• 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.

Round 18: Waratahs v Sunwolves, Saturday 7:15 AET, SFS

Status
Not open for further replies.

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
No, not in a lifting tackle. I just think it’s easier to stomach a red when someone’s done something maliciously like striking or a tackle off the ball. Although I guess everyone knows that a red card is likely for that sort of lifting tackle and players should be smart enough to avoid them.
But I think Red is for an action which is dangerous to another player - lifting, spearing, punching etc......... In single player incidents they need to make it simple.
Trying to attribute malice or intent is fraught. When they have a sliding scale for similar offences, all they do is create grey areas. Problem areas arise with 2 or more players contributing to an outcome and the ref or TMO trying to apportion blame, and ignore the input of one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Up the Guts

Steve Williams (59)
But I think Red is for an action which is dangerous to another player - lifting, spearing, punching etc... In single player incidents they need to make it simple.
Trying to attribute malice or intent is fraught. When they have a sliding scale for similar offences, all they do is create grey areas. Problem areas arise with 2 or more players contributing to an outcome and the ref or TMO trying to apportion blame, and ignore the input of one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Yeah agree. Not advocating that we hand out reds based on perceived malice just saying as a spectator it’s easier to accept that a guy is going to be off for the rest of the game if his actions seemed malicious. I do like the report system in League where the action gets reviewed but the player is not sidelined for the remainder of the match so the game is not ruined by one incident but that opens a whole other can of worms.
 

Brumby Runner

David Wilson (68)
Had to be red. He took a yellow card tackle then continued to drive his head into the ground. Was really dangerous. If he had just let him go and ceased adding force would have only been yellow.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Yep BH, but compare with Evans' hit on Pocock last week. A neck roll above the horizontal (YC) and driven head first with force into the ground (RC). Just a penalty. Rubbish inconsistency.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Pocock didn't get his head driven into the ground. He got pulled across Evans' body.

It was yellow all day but I don't think it was red.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

A mutterer

Chilla Wilson (44)
Yep BH, but compare with Evans' hit on Pocock last week. A neck roll above the horizontal (YC) and driven head first with force into the ground (RC). Just a penalty. Rubbish inconsistency.

except the moondogs scrum half got a yellow for a neckroll on gordon, even thought it looked more like a wwe ddt.
 

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
So i didn't watch this but it looks like they were going to push us close until the red and then everything after is irrelevant. Bout right?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

Up the Guts

Steve Williams (59)
So i didn't watch this but it looks like they were going to push us close until the red and then everything after is irrelevant. Bout right?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

It was close but the Tahs looked in control, wouldn't have been 70 but still would have been a comfortable win.
 

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
How the fuck is this game not on FTA TV this morning instead of the Reds v Rebels?

OUTRAGE!


What's an outrage is that the Reds/Rebels game was so poor. Not a good advert for the game at all! The Tahs/Sunnies game had lots of good skill on show from both sides. The skill highlight was Yamada absolutely gassing Izzy on the outside. I've never seen Izzy so totally outclassed, ever.
 

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
So i didn't watch this but it looks like they were going to push us close until the red and then everything after is irrelevant. Bout right?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


Red card came at 24-17 Tahs and at that stage they were in full control. Result was never in doubt IMO.
 

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
What's an outrage is that the Reds/Rebels game was so poor. Not a good advert for the game at all! The Tahs/Sunnies game had lots of good skill on show from both sides. The skill highlight was Yamada absolutely gassing Izzy on the outside. I've never seen Izzy so totally outclassed, ever.
He's never been the most amazing defender.
 

Rock Lobster

Larry Dwyer (12)
Yep agree just a sloppy tackle and I still say he let him go as they end up about 2 meters apart on the ground. Was the forward pass even looked at?
 

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
Certainly wasn't driven hey. Just a sloppy tackle. Don't think too many people would be upset if he just got a yellow.
So what? The laws are based on how the player lands - i.e. which part contacts ground first. If the player goes head first any which way, the potential outcome is terrible. So, IF World Rugby is basing their sanctions on player safety, it makes no difference if some think "he wasn't driven, hey" or otherwise. Rather than having a guessing game with these tackles on the vibe of how much the player intended it, or drove the player down, they'd be better focussing on perhaps a better system of cards; perhaps utilising the often proposed idea of the Red being player off 10 mins, then subbed, so the team gets numbers back, but is penalised with fewer replacement options. Then make any attack on the head, whether by high tackle, striking, or tip tackle a Red on the basis they are trying to preserve player safety. Take out the ambiguity.
 

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
So what? The laws are based on how the player lands - i.e. which part contacts ground first. If the player goes head first any which way, the potential outcome is terrible. So, IF World Rugby is basing their sanctions on player safety, it makes no difference if some think "he wasn't driven, hey" or otherwise. Rather than having a guessing game with these tackles on the vibe of how much the player intended it, or drove the player down, they'd be better focussing on perhaps a better system of cards; perhaps utilising the often proposed idea of the Red being player off 10 mins, then subbed, so the team gets numbers back, but is penalised with fewer replacement options. Then make any attack on the head, whether by high tackle, striking, or tip tackle a Red on the basis they are trying to preserve player safety. Take out the ambiguity.


And, for what its worth I think the refs would have had no qualms about red-carding both Cane and ? (oldtimers) for the tackle fracturing the froggies skull in two places.
 

mark_s

Chilla Wilson (44)
I reckon the refs got both card calls right. It ruined the game, but that’s because both acts were dangerous. Players landing on the top of their head is a recipe for disaster. Foley’s was late and also. I was hoping Gibson would bring Foley off because he looks like he needs a rest, but he only got a rest very late.

Some of the sunwolves play was electric. Their winger smoked our guys a couple of times. Not the best game to attend live (was freezing at the ground) but good to see us get the job done.

The sunwolves lacked on field leadership IMO. They need a very experienced international to lead them around the field.

Ps I watched rob Simmons closely last night and thought he played bloody well. Not our best player, but he did lots of hard yards, plus he has cut out some of the crap that used to be in his game. (Hanigan, seems to have inherited some of that stuff though)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top