Steve Walsh handed 6N finale again

First topic message reminder :

On form, the six nations will be a call between unbeaten France and Ireland. The "grand final" will be the last match played and similarly to last years climax between England and Wales, Steve Walsh has been handed the honours.

Surely this is yet a further underlining of the man's status as possibly the finest referee in the world and a continuation of the upward trend in his professional career after his well documented personal issues.

Congratulations Mr Walsh! A truly inspiring tale of personal strength and success - a role model for many no doubt!

7.5 I actually acknowledge the law as its written as I believe it was originally intended. What others acknowledge is an interpretation of the law. Where the ball can go a little bit forward but not too much.

No you don't. It doesn't matter how far a pass goes towards the oppositions try line as long as it's passed backwards (or sideways for that matter). Ignoring it it does nothing for you. Have you any idea how many tries would be called up and the stoppages in the game if we were to call anytime the ball goes forward a forward pass?

Glory, the ball looks like it's going backwards but in fact it's going forwards and backwards. It's straight forward, get it?

Glory, you really would get more credence for any new argument you want to make if you didn't start off by mentioning another position where you are:

1. Totally isolated
2. Obviously wrong

Why don't you accept you misunderstood "thrown forward" to mean "travels forward relative to the pitch", admit you're wrong and then we can move on without you derailing every thread with this obtuse nonsense?

Oh come on GE. Have you debunked them yet? If not it looks like you have lost your final shred of credibility. Still waiting.  

Ps. Had your senior moment today. It was you that regurgitated the thrown or passed forward law not me and its your Walsh thread too.

Now is this an article to say well done to actually congratulate Walsh or is it an article to point out how inferior NH is in every way possible to NZ?

If it is the first, I think it is a really thin argument, as it assumes that the selection criteria is based on who is best, which match is most important, the match is a 'reward' for being the best and that it is like a certificate of bestness - which most of these things are not the case

If it is the latter - then - I accept defeat - NH rugby, NH refs and all things NH is worst than our SH friends - (Is that enough to stop these threads?)

Risky, it was just to mentioned that Walsh continues to maintain a high standard and profile in the IRB circuit. Just a casual pat in the back for the man, to be trusted with the two biggest nh games in two years.

Not sure when all the hate started, I certainly have no hidden agenda here.

Old glory seems like he's auditioning for a role in the rugby adaptation of legally blonde, not entirely sure where he's coming from.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Risky, it was just to mentioned that Walsh continues to maintain a high standard and profile in the IRB circuit. Just a casual pat in the back for the man, to be trusted with the two biggest nh games in two years.

Not sure when all the hate started, I certainly have no hidden agenda here.

Old glory seems like he's auditioning for a role in the rugby adaptation of legally blonde, not entirely sure where he's coming from.

Probably because when it comes to belittling anything to do with NH hemisphere rugby, you are a repetetive and tedious offender of the most recidivistic nature.

Oh dear GE has finally accepted that Walsh does make errors and deserves criticism. No trace of an apology I see for all the bile he deposited on this board about it.

Nope, still waiting for you to provide a shred of evidence.

Watch any match he's reffed and you'll see mistakes. Every ref does. He's getting better now he has better guidance under the Aussies though.

Again - speculation with no proof.

No he's definitely better under the Aussies. Must just be a better set up than he was under previously. You could see he didn't feel supported in that environment.

yep, as I thought. No actual examples can be provided by anyone. Despite their alleged ubiquity.

As I've said, check out any game and there'll be an example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxXGv9Ps6ss

No way it is a double movement. Sure he's made plenty of mistakes - he's only human. Can't blame a ref for making some mistakes. (and you've had numerous posters point these out to you - you then choose to disregard them all.)

Where he fails in my eyes is that he allows his temper to get the better of him, and then appears to view the game through a lens coloured by his own temper tantrum. Hence Giteau saying he wouldn't see the point in turning up if Walsh was reffing.

There is another OP regarding perceived nepotism. Is Steve Walsh your son?

Can't look right now, I'll review it later.

nobbled wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxXGv9Ps6ss

No way it is a double movement. Sure he's made plenty of mistakes - he's only human. Can't blame a ref for making some mistakes. (and you've had numerous posters point these out to you - you then choose to disregard them all.)

