In or out?????????????????

[Bigtallfatbloke]

..looked out to me....maybe he should've shaved his legs...then we'd have won

 

[wafflycat]

Looked in to me, but only just.

 

[Fab Foodie]

It doesn't matter.

When you give the opposition enough penalties to win...

When will an English team realise that at the highest level you have to obey the rules and play cleaner than the other guys.

Displayed guts though, kept the SA big guns out of the game but SA were the team on form. They deserved it.

 

[Bigtallfatbloke]

can we blame the french line painter maybe?...had he/she not sneezed just at that point as the line was painted we'd have won...typical French

 

[Dormouse]

Looked in to me, we woz robbed!

 

[Bigtallfatbloke]

...we lost to a superb team and I am happy for the SA's...they deserve it and their country deserves it. But yes...we wos still robbed

 

[bonj2]

should have put 'warning- rugby' in the title. I thought this was another europe thread

 

[Melvil]

In.

But surely anyone could see it wasn't behind the line and therefore, clearly, the onus should be proving that it wasn't a try, which I think would have been impossible and therefore the try would have been given.

It was all a bit disappointing, really. I have nothing against SA, good on 'em they played very well indeed, but something was missing from the final and I can't put my finger on (apart from the whole losing thing) what it was

 

[bonj2]

Surely it should be defined that if it's ON the line, it's either in or out. As pre-determined, i.e. it's too difficult to say 'is the centre of gravity of the ball over the exact middle of the line', so we say 'has the ball TOUCHED the line', if so then a predetermined rule applies.

for example in squash, if it's ON the line, then it's OUT. Is this not defined in rugby?

 

[Bigtallfatbloke]

something was missing from the final and I can't put my finger on (apart from the whole losing thing) what it was

Cheerleaders?

 

[Bigtallfatbloke]

it was his left foot that touched the line, that is why it was out of play before he touched the ball down over the try line.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Like FF implies (and I apologise if I've misread your post), I don't think we played well enough to win it anyway. SA were the better team tonight. Although it was by no means a walkover, and we should be proud of that.

NB written from a very limited knowledge of rugby!

 

[MichaelM]

Surely it should be defined that if it's ON the line, it's either in or out. As pre-determined, i.e. it's too difficult to say 'is the centre of gravity of the ball over the exact middle of the line', so we say 'has the ball TOUCHED the line', if so then a predetermined rule applies.

for example in squash, if it's ON the line, then it's OUT. Is this not defined in rugby?

It is defined, it's the touch line -touch it, and you're out of play.

 

[Melvil]

Looked like his leg was up to me...therefore not in touch but, well, I think we would have lost it anyway...

Shame but there you go...at least we are not among the people who shelled out thousands of squid to see it in person...they must be even more gutted.

 

[Elmer Fudd]

I saw him lift his foot so it didn't touch the touchline, but I think (sadly) that his knee hit the touchline just before the ball was grounded, so it was out.

When I used to play at school (a long time ago) if you ran down the touch line and the ref saw a cloud of white lift off your foot it meant you had trod on the touchline and therefore the ball was out.

I concur that maybe the french line painters could have done the pitch before they hit the plonk though !!

Least we put up a good fight after the 36-0 trouncing they gave us in the qualifiers though.