Exeter Vs Munster

[Marc Wakeham]

[video]https://m0.sportsjoe.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/13141519/conway-Steenson.gif[/video]

Any thoughts?

 

[Phil E]

I would say he jumps to block the kick at almost the same time it’s kicked, so it’s not late.
Unfortunate outcome, but no offence.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Contact to the head is fair?

 

[crossref]

i'd like to see a wider shot -- did he arrive through the ball, or actually rather to one side of the ball -- aiming for the kicker

 

[mcroker]

Penalty red for contact with player in the air

 

[crossref]

Penalty red for contact with player in the air

:biggrin: laptop covered with my cup of tea

 

[L'irlandais]

https://www.balls.ie/rugby/wacth-andrew-conway-yellow-clumsy-chargedown-398722
Good call from the ref. Accidental, rugby is a contact sport, FFS.

I don’t think anyone would have complained if he was carded however.

 

[crossref]

Conversion kicks are not supposed to be a contact sport .. YC and restart with a PK

 

[L'irlandais]

A law reference for your decision?

I say good call, based on the following:
Law 8.14 allows the opposition to charge down or jump to block the kick.
Red’s action were within the Laws of the game. Why penalise a player if he has not infringed?
[LAWS]All opposing players retire to their goal line and do not overstep that line until the kicker begins the approach to kick. When the kicker does this, they may charge or jump to prevent a goal but must not be physically supported by other players in these actions.
[/LAWS]

 

[crossref]

[LAWS] 9.25 A player must not intentionally charge or obstruct an opponent who has just kicked the ball. [/LAWS]

Or

[LAWS] 9.11 Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others. [/LAWS]

 

[Marc Wakeham]

A law reference for your decision?

I say good call, based on the following:
Law 8.14 allows the opposition to charge down or jump to block the kick.
Red’s action were within the Laws of the game. Why penalise a player if he has not infringed?
[LAWS]All opposing players retire to their goal line and do not overstep that line until the kicker begins the approach to kick. When the kicker does this, they may charge or jump to prevent a goal but must not be physically supported by other players in these actions.
[/LAWS]

Elbow making contact to the head area covers it for me. Surely the high contct directives apply here (whether you agree in principle with them or not).

A tackle where the player does not intend to be high is a PK. The player hwre make contact with the head. What is the difference?

 

[Camquin]

My take is that he did not seem to have his hands up to block the kick.
So what is he doing - I am tempted to say deliberately roughing the kicker - to use a grid iron term.
I cannot see timing from the gif so it might be OK
But I am thinking card and given contact to the head wonder why not red.
Possible citing?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

My take is that he did not seem to have his hands up to block the kick.
So what is he doing - I am tempted to say deliberately roughing the kicker - to use a grid iron term.
I cannot see timing from the gif so it might be OK
But I am thinking card and given contact to the head wonder why not red.
Possible citing?

Indeed. Trying to block you create a big target. You may well turn your back. You DON'T raise your elbow to neck / head height and make the block smaller.

 

[SimonSmith]

That was a card for me, for all the reasons espoused above.

Neck and head contact with the kicker. In open play that would have been at least 10 minutes, no reason a conversion should be any different.

 

[OB..]

A law reference for your decision?

I say good call, based on the following:
Law 8.14 allows the opposition to charge down or jump to block the kick.
Red’s action were within the Laws of the game. Why penalise a player if he has not infringed?
[LAWS]All opposing players retire to their goal line and do not overstep that line until the kicker begins the approach to kick. When the kicker does this, they may charge or jump to prevent a goal but must not be physically supported by other players in these actions.
[/LAWS]

[LAWS] 9.25 A player must not intentionally charge or obstruct an opponent who has just kicked the ball. [/LAWS]

Or

[LAWS] 9.11 Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others. [/LAWS]

Attempting to block a kick does not in itself justify jumping in such a fashion that you will land on the kicker, who is uniquely vulnerable.

NFL has it right - you must jump across the kicking line, not along it.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I would say he jumps to block the kick at almost the same time it’s kicked, so it’s not late.
Unfortunate outcome, but no offence.

I find this post quite worrying, coming from a very experienced poster. An elbow raised towards and making contact with the head is merely an "unfortunate outcome". As other posters have said / isuggested, in open play that would be a card. In the more controlled enviroment of a conversion I ca's see how it is minimum YC with quite a strong leaning to RC.

 

[crossref]

I agree , in open play every kicker is not exactly braced for this, but is half expecting it. For a conversion, well I have never that before , has anyone else ?

 

[chbg]

From the long-distance view, I think that the charge-down was taken on the correct line, not directly at the place of kick. However the kicker used a 'round the corner' kick, so that his follow-through took him to the left of the kicking tee. Nothing to say that he can't do that! It also appears that the referee is not aware of the collision until it happens, and therefore was not sighted. He probably should have looked to the TMO. The elbow to head is not good, certainly reckless.


Should have been YC IMHO.

 

[Phil E]

The player jumps to charge down the ball as it is kicked. That is perfectly legal and happens many times in a game.
Once he realises he is going to land on the kicker he tries to turn away, but you can't move your body in mid air and you cant change where you are going to land.
I don't believe the elbow was deliberate. For me it was a rugby incident.

If the TMO thought it was foul play he could have brought it to the referees attention. I don't think he did, did he?

I understand other may see it differently and I wouldn't complain about a PK or a card, but neither would I complain about no offence. Sometimes in rugby people get hurt by accident.

 

[DocY]

Penalty and YC against blue - taking the man out in the air!