Search results

An interesting judgement which I hope is widely publicised around club. It might, just might, make players think more about their potential liability for the cheap shots that frequently occur on the pitch.

I disagree, just because there was no contact doesn't mean there wasn't any danger. I’d say all the players in the ruck were in danger.

TV rugby very different to ours, I don’t worry about trends on TV.

Didn’t Mako watch it whilst picking his nose and looking thoroughly uninterested a few years ago?

Depends where it is. One of the two at the rear? I’m asking them to change boots or get a stud AND find me before the game to show me it’s now OK. At the front I’m a little more sympathetic if 1 of 6 (or 4) is missing.

I also thought this should have been a YC. I’m not overly happy with players jumping with a high knee, particularly if it prevents a fair contest. In this case it was dangerous play, a player not in position to win the ball recklessly impacting an opponent in the air. He was a lucky boy to...

I have no problem with wearing a mic for a team video, I’ve done it once and would have no objection to doing it again.

I don‘t see an issue with it. When I call captain, I deal with whoever comes up to me. Doesn’t matter to me if that person changes through the game, or goes back and forward from one player to another.

I once managed a reporting process where were reporting daily on the quality of controls. What started off as a RAG status (Red, Amber, Green) eventually ended as a 7 colour matrix (Purple, Orange, Blue and White were added) to deal with various nuances between Red and Green. Not our finest...

I’m all for protecting players and generally have no challenge against RC issued for high tackles, however I don’t agree with this RC. For me Steward is going for a loose ball, realises he will not get there first and attempts to turn to protect himself and not run into the Irish player. It is...

Excellent. Something has to be done to reduce head contact to tackled players from high tackles. I'm all for lowering the tackle height. I'm glad to see this is now heading towards WR led approrach rather than relying on individual unions to deal with it.

The rolypoly signal for players rolling on the ground after the tackle to prevent a jackel.

Why would you look foolish? If you treat this as unsportsmanlike, and the team repeat offends, you move up the sanction tree as you have suggested. It’s not your fault the players choose to continue to offend.

1. Yes, this should be penalised more often 2. No idea, I’ve watched that a few times and can’t figure out if it’s a knock on or something else happened. Go with whatever the ref decided.

I'd say it is the tacklers responsibility to end up on the right side. If they end up on the defending side they've got to make an immediate effort to get out of the way. I often find players complaining about being trapped in, but they're only trapped as a) they put themselves there and b)...

As I said, it’s not the play that is rewarded with a penalty, it is the offence by the opposition that results in a penalty. The ‘reward’ is the penalty as the good play from the attacking team resulted in an offence by the opposition. Thus there is a reward for good play. Simples.

No

Certain methods of play don’t lead to a PK award, certain methods of play which result in the other team offending does result in a PK reward.

What I see a lot is the jackler getting hands on the ball, then expecting a penalty even though they’re not lifting the ball the the tackled player isn’t holding onto the ball. I let it continue until something else happens, either jackler decides to actually try and lift the ball, tackled...

I say try, no knock on. Although the definition if a knock on is when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, we would allow a player to juggle the ball, and if a player lost it forward and caught it before it hit the floor or anyone else, by convention we don't call that a...