Refereeing decisions

[Slim 293]

.. but how low is it reasonable to expect a defender to get?

In both cases the player was already being tackled/going to ground........ I would suggest they need to adapt their technique and maybe not go for the cheap shot.

If you go for a swinging arm to a player in a vulnerable position, you get what you deserve.

 

[molman]

In both cases it was the second man in when the player was already being tackled/going to ground.... I would suggest they need to adapt their technique and maybe not go for the cheap shot.

If you go for a swinging arm to a player in a vulnerable position, you get what you deserve.

Eh? There was no second man situation in the 30th minute incident? He NAM player caught ball, brushed off AB's near him and ran almost head first into the AB 3 who went reasonable low for a big lad.

 

[Slim 293]

Eh? There was no second man situation in the 30th minute incident? He NAM player caught ball, brushed off AB's near him and ran almost head first into the AB 3 who went reasonable low for a big lad.

Yeah, I amended my post for the first one............ but the point still stands.

He could've easily avoided the head.

Anyways, I'm not really sympathetic to some of the bleating from some supporters about players getting punished for foul play.

It's like when WR (World Rugby) clamped down on tip tackles, and people cried "what're we supposed to do?!"

 

[molman]

I'd reply Slim, but you keep editing your post .. I do admit I was thinking mainly of the first yellow card... second, I can see more your point.

I agree on your point (which you edited?), it's clear the direction that WR (World Rugby) is going... most cards in a RWC yet and I doubt the players are any more afoul of the laws than prior years... don't know about your tip tackle comment, don't recall that being all that contenious, but if you say so.

 

[Proud Pig]

The first was a swinging arm and collected the side of the head.
I have no issue with the yellow card for that one the player was going down so it was only a yellow, all good.
The second I thought was not as bad and had it been the first incident may have gotten away with a penalty.
However, it was definitely stupid as he had just seen it called.
I have sympathy for the defenders it is very hard not to infringe against a player going to ground.
In my playing days I was a 6" 2' prop, so a big lump of a lad, and did on occasion run foul of the officiating.
The answer to tackling a player going to ground is simple just temper the desire for a dominating tackle and while it may still be high and draw a penalty that is all it will draw.

I will however say that in my playing days, 80s and 90s, the coach did on occasion say "Remember lads they can't run without a head." Ah, different times.

 

[Tex]

I will however say that in my playing days, 80s and 90s, the coach did on occasion say "Remember lads they can't run without a head." Ah, different times.

I was taught to run with my knees up to "kick the bastards in the head" :/

Lavanini's tackle was pretty bad in intent and execution. If he hadn't tried to murder Farrell (understandable but not kosher) and just wrapped him a bit more accurately he would have been fine.

All that said, I still think there's merit to introducing a third card level between the 10 minute yellow and the game ending red. Keep the red card for acts of serious harm and aggression, punching, dump tackles and shoulder charges etc.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

How do you only get three weeks for dropping a bloke on his head? What possible mitigation could there be?

 

[Derpus]

Thank God NRL is always there for a little perspective eh.

 

[molman]

How do you only get three weeks for dropping a bloke on his head? What possible mitigation could there be?

That's the bit that's frustrating. All this range of 'foul' play recieving the same sanctions. It seems like the outcome of the incident is coming into it way too much. Just the fact that Vermeulen came out ok I'm hearing was a factor in the sanction not being as bad as it could.

 

[Proud Pig]

How do you only get three weeks for dropping a bloke on his head? What possible mitigation could there be?

While not relevant in this situation, the player dumped being either a half-back or winger should be sufficient mitigation.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I don't understand how both players got the same sanction too. The mitigation seems to be that the player wasn't hurt (!?!) and each player got to blame the other, or other players contributed to the situation

 

[2bluesfan]

I will however say that in my playing days, 80s and 90s, the coach did on occasion say "Remember lads they can't run without a head." Ah, different times.

In the same era, I can recall watching a subbies match where, in a huddle of one side while the ref lectured both captains post scuffle, I distinctly heard the cry "Remember boys, they can't run without eyes". Different times indeed.

 

[Spruce Moose]

After watching the ENG v ARG game and reflecting on Coleman in the earlier game and even Arnold in the past, I was curious if taller players are statistically receiving more high tackle related penalties? it would also be interesting to know what the height differential was on average between players. I look at Farrell in his sitting on a seat shape and just think the margins between a big hit and high tackle have just got to be so fine for these big boys. Also, as an aside, why wasn't there a HIA for Farrell?