Where he fails in my eyes is that he allows his temper to get the better of him, and then appears to view the game through a lens coloured by his own temper tantrum. Hence Giteau saying he wouldn't see the point in turning up if Walsh was reffing.

There is another OP regarding perceived nepotism. Is Steve Walsh your son?

They're civil partners I think.

nobbled wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxXGv9Ps6ss

No way it is a double movement. Sure he's made plenty of mistakes - he's only human. Can't blame a ref for making some mistakes. (and you've had numerous posters point these out to you - you then choose to disregard them all.)

Where he fails in my eyes is that he allows his temper to get the better of him, and then appears to view the game through a lens coloured by his own temper tantrum. Hence Giteau saying he wouldn't see the point in turning up if Walsh was reffing.

There is another OP regarding perceived nepotism. Is Steve Walsh your son?

It's a double movement. Pretty clear one actually.

Now the law is that the player is tackled when his knee touches the ground. Then he must place the ball in any direction immediately. Even though he is still in motion is irrelevant. If he'd managed to placed the ball over the try line with out the extra dive (he propels himself of his knee before reaching out) it would've been a try. However, he doesn't manage this. There is an extra movement.

I've seen this kind of thing given incorrectly (Hartley versus All Blacks a few seasons ago). However in this case the call is justifiably correct.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

nobbled wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxXGv9Ps6ss

No way it is a double movement. Sure he's made plenty of mistakes - he's only human. Can't blame a ref for making some mistakes. (and you've had numerous posters point these out to you - you then choose to disregard them all.)

Where he fails in my eyes is that he allows his temper to get the better of him, and then appears to view the game through a lens coloured by his own temper tantrum. Hence Giteau saying he wouldn't see the point in turning up if Walsh was reffing.

There is another OP regarding perceived nepotism. Is Steve Walsh your son?

It's a double movement. Pretty clear one actually.

Now the law is that the player is tackled when his knee touches the ground. Then he must place the ball in any direction immediately. Even though he is still in motion is irrelevant. If he'd managed to placed the ball over the try line with out the extra dive (he propels himself of his knee before reaching out) it would've been a try. However, he doesn't manage this. There is an extra movement.

I've seen this kind of thing given incorrectly (Hartley versus All Blacks a few seasons ago). However in this case the call is justifiably correct.

Afraid it was a bit of a trick question. No such thing as "double movement" in Rugby Union. Momentum (provided in this case by the tackler) takes him over the line and he places the ball. Try.
None so blind as those who will not see. Even when clearly obvious to everyone. Except you.
And Steve Walsh.

nobbled wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

nobbled wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxXGv9Ps6ss

No way it is a double movement. Sure he's made plenty of mistakes - he's only human. Can't blame a ref for making some mistakes. (and you've had numerous posters point these out to you - you then choose to disregard them all.)

Where he fails in my eyes is that he allows his temper to get the better of him, and then appears to view the game through a lens coloured by his own temper tantrum. Hence Giteau saying he wouldn't see the point in turning up if Walsh was reffing.

There is another OP regarding perceived nepotism. Is Steve Walsh your son?

It's a double movement. Pretty clear one actually.

Now the law is that the player is tackled when his knee touches the ground. Then he must place the ball in any direction immediately. Even though he is still in motion is irrelevant. If he'd managed to placed the ball over the try line with out the extra dive (he propels himself of his knee before reaching out) it would've been a try. However, he doesn't manage this. There is an extra movement.

I've seen this kind of thing given incorrectly (Hartley versus All Blacks a few seasons ago). However in this case the call is justifiably correct.

Afraid it was a bit of a trick question. No such thing as "double movement" in Rugby Union. Momentum (provided in this case by the tackler) takes him over the line and he places the ball. Try.
None so blind as those who will not see. Even when clearly obvious to everyone. Except you.
And Steve Walsh.

Nope. I was using the "double movement" phrase obiter dictum.

Read law 15.3(a)

The player is tackled when the player "has one knee on the ground".

NOT when his momentum has been reduced to zero.

The tackled player must INMEDIATELY pass or release the ball. He may place it on the ground in any direction.

