Force v Brumbies 25 March 2022 @ HBF Park

[Adam84]

No real issue with that D, but Pulu did duck his head towards Banks in trying to beat him on the inside. No problem with what Pulu did. He has every right to try to beat the defender. It was just an out and out accident. No foul play. The red card should not be used for accidental clashes.

Pulu ducked his head?
Banks put himself in the completely wrong position and it was dangerous to both players.

Whether it was an accident(I agree it was) isn’t the issue, they’re penalising poor technique as well to force teams to train differently.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Fair enough Adam, but how could Banks have put his head in any other position. The neck is some sort of constraint. But seriously, Banks was chasing across field at full pace. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with his running style, and I fail to see how he could possibly have his head or neck in any other position when at full pace. He most certainly couldn't have lowered his head by bending at the waist without falling over his own feet. What was he otherwise meant to do? Ease off and allow the winger to score the try unhindered? That looks to be the only alternative to me, and that simply is not rugby.

Incidentally, I still maintain that Pulu, in the act of taking the inside step brought his head directly into collision with Banks' head. That still does not mean foul or negligent action on his part, just as Banks was neither in the act of foul play or negligent play. It was an accident.

 

[SteveWA]

Pulu got the ball 10m out. Banks hit him 5m out. Banks was not competing for the ball. He had plenty of time to adjust and go low. If he had he would not have hit Pulu in the head (and he may still have prevented a try). It was not deliberate but it was negligent. He deserved the card and the officials followed the protocol as required.

 

[Adam84]

Fair enough Adam, but how could Banks have put his head in any other position. The neck is some sort of constraint. But seriously, Banks was chasing across field at full pace. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with his running style, and I fail to see how he could possibly have his head or neck in any other position when at full pace. He most certainly couldn't have lowered his head by bending at the waist without falling over his own feet. What was he otherwise meant to do? Ease off and allow the winger to score the try unhindered? That looks to be the only alternative to me, and that simply is not rugby.

Incidentally, I still maintain that Pulu, in the act of taking the inside step brought his head directly into collision with Banks' head. That still does not mean foul or negligent action on his part, just as Banks was neither in the act of foul play or negligent play. It was an accident.

BR, fullbacks make covering tackle every week at fullpace; bend at the hips and lower the body height.

Example A, albeit JP put his head on the wrong side

Banks can cover tackle properly and has plenty of times in the past, this was an accident however it was poor technique which lead to a dangerous tackle which absolutely meets the threshold for the head contact protocols.

 

[dru]

I'd been thinking that a low cover tackle by Banks had no chance of stopping a try, that a "ball and all wrap" was required.

To be fair here, the Petaia tackle and the Banks tackle show that I'm probably wrong. Both very similar in terms of :
a) attacker proximity to touch
b) attacker proximity to the try line
c) cover required by the defending FB
d) probably similar speeds by all parties - however only one involves a step inside by the attacker

I thought the Petaia defence was awesome, but I'm not sure it stops that try every time.

I don't think Banks did anything "unethical", but whatever BR's protestations it was clearly against the very well publicised and policed rules. He also came off second best so you'd hope he will think it through next time.

 

[ForceFan]

Pulu ducked his head?
Banks put himself in the completely wrong position and it was dangerous to both players.

Whether it was an accident(I agree it was) isn’t the issue, they’re penalising poor technique as well to force teams to train differently.

This pic makes it appear that Banks is stationary when in reality he still had momentum toward the side line.

There was always going to be head to head contact, even if Pulu had not taken a half-step towards Banks.

The guidelines are clear - it's up to the tackling player to avoid the head-to-head contact.

 

[ForceFan]

Have just watched the game again to be sure of the impressions gained at the ground.

How do you gain or lose momentum in a rugby match?
By having a referee who ignores illegal entry into rucks.

All 4 first half tries by the Brumbies followed periods of up to 3 x side entries (the try at 1:30) into rucks leading up to tries being scored.
(That's also ignoring the forward pass for the 4th try at 33 minutes)
.By my count 14 side entries by the Brumbies in the first half and another 7 in the 2nd - ignored by Gardner and the ARs.
The worst offenders were Swain (5), Kautai (4), Brown (4), L Lonergan (2), Valentini (2).

Defence seemed optional for both sides but enjoyed the 77 points scored in an entertaining game.

 

[RugbyReg]

No side entry by the Force players?

 

[SteveWA]

No side entry by the Force players?

One that I noted and he was rightfully penalised, but nice attempt at deflection Reg.

 

[RugbyReg]

One that I noted and he was rightfully penalised, but nice attempt at deflection Reg.

Wasn’t deflection it was a genuine question. Need to ensure both sides are being recorded the same way to ensure no bias can be implied. But nice chip on your shoulder Steve.

 

[SteveWA]

Wasn’t deflection it was a genuine question. Need to ensure both sides are being recorded the same way to ensure no bias can be implied. But nice chip on your shoulder Steve.

Pot, kettle, black. Seriously.

 

[Slim 293]

Just wait until the Force fans realise all of those side entries were just a diversion to distract them from all the truly nefarious acts the Brumbies were committing… all under the watchful eye of the ruling east coast elite…

 

[SteveWA]

Just wait until the Force fans realise all of those side entries were just a diversion to distract them from all the truly nefarious acts the Brumbies were committing… all under the watchful eye of the ruling east coast elite…

So what was incorrect in the stats that ForceFan gave? A genuine question?

 

[Brumby Runner]

Not stats, Steve - observations from a biased fan. Not the sort of data any impartial party would rely on. Definitely no credibility at all from my point of view as a Brumbies fan.

 

[SteveWA]

Not stats, Steve - observations from a biased fan. Not the sort of data any impartial party would rely on. Definitely no credibility at all from my point of view as a Brumbies fan

So if it is biased and has no credibility it shouldn’t be too hard to point out the errors? A genuine question.

 

[Tomikin]

So if it is biased and has no credibility it shouldn’t be too hard to point out the errors? A genuine question.

I looked the stats up on espn, none of them where called from for side entry, oh except the force one..

 

[RugbyReg]

So if it is biased and has no credibility it shouldn’t be too hard to point out the errors? A genuine question.

That’s correct. Just need all the data - ie the Force numbers.

 

[Derpus]

Fair enough Adam, but how could Banks have put his head in any other position. The neck is some sort of constraint. But seriously, Banks was chasing across field at full pace. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with his running style, and I fail to see how he could possibly have his head or neck in any other position when at full pace. He most certainly couldn't have lowered his head by bending at the waist without falling over his own feet. What was he otherwise meant to do? Ease off and allow the winger to score the try unhindered? That looks to be the only alternative to me, and that simply is not rugby.

Incidentally, I still maintain that Pulu, in the act of taking the inside step brought his head directly into collision with Banks' head. That still does not mean foul or negligent action on his part, just as Banks was neither in the act of foul play or negligent play. It was an accident.

I'd expect you to be more critical of Banks here, given he basically pulled a Beale.

 

[ForceFan]

Don't need the opinion pieces from the normal cast members.
Watch the game again and tell me that my observations are incorrect.
You'll have no trouble confirming my numbers - especially if you are even half aware of the rules for the breakdown/rucks.
The refs are consistently not calling repeated offsides and forward passes - yet the TMO are happy to point out obscure infringements.
Yes, there were side enties from the WF - but check how often they were called for ruck infringements.
IMO - it's becoming a blight on the game.
I'm all for allowing the game to flow but not when one side is continually being given or getting an unfair advantage.
I could add the additional infringements of tackling players without the ball when not connected to the ruck and the consistent loitering on either side of the ruck (without penalty). The Brumbies must practice all of these strategies as they very well applied - like most of their skills.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

The gate at the tackle has been very wide for years. There are hardly any penalties in any game for side entry. I am not sure this game was any different. (Personally I would like to see this cleaned up a bit)