For the final cancelled try, it was the correct decision. The commentary team were saying it should be a try because his boot was off the ground before the grounding, but the toe of his boot made clear contact with the touch line before coming back up. In this case, who cares if he boot was up for the grounding as he had already go into touch.
6:16 This one is very interesting because three players have their hand on the ball: Jamie George, Billy Vunipola, and Brodie Retallick. George has one hand under the ball and holding the back, Vunipola's arm is underneath George's and has one hand barely holding the front of the ball and Retallick has one hand on top of the ball. Now if you look closely at the play, you can see that two of the players let go of the ball and these are Vunipola and Retallick but George always keeps a hand on it and the ball seems to be going straight (at least for me) and not forward. Vunipola lets go of the ball first, mainly because Retallick does a great job at disrupting the move. Because of the motion of Retallick hand, not only does it seem that he is bringing the ball towards himself but also downwards at which point he no longer has a hand on it and George regathers.
The player behind loses control of the ball and stops touching it. The player in front takes control of it. Although the ball has not been dropped forward this is considered a knock on. It's clear enough
Ben Young's is a try. The guy behind tried to rip the ball from the player in front but didn't succeed. The player in front has always had control of the ball. No knock on or offside in my opinion.
Yes, Cueto lifted his left foot before grounding the ball... BUT he had already touched the touchline BEFORE he lifted his foot while still holding the ball.. and that means he was in touch. If you set the playback speed to 0.25 and frame-by-frame, on the exact frame where the time clicks over from 12:34 to 12:35 you can clearly see Cueto's toe in contact with the touchline, with the ball still in his possession and not grounded. For mine, this was not even a marginal decision, its clear and obvious and straightforward.
@@davidanderson4091 You're right, it's so clear I'm not sure why it's even disputed - I'm assuming people just want something neutral to blame for losing the match
It’s a bit of a strange one where the disruption of the maul happened by France, yet Wales chose to play out wide to attempt a score. Nigel Owens said Wales should have been awarded a penalty try, yet Pearce wasn’t convinced a try would have been scored from that rolling maul🤦🏻
Exactly. I’m English, but even I know the commentary’s arguments about his foot being off the floor at the point of grounding the ball is irrelevant when he’s already previously gone into touch. 🤦🏻♂️
Can't help but think that if the Matawalu try wasn't against the host nation England, that replay would not have been put on the big screen for the ref to see before the conversion was taken
@@olivieru on purpose means they must have seen it first, analysed it and then decide to put it on the big screen rather than showing nothing at all. If you have a screen you are always going to see the tries, now with penalties, yes that is a choice.
I LOVE Rugby, but after almost 10 of watching the World Cups and 6 Nations and trying to learn more and more, the laws of the game are still confusing to me.
The english try is clearly good to be awarded. The guy in front was just giving the ball to the guy behind, but both of them lost more or less control until the guy in front regained control before touching the ground. The pass was not completed yet... Video is sometimes not good
I think that’s what Marius Joncker went with, the guy in front taking control, thus a forward pass. he did the TMO override with Sam Underhill on 2 occasions
If Mr Nigel is referring, you just listen and accept the decision, as simple as that. As for #1, not familiar with Rugby rules but that one was a try no matter how much you watch the replay because he touches the goal section with the ball while his left foot was up not touching the border line (sorry, don't know the proper names of the zones of a rugby field).
He was out. His foot scraped the line before he lifted it - you can see it clear as daylight if you pause and go forward frame by frame. Do that and you can not only see that his foot crossed onto the whitewash by 2 inches or so, but you can also see the exact point where he lifts his foot off of the line.
@@jacobgodwin5418 I stand by what I said earlier - watch it frame by frame and you can clearly see his foot touching the line before the ball is grounded. It's not a tough decision at all.
@@Karma-qt4jiA player is allowed to go out of touch and then come back in, what matters is whether he was out of touch at the instant the ball was grounded. There's no dispute that he was out of touch for a moment beforehand.
