• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Blues v Reds

Status
Not open for further replies.
gel

gel

Ken Catchpole (46)
Not that I recall.

He has been cited and cleared previously.

Given a clean sheet I expect he will get 6-8 weeks, if not more.
 
Dan54

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
I would expect 6 weeks seems to be about right, it's not what the guy lands on, it's the lifting and not putting down is problem!! He looked like he was driving down on him, not sure if he was or not, but we will know in a couple of days! Didn't realise he had even been cited before, makes you think he would be a tad more careful.
 
ACT Crusader

ACT Crusader

Jim Lenehan (48)
Hawko said:
Kurtley Beale was picked up by three Blues players and piledriven into the ground right in front of the referee. The commentators were beside themselves about how good a tackle it was. I think that if Slipper gets cited he could do worse than give the judiciary a video of the Beale tackle. Agree Slipper lifted him slightly higher than the Beale tackle, about 5 degrees more, but the angle of contact with the ground was about the same.

But then that requires consistency from the judiciary process and the Sanzar judicial process, from referees to citings, is not noted for its consistency.
Click to expand...

Do you read all the citing commission reports and findings? How do you know it's inconsistent?
 
Sully

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
It's not the first time I've seen the Blues do something like this. Wish more clubs did the same thing!
 
GaffaCHinO

GaffaCHinO

Peter Sullivan (51)
ACT Crusader said:
Very surprised to see Ma'a in a suit. He's more a hoody and shorts guy, well that's what he wore at official things at the Canes...
Click to expand...
Official things?

8umyge6a.jpg
 
biggsy

biggsy

Chilla Wilson (44)
Galde I was in bush with no service for this game.
Yet to watch the game (don't know if I still will) but sounds like the defence was ordinary again.
New that when the back line was named.....
 
Ash

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
Dan54 said:
I would expect 6 weeks seems to be about right, it's not what the guy lands on, it's the lifting and not putting down is problem!! He looked like he was driving down on him, not sure if he was or not, but we will know in a couple of days! Didn't realise he had even been cited before, makes you think he would be a tad more careful.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. The angle is the most important thing when considering a tip tackle.

As the guy's back was practically flat when he hit the ground, the tackle is either at the lowest end of the tip tackle range, or Slipper will be suspended for lifting and not putting down gently.

A driving tackle onto a guy's back is a lower severity of a tip tackle without driving. A driving tip tackle is worse. The severity of the tip tackle depends on the angle and if he was dropped or driven.

If you think that tackle deserves 6 weeks, then going back to "BOD I could have died", Umaga should have been out for 6 months.
 
Dan54

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
Ash I agree angle is the only thing taken into account, the law is I think if you take him his legs above the 90 degree you were in trouble, I was saying I didn't think it made difference if player lands on back or neck. I agree his back was straight, but his legs were certainly still in air.
To make it clear , I didn't think Slipper wastrying to hurt him, just no matter how I look at it , was atip tackle!
As for going back to BOD incident, not sure what it's got to do with Slipper, but perhaps you can enlighten me!!
 
Dan54

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
Hawko said:
Yes I have read the findings before and I stand by my claim that the only consistent thing about the Sanzar process is their inconsistency.
Click to expand...
Hawko, I think you will find the fact that 3 players were involved with Beale is exactly why it was not a tip tackle, he had someone rightly or wrongly making sure he didn't go headfirst into ground where as perhaps with Slipper it was the tackled player himself that managed to stop it?? not sure ,but that is how I see it.
 
Ballboy

Ballboy

Chris McKivat (8)
Reds fans what is the Beau Robinson story ? from the limited amount i see him hee seems to make a good impact but does not seem to be in favour ?
 
Scrubber2050

Scrubber2050

Mark Ella (57)
Shit a few years ago it would have been considered a good tackle.

Sure he lifted him - he hit on his back flat.- bloke not hurt.

It was dealt with on the field with the Ref and TMO adjusicating that a yellow was sufficent.

Maybe give a week for stupidity but no more than that.
 
Ash

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
Dan54 said:
Ash I agree angle is the only thing taken into account, the law is I think if you take him his legs above the 90 degree you were in trouble, I was saying I didn't think it made difference if player lands on back or neck. I agree his back was straight, but his legs were certainly still in air.
To make it clear , I didn't think Slipper wastrying to hurt him, just no matter how I look at it , was atip tackle!
As for going back to BOD incident, not sure what it's got to do with Slipper, but perhaps you can enlighten me!!
Click to expand...

Comparing how bad tackles are in terms of severity.

The angle of the back is what's important. A flat back (the angle of back parallel to the ground) means minimal risk to the neck. I thought that Slipper's tackle the back was basically parallel to the ground, so it's at the very bottom of the severity rating. Hence why I think that 6 weeks is over the top.

My recollection of the Slipper tackle is that the guy's back was parallel to the ground and the tackled player didn't do anything to stabilise has position, e.g. no arm went out.

A person's legs being in the air signify nothing - your legs could be in the air and you land on your backside. Nothing wrong with that.

Unfortunately I can't find a video of it online.

As an example, here's the tackle from Ioane on Coetzee in 2012 where Coetzee's back goes well past parallel to the ground, and it's only Coetzee's arm that stops it from going further. Pretty sure that the base suspension for Ioane's tackle was about 7 or so weeks.

 
Ash

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
boyo said:
Surely dey don't do dat torta ting?
Click to expand...

Was a sneaky swipe at the amount of Kiwis who still claim that Umaga shouldn't have been suspended; fair enough for Dan54 to call me on it ;) I think that if a similar tackle occurred now, it would be a couple months on the sidelines for the culprit.
 
Dan54

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
Well fair enough, obviously the judicary agree with you Ash, and I really have no problem with that at all. They would of looked at more than the once I did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ash
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top