Wednesday, December 09, 2009
Matt Banahan red carded for stamping
Banahan was shown a straight red card following his stamping on Stephen Myler, and action that could mean he faces a suspension of at least two weeks. Bath will apparently contest the red card and possible ban, as the England wing stands to miss back-to-back Heineken Cup games against Edinburgh.
"It didn't look like a red card," said head coach Steve Meehan.
Myler, the player who was on the receiving end of the 6ft7 wings boot, played down the incident, which will possibly work in Banahans favour when it comes to a ruling.
"Myler said that he made contact with his forearm, not his head, but the assistant referee said he made contact with his head. The referee wasn't influenced by anyone except the assistant referee who told him it was a red card," he said.
While there is a difference between stamping and rucking, many have called for the latter to be brought back into the game, including former players who can see the value in getting a player to release the ball, or get on his side, by administering a bit of shoe-pie .
If this were 15 years ago, the incident would go unnoticed, but the rules these days are clear, so Banahan will most likely be facing a couple of weeks on the sideline.
Update 10/12/2009: Following the disciplinary hearing late last night, it was confirmed that he has been handed a two week suspension.
Time: 0:36
Posted at 7:31 pm | 48 comments
|
Viewing 48 comments
MCB December 09, 2009 7:45 pm
Looked like a regular shoeing but if it was on or near his head its very dodgy. Right call if that's the case. 4-6 weeks
Kearney for tests December 09, 2009 7:46 pm
Not really deserving of a red in my opinion. It's hard to see what's going on, but even a yellow to me would seem harsh, assuming that Myler was doing something in the ruck that he shouldn't have been.
Although he's so crap I couldn't really care.
Although he's so crap I couldn't really care.
Bobby Nations December 09, 2009 7:49 pm
Myler was blatantly laying over the ball.
I'll say again (for the 1000th time), bring back rucking, and these things will sort themselves out easily enough. There was no reason for that ball not to be played out immediately to one side or the other. I've had enough of the piles of grunting foragers wrestling for the ball on the floor that seems to characterize every breakdown under current laws.
I'll say again (for the 1000th time), bring back rucking, and these things will sort themselves out easily enough. There was no reason for that ball not to be played out immediately to one side or the other. I've had enough of the piles of grunting foragers wrestling for the ball on the floor that seems to characterize every breakdown under current laws.
Bobby Nations December 09, 2009 7:52 pm
"There's a battle on the floor for the ball there"
The sad part is that this commentary was spoken with a complete lack of irony. That such a thing is so commonplace as to rate no special mention is one of the chief things going wrong with the state of the game today.
The sad part is that this commentary was spoken with a complete lack of irony. That such a thing is so commonplace as to rate no special mention is one of the chief things going wrong with the state of the game today.
JJW December 09, 2009 8:30 pm
Bring back rucking, the game needs taking back a few years to make it good again.
Ireland for WC 2011 December 09, 2009 8:39 pm
nowhere near his head,but even still,will probably get a couple of weeks(not that i agree with it).
i think the IRB are all over the place with their rulings.bans for people who stick their finger in someone elses eye unprovoked are the same length as for people who give a bit of "shoe pie" to people who are acting illegally(a practice which all real rugby players agree is fair enough). ridiculous
i think the IRB are all over the place with their rulings.bans for people who stick their finger in someone elses eye unprovoked are the same length as for people who give a bit of "shoe pie" to people who are acting illegally(a practice which all real rugby players agree is fair enough). ridiculous
Anonymous December 09, 2009 8:44 pm
nothing wrong with that, myler in the way so he raked him.
David December 09, 2009 9:40 pm
Nowt wrong with that! Seriously the game is going down the pan slowly. Went I started playing i used to have ruck marks everyone! Sign of a good hard game. I can come off now with nothing to show for playing. We are getting toooo over protective. I dont agree with thuggery and cheap shots, but if somewhere is killing the ball its fair game, away from head and private areas...
Anonymous December 09, 2009 10:03 pm
bring back the biff in rugby!
banahans tattoos are horrible as well what was he thinking!
banahans tattoos are horrible as well what was he thinking!
