RugbyRebels

Toner with a filthy headshot just before Patchell’s score. Proper filth!!

And he did it right in front of the ref. What was Poite looking at??

Luckily (for Toner), Rob Evans got up and carried on.

That is a straight red card, every day of the week. Following on from this last week:



Does anyone have any expectation that it'll be cited?

Son of Mathonwy wrote:And he did it right in front of the ref. What was Poite looking at??

Luckily (for Toner), Rob Evans got up and carried on.

There's a fairly decent argument that it's savvy play to stay down and roll around like a footballer to improve the chances of the ref having a look at the TMO. No-one wants to see that, but when the punishment is so strict, yet so inconsistently looked at, players are going to be tempted to try and change the game by acting the prat to try and draw attention to it.

Puja

I’m just watching the Fiji v Tonga highlights. A Tongan got penalised for basically standing there while a Fijian ran headfirst into his shoulder. Tough call.

Lizard wrote:I’m just watching the Fiji v Tonga highlights. A Tongan got penalised for basically standing there while a Fijian ran headfirst into his shoulder. Tough call.

Disallowed a try for it at the same time too!

Puja wrote:That is a straight red card, every day of the week. Following on from this last week:



Does anyone have any expectation that it'll be cited?

Son of Mathonwy wrote:And he did it right in front of the ref. What was Poite looking at??

Luckily (for Toner), Rob Evans got up and carried on.

There's a fairly decent argument that it's savvy play to stay down and roll around like a footballer to improve the chances of the ref having a look at the TMO. No-one wants to see that, but when the punishment is so strict, yet so inconsistently looked at, players are going to be tempted to try and change the game by acting the prat to try and draw attention to it.

Puja

Both look terrible, but the citing commissioner won’t bother looking too hard. You are right unless the ref, or TMO, picks these up with greater frequency then players will either act up or just take the law into their own hands.

No one wants to see lots of red cards handed out but if that what the game needs for players to get the message then so be it.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:Toner with a filthy headshot just before Patchell’s score. Proper filth!!

Really stupid, particularly as Evans had no chance of making the line .

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:And he did it right in front of the ref. What was Poite looking at??

Luckily (for Toner), Rob Evans got up and carried on.

There's a fairly decent argument that it's savvy play to stay down and roll around like a footballer to improve the chances of the ref having a look at the TMO. No-one wants to see that, but when the punishment is so strict, yet so inconsistently looked at, players are going to be tempted to try and change the game by acting the prat to try and draw attention to it.

Puja

Both look terrible, but the citing commissioner won’t bother looking too hard. You are right unless the ref, or TMO, picks these up with greater frequency then players will either act up or just take the law into their own hands.

No one wants to see lots of red cards handed out but if that what the game needs for players to get the message then so be it.

I'm just worried it'll be ignored for most of the games only for it randomly to be given in a crucial knock-out game and be the game-changer.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:

There's a fairly decent argument that it's savvy play to stay down and roll around like a footballer to improve the chances of the ref having a look at the TMO. No-one wants to see that, but when the punishment is so strict, yet so inconsistently looked at, players are going to be tempted to try and change the game by acting the prat to try and draw attention to it.

Puja

Both look terrible, but the citing commissioner won’t bother looking too hard. You are right unless the ref, or TMO, picks these up with greater frequency then players will either act up or just take the law into their own hands.

No one wants to see lots of red cards handed out but if that what the game needs for players to get the message then so be it.

I'm just worried it'll be ignored for most of the games only for it randomly to be given in a crucial knock-out game and be the game-changer.

Puja

Indeed, the best laws are useless unless they're applied consistently.

I can understand why no one wanted to stop the action for Toner's hit since a try appeared to be (and was) on the way. But the ref or the TMO should have gone back to what was probably a red card once the try was given (although I assume in this case neither of them actually spotted the offence...?).

Also (whether or not this was the case yesterday) there's a sense that if a try is scored, all dangerous tackles/cheap shots in the run up are cancelled. This should not be the case. If it causes a team to take a 10 point hit, so be it, they deserved it.

It does seem that advantage given for a potential yellow card offence is overlooked if advantage is take.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Both look terrible, but the citing commissioner won’t bother looking too hard. You are right unless the ref, or TMO, picks these up with greater frequency then players will either act up or just take the law into their own hands.

No one wants to see lots of red cards handed out but if that what the game needs for players to get the message then so be it.

I'm just worried it'll be ignored for most of the games only for it randomly to be given in a crucial knock-out game and be the game-changer.

Puja

Indeed, the best laws are useless unless they're applied consistently.

I can understand why no one wanted to stop the action for Toner's hit since a try appeared to be (and was) on the way. But the ref or the TMO should have gone back to what was probably a red card once the try was given (although I assume in this case neither of them actually spotted the offence...?).

Also (whether or not this was the case yesterday) there's a sense that if a try is scored, all dangerous tackles/cheap shots in the run up are cancelled. This should not be the case. If it causes a team to take a 10 point hit, so be it, they deserved it.

