Considering that rugby union is much more popular around the globe, some who come across this site might not have much interest in rugby league or the State of Origin series. If you are a union fan who thinks you’ve got no room for league in your interests, I suggest you set aside some time to sit through this one-hour television special titled “Thirty Years of Origin: A Celebration” and see whether you still feel that way:

Larkham has been retired from test rugby since 2007 and now plays in Japan, though he may soon be returning to his home nation as a coach. Larkham’s impact on the sport as a player won’t soon be forgotten, though, with Wallaby fans relishing memories of his greatest moments and opposition supporters cursing some of those same moments. You can find a pretty good written tribute to the legendary playmaker here, but we’ll let you see his magic for yourself:

The action on the park has been thrilling, but the post-match broadcasts have also been pretty lively at times. On at least three occasions, players turned the air blue for viewers around the globe with a little bit of language not typically shared on family-friendly television and radio. As we get ready to enjoy the knockout rounds of the Super 14 competition, we thoughts we’d warn you that you may need to keep the youngsters away from the broadcast after the match in case there are more incidents like those documented below from Green and Gold Rugby and elsewhere. (Note: Clips contain rude language–obviously.)

Early in the year, the cameras caught the Reds’ Van Humphries in an inspirational monologue that wasn’t intended for the airwaves:

Nathan Sharpe of the Force was a little bit more direct in treating the media to a little bit of extra colorful language:

Unwilling to leave all the cursing to the Aussies, Ma’a Nonu of the Hurricanes made sure to top them all in a radio interview late in the season (the gems start about 40 seconds in):

You may have to watch out during the match, too, though, and not just for the players. A lot of rude things get said about referees, but this time match official Bryce Lawrence was the one dishing out the language:

Enjoy the knockout rounds as the Super 14 season closes down this month–but you may need to turn down the sound!

The Waratahs just barely got by the Sharks this past weekend–got by just by their fingertips, in fact. Late in the match, Sharks fullback Stephen Treblanche’s pass to unmarked teammate Ryan Kankowski was swatted away by Waratahs outside back Kurtley Beale, stopping a line break that was on its way to the white line. Beale earned a penalty and an enforced ten-minute rest for his troubles, but the Sharks camp believes a penalty try would have been more appropriate.

Renowned Australian rugby commentary site Green and Gold Rugby offers a useful discussion of the controversy, including some key points of law regarding both intentional knock-ons and penalty tries. Green and Gold’s insight regarding whether or not Beale truly robbed the Sharks of a sure five-pointer are helpful, but the site’s comments on when an intentional knock-on should be awarded raise a more general issue about the difficulty involved in assessing a penalty for a deliberate knock-on. As Green and Gold indicates, the law states:

A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm, nor throw forward.

If the knock-on is intentional, a penalty is awarded. If unintentional, of course, the result is a scrum. A big difference, even when the situation is not as dramatic as it was when Beale committed his knock-on. The law makes perfect intuitive sense, as swatting a ball away is a cynical offense that should be punished much more strictly than an accidental case of butterfingers. But there is one problem. It’s challenging enough for a referee to see everything on the park, even with the help of assistant referees. But the “intentional” wording requires a referee to see inside a players’ mind.

The Green and Gold discussion does a good job of mentioning some ways Beale’s intent might be judged, such as the position of his body, the motion of his arms, and his pursuit of the ball after the knock-on occurred. However, all of these indicators could be construed as ways to judge Beale’s acting ability as much as his legitimate intent, so the question remains: How does a referee judge a player’s intent? Few other laws are construed in the same manner. While intent might be used in a decision to award a yellow or red card, intent doesn’t seem to be a factor in awarding penalties for infractions like offsides, late tackles, and so forth.

So, regardless of how you view the Beale situation, our question is: Should referees really be in the mind-reading business? And if not, how do you judge a deliberate knock-on more empirically? By whether they got both hands to the ball? By body position?

It’s a tricky question, and one we’d rather ask than answer. Mull it over as you watch the below video, and please post a comment if you have a solution worked out!

Incidentally, Green and Gold also points out that there was a similar incident on the same weekend involving Will Chambers of the Reds where not even a penalty was awarded, as you can see here (we won’t comment on whether Chambers’ teammate Quade Cooper might have had sticky enough fingers to hang on to the football):

And if you’re not yet convinced that the deliberate knock-on issue is a bit murky, consider this referees’ discussion of another dubious example from 2008.