Anonymous December 09, 2009 10:06 pm
Looked bad enough he knew where he was stamping he was looking down, probably only a yellow and no ban but harsh and silly but the irb show no common sense in the sighting process.
Anonymous December 09, 2009 10:11 pm
Stop lying on the ball. Someone tell mewhy Banahan can't play #8 or something?
Cameron Maxted December 09, 2009 11:48 pm
who remembers when The Rock smashed this guy to the floor at dublin?
get rid of the attitude banahan you arent all that!!!!
get rid of the attitude banahan you arent all that!!!!
conan December 09, 2009 11:57 pm
"The Rock" as in the wrestler? Or "The Rock" as in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rock_(rugby_team)
Either way...what?
------
I agree with what everyone else has said though...if you're on the wrong side of the ruck, you're bound to get a boot on you, so what's the big deal? Everyone knows it's what'll happen, so you don't lay over the ball....the touch judge must've never played a match before or something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rock_(rugby_team)
Either way...what?
------
I agree with what everyone else has said though...if you're on the wrong side of the ruck, you're bound to get a boot on you, so what's the big deal? Everyone knows it's what'll happen, so you don't lay over the ball....the touch judge must've never played a match before or something.
Anonymous December 10, 2009 12:05 am
yep nice bit of shoe-pie used to be the fairest law in the land. You lie in the ball to slow it down you get a shoeing simple. Then you wont do it, speed up the game problem solved...... unless your hard of course and can take it.
Anonymous December 10, 2009 12:21 am
"banahans tattoos are horrible as well what was he thinking!"
what does that have to do with stamping ... Im a big fan of tattoos and the whole tattoo culture and I think his japanese sleeve with the gaps is quite unique. Its not traditional to have those gaps tho, which is the point of japanese pieces. And ultimately I dont like it either although Im sure its an impressive piece of art, but tattoos arent for OTHER people to enjoy (although they do like looking)...so shut up you ignorant twat.
On the other hand, he may regret the hand and neck tattoos. Unless he plans on being a tattoo artist lol.
In regards to the redcard .. HARSH
what does that have to do with stamping ... Im a big fan of tattoos and the whole tattoo culture and I think his japanese sleeve with the gaps is quite unique. Its not traditional to have those gaps tho, which is the point of japanese pieces. And ultimately I dont like it either although Im sure its an impressive piece of art, but tattoos arent for OTHER people to enjoy (although they do like looking)...so shut up you ignorant twat.
On the other hand, he may regret the hand and neck tattoos. Unless he plans on being a tattoo artist lol.
In regards to the redcard .. HARSH
Anonymous December 10, 2009 12:49 am
banahan is a huge tool
However, unless he was rucking someones head (which i couldn't see)... Red card is pretty harsh!
However, unless he was rucking someones head (which i couldn't see)... Red card is pretty harsh!
Anonymous December 10, 2009 1:19 am
They used to call that rucking... it was across the guys back. Under the current rules it's a yellow but it should be re-instituted
No.7 December 10, 2009 1:45 am
Everyone agrees.....bobby nations got in there first!
i think its ridiculous....i already had this argument with someone a while ago about 'shoe-pie' (awesome term!!) where they were stating that 'due to it being seen on tv and blah blah blah, its not nice to see people bleeding etc....'
I think bring it back, the game isnt for the tv its for those playing, and i can tell anyone that without rucking the game gets slower....players take just that bit longer to get out the way....
i remember being pinned and seeing the opposition front row above me with their bloody boots.....yeh it was harsh because i was pinned, but it happens... it was part of the game...next time i made sure i was out of the way before i could get pinned....
....remember those hands poking through trying to play the ball...a quick flash of studs stopped that.....
although gotta say head contact isnt good.....
i think its ridiculous....i already had this argument with someone a while ago about 'shoe-pie' (awesome term!!) where they were stating that 'due to it being seen on tv and blah blah blah, its not nice to see people bleeding etc....'
