RD 16: Rebels v Tahs

[Rug&tug]

I don't really get how that saves Cottrell though. It didn't make it less dangerous because it wasn't his fault.
Fair enough. Just my thoughts. I think you have to draw a line somewhere.
If say, nick phipps pushed Angus into foley. Would that still be his responsibility?.im not sure of the exact wording of the law. I’ve also seen a few dangerous landings where the player has clashed in the air with a teammate.never seen it punished though. Is it only dangerous if the opposition causes it?
Just thoughts.

I thought that was bad refereeing along with many other aspects. The Tahs got the rub of the green overall but certainly there were poor decisions both ways.

 

[KevinO]

The ref was poor, we all know that. All the calls here etc, plus the amount that was let go at the breakdown, sick of it this year actually. Every team just allowed to flop off there feet to secure the ball and getting away with it.

The Rebels lost the game in the back row, Tahs back row did a lot of work in defense and Rebels didn't. While Rebels back row had a lot more impact in attack.

Tackles.

Hooper 21
Wells 17
Swin 9

Rebels
18 between the three.

 

[Finsbury Girl]

You are allowed to contest for the ball. Foley went up very late, fell awkwardly, oppo watching at the ball as they should. Ref decision absolutely perfect, no foul/dangerous play in the slightest.

Rebels were pretty ordinary, they haven't coped well with pressure especially up front.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I thought Rona was planning on making a regulation tackle, but then Koro stepped back into him and he couldn't adjust to get his arm around.

It was a shoulder charge, but I don't think it was deliberate or cynical. Penalty was a fair call, but if it was anything more I reckon Rona would be right to feel a bit aggrieved.
.

Seems to me, Barb, that you have described the situation where just about every coat hanger (stiff arm) tackle originates. It is a reflex action when the tackler is travelling at full speed and the ball carrier steps inside. Same happened with Rona. Both situations (high, stiff arm tackle and the shoulder charge) are banned and in this case, so close to the tryline, a penalty try and YC should have been the result imo.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The Cottrell one was a mystery, in my eyes clearly a yellow. It was a poorly timed attempt at the high ball and put the opposite player in a dangerous position.

I recall a game in NZ a year or two ago where a similar situation occurred. The tackler was carded (red from memory) but later exonerated because he had been bumped by another player and it was judged that that caused the collision. The same happened with Cottrell. He was bumped by DHP just before the point of collision and was somewhat off balance leading to his hit on Beale (EDIT : or Foley apparently). The on field Ref stated that was the reason for no penalty, though I had the distinct impression that the video ref had a different opinion but wasn't ready to overturn the main man.

 

[Braveheart81]

I recall a game in NZ a year or two ago where a similar situation occurred. The tackler was carded (red from memory) but later exonerated because he had been bumped by another player and it was judged that that caused the collision. The same happened with Cottrell. He was bumped by DHP just before the point of collision and was somewhat off balance leading to his hit on Beale (EDIT : or Foley apparently). The on field Ref stated that was the reason for no penalty, though I had the distinct impression that the video ref had a different opinion but wasn't ready to overturn the main man.

It was NZ vs France last year.

The French player (Fall) that was red carded was exonerated on the basis that it was an All Black player (Lienert-Brown) that bumped into them and then caused Fall to take out Barrett in the air.

The difference there was that it was a NZ player that contributed to the dangerous contest that injured Barrett.

I agree with you that the TMO was likely going to call for a penalty at least.