Warren #82 - Your comment is the equivalent of a kid saying 'nyah nyah nyah nyah!' and sticking out his tongue. NZ was not asking for SA support. Certainly not yours! Get a grip!

Portugese Rugby Fan #89

My thoughts upon seeing the replay was that a penalty try was going to be awarded. However, listening to Craig Joubert's request he asked for the TMO to say 'Try or No Try', in this case being no try as one was not fairly scored (albeit as a result of foul play). I am going on the fact that as the TMO was not asked to rule whether it deserved a penalty try then he is unable to rule one, he can only rule on what he is asked, nothing more, nothing less. I think that is the most likely explanation.

Just seen that Carter recieved a one week suspension. I think a dangerous precedent has been set with that, lets just hope that all similar situations get dealt with in the same manner, regardless of who the player is.

Matt The Ref, since you're answering questions... When Leonard knocked on near the try line and a penalty was awarded for a welsh hand on the ball, shouldn't that have been a penalty try? It looked a certain try if that hand wasn't there.

All Weather Supporter #87

A good question and one I am struggling to answer with any real confidence. This is a very grey area for any reviews.

All I can think is it is possibly to due what can and can't be seen. In the case of the Jones' kicking of Leonard it was obvious (at least in my opinion) that it was a shot at the ball and no intention of going for the head. With the angles we got of Carter's shot it is much harder to say there was no intention to go high. He was aiming (in my opinion) for the chest to secure the ball and he has gone up. The thing with the citing is that it needs to be done within 24 hours so the guy that makes the initial citing has to decide whether it is clear cut that they would not have a case to answer (Jones/Leonard) or if there MAY be a case to answer (Carter), in which case this would go to a hearing.

But you could also be right in that the may have been some pressure to cite him for it. I thought it deserved a penalty but nothing more, you see people get away with worse.

#86 Matt The Ref

Maybe you can clear this up - Dan Carters marginally high tackle was obviously accidental as was Stephen Jones kicking Brendon Leonard in the head/face.

There was no intent in either action yet one gets cited the other doesn't.

Why? Or is this just a result of Wales whining?

Evan #80. I understand what you are saying, I agree that it is a safe bet that at some point the ball was grounded, however you have done exactly the same thing as Petone Boy by saying 'basically' on the ground. In rugby there is no benefit of the doubt, if you do not see the ball on the ground then you do not award a try.

Ron Smith #11 Too young unfortunately to have seen Meads' incident, I have heard it was accidental and should not have been sent off but I can't give my personal opinion. Yes contact was made with the head however the vision was clearly on the ball and that was his target, it would have been reviewed by the citing commissioner who has come to the same opinion therefore he was not sighted. He does not deserve a citing for an accident just because the same thing happened to Pinetree. Tow wrongs do not make a right.

Warren #83

Let all that pent up anger out mate, its good therapy for you. Your comments blah blah blah, we've heard it all before & we don't care what you think.

Everyone knows that the Allblacks are the worst cheaters in the game. Take your medicine like good little children and stop you whinging.

To Kyle #73

SA girl is right on and you don't know your rugby mate. SA scored more tries this year in tests than the AB's have, percentage wise the statistics of the tri-nations showed the kicking statistics for tri-nations as follows:

SA 33.4% NZ 32.9% Aus 32.5%

Am pretty sure that translates to around three extra kicks over the entire series by the Boks and I have it on good authority two of those were our numbers 9 and 10 kicking the ball out to celebrate victory over the AB's, so basically we had one extra kick, probably a high ball to that "joke" of a winger Joe R. Excuse us there Kyle, for that one extra kick over six tests ... it was probably just for laughs, to watch him knock it on and throw his name away one more time. Admit it Kyle, anyone who beats the AB’s three times consecutively must be playing boring rugby? Anyone who doesn’t choke in front of the Webb Ellis trophy must surely be playing boring rugby? And as the stats prove mate, anyone who scores more tries over a series than the AB’s (as the stats proved) surely must be playing boring rugby? And finally after all the evidence, surely someone who still labels the Boks as playing boring rugby after all the evidence points to the contrary, must be suffering from a common NZ ailment known as : SORE LOSER !!!!

As a South African supporter I am over the moon with this citing. I mean how strange that someone gets cited for something so seemingly tame in the game of rugby. All I can say is, now the whole of NZ knows what it is like to be a South African supporter. When Bakkies was cited for what his "victim" called a joke, where was NZ support for that ludicrous call (it was a NZ citing commissioner after all)? Or when Giteau wasn't cited for a blatantly late charge on Fourie du Preez, where was NZ support? One week for Thorn for a spear on Smith?

Year after year we have to deal with this and it is so obvious these citings are a load of rubbish and sour grapes. It totally sucks to see one of your heroes pinned for what is after all nothing. I am glad this has happened, not for Carter, but so that NZ can see that these citings are nothing more than a revenge tactic for sore losers, a system that NZ has benefited from in the past, just so that they can say "those Africans are dirty players!!", when all SA see is inconsistency. These inconsistencies will remain as long as the ridiculous IRB mandate this crappy system where one coach (after losing) can come into a room and say "did you see that!!!".

All I really want to say is ....

HOW DOES IT FEEL NEW ZEALAND ????!!!!

Where is South Africa on this? I mean this whole heartedly, "the citing of Dan Carter is ridiculous in the extrenme and does nothing to promote rugby relations between Wales and NZ"