I think bring it back, the game isnt for the tv its for those playing, and i can tell anyone that without rucking the game gets slower....players take just that bit longer to get out the way....
i remember being pinned and seeing the opposition front row above me with their bloody boots.....yeh it was harsh because i was pinned, but it happens... it was part of the game...next time i made sure i was out of the way before i could get pinned....
....remember those hands poking through trying to play the ball...a quick flash of studs stopped that.....
although gotta say head contact isnt good.....
:) December 10, 2009 1:55 am
banahan used to play second row for jersey when he was younger i think...i think back row would be good for him, he has the power and the speed, i dont think he is a great wing though....
RedYeti December 10, 2009 2:03 am
What do people think about his 2 week ban for this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/my_club/bath/8398046.stm
Personally I agree with people here; when I play (back row) I kill the ball on the floor and fully expect to get a shoeing for it, and I accept that without complaint, unless it goes too far and develops into full-blown face-stamping...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/my_club/bath/8398046.stm
Personally I agree with people here; when I play (back row) I kill the ball on the floor and fully expect to get a shoeing for it, and I accept that without complaint, unless it goes too far and develops into full-blown face-stamping...
:) December 10, 2009 2:37 am
yeah its a bit harsh on old banahan, I mean he could become like an Isaac ross lock and be mobile and sleek with some pace of a man-horse.
No.7 December 10, 2009 2:47 am
I think with the current rules today banahan is lucky with 2 weeks....
dont get me wrong i dont think anything should come of it, considering the other player didnt say it was head contact.....
that to me seems that either the other guy is a great guy, or he knew he was in the wrong (in terms of the rugby we want...rucking etc)
if banahan made head contact then i think the 2 weeks is deserved and maybe more....
but with no head contact i think its unfortunate but 2 weeks is probably right (at least the irb stated that its illegal to do that, and those doing that will be penalised and they actually gave a reasonable ban....)
(it still sucks though...)
dont get me wrong i dont think anything should come of it, considering the other player didnt say it was head contact.....
that to me seems that either the other guy is a great guy, or he knew he was in the wrong (in terms of the rugby we want...rucking etc)
if banahan made head contact then i think the 2 weeks is deserved and maybe more....
but with no head contact i think its unfortunate but 2 weeks is probably right (at least the irb stated that its illegal to do that, and those doing that will be penalised and they actually gave a reasonable ban....)
(it still sucks though...)
:) December 10, 2009 2:53 am
2 weeks is a bit harsh for this, especially as myler said contact was on the arm....unless ofcourse myler had his arms over his head....
you know the old take the ball into contact lay it back then cover your head tactic...so i dunno if myler had some sort of that going on.....
shame that rucking has been taken out of the game when i really dont know anyone who agrees with it being taken out....
you know the old take the ball into contact lay it back then cover your head tactic...so i dunno if myler had some sort of that going on.....
shame that rucking has been taken out of the game when i really dont know anyone who agrees with it being taken out....
:) December 10, 2009 2:54 am
WTF!!!
':) said...
yeah its a bit harsh on old banahan, I mean he could become like an Isaac ross lock and be mobile and sleek with some pace of a man-horse.'
I didnt say that......i mean the guy has a point but what a tool!
':) said...
yeah its a bit harsh on old banahan, I mean he could become like an Isaac ross lock and be mobile and sleek with some pace of a man-horse.'
I didnt say that......i mean the guy has a point but what a tool!
goodNumber10 December 10, 2009 7:20 am
downward motion, on the man - regardless of if it was his arm or head that's not rucking - which should have a latteral motion or at least did till they banned it - that's stamping!
red card right - two week ban right.
Shame, we need to bring back being able to move the player with your boot, that's not to say you can stamp all over someone but pulling them backwards with your boot would improve the speed of the ball so much.
red card right - two week ban right.
Shame, we need to bring back being able to move the player with your boot, that's not to say you can stamp all over someone but pulling them backwards with your boot would improve the speed of the ball so much.
milos December 10, 2009 7:57 am
You say that, but your name implies you're a fly-half...of all the people on the pitch, you'd seem the least likely to be in the position of getting a shoeing or doing it yourself. That's NOT to say it doesn't happen - even a number 10 will end up in a ruck...sometimes...it's just that what Banahan did here was out of frustration and in most rugby circles, it would be completely accepted/expected.