Now
(F) and (g) may apply I this case.

However his momentum has not carried him in-goal, he has clearly made another movement to change direction before reaching out to place the ball.


No try.

Words fail me - it's so clear I just can't ...
It....
I've fallen into the trap haven't I?
I've entered a debate with someone incapable of an alternative viewpoint.
It's like a broken pencil.
Pointless.

Another classic GE thread going through the usual phases.

Well, he's clearly quite good now. What was so toxic with the NZ ref setup that caused him so many problems?

No idea 7.5.

Glad you agree he's good!

nobbled wrote:Words fail me - it's so clear I just can't ...
It....
I've fallen into the trap haven't I?
I've entered a debate with someone incapable of an alternative viewpoint.
It's like a broken pencil.
Pointless.

The law is clear. He hasn't released and momentum didn't carry him over - he has propelled himself after the tackle was complete. No try.

Quite good Glorious Ghost! Why do we think NZ handled him so badly though. Is it widespread incompetance or something more sinister?

Steve has perused this thread and has come to the professional decision to abandon his intention to ref the 6N finale...in the interests of Inter galactic peace and favourable mining rights on Rigel 7

No 7&1/2 wrote:Quite good Glorious Ghost! Why do we think NZ handled him so badly though. Is it widespread incompetance or something more sinister?

I expect the high pressure environment of high standards and a culture of over-achieving isn't for everyone.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Quite good Glorious Ghost! Why do we think NZ handled him so badly though. Is it widespread incompetance or something more sinister?

I expect the high pressure environment of high standards and a culture of over-achieving isn't for everyone.

you sure your not english? your sounding very arrogant.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Quite good Glorious Ghost! Why do we think NZ handled him so badly though. Is it widespread incompetance or something more sinister?

I expect the high pressure environment of high standards and a culture of over-achieving isn't for everyone.

Well you reckon he handled the big pressure of the 6N finale well last year so that can't be it. How far does this cancer within NZ rugby spread. Why don't they seem to be doing anything about it? You're right Glorious there seems to be something sinister here.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Quite good Glorious Ghost! Why do we think NZ handled him so badly though. Is it widespread incompetance or something more sinister?

I expect the high pressure environment of high standards and a culture of over-achieving isn't for everyone.

Well you reckon he handled the big pressure of the 6N finale well last year so that can't be it. How far does this cancer within NZ rugby spread. Why don't they seem to be doing anything about it? You're right Glorious there seems to be something sinister here.

When he's done a few more 6N finales he might be ready to step up to the ITM cup, perhaps.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Quite good Glorious Ghost! Why do we think NZ handled him so badly though. Is it widespread incompetance or something more sinister?

I expect the high pressure environment of high standards and a culture of over-achieving isn't for everyone.

Well you reckon he handled the big pressure of the 6N finale well last year so that can't be it. How far does this cancer within NZ rugby spread. Why don't they seem to be doing anything about it? You're right Glorious there seems to be something sinister here.

When he's done a few more 6N finales he might be ready to step up to the ITM cup, perhaps.

So you don't think he's international standard now? You're being harsh, he was treated appallingly by NZ as we all now agree. Should heads roll? How far does this spread, i ask again. Unchecked this disgusting behaviour and awful treatment and support of valued refs may continue. Australia may not be able to save the careers of NZ refs all the time.

Yawn.

A role model to many Australians but imagine the amount of NZ kids may have had their dreams shattered. Look kids you may be one of the best in the world but NZ officials will victimise (?), bully(?!) you and you will have to look overseas to fulfil your potential. Such a sad state of affairs. Thank you GE for bringing this to our attention. We can but pray these sinister figures in the shadows of NZ rugby are removed.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Nope, still waiting for you to provide a shred of evidence.

Just look at the evidence I've provided. Are you dumber than I thought. SA clearly knock- on in the first clip about 8m from the line and he blows and gives scrum to SA. Next clip sa knock on again and he ignores it . Are you blind? Or is it because you can't debunk it. You are a complete sham and should apologize to the board for your time wasting if nothing else.

Glory, i started ignoring everything you have to say about forward passes and knock ons about 400 posts ago. It wasn't intentional, just a self defense mechanism in my brain to prevent it haemorraging through outright despair.

