The Rugby Union Thread

p90fool

scrumhalf said:

As the laws of the game stand Tuilagi should have got a red card. I do think, however, that law should be considered for amendment in cases where the player being hit has lowered his head to a certain degree.

If the "assailant" has tried to make a legal tackle at what was a reasonable height but has made contact with the opponent's head due to that opponent's late and unpredictable movement then maybe a red card isn't the correct punishment.

But as far as no-arms tackles are concerned, off you go. 

He wouldn't have been given a red if the tackled player had ducked down under his outstretched arms. 

The worrying thing is that if Tuilagi had just flattened him with a shoulder charge to the torso instead of accidentally to the head that referee wouldn't have even awarded a penalty against him, as was demonstrated in the opening minutes. 

digitalscream

See, it looked to me like he was going for the tackle, saw that he was going down and pulled his arm back in to avoid clotheslining him (because the laws of physics dictated that there was no chance of pulling out of the tackle altogether), which would've been a much worse outcome.

So...if the tackler attempts to mitigate the impact, but only gets part of the way there and still makes contact...what then? At some point, common sense has to come into it. Even if you just say "Intent matters".

fields5069

Fretwired said:

crunchman said:

If the Tuilagi one was a red, then the rules need tweaking.  The player was going down because of the Slade tackle when Tuilagi was already committed.  If a player is going down in that situation, then it shouldn't be a red card.  You have to give defenders a chance.

I'm an England fan. It was red. The rules don't need tweaking. Former international referee, Jonathan Kaplan said "simply put, it was a no-arms tackle - i.e. a shoulder charge - where first contact was made to the head of the ball carrier, Wales’ George North. That is automatically a red card, with mitigation not considered.

"On the replays you can see how Tuilagi actually tucks his right arm close to his body, which makes it impossible to even attempt to wrap it in the tackle. That ensures he is in serious trouble, and once he makes contact with North’s head a red card is inevitable.

"As I say, mitigation was not considered due to the nature of the tackle, but you could see that Tuilagi may have been caught out slightly by the fact North dipped shortly before contact was made as he was tackled by Henry Slade. If Tuilagi had been trying to wrap his arms that might have saved him, but as it was a no-arms tackle he had to go."

Yeah that's my view pretty much. At least people like Farrell adopt a sort of crab-like stance to try to fool the ref.

Jalapeno

Probably a Red, but to me looked like he was trying to pullout. Thought Tuilagi had it right by nodding acceptance, and then apologising to George North. Showed that it wasn't malicious in the slightest.

fretmeister

Sky have just announced that France -v- Ireland on Sat has been postponed now.

COBR are meeting at the moment - I wonder if there will be a ban on any gathering over say 100 people like some other countries have imposed.

fretmeister

Marler, Tuilagi and Lawes all cited.

Apparently Lawes was head contact while tackling AWJ. I didn't see that though. The other 2 are somewhat obvious.

fretmeister

https://www.ruck.co.uk/courtney-lawes-tackle-on-alun-wyn-jones/


Seems a bit harsh to cite Lawes. AWJ is nearly on the floor!

digitalscream

fretmeister said:

https://www.ruck.co.uk/courtney-lawes-tackle-on-alun-wyn-jones/


Seems a bit harsh to cite Lawes. AWJ is nearly on the floor!

Bloody hell. That's almost to the point where they should be citing AWJ for headbutting Lawes in the nuts!

fretmeister

digitalscream said:

fretmeister said:

https://www.ruck.co.uk/courtney-lawes-tackle-on-alun-wyn-jones/


Seems a bit harsh to cite Lawes. AWJ is nearly on the floor!

Bloody hell. That's almost to the point where they should be citing AWJ for headbutting Lawes in the nuts!

No wonder I didn't spot it on Saturday!

Samgb

fretmeister said:

Marler, Tuilagi and Lawes all cited.

Apparently Lawes was head contact while tackling AWJ. I didn't see that though. The other 2 are somewhat obvious.

So no citing for Parkes who 'tackled' Tuilagi with a shoulder and headbutt to the face in the first half? Shocker that. Should have been a red.

fretmeister

No Welsh citings at all.

fields5069

If we're citing everything, there were players looking at multiple citings so I guess there is a fine line to be drawn somewhere.

VimFuego

I don't mind the citings, or the cards or whatever (mostly cos no exeter players are involved), they just make the sour grapes taste all the sweeter. 

NorthernGooner

Samgb said:

fretmeister said:

Marler, Tuilagi and Lawes all cited.

Apparently Lawes was head contact while tackling AWJ. I didn't see that though. The other 2 are somewhat obvious.

So no citing for Parkes who 'tackled' Tuilagi with a shoulder and headbutt to the face in the first half? Shocker that. Should have been a red.

Apparently the Citing Officer makes his citing decisions after watching Scrum V on Welsh TV. So he wouldn't have seen the Parkes incident,  

rsvmark

while the laws of the game are evolving rapidly involving tackle techniques, impact of body part x on body part y, I haven’t seen much debate on how the ball carrier goes into contact. We have seen considerable debate on whether there are ‘mitigating’ circumstances, ie was the ball carrier ducking into the tackle or was already falling, which can influence a referees decision, particular with red and yellow cards at stake. I haven’t seen much debate about how a runner, particularly a forward might go into contact.

we often see forwards, as the ball carrier, go into contact by ducking and leading with the head, or even attempting a hand / fend off with a leading forearm or elbow. All of course making it nigh on impossible to the tackler to go low if the runner is bent at the waist and has a body position when their back is almost parallel with the ground- the only remaining target area being the ankles! In a front on classic tackle technique, I coached minis and juniors to target the thigh/hip/waist area.... none of which is possible now. 

Dunno what the answer is, or even whether there is a question in there, but just a thought.....

Samgb

NorthernGooner said:

Samgb said:

fretmeister said:

Marler, Tuilagi and Lawes all cited.

Apparently Lawes was head contact while tackling AWJ. I didn't see that though. The other 2 are somewhat obvious.

So no citing for Parkes who 'tackled' Tuilagi with a shoulder and headbutt to the face in the first half? Shocker that. Should have been a red.

Apparently the Citing Officer makes his citing decisions after watching Scrum V on Welsh TV. So he wouldn't have seen the Parkes incident,  


You made me laugh. I get why Tuilagi was sent off. I dont think it was malicious particularly but within the rules and to protect the players that is a red. I have to say though that he could claim he was concussed from the earlier incident because that had no mitigation of some else being in the tackle and North suddenly being dropped. Parkes' tackle was an absolute shocker.
Just to balance things out i did think Farrell could and should have been yellow carded in the first for his behaviour off the ball. All that laughing in peoples' face and slapping North. I hate that shit. I dont think he should be captain acting the bellend like that.   

MagicPigDetective

Can I remind you that as England won the match and Triple Crown, you are allowed to be happy  

fields5069

I am happy for you. It’s high time the country with the much larger population actually won something! 

VimFuego

fields5069 said:

I am happy for you. It’s high time the country with the much larger population actually won something! 

yum, I'm loving your sour grapes. 

fields5069

VimFuego said:

fields5069 said:

I am happy for you. It’s high time the country with the much larger population actually won something! 

yum, I'm loving your sour grapes. 

You can pretend all you like. My take is that a win for Wales would have covered up deficiencies in their execution of the game plan. I think they still have the talent, just not the execution and in the early exchanges they got hammered. Also the scrum was shit. To be honest you could argue that England should have put the game to bed, they almost certainly didn't need to infringe so much, chances are that Wales would have fluffed chances.