Waratahs v Crusaders, round 15, Saturday 23 May @ Homebush
- Thread starter Lindommer
- Start date
- Status
qwerty51
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Yes but you're saying if Cruden was hurt Steyn should've got a harsher sentence, it would've been the exact same tackle so why should his sentence change?
You'll see even more simulation if injuries are taken into account. Whitelock was playing for the review. Not to mention clubs making up medical information to get players banned longer.
You'll see even more simulation if injuries are taken into account. Whitelock was playing for the review. Not to mention clubs making up medical information to get players banned longer.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
No, I'm not missing your point - it's two different sentences for two different outcomes..........
And hypothetically, it wouldn't be the same tackle if it caused a much different outcome.
Going back to World Rugby Regulation 17 which deals with this, injury is just one of nine aspects that need to be considered in determining both the severity of the charge and then the punishment.
So on that basis it's counted, but shouldn't in any way be the dominant indicator in a decision.
So on that basis it's counted, but shouldn't in any way be the dominant indicator in a decision.
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
Well....that's hardly fair - most rugby players are more scared of mums - anyone's mum - than anyone they meet on the field!
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
Yep, I was chased by a kids mum once, the big heifer wasn't pleased with the way I dealt with her son.
She chased me half way across the field
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
What happens if your mum plays rugby?
Pfitzy
George Gregan (70)
Right well I want to discuss the bans:
Latu got his medicine.
Skelton's sentence is a fucking joke, handed down by incompetent clowns, and is nothing more than a "stop pwaying wuff wiff pwecious Wichie!"
What a fucking joke the initial hearing was, and what a fucking joke the appeal was.
Appeasement for NZ. Nothing but.
Latu got his medicine.
Skelton's sentence is a fucking joke, handed down by incompetent clowns, and is nothing more than a "stop pwaying wuff wiff pwecious Wichie!"
What a fucking joke the initial hearing was, and what a fucking joke the appeal was.
Appeasement for NZ. Nothing but.
FrankLind
Colin Windon (37)
Hard to know if you are trolling or Richie-hate has poisoned your brain. Skelton was banned for the Whitelock "tackle". Nothing to do with McCaw.
Skelton should have been cited for his dive leading with the shoulder on a player already on the ground. Unnecessary and malicious.
Look on the bright side. Skelton's tough guy act might cost his team competition points. Well done Will.
Dan54
Tim Horan (67)
Right well I want to discuss the bans:
(Latu got his medicine.
Skelton's sentence is a fucking joke, handed down by incompetent clowns, and is nothing more than a "stop pwaying wuff wiff pwecious Wichie!"
What a fucking joke the initial hearing was, and what a fucking joke the appeal was.
Appeasement for NZ. Nothing but. )
Yep I see what you mean about all the bitching Pfitzy
(Latu got his medicine.
Skelton's sentence is a fucking joke, handed down by incompetent clowns, and is nothing more than a "stop pwaying wuff wiff pwecious Wichie!"
What a fucking joke the initial hearing was, and what a fucking joke the appeal was.
Appeasement for NZ. Nothing but. )
Yep I see what you mean about all the bitching Pfitzy
Pfitzy
George Gregan (70)
Skelton's involvement in the tackle was harmless UNTIL Latu got involved. How they can say he's responsible for the level of danger in that tackle is to complete ignore the 4-week sentence handed out to the actual culprit.
You see that kind of tackle Skelton was attempting every week but go unpenalised. Even in this game: Nadolo flipped Hooper in a dump tackle, onto his face, while wrapping his arms around Hooper's neck and head, at 33:48 in the game and the ref didn't even stick his arm out. No judiciary looked at that, but it was just as dangerous as Skelton's actions in any other part of the game.
As none of his other offences were citable, they decided to ignore precedent, commonsense, and physics, and throw the book at Skelton as a sly dig for his two other incidents of physical intimidation.
TWO referees - one on the field, one in the box, looked at the footage and saw NO sanction for Skelton at the tackle on Whitelock. So the judiciary is taking a massive shit on Marius vdW and wiping their arse with Peter Marshall.
It probably would have been smarter for the Waratahs to challenge Skelton's but admit Latu's guilt and move on. Now they've fucked it and the rest of the team need to cover the loss.
You see that kind of tackle Skelton was attempting every week but go unpenalised. Even in this game: Nadolo flipped Hooper in a dump tackle, onto his face, while wrapping his arms around Hooper's neck and head, at 33:48 in the game and the ref didn't even stick his arm out. No judiciary looked at that, but it was just as dangerous as Skelton's actions in any other part of the game.
As none of his other offences were citable, they decided to ignore precedent, commonsense, and physics, and throw the book at Skelton as a sly dig for his two other incidents of physical intimidation.
TWO referees - one on the field, one in the box, looked at the footage and saw NO sanction for Skelton at the tackle on Whitelock. So the judiciary is taking a massive shit on Marius vdW and wiping their arse with Peter Marshall.
It probably would have been smarter for the Waratahs to challenge Skelton's but admit Latu's guilt and move on. Now they've fucked it and the rest of the team need to cover the loss.
Pfitzy
George Gregan (70)
Hi guys, I think my internet is broken because I can't find the headline "Robbie Fruean cited for dangerous tackle" for this little incident.
I'm fully expecting the judiciary in NZ to hand down a 6 week ban for this, given the player landed on his shoulder and his head was impacted.
Although, now that I think about it, Justin Marshall did present the "landed awkwardly" defence, which is a good one, AND Fruean is wearing a Crusaders jersey.
So yellow was punishment enough.
I'm fully expecting the judiciary in NZ to hand down a 6 week ban for this, given the player landed on his shoulder and his head was impacted.
Although, now that I think about it, Justin Marshall did present the "landed awkwardly" defence, which is a good one, AND Fruean is wearing a Crusaders jersey.
So yellow was punishment enough.
- Status