I've noticed that as well. The hit on Curry was just after he delivered a try-scoring pass (not late, but just after) and it seemed like the try erased any need to even check. If Curry had screwed up the pass, you sense the TMO might have piped up and Kearney would've seen red.

Compare and contrast to the Scotland vs Georgia game, where the ref took a literal 5 minutes trying to work out whether a punch had been thrown in a ruck, before finally coming to the conclusion that nothing much of anything had happened (and then coming back for the scrum, which collapsed for a further 3 minutes). Glad that match wasn't on FTA television).

Puja

This is exactly why I wouldn't put a full team out next week

Ross. S wrote:This is exactly why I wouldn't put a full team out next week

But then you run the risk of being undercooked, with three weeks between games. What's your order of games - do you start off easy?

Puja

We've already played your lot twice and the micks once, cant see us being that under cooked. We kick off with Georgia then the Aussies 6 days later, they kick off against Fiji

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Both look terrible, but the citing commissioner won’t bother looking too hard. You are right unless the ref, or TMO, picks these up with greater frequency then players will either act up or just take the law into their own hands.

No one wants to see lots of red cards handed out but if that what the game needs for players to get the message then so be it.

I'm just worried it'll be ignored for most of the games only for it randomly to be given in a crucial knock-out game and be the game-changer.

Puja

Indeed, the best laws are useless unless they're applied consistently.

I can understand why no one wanted to stop the action for Toner's hit since a try appeared to be (and was) on the way. But the ref or the TMO should have gone back to what was probably a red card once the try was given (although I assume in this case neither of them actually spotted the offence...?).

Also (whether or not this was the case yesterday) there's a sense that if a try is scored, all dangerous tackles/cheap shots in the run up are cancelled. This should not be the case. If it causes a team to take a 10 point hit, so be it, they deserved it.

Absolutely. Award the try, card the player and restart with a penalty. Do that a few times and players will think harder about their tackling.

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Puja wrote:
I'm just worried it'll be ignored for most of the games only for it randomly to be given in a crucial knock-out game and be the game-changer.

Puja

Indeed, the best laws are useless unless they're applied consistently.

I can understand why no one wanted to stop the action for Toner's hit since a try appeared to be (and was) on the way. But the ref or the TMO should have gone back to what was probably a red card once the try was given (although I assume in this case neither of them actually spotted the offence...?).

Also (whether or not this was the case yesterday) there's a sense that if a try is scored, all dangerous tackles/cheap shots in the run up are cancelled. This should not be the case. If it causes a team to take a 10 point hit, so be it, they deserved it.

Absolutely. Award the try, card the player and restart with a penalty. Do that a few times and players will think harder about their tackling.

The thing that really grates on me is when players are diving for the corner, apparently tacklers are just allowed to launch shoulder first, like an exocet missile, to try and barge them out of play. You see a dozen TMO replays with discussion of whether the attacker's foot has grazed the touchline before the ball was grounded, and everyone's ignoring me shouting, "That's not relevant! He's shoulder charged him, so it's a penalty try!" at the television screen.

They never listen to me.

Ross. S wrote:We've already played your lot twice and the micks once, cant see us being that under cooked. We kick off with Georgia then the Aussies 6 days later, they kick off against Fiji

A three week gap's a bit of time to lose match fitness though. Still, starting with Georgia means you've effectively got a free warm-up, so you're right that this one isn't necessary.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Indeed, the best laws are useless unless they're applied consistently.

I can understand why no one wanted to stop the action for Toner's hit since a try appeared to be (and was) on the way. But the ref or the TMO should have gone back to what was probably a red card once the try was given (although I assume in this case neither of them actually spotted the offence...?).

Also (whether or not this was the case yesterday) there's a sense that if a try is scored, all dangerous tackles/cheap shots in the run up are cancelled. This should not be the case. If it causes a team to take a 10 point hit, so be it, they deserved it.

Absolutely. Award the try, card the player and restart with a penalty. Do that a few times and players will think harder about their tackling.

The thing that really grates on me is when players are diving for the corner, apparently tacklers are just allowed to launch shoulder first, like an exocet missile, to try and barge them out of play. You see a dozen TMO replays with discussion of whether the attacker's foot has grazed the touchline before the ball was grounded, and everyone's ignoring me shouting, "That's not relevant! He's shoulder charged him, so it's a penalty try!" at the television screen.

They never listen to me.

Ross. S wrote:We've already played your lot twice and the micks once, cant see us being that under cooked. We kick off with Georgia then the Aussies 6 days later, they kick off against Fiji

A three week gap's a bit of time to lose match fitness though. Still, starting with Georgia means you've effectively got a free warm-up, so you're right that this one isn't necessary.

Puja

Don’t take it personally.

I think the intention is to go full strength against Georgia which is why we put strong teams out against England to practice the 6 day turnaround. I’m hoping we can open some distance against the Georgians to allow maximum use of the bench.