![Summer Walker - Heart Of A Woman [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SFddctbZzw8/mqdefault.jpg)
![Megan Thee Stallion - Bigger In Texas [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QxTkZTLWdo4/mqdefault.jpg)
For the final cancelled try, it was the correct decision. The commentary team were saying it should be a try because his boot was off the ground before the grounding, but the toe of his boot made clear contact with the touch line before coming back up. In this case, who cares if he boot was up for the grounding as he had already go into touch.
Agreed !!!
2:57 I remember watching the game and the TMO saying "that was not clear" got me so annoyed. This is as clear as the sky in the Sahara desert.
Still a good try and Korobiete was unfortunate
@@williamdarlow8773 07l0
@@williamdarlow8773 0l70
0
6:16 This one is very interesting because three players have their hand on the ball: Jamie George, Billy Vunipola, and Brodie Retallick. George has one hand under the ball and holding the back, Vunipola's arm is underneath George's and has one hand barely holding the front of the ball and Retallick has one hand on top of the ball. Now if you look closely at the play, you can see that two of the players let go of the ball and these are Vunipola and Retallick but George always keeps a hand on it and the ball seems to be going straight (at least for me) and not forward. Vunipola lets go of the ball first, mainly because Retallick does a great job at disrupting the move. Because of the motion of Retallick hand, not only does it seem that he is bringing the ball towards himself but also downwards at which point he no longer has a hand on it and George regathers.
The person snatching the ball becomes the new carrier, it applies for opponents and the ones from the same team.
The player behind loses control of the ball and stops touching it. The player in front takes control of it. Although the ball has not been dropped forward this is considered a knock on. It's clear enough
Ben Skeen pushing on the Oz pass as not clear made me so angry. If ever you wondered if someone had an agenda it was Ben Skeen
Amazing skill and amazing officiating. This is why our sport is the best.
8:48 Mike Brown WHAT A PLAYER that is an incredible try-saving effort. Love him or loath him he is a true competitor.
4:43 I remember being at that game as a South African supporter, I still remember the score - 46-6
Sometimes it just not meant to be
So true! But some great efforts!
Small mistakes , do it right haha - Canada one hurt to watch
08:00 Nigel Owens-what a ref!
Wayne Barnes surely learning from past mistakes 😁
I played rugby for about 25 years. I scored a heap of tries that never were.
Ben Young's is a try. The guy behind tried to rip the ball from the player in front but didn't succeed. The player in front has always had control of the ball. No knock on or offside in my opinion.
What close-call moments can you remember?
TJs greatest try ever. That was CLOSE!
There were no TMO back then, but I really thought Abdelatif Benazzi scored in the 1995 semi-final :-(
Soso Matiashvili try against Canada
Cueto was in touch. End of.
@@jacobgodwin5418 would that be the foot that was in touch before he 'scored'?
Um no he wasn't .....
Yes, Cueto lifted his left foot before grounding the ball... BUT he had already touched the touchline BEFORE he lifted his foot while still holding the ball.. and that means he was in touch. If you set the playback speed to 0.25 and frame-by-frame, on the exact frame where the time clicks over from 12:34 to 12:35 you can clearly see Cueto's toe in contact with the touchline, with the ball still in his possession and not grounded. For mine, this was not even a marginal decision, its clear and obvious and straightforward.
@@davidanderson4091 You're right, it's so clear I'm not sure why it's even disputed - I'm assuming people just want something neutral to blame for losing the match
@@jacobgodwin5418 his foot was in touch before scoring and lifted his foot before placing the ball. Correct decision by ref.
LRZs against France the other day was so close and it would’ve secured a grand slam!
It’s a bit of a strange one where the disruption of the maul happened by France, yet Wales chose to play out wide to attempt a score. Nigel Owens said Wales should have been awarded a penalty try, yet Pearce wasn’t convinced a try would have been scored from that rolling maul🤦🏻
@@WalsallGooner yeah tbh but it was a great effort
So unlucky, inches really can make the difference!
@Paul what do you mean
@Paul they didn’t accept France one because he pulled the welsh mans eye
how on earth is the last one controversial? foot clearly slid across the line then came up...
Exactly!! Typical biased English commentator maybe? And I’m English.