Also, how is "pulling someone backward" with your boot not in the same boat as grating them to get them off the ball? You've got to step on them to do that, too, unless they've got a nifty little stirrups built into their kit...
Also, how is "pulling someone backward" with your boot not in the same boat as grating them to get them off the ball? You've got to step on them to do that, too, unless they've got a nifty little stirrups built into their kit...
Andy December 10, 2009 9:24 am
Good number 10 i see what you're saying but Banahan was stamping on the guys arm becasue he wasn't releasing. Which i think is similar to a raking if you're lying on the wrong side. There's a difference in that compared a downward stamp on someone's knee or head. Granted it's hard to ref but if you're not releasing expect a shoe on your arm holding the ball.
Anonymous December 10, 2009 10:23 am
If its on his head fair enough. If not I think its fair game, fed up watching or playing games where the other side just lays on top of the ball to slow the game down, no wonder there is so much kicking at the moment.
If they allow you to rake people again i bet most players would think twice about laying on the wrong side...
its meant to be rugby not football
If they allow you to rake people again i bet most players would think twice about laying on the wrong side...
its meant to be rugby not football
NZ:WC2011 December 10, 2009 11:45 am
Banahan is an embarrassment to rugby. England is in such a poor state they have this gloried lock on wing.
Jon December 10, 2009 11:45 am
There's very little in this.
I would have though a penalty for this would be enough, he didn't do any damage, he didn't look like he was trying to really fuck the guy up or anything.
Maybe a yellow, but a red seems harsh, and a two or three week ban?
Jesus, there's no consistency or sense in the citing process.
I would have though a penalty for this would be enough, he didn't do any damage, he didn't look like he was trying to really fuck the guy up or anything.
Maybe a yellow, but a red seems harsh, and a two or three week ban?
Jesus, there's no consistency or sense in the citing process.
Bill December 10, 2009 11:50 am
Hey anon, the defensive dominance at the breakdown really has nothing to do with guys lying over the ball (if anything there's less of this than there was five years ago).
The dominance is perfectly legal and is a combination of allowing the tackler to play the ball on his feet without re-entering the ruck through the gate (which is actually a commonsense ruling and should probably stay) and also the general dominance of the defenses due to the slow speed of the play in test match rugby (which is due to several factors, but mostly just because players are fitter and stronger than ever before and can defend better and in more numbers).
The only real way to free up offenses is to alter the rules slightly to allow them more leeway or time on the ball.
The dominance is perfectly legal and is a combination of allowing the tackler to play the ball on his feet without re-entering the ruck through the gate (which is actually a commonsense ruling and should probably stay) and also the general dominance of the defenses due to the slow speed of the play in test match rugby (which is due to several factors, but mostly just because players are fitter and stronger than ever before and can defend better and in more numbers).
The only real way to free up offenses is to alter the rules slightly to allow them more leeway or time on the ball.
KoroDogg December 10, 2009 11:59 am
Bring back the Rucking I reckon! What are you suppose to do when a player is lying all over the ball and wont move. The ref doesnt do anything and the player eventually gets away with it! Touchy stay out of it, ref sort it out and IRB bring back the Rucking..... that was a shocking decision on Banahan, no malice what so ever.....
Anonymous December 10, 2009 12:44 pm
Ok, this is an awkward one, the last thing you want is stamping all over the park but by banning Banahan and making an example of him it basically says that Myler was in the right for lying all over the ball and slowing play down, now that doesn't seem fair either....
cheyanqui December 10, 2009 1:57 pm
Shoe Pie (not to be confused with Shoofly Pie, a Pennsylvania favorite) is fine with me.
That's just "Old Time Rugby".
Bring back a little self-policing.
That's just "Old Time Rugby".
Bring back a little self-policing.
luxi December 10, 2009 7:28 pm
red card and only 2 weeks !!! thats gotta be a joke when u think burger got 6 for eye-gouging and Parisse got 8 for unintentional eye-gouging !!!!!!!!!!!
should be min 6 weeks !!
should be min 6 weeks !!
goodNumber10 December 10, 2009 11:03 pm
Just to clarify, the law used to be, move them in a backwards motion with one leg ont he gorund - ro somethign similar to that.
both feet off the gorund or downward motion = stamping.