That's the last word I will have with you on forward passes.

The end of debunking as we know it by GE. He hasn't got the guts to stand up and be counted. I wouldn't want to go to war with him. You provide incontrovertible proof that he is wrong and all he does is deliberately side step the whole thing. At least we know for certain what he is really like. Someone you can ignore completely without reservation.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:I see the more GE gets backed in to a corner the more his vitriol and profanity ensues. It's clear that anyone who debunks his flawed arguments will become the focus of a rageful rant. Are you ready for the next article from a "foamy mouthed keyboard warrior" here goes. In it you will see that even the head of the SANZAR refs says he got it wrong. His he foamy mouthed too?

http://www.therugbysite.com/blog/news-opinions/pushy-steve-walsh-and-the-whistle-of-prejudice

Hilarious, qouting a Mark Reason article that is anti Steve walsh, We all know Reason Hates Walsh nearly as much as his old man hated new Zealand.

 The English need to either learn to suck it up or learn how to play the referee, and a good place to start might be to start listening to him.

Like the French did in 2007 in Cardiff. Suck it up NZ  

You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

englandglory4ever wrote:The end of debunking as we know it by GE. He hasn't got the guts to stand up and be counted. I wouldn't want to go to war with him. You provide incontrovertible proof that he is wrong and all he does is deliberately side step the whole thing. At least we know for certain what he is really like. Someone you can ignore completely without reservation.

Unfortunately glory, you don't seem able to at all. In fact since you embarrassed yourself with the whole forward pass thing, where virtually every poster on the site dropped by to tell you that you were wrong you've been following me from thread to thread making equally absurd assertions.

So to prevent any further disruption to the forum (the rugby is starting again after all and time for amusing side posts is over) i shall set you to ignore (the grown up thing to do) and allow your further gibberish to be passed over rather than read more of your envious ramblings about NZ's back line's ability to actually pass the ball to each other.

Wake me up if you ever actually provide an answer about Walsh or I will have to assume that you dislike him through some form of xenophobic backlash because he represents the confidence and capability of the new world that is so desperately repressed in some other parts of the globe.

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand. Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

englandglory4ever wrote:The end of debunking as we know it by GE. He hasn't got the guts to stand up and be counted. I wouldn't want to go to war with him. You provide incontrovertible proof that he is wrong and all he does is deliberately side step the whole thing. At least we know for certain what he is really like. Someone you can ignore completely without reservation.

Unfortunately glory, you don't seem able to at all. In fact since you embarrassed yourself with the whole forward pass thing, where virtually every poster on the site dropped by to tell you that you were wrong you've been following me from thread to thread making equally absurd assertions.

So to prevent any further disruption to the forum (the rugby is starting again after all and time for amusing side posts is over) i shall set you to ignore (the grown up thing to do) and allow your further gibberish to be passed over rather than read more of your envious ramblings about NZ's back line's ability to actually pass the ball to each other.

Wake me up if you ever actually provide an answer about Walsh or I will have to assume that you dislike him through some form of xenophobic backlash because he represents the confidence and capability of the new world that is so desperately repressed in some other parts of the globe.

Well the NZ board didn't like him for some reason but not a xenophobic one. Something sinister lurks in NZ rugby.

GE got hammered by me and has cleared off. Brilliant. Just what he deserves. We should all go out and have a couple of pints to set him on his way in style. Good riddance.

I like these clips the best. There the ones that GE ignores like the plague.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ffpzmQMUBQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhbOVco4eYw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTO6oqeozkI

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand.  Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

Wow, that's a mighty flighty statement. I wonder if the mods will spot it.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand.  Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

  Mr Chuckles, you sure are very clever 

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand.  Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

Come on mate, can we cease the "your country is worse than mine" please.

It is becoming tedious

ebop wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand.  Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

  Mr Chuckles, you sure are very clever 

I am a total genius since leaving Wales and moving here

Biltong wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand.  Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

Come on mate, can we cease the "your country is worse than mine" please.

It is becoming tedious

But you tend to ignore GE with his disgusting comments, outstanding.

Oh and bepopper or what ever her name is.

Nah, seriously mate, it is tedious.