Exactly. I’m English, but even I know the commentary’s arguments about his foot being off the floor at the point of grounding the ball is irrelevant when he’s already previously gone into touch. 🤦🏻♂️
Can't help but think that if the Matawalu try wasn't against the host nation England, that replay would not have been put on the big screen for the ref to see before the conversion was taken
I don't think that they first reviewed the try and after seeing that he lost control they decided to put it on the big screen.
Was such a great effort!
@@JoostMehrtens I think they did it in purpose.
@@olivieru on purpose means they must have seen it first, analysed it and then decide to put it on the big screen rather than showing nothing at all.
If you have a screen you are always going to see the tries, now with penalties, yes that is a choice.
So you think it would've been fair for that try to of stood lol...¿
Who’s the tmo on the koroibete saying no clear evidence on forward pass 😂😂
Lmao I asked myself the same question
An Aussie.... Lol
選手の反則ではなく、レフェリーの質の高さを見る動画
Matawalu was the best half back for fiji,
Great player!
I LOVE Rugby, but after almost 10 of watching the World Cups and 6 Nations and trying to learn more and more, the laws of the game are still confusing to me.
exactly
There are so many rules. If you didn't grow up playing the game it's hard to understand.
The game has been killed by endless reviews. Tries that would have been allowed now ruled out because of a marginal forward pass five minutes earlier.
Congested to who is early
Nothing wrong with that Mark Cueto try.
Player's foot clearly on the touch line before the ball was grounded.... No Try! Not even difficult to see.
The final score was 15-6 so it wouldn't have mattered anyway
@@jintoo7489 both feet were in the air the moment the ball was grounded
@@johnmitchell2269 lol he had the ball before he grounded,when his foot was in touch you salty english lol bokke is the best
Jerome Garces 👍🏻
The TMO that denied the Ben Youngs try was the same TMO that denied Sam Underhill in November 2018, same fixture at Twickenham
Underhill's try wasn't legal though
@@kimok4716 what’s your point?
@@WalsallGooner
Whats the point of pointing this fact except rantinf at the referee ?
I’m stating fact
@@WalsallGooner So whats your point ? Do you think he should just let it pass because of the previous decision or should he just do his job ?
All of these would have been given as tries in the NRL 😆
Or Super Rugby Aoteroa
I like how few players score the try then celebrate... but really, they knew they failed. 🤣🤣🤣🤣... come on
which ones would you say are celebrating when they fail in this video? I don't disagree I'm just asking
I mean...Tusi Pisi but ok
6 bloody ads
That's painful to watch
Some decsion so finely technical..
Though sad thing is the TV decides the game these days .
De Jager's almost try against Wales in the 2019 semifinal should have been on this list.
So close!
Lol... Aussie tmo trying to manufacture the 3rd try.
The english try is clearly good to be awarded. The guy in front was just giving the ball to the guy behind, but both of them lost more or less control until the guy in front regained control before touching the ground. The pass was not completed yet... Video is sometimes not good
The play behind knocks the ball out of the hands and it is pushed onto the leg its clearly off sides.
I think that’s what Marius Joncker went with, the guy in front taking control, thus a forward pass. he did the TMO override with Sam Underhill on 2 occasions
@@WalsallGooner but underhills try was not legal though
@@keanehodkinson5279 which is same the as all the other ones here, your point?
If Mr Nigel is referring, you just listen and accept the decision, as simple as that.
As for #1, not familiar with Rugby rules but that one was a try no matter how much you watch the replay because he touches the goal section with the ball while his left foot was up not touching the border line (sorry, don't know the proper names of the zones of a rugby field).
As a brazilian rugby fan, this "no try # 1" is so controversial.
He was out. His foot scraped the line before he lifted it - you can see it clear as daylight if you pause and go forward frame by frame.
Do that and you can not only see that his foot crossed onto the whitewash by 2 inches or so, but you can also see the exact point where he lifts his foot off of the line.
@@jacobgodwin5418 I stand by what I said earlier - watch it frame by frame and you can clearly see his foot touching the line before the ball is grounded. It's not a tough decision at all.
@@Karma-qt4jiA player is allowed to go out of touch and then come back in, what matters is whether he was out of touch at the instant the ball was grounded. There's no dispute that he was out of touch for a moment beforehand.
In Nigel we trust!
eooo
Early