the refs, etc, etc, etc
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 May 2015, 11:29
#40
18 May 2015, 11:29#40
 ABF
Sorry - but I get the following message on my screen when I tried to open the video clips you posted:-
"This video contains contents from DSTV, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds." 
It seems to me that you may make copies - but cannot post it on this site on copyright grounds. 



↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 2)

More from Rugby

More news