From: s8921366@macnab.mqcs.mq.oz.au (Paul English)
Subject: Re: Some further comments.
Followup-To: rec.sport.rugby
Summary: More on the Loe incident, and a call for the IRB to handle citings.
Keywords: Loe, foul play
Organization: Macquarie University, School of Mathematics, Physics, Computing and Electronics
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 11:37:40 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.142714.6031@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Bill Taylor) writes:

>
>About Loe, on Carozza; (yet again).
>
>No Oz is ever going to believe it could have been an accident; we're all going
>to have to live with that. I still don't know if it was or not; but the NZU
>believes it wasn't. Of course no Oz will ever be convinced, either, that they're
>not all a bunch of unscrupulous, self-serving, win-at-all-costs chauvinists
>with no real love for the game.   Isn't this obvious to all !!

If the NZU believe it wasn't an accident will they take action?
It shouldn't have been left to the team management, I for one hope it is
taken further.

>
>Well; let me remind anyone who can still see through their rage-blind eyes, of
>two clear facts. (i) the TV commentators, at the time, made NO suggestion that
>it was a deliberate foul; and they're usually VERY quick and non-partizan
>about this. (ii) the ref didn't see anything to worry about either - perhaps he
>too has no love for the game ! And before you jump up and down; recall a ref is
>quite at liberty to penalize foul play after a try is scored, and let the
>scoring side kick off again with a penalty kick from half-way. This does happen.

(i) I assume you meant the TVNZ commentators made no suggestion of foul
play.  Having followed some of their world cup commentary this doesn't
surprise me.  Let's face it, all national broadcasters tend to be biased
towards their own team, and NZ is no different.  The Australian Channel 10
commentators (admittedly biased Australians) said at the time Loe was fortunate
to still be on the field.  This was after viewing the replay.  When the try
was scored they were more interested in ensuring Carozza grounded the ball
(which he clearly did on replay).  This leads to the second point.

(ii) The referee would have been watching the ball to ensure the try was
scored, then would have seen Loe fall across Carozza.  From where he was
positioned Loe's body would have made it impossible for him to see the
action of Loe's right forearm, for the same reason the commentators
wouldn't have seen what happened at first.  The only camera angle which showed
the offence clearly was from the end of the field.  This shot leaves no doubt
that Loe dropped his forearm or elbow on Carozza's face.  The linesman was
also not necessarily in a good position to see, though he would have been
better placed than the referee.  This is not a criticism of the officials,
just the observation that they can't be everywhere watching everything,
after all, this is why citings are necessary after games.  If the officials
had seen the incident and made a decision there would be no need to take it
further.

Let's hope the NZRU have another look at the incident on the team's return
home.  If then found not guilty, so be it, at least the air would have been
cleared.  At the moment the whole situation of team managements looking at
their own touring players leaves doubt that justice would be done.

On this point, I think the IRB should have some mechanism set up so any
further incidents in Test matches can be dealt with by an independent body.
This would at least have justice seen to be done.

--
      Paul English    |                                | 
     School of MPCE   | Email:                         |   This space
 Macquarie University | s8921366@mackay.mpce.mq.edu.au |    for rent
   Sydney, Australia  |     paul@vulcan.anu.edu.au     |