I think they should bring back boots on, it's the only thign that will stop people laying on the ball, but under the law the ref's right.
both feet off the gorund or downward motion = stamping.
I think they should bring back boots on, it's the only thign that will stop people laying on the ball, but under the law the ref's right.
Anonymous December 10, 2009 11:22 pm
If he was a little scrumhalf they wouldn't have given tht a second glance. The rules don't allow it, rightly or wrongly, though and he should know them.
number7 December 10, 2009 11:45 pm
lads as an openside theres nothing i like more than killing or slowing up the opponents ball but in doing so i understand nd accept that i probably deserve a good rub of the metal but its still pretty cowardly to stamp or rake in my estimation just pull the guy out of the ruck by the leg or something its just as effective as its pretty embarrasing being dragged through mud on your earg 6 feet in the air
te-tank December 11, 2009 12:57 am
Is this the guy that played on the wing for England when the All Black's played them? If he is I reckon he quite a talented player. From a Kiwi's point of view he was a stand-out against us. He tackled hard and put the shit up our rookies.
Thomas December 11, 2009 3:25 am
Absolutely bloody outrageous, David Rose has made a few cock ups in his time (and it seems especially in the last couple of weeks) but this must rank amongst the highest.
Bring back the ruck!!!!!
Bring back the ruck!!!!!
RedYeti December 11, 2009 4:41 pm
It seems silly that you see scrum halfs doing this all of the time, to free the ball. It's fine when that happens, but because Banahan is a big tattooed beast with a bit of a temper he gets an immediate red card, which leaves the citing commission with no option really. If someone gets a red they can't be seen to take no action and undermine their referee...
No.7 December 11, 2009 6:22 pm
red yeti, the citing commissioners dont have to ban anyone...
red doesnt equal ban....
red doesnt equal ban....
No.7 December 11, 2009 6:23 pm
red yeti, the citing commissioners dont have to ban anyone...
red doesnt equal ban....
red doesnt equal ban....
RedYeti December 12, 2009 7:21 pm
I know that, but if a referee sends a player off, and then the citing commission decide not to punish the player any further it undermines the ref's authority and generally doesn't look good for them.
No.7 December 12, 2009 10:51 pm
Sorry redyeti but i disagree....
there isnt a relation between the two...
if a referee decides to give a player a red because he feels the player does not warrant anymore time on the pitch then it can be left at that....the citing chumps could have a look and say:
'ah, ok well done referee you did the right thing getting him off the pitch, but it doesnt deserve anything further...'
In terms of say gouging, if the referee gives a red and then nothing comes along and there is video evidence to compliment the gouge then that more undermines the citing commissioners themselves rather than the referee...
how about this scenario, a player plays the ball with hands in the ruck on his 5m line the referee may decide to yellow card him. then towards the end of the game, the same player gets caught killing the ball say or not releasing the ball, the referee might have had enough with that guy for one day so gives him a second yellow...2 yellows=red....you wouldnt expect the citing bunch to jump in afterwards...
anyway, i see what you're saying, i just dont believe it to be true..
there isnt a relation between the two...
if a referee decides to give a player a red because he feels the player does not warrant anymore time on the pitch then it can be left at that....the citing chumps could have a look and say:
'ah, ok well done referee you did the right thing getting him off the pitch, but it doesnt deserve anything further...'
In terms of say gouging, if the referee gives a red and then nothing comes along and there is video evidence to compliment the gouge then that more undermines the citing commissioners themselves rather than the referee...
how about this scenario, a player plays the ball with hands in the ruck on his 5m line the referee may decide to yellow card him. then towards the end of the game, the same player gets caught killing the ball say or not releasing the ball, the referee might have had enough with that guy for one day so gives him a second yellow...2 yellows=red....you wouldnt expect the citing bunch to jump in afterwards...
anyway, i see what you're saying, i just dont believe it to be true..
Commenting as Guest | Register or Login