Based on this weekend’s first round of matches, we’d have to say the new interpretations look like a success even if there were a few high penalty counts as players get used to the new guidelines. In fact, we’re already hoping that the new guidelines catch on worldwide. We may get our wish, considering that the new interpretations may be seen in international tests in a few months. But we’ll let you be the judge after taking a look at these highlights from three of the weekend’s matches:

Bulls v. Cheetahs:

Blues v. Hurricanes:

Brumbies v. Force:

Unfortunately, he seems to have missed that distinction in a match earlier this month for Biarritz.  It looks like Hunt has been so busy signing contracts and hopping on flights, he may have missed a leaf from the union law book.  Either that, or perhaps match pressure got to him and he went to instincts.  In either case, Hunt himself explains it best.  But you don’t have to take his word for it.  Instead, have a look at this clip from Rugby Dump:

The Americans’ competition will be tough, as they have been placed in a pool that includes Australia, Ireland, Italy, and a to-be-named European side. For now, though, we may as well just enjoy the full match footage of this past Saturday’s qualifer, courtest of the USA Rugby Ustream Channel:

First Half:

Second Half:

One problem, though, is that it has still often looked like there’s no legitimate third contender in the sport to pressure those two antipodean rivals, England went ahead and beat New Zealand today. That means that the Four Nations final won’t include New Zealand, and it also means that the tournament this year was competitive enough that tournament final will include a side with a loss (England) and a side with a draw (Australia). Only struggling France failed to emerge from the tournament without a win in the end, and even France led England at half-time when the two European sides met in the tournament.

A cynic might say that the emergence of apparent competitiveness between Australia, New Zealand, and England isn’t much, and that it only means rugby league is at best a three-horse race (even if France competed gamely with them and there are other interesting international matches going on right now as well). Compared to rugby union, for example with its hundreds of member nations, three sides offering legitimate contention for the title is far from competitive. Right? Maybe. After all, how many teams have held the top spot in the International Rugby Board’s rankings over their entire history since being introduced in 2003?

Let’s see: There’s England (ranked #1 at points during 2003 and 2004), New Zealand (ranked #1 from mid-2004 to late 2007 and during parts of 2008 and 2009), and South Africa (ranked #1 during parts of 2007, 2008, and 2009, including right now). That would be … three sides?

Looking at things that way, international rugby league might be reasonably competitive after all, more so if England can rise to the occasion in next week’s Four Nations final. In any case, it looks like rugby union is watching.

Here’s a fan’s view of a few moments from England vs. New Zealand:

We can’t find much other video out there yet to post for today’s matches, but here are some earlier tournament highlights:

Australia vs. England:

New Zealand vs. France:

Australia vs. New Zealand:

England vs. France:

We were wrong. Before his AFL career begins, Hunt plans to wear a shirt with sleeves for just a bit longer by playing rugby union for six months with Biarritz in France. This means that if all goes according to plan, Hunt will have played three football codes at a top professional level in the space of a year. So far, he seems to be enjoying the journey.

Some have already been questioning the intent behind Hunt’s frequent code-hopping. We won’t speculate on what’s behind the sport-swapping, but if it’s all about the publicity, Hunt may want to get Nike on the telephone. After all, this is starting to look very familiar to some of us in the United States:

The similarities grow even eerier when we recall that Hunt is a big fan of basketball and the NFL.

Here’s hoping things go well for the multi-talented athlete. Fortunately for Karmichael Hunt, there shouldn’t be any sign of “Rabbits” Warren (see video in link) or Fuifui Moimoi (see second video in link) in Biarritz or the AFL.

Among the most memorable Eels players for the American audience week in and week out must have been Tongan-born Fuifui Moimoi (who is also eligible to play for New Zealand internationally). He got audiences’ attention with hits so big that they can only be appreciated fully with the aid of science (sometimes a little too big), though his memorable name may have garnered as much notice from new viewers as his tremendous play.

If you found yourself becoming a new fan of Moimoi’s, but were as captivated by the cult figure’s interesting moniker as you were by his tremendous efforts, you’re not alone. Moimoi is the subject of a song focused on his name and acheivements, as seen below:

We assume he doesn’t mind the song because it will be playing when he enters the boxing ring for a charity match (the bout has been delayed by the Eels’ success). If you’re not a fan, though, you can see examples of Fuifui’s imposing play without the soundtrack:

Now and then, of course, Moimoi is on the receiving end as well:

Here’s hoping Spike TV and other U.S. networks see fit to show us more of Moimoi and the NRL’s other luminaries in the future!