Arbitration – XV of France. Was Michael Hooper’s article really correct?

Australia’s captain, Michael Hooper, fired his people’s second attempt against France’s 15th. (© Screen capture Stan Sport Australia)

The fatal bug at the end of the blues game spread on social networks. For both players and fans alike, this action caused a severe headache, with a victory very close while the France He no longer wins Australia For 31 years (23-21). But there is another sequence for this part that defies: Michael Hooper’s article in 71e Accurate.

After a regular bombardment in front of the French goal, the captain of the Wallabies, very close to the goalkeeper, caught the ball, the surface of the nose and the beard surprisingly and stunned the tricolor defense. 20-21, the suspense was all-encompassing and the end of the game unable to breathe.

Was he an intruder?

But it was Hopper’s job legal ? We don’t hide from you that you have to go through it a few times to get an idea, and tip our hat to the New Zealand referee Brendon Becquerel To validate the test even without the use of video (right?).

Hopper was in front of the ball when he caught it, thus in a position out of the game ? It’s not very obvious with real speed, but the Australian seems to have one foot behind the ball when he catches it and turns around, in order to have his back in the Habs defence. So it does not appear to be a hacker.

READ  Leclerc and Sainz should "lead the team"

Was Hopper associated with ark?

Another fact to watch: Was Michael Hopper related to tuck ? Note that the third row has both hands on the ball and is not tied to any other teammate. It is not clear and obvious that the 19th Australian is keeping him and serving as a link. On the other hand, Hooper can play the ball in his hand, being the last participant in the game.

We realize that, it is a business that is not easy to judge. Nothing is clear and obvious, so it benefits the game. At the time, Huber was very clever (especially in positioning his body to protect the ball before putting it in the opponent’s goal) and the French defense had such a small bit of delay that prevented him from interfering (you could have interfered with him just by putting his hands on the ball). There are no official elements that allow you to reject this article.

Was this article helpful to you? Note that you can follow Actu Rugby in the Mon Actu space. With one click, after registration, you will find all the news of your favorite cities and brands.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *