Refereeing decisions
- Thread starter boyo
- Start date
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Halftime?
I'm not sure how much I care about the actual incident out of which my frustration has arisen: it doesn't look that clear to me and I think that was Walsh's view. He could have been cited.
Its very messy.
swingpass
Peter Sullivan (51)
I agree it's messy but important. In the earlier game do you think deysal should have been carded for the kick ? Not seen at the time by the ref
Earlier in the year Rebs v Clan, dangerous tackle on Stirzaker, play on call, no referral from either AR or TMO so player stays on. Cited post game and gets a few weeks holiday. But if he had been sent off because the TMO or the AR had the balls to refer it to the ref, the highlanders would have had to ply with 14 for 75 mins and 13 for 10. May well have changed the outcome.
I am not suggesting that anything other than dangerous or foul play be dealt with in this way.
Earlier in the year Rebs v Clan, dangerous tackle on Stirzaker, play on call, no referral from either AR or TMO so player stays on. Cited post game and gets a few weeks holiday. But if he had been sent off because the TMO or the AR had the balls to refer it to the ref, the highlanders would have had to ply with 14 for 75 mins and 13 for 10. May well have changed the outcome.
I am not suggesting that anything other than dangerous or foul play be dealt with in this way.
Might be messy but it is probably good for the lawyers and SC, @Inside Shoulder.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
All valid points.
Its not so much about what punishment the offence deserves if detected at or shortly after its committed or even a comparison with the punishment given when cited. I'm not condoning foul or dangerous play.
I haven't seen the kick/stomp yet.
The analogy that occurs to me from last night is formula 1: they have the champagne spraying and then weeks or months down the track the result is overturned or confirmed and it detracts from the credibility of the sport - I suspect the sponsors get the pics of the champagne spraying and use them even if the driver is subsequently DSQd.
The application of the rugby laws already has a credibility issue with the general public.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
No HJ we prefer the citing process - although the resultant hearing is always done for free!!
Yep. The various judiciaries come in for a fair bit of adverse comment from time to time, but most of the judiciary reports I have read from google seem to be fairly fair and above board from a legal (and rules of evidence) procedural perspective.
ChargerWA
Mark Loane (55)
Will Ed O'dungbrain go down in history as the first Australian professional rugby player found guilty of eye gouging? Adam Byrnes avoided that ignominy by appealing his ban and having it overturned.
He deserves at least 6 weeks off for the shear fucking stupidity of putting his fingers anywhere near Higgers eyes. Eyes are sacred.
He deserves at least 6 weeks off for the shear fucking stupidity of putting his fingers anywhere near Higgers eyes. Eyes are sacred.
FilthRugby
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
But didn't Adam Byrnes get a 10 weeks suspension for calling Tom Carter a 'liar'?
How the hell can you get suspended for that????
A medal on the other hand...
How the hell can you get suspended for that????
A medal on the other hand...
ChargerWA
Mark Loane (55)
If he did get suspended for calling Tom a liar, Horwill will be lucky to play before the 15 RWC for his outburst after the game.
swingpass
Peter Sullivan (51)
well then you have to go back to no technology and law no. one, the referee is the sole arbiter of fact, and everyone just lives with the 50/50, bad and plainly outrageous decisions as we did before. i am happy with that but i suspect not many will be.
Gnostic
Mark Ella (57)
The funny thing is IS that this is just an application of the existing laws with an extension allowing for the technology.
Years ago (in the 90s) I saw a length of the field try called back on the report of the Touch Judge, IN A TEST MATCH, against a PI team from my very vague memory. The ref had called play on and awarded the try. The TJ marked the sport of the offence and when he caught up to the ref, after the try was awarded. It was duly cancelled and a penalty awarded at the site of the offence.
No difference to what happened here, except they all had the benefit of video replay which clearly shows Ed O scrunching his across the face of a prone player he had pinned. You do yourself no credit defending that or criticising a process that has always been there.
In terms of standardised guidance for Illegal and/or Foul Play and Misconduct, IRB Regulation 17 applies, and is used by nearly all judiciaries to assist to determine sanctions for citings.
(extract below)
Judiciary Entry Point Based on Scale of Seriousness of the Player’s conduct, which constitutes the offending.
Law No 10.4(k) Contact with Eyes or the Eye Area
Lower End 12 weeks, Mid Range 18 weeks, Top End 24+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 156 weeks
Dismal Pillock
Simon Poidevin (60)
JP Pietersen should get fined $50 for calling Corey Flynn "fat" the other night.
No place for that sort of behaviour on the rugby field.
It was a sign of respect. He called him "Phat", y'all.
lincoln
Bob Loudon (25)
Hmm - which definition - pretty hot and tempting or pussy hips ass tits?
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
That is or was a major difference from league: they could not pull the try once awarded.
I think what I take to be Walsh's refusal to be involved is what is unseemly. (refusal in that he was saying you better tell me what you can see- based on Jarse's post above there was clearly visible contact with the eye area at least)
This thread is for discussing refereeing decisions and their implications. It's not for stupid made up names for player and officials or mind reading player intentions. You are allowed plenty of latitude for that in match threads.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
It is what it is
John Solomon (38)
I'd like them to go back to Richard Loe in
I'd like them to go back as far as Richard Loe's effort in Brisbane.
Baldric
Jim Clark (26)
Of the two red card incidents this weekend which one do people think was handled better? I thought the incident in the Sharks game was handled well but it was poorly done in the Reds game.
In the Reds game there was wrestling going on behind play which Walsh did not see, he then ruled on what he did see instead of referring to the TMO. We see the ref use the TMO to check for knock-ons but when it is a fairly important incident they do not. I think they need to work out a better way of doing things. Ass Refs are supposed to monitor the off the ball play. In this case the solution would have been for the Ass Ref to say to Walsh, check the video and see what happened.
In the Reds game there was wrestling going on behind play which Walsh did not see, he then ruled on what he did see instead of referring to the TMO. We see the ref use the TMO to check for knock-ons but when it is a fairly important incident they do not. I think they need to work out a better way of doing things. Ass Refs are supposed to monitor the off the ball play. In this case the solution would have been for the Ass Ref to say to Walsh, check the video and see what happened.