The All Blacks should have finished with 12 men, not 13

Pat Lambie was tackled in the air when scoring a try. 

I dont understand why the referee never gave the tackler a yellow card because initially he was considering a penalty try.

He confirmed this to Jean Devilliers who was requesting a penalty try and a kick in front of the poles.

The TMO confirmed that it was not a forward pass to Lambie, but then the referee did not ask the TMO toconfirm if it was a tackle in the air. 

The referee was watching the replay on the big screen but still did not make the call when it was 100% clear it was a tackle in the air- and did not require the TMO to confirm what he could see in the replay himself.

Even if Lambie scores surely it should still be a penalisable offence because tackling a player in the air is a yellow card offense.

Even if he was playing advantage it was still a dangerous tackle, and Lambie fell awardly and was just able to turn well in the air.

It was allmost a tip tackle as well as a tackle in the air.

Bismaark got a yellow card for a no arms tackle when the camera replay shows that arms were used, but Lambie can get tackled in the air but the tackler gets no yellow card.

When the pressure was on the AllBlacks in the last 10 minutes they actually gave away 3 penalties that should have been yellow cards, not 2. 

 Clutching at straws Sharkbok! Tackling a player in the air results in a penalty....it's only a yellow card if it's considered dangerous. Read the rule book before you open your stupid mouth! If you think what happened to Lambie was dangerous then you are a bigger girl than I could imagine.

I notice you haven't bothered to comment on Read's card. If ever there was a soft yellow, that was it! Shame on the biased ref trying to hand the game to the Boks.

There is no such thing as a yellow card offence. Nowhere in the lawbook is there anything that describes when a red or yellow card should be shown. The lawbook only describes what the two cards means, i.e. what the effects of each of them are.

 Moola when is tackling in the air not dangerous?. (Only when the tackled player lands on his own two feet). 

It is illegal to interfere with someone in the air, unless it is competing for the ball.

Any form of tackle in the air is illegal, and surely if the tackled player does not land on his feet it is dangerous.

Lambie is turning in the air and is close to even being both a high tackle and a tip tackle. 

Lambie just does well to balance himself, otherwise he could have landed head down. Watch how he swivels his own body to prevent the bad landing.

It is in minute 1:19:31

http://youtu.be/W6ztgwPaWZY?t=1h20m29s

Reid is at 1:14:15 (It is very unclear because they are so many players blocking the camera view, it is hard to even see it from the viewers perspective. This is not to say that it did or did not happen, it is just very unclear.

http://youtu.be/W6ztgwPaWZY?t=1h14m15s

This is "mountain out of molehill"-stuf. A penalty try would have been awarded if there was a posibility of a try being scored and there was foul play that prevented it from being scored. The ref asked the TMO to check if Lambie has not lost the ball forward. Jean de Villiers was the one who talked about and ask about the possibility of a penalty try. The commentators in their wisdom mentioned the penalty try if he was tackled in the air. The penalty try would only have come into play if the tackle in the air prevented the try from being scored.

A penalty from the halfway line after the try is also out of the question, because that only comes into play if there was dangerous/foul play in the in-goal area after the try was scored.

Then, as I have mentioned earlier, there is no such thing as a yellow card offence. A yellow card is only mentioned under the defintions on page 9 of the lawbook, and then again on page 70 where it describes the meanings of the red and the yellow cards. That is it.

Ceradyne, laws in rugby are similar to laws in society. This is called precedent, otherwise known as common law.

A precedent means applying a consistent interpretation of the laws to sanction the illegal action.

If 10 of the exact same crimes are commited, then the sentencing should be the same in each case.

It is referring back to historical interpretation which are the "precedent". 

So tackling a player in the air is typically a yellow card, unless it is extremely dangerous when it is a red card.

It is one of the major gripes around the world is the inconsistent refereeing and even the citing that is recieved from the IRB.

Two player commit exactly the same offense under the same situation but get different punishments. 

I am not going to argue with you about this. It is of no use. How often is a player yellow carded for a tackle in the air? We all know by now that Poite had a crap game, and that he dished out cards like there is no tomorrow but to see a yellow card around every corner, or every second minute of the game is ridiculous. Apart from it being illegal, there was no danger or potential injury in that tackle and while it cannot be proven without any doubt, I cannot see how their could have been much danger in that tackle. There was no need for a yellow card, IMO. There was nothing cynical and looked more like a matter of missed timing, which, IMO, is what happens in most cases of early tackles, late tackles and tackles in the air. If you want to see malicious intent, then go watch the game between Gloucester and Saracens earlier today. A player blatantly and intentionally stampad another player, Jacques Burger, on the ground and in the face.

 It is a bit grey but considering Bismaark got a yellow for a high tackle the referee has been inconsistent and overall crap.

Another angle was that it was also a cynical foul in an attempt to sacrifice 3 points for a certain try.

This in itself is often a yellow card, and given that it was a tackle in the air and potentially dangerous, on another day it could have been a yellow.

Yes. As I have said, the fact that Poite was crap is no news any more. You are still not 100% correct though. Bismarck was not yellow carded for a high tackle. He did not even tackle the player, he was the one being tackled. He struck the tackler with his elbow on the throat, and that was dangerous. Don't you agree?

You are correct in saying that they could have seen to have scraficed a possible 3 pointer to prevent a try. That is however where the discretion comes in. He had to consider a few things.

• First: "Was a try scored, yes or no". In this case the answer was "yes". If the answer was "no"he would then have had to consider if the tackler cynically prevented Lambie from probably scoring a try. Interesting at this point is the fact that the law does not say (like many commentators like to argue) that a try should definitely have been scored. The law says that a try should PROBABLY have been scored. If he was happy that a probably try was prevented then he would have had to award a penalty try.
• Second: "Was there any foul play after the try was scored"? If yes, then there would have been a penalty from teh middle after the conversion kick.

Although just like you, I would have loved to grill Poite for each and every suspect decision, he was correct in thsi instance. He followed the letter of the law, IMO. Remember that when there is a penalty advantage and the team who has the advantage scores a try, that it then negates the penalty. The same goes in this instance. Had Lambie not managed to score the try, it would probably have been a penalty try. In hindsight, he should perhaps have lost the ball in the tackle. LOL.

@sharkbok,

"Reid is at 1:14:15 (It is very unclear because they are so many players blocking the camera view, it is hard to even see it from the viewers perspective. This is not to say that it did or did not happen, it is just very unclear."
bro if u say that u cant see read not pushing anyone cos there are too many players blocking the camera view, then u shouldnt be commenting on utube clips until u get ur eyes checked.

fact, theres not one instance when the ball is thrown in the lineout where u cant clearly see read, o_O

ur rugby credit rating is pretty shocking too.