Viewing comments for Gonzoman
To echo what's posted in reply already and to bring the relevant law into the discussion:
Law 10.4 (j) deals specifically with tip-tackles - "Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player's feet are still off the ground such that the player's head and/or upper body come into contact with the ground is dangerous play."
There are two parts to this law; we'll deal with the second first because it is what most people are reacting to. The tackled player has been dropped/driven into the ground in such a way as to land on his head/upper body. This tackle contravenes the second part of the law.
HOWEVER, the second part of the law is conditional on the first clause of the law - this means that the part about landing on the head only applies if the first part is true, and that is that the tackler lifts the ball carrier. This has not happened in this case, so whether or not the tackled player lands on his head is irrelevant.
To sum up: in order to be sanctioned under the tip tackle law 10.4 (j), an action must satisfy two conditions (lift, and drive/drop onto head/upper body). Since the tackle in this video only fulfills one of the two conditions, it's play on.
Of course, the ref appears to be doing the right thing and penalizing the guy for lying all over his victim...
10 Months, 5 Days ago
Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off the floor.
10 Months, 2 Weeks ago
I am a ref, but I'm not clever enough to come up with Carley's kind of response off the cuff...I tend to take what I have now dubbed the "stroudos-lite" approach: I'd tell him that I made the call, and should he choose to challenge like that again I would penalize him. With the guys I have the pleasure of refereeing, that's usually enough but the few times that someone continues to argue, I go "full-stroudos". I have no qualms following through on a promise to penalize!
11 Months, 2 Weeks ago
Except Ford didn't "ask" the ref anything - He went up and told the ref "my hands were there". A proper, respectful way of asking would start with an apology for flailing his arms around and reacting poorly to a call, then be followed up with something with containing a question mark and a please, eg: "Sorry sir, I got frustrated. Could you please let me know why you ruled that pass forward? I thought I had released it backwards".
Of course, for something as simple and straightforward as a forward pass, there's no point even asking, because the ref will just tell you he saw you throw the ball forward - even if he uses more words. I could justify asking for a law interpretation after a breakdown penalty or something that actually requires clarification, but after a forward pass or a knock-on there's no value in asking for clarification.
Ford is a professional and should know better.
11 Months, 2 Weeks ago
Given that CJ was a lot closer and had better line of sight than the ARs, I don't think consulting them would have done a lick of good - they probably didn't see it either.
Joubert gave a penalty because he didn't see it touch the Aussie, and therefore though it was a penalty.
1 Year, 6 Days ago
The Scot gathering the ball did in fact prevent the Aussies from gaining advantage, even if he released it right after: he's prevented them from playing the ball as they would have it, instead making them play it a second or two later, and from a position that he dictates (and that is less favourable for the Aussies).
As to the Assistant referee debate, it's likely that the Assistant referees missed it too - it was a brief touch and there were bodies in the way, not to mention a decent distance between the sideline and where the play happened.
1 Year, 6 Days ago
I'm sure the people hired as citing commissioners would love the banning of poor technique, but that was offered as tongue-in-cheek. It did make me think though...
Do we know how citing commissioners are selected and remunerated? Is it a panel of people identified as citing commissioners and paid on a per-match basis, are they contracted on a retainer for the year/event/etc., or do they get paid per ban?
Do they have a set policy or standard under which they observe games?
It seems to me that as long as they have been around, they've been a source of consternation and inconsistency to the rugby community.
1 Year, 2 Weeks ago
As a player, I always used to lift my knee up while in the air competing for the high ball. Now it appears that I have been lucky my entire playing career to not get binned, cited, and banned for the few dozen times when my leading knee bumped another player!
And now that I'm a referee, I'm going to be extra careful that no player is permitted to move their knees up and forward while running...such disgraceful and reckless actions are the scourge of the modern game!
In all seriousness, if the Japanese player had tackled properly ("spine in line, bands of steel, and cheek to cheek" as my old coach used to say) then this would all be a non-issue. To my mind, there are two ways to get rid of such poor tackling: either cite the guy for deliberately executing a tackle dangerous to himself (he's got a duty of care to himself, etc.) or just let things like this happen - I'll bet that when the would-be tackler was watching the game tape, he promised himself he would never do that again.
1 Year, 2 Weeks ago
You know, a smart player would have just waited for the other guy to release him - according to the player himself, he knew there was advantage; based on the reaction of the players around the ruck, the whistle had gone and the penalty given. Pretty safe bet that your team would benefit more from you leaving the other guy alone.
As to your question:
"Now my question is how do I put a player down if I'm the ball carrier and his arms are locked on my neck and he's already on my shoulders?"
I have a simple solution - one I use every time I pick up something and need to put it down: reverse what you did to pick the bloke up. Come on now: bend your knees, lean slightly forward, and now that his feet are on the ground, let him go. Easy, isn't it?
1 Year, 3 Months ago
First, when I was playing (a mere two years ago) you made sure that if you were passing you did so in a position to minimize damage to yourself. We understood that if we wanted to be flatter and closer to the defense when we made the pass, we'd be at a higher risk of getting hit. So first and foremost, Plisson should have been expecting some sort of contact.
Second, I have never been a forward, but I know that as a centre/winger/fullback I would regularly approach the line at close to top speed to cut down space and time. You don't see it all that often at first receiver because typically your forwards don't have the kind of pace needed to get there while the ball is still in the 10's hands. Lawes clearly does have the pace, and is willing to use it. Just because few other forwards can do it doesn't mean it's illegal when Lawes does - his freakish combination of athleticism and size means that he forces fly-halves to play the game differently. To draw a parallel, remember when Wilkinson could knock over penalties from anywhere with ease? He forced teams to be very careful not to give up penalties within 60m of their goal-line. No one complained, and now most international kickers can hit penalties like that. I'll bet in 10 years we'll see numerous athletic locks, and fly-halves taking passes deeper than they do now!
1 Year, 7 Months ago