DELETED

So they now have 5 tightheads on their books - Afoa, Fitzpatrick, Lutton, Ross and Macklin?

Could Afoa be off this summer rather than next?

Borders no.2 wrote: In all fairness that argument is completely ridiculous. 3rd try shouldn't have been given but even at that stage Scarlets were gone. Yes Ulster got a few fortunate decisions and Rolland wasn't at his best but if Scarlets were there until this evening with the Ref obstructing Ulster players at every turn for them they wouldn't win. The game was over 5 minutes into the 2nd half.
Ulster rested on their laurels and Scarlets managed to give the scoreboard some level of respectability that their shambolic performance didn't deserve.

Scarlets have to look at their own team and be critical:
Up front they are poor
No composure displayed at half back on the night
No real team ethic
Paper thin defence which Ulster failed to fully capitalise on
Key players offering no leadership, everyone doing their own thing

Having said that the league loses credibility having an Irish ref for a game involving one of the provinces or vice versa. You could make some argument during the main season that there aren't enough refs free to officiate but at this stage they nearly have their pick.

Agree with most of this, but were scarlets not down to their third fly half option by half time or soon afterwards? I wasn't aware of it at the time but priestland was supposed to start and pulled up in the warm up. I think that probably explains a lack of composure from players who were likely out of position.

connachtexile wrote: Rossie said:

Ive read in past that rolland decides beforehand who merits winning of a game and refs accordingly. This performance provides evidence supporting that theory.

I seriously doubt that and I think your doing him a massive disservice. Rolland is one of the best referees in the world and while I admit he had a bad game one bad game does not make a bad referee.

Also find it amusing that I'm defending Rolland rather than our usual 'holier than thou's' we have on here.

The thing about Rolland is he's a stickler for the application of the Laws, he doesn't do grey areas. It's unfortunate that this get's in the way that some teams and their supporters feel the game should be managed but sure maybe we should just crucify him and be done with it because he obviously created the laws himself...

Aside from the fact he's multilingual and a former rugby international himself, he's probably the best communicator of any of the refs, and it still amazes me why players and their coaches complain about getting penalised after they ignore the third or fourth warning from him...

For most of the

How am i doing him a disservice. I pointed out that its a theory thats out there snd believed by many. His performance the other night goes towards supporting that theory for those who believe it.
I dont agree that he is one of the best refs in world rugby. I agree that he has been at the top tier for a long time but that is entirely different. Msr poite and clancy are also up there. I think you get my point.

rossie wrote: Ive read in past that rolland decides beforehand who merits winning of a game and refs accordingly.

Would explain how he refs us

I think the furore is a package deal re the officials. Scarlets were pulled while pienaar/ulster recieved the benefit of the doubt. Add in other errors of ref and tmo, tj inability/ unwillingness to see whats under his nose, massively different instruction to scrumhalves of each team at breakdown and you have the reason why most are upset and annoyed by his performance.
Ive read in past that rolland decides beforehand who merits winning of a game and refs accordingly. This performance provides evidence supporting that theory.

I don't disagree that the officials were poor, all I'm saying is that Scarlets were so poor and so lacking in fight that it wouldn't have made any difference anyway. I'm not saying the officials shouldn't be held to account for their poor performance but really you have only a handful of decent officials in the Rabo anyway, the only difference this week was it was a higher profile game and on TV.

As for the forwards passes, the refs seem to let go marginally forward passes these days so don't see why there is a big furore over that. He gave one dubious one against Scarlets with the last play which didn't make any difference anyway.

Borfers it wasnt 1 try that officials errors assisted in it was 2. Thats 12-14 pts. To call rolland not at his best is the understatement of the year. His interpretation and errors(including tjs and tmo) aided ulster all night, anx they didnt need it.
Gauzere gave 1 or 2 contentious decisions leinsters way and was conned a few times by leinster but he let the 2 teams get on with it and try and win it. Thats the difference.

I think the point hook was trying to make was that rolland was calling them flat when they looked forward on more than one occasion. He just madea b***s of his point as usual. I defi.ately felt that.

My favourite comment of he night was Shaggy's response (at last an analyst who knows what he is talking about) to George Hook's contention that a flat pass was forward " a flat pass is flat George, and is technically legal" - no response.

In all fairness that argument is completely ridiculous. 3rd try shouldn't have been given but even at that stage Scarlets were gone. Yes Ulster got a few fortunate decisions and Rolland wasn't at his best but if Scarlets were there until this evening with the Ref obstructing Ulster players at every turn for them they wouldn't win. The game was over 5 minutes into the 2nd half.
Ulster rested on their laurels and Scarlets managed to give the scoreboard some level of respectability that their shambolic performance didn't deserve.

Scarlets have to look at their own team and be critical:
Up front they are poor
No composure displayed at half back on the night
No real team ethic
Paper thin defence which Ulster failed to fully capitalise on
Key players offering no leadership, everyone doing their own thing

Having said that the league loses credibility having an Irish ref for a game involving one of the provinces or vice versa. You could make some argument during the main season that there aren't enough refs free to officiate but at this stage they nearly have their pick.

Poor reffing decisions gave ulster 12-14 pts. I cant rem if both tries were converted. They won by 11 so the ref and his assistants including tmo had a massive impact on outcome of game. If you add in rolland continually pressurising the scarlets scrumhalves to play ball at breakdown and scrum while applying no such pressure on piennaar or marshall and his calling of pienaars passing flat and scarlets forward and there is a definate justifiable grievance there and a moral case to answer definately. This is sport so he wont be called to account officially.

swift4prez wrote: for the ulster first try, kick through, scarlets player catches, runs and is foot tripped
roland was awful.

It was Diack that tripped the Scarlets man, should have got a yellow. In fairness to Rolland he may have had his view obscured, but the touch judge had no such excuse.

He was generally awful though.

Ulster were fairly impressive in the first thirty but as others have said they were helped along substantially by poor reffing and tmo which created a scoreline which flattered Ulster. Davies try for Scarlets was great, the 20 minutes preceding it the scarlets seemed to have given up and accepted the poor refereeing, if that score had come earlier or Courts wasn't awarded maybe they would have fought harder (not that I think that sort of attitude is acceptable from a team if they hope to win the league).

yes court seem disappointed when it was given.

for the ulster first try, kick through, scarlets player catches, runs and is foot tripped, court comes in and jumps on him, of his feet, lineout, try.

roland was awful.