Should have been a penalty against Farrell for leading with a forearm.

Unsure why Farrell didn't get HIA, he didn't get one against US either from memory. Maybe he had scans in the past that show a thick skull with a small brain so the England Docs aren't overly concerned.

 

[Spruce Moose]

Did anyone see the call for crooked put in that lead to Japan's BP try? That was the most classic example of refs being inconsistent and just calling something they haven't called all game (likely getting caught up in the amazing atmosphere with a packed house of cherry blossom shirts).
The more bizarre thing was when Japan had the subsequent put in, the ref moved to the other side of the scrum and didn't even watch the Japanese scrum half put the ball in to ensure he put it in straight. That just does my head in!

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

"During the [South Africa] match, Italy lost [props] Simone Ferrari (hamstring) and replacement Marco Riccioni (concussion) inside 18 minutes, which led to uncontested scrums.

"[Italy coach] O'Shea will, therefore, have to call in replacements for the October 12 match against the All Blacks, with only Tiziano Pasquali and Federico Zani left in the squad."

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/rugb...ti-nicola-quaglio-handed-three-game-bans.html

So does that mean two other players have to leave the squad to allow the replacement props to join it? I'm thinking it probably does but can't find anything confirming it.

Also, what happens if a defender faced with a ball-carrier coming in head-first & low simply stands his ground & lets the carrier run into him?

 

[molman]

Should have been a penalty against Farrell for leading with a forearm.

Unsure why Farrell didn't get HIA, he didn't get one against US either from memory. Maybe he had scans in the past that show a thick skull with a small brain so the England Docs aren't overly concerned.

Maybe a little unfair, but this video made me laugh.

 

[molman]

So does that mean two other players have to leave the squad to allow the replacement props to join it? I'm thinking it probably does but can't find anything confirming it.

Me either. I had a look to see if I could find any published rules/laws for the tournament around this but couldn't. In 2015 RWC there was the possibility that you could start a match with uncontested scrums, especially if an injury happened close to the match as there was a min 48hr window before replacement players (for injured) could join the squad so there was a possible senario of a team not having the required forwards for match day. You've got to assume they loose whoever they replace for the incoming players.

Also, what happens if a defender faced with a ball-carrier coming in head-first & low simply stands his ground & lets the carrier run into him?

Who knows. It's a lottery as all the onious is on the defender (unless you have that elbow out as an attacker, which they cherry pick if they are going to deal with or not). New tactic, run head first at their best player and get them sent off

In all seriousness, I think we need to have some guidelines on both the body shape of the attacking player to be taken into consideration. Perhaps even the hight of their head above waist or leading with head or something. Also if they are serious and this is not just for the look of the thing, why don't head high fouls trigger an automatic HIA?

 

[yourmatesam]

Did anyone see the call for crooked put in that lead to Japan's BP try? That was the most classic example of refs being inconsistent and just calling something they haven't called all game (likely getting caught up in the amazing atmosphere with a packed house of cherry blossom shirts).
The more bizarre thing was when Japan had the subsequent put in, the ref moved to the other side of the scrum and didn't even watch the Japanese scrum half put the ball in to ensure he put it in straight. That just does my head in!

Yep, frustrating from every angle wasn't it!!

That is not the time of the game to call a crooked feed. I'd love to see the stats on crooked feeds across the entire tournament, there wouldn't be many!!

 

[Strewthcobber]

Yep, frustrating from every angle wasn't it!!

That is not the time of the game to call a crooked feed. I'd love to see the stats on crooked feeds across the entire tournament, there wouldn't be many!!

Watched the replay on that one last night and in the end didn't mind that call. The problem for Samoa wasn't just the feed, it's that they didn't hook, or even pretend to hook. It was a really obvious egregious crooked feed too.

The ref lectured both teams afterwards about the requirements to hook, and then presumably saw the Japanese hooker hook from the other side of the scrum

 

[Proud Pig]

Look, most feeds could technically be called crooked but usually the feeding team at least make a perfunctory attempt to make look like they need to hook. This one was just such a blatant feed to the second row that the Ref had little choice but to call it.
It is one thing to push the boundaries it is a whole other thing to just bulldoze over them.