France Vs Wales

[Balones]

I think it's acceptable to discuss refereeing mistakes. (I suggested before that the silly ban on discussing referees was a big part of the Sonia controversy)

I'd like to see NO take a wider view. At the moment he seems to comment mainly on the controversial incidents (and the controversial ones are - let's face it - when a mistake may have been made)
This is exactly what every other commentators talk about and his voice blends in with all the other commentators, save that we pay more attention because he is a great ref (although not necessarily a Laws nause)

I'd like him to perhaps show some special insights .. perhaps there were moments of great refereeing , or great game management that he could see, but passed most people by. Perhaps he would have insights into the ref / captain dynamics
What were the challenges to the ref ? What were the key moments

To he fair Kaplan does a bit of that

But NO is new to this game, he will get better

(I have to admit i do enjoy his blokey light-hearted YouTube videos !)

I think it is a case that he responds to the numerous questions he is asked about a particular incident. If he didn’t respond he would probably be accused of avoiding the question. If the rugby public asked more questions about well handled situations I’m sure he would respond accordingly but he does like any of us have to prioritise his time so cannot respond to everything.
You make a good point about him developing into a new role. It was something I said a few weeks ago in a previous post. I’d hate to see him completely muzzled because of the occasional overstepping of the mark. We’ve nearly all done that, even on this forum probably.
Listening to the radio today, a presenter said ‘you can’t say anything at all without somebody being upset’. Seems to be a truism.

Anyway, let’s hope for an incident free game between France and Scotland. Or if we are being honest are we hoping for at least one controversial incident so we can again cut loose on this forum? If there is I wouldn’t mind betting that NO will be inundated as well.

 

[crossref]

I would like a great big controversial moment, where the referee is proved to be completely correct !

 

[Rich_NL]

Alain Rolland giving Warburton a red in 2011?

 

[crossref]

Alain Rolland giving Warburton a red in 2011?

That's the one ! Was really ten years ago

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

That's the one !

Especially satisfying after watching Francois Pienaar et al having a cataclysmic meltdown (during the HT interval) at the initial decision!:biggrin:

Ref: Warren Gatland - er yes!

Almost as funny as listening to Jonathan Davies trying to pronounce Imanol Harinordoquy

 

[KoolFork]

It's quite a good reminder really. At the time, many similar tackles were not even penalised; others got a penalty and others a YC. A red card was a bit different. However, we don't see many tip tackles at the top level any more. I suspect we will see fewer red cards for head collisions as players adjust.

One thing's for sure though. Red cards do spoil the contest.

 

[crossref]

It's quite a good reminder really. At the time, many similar tackles were not even penalised; others got a penalty and others a YC. A red card was a bit different. However, we don't see many tip tackles at the top level any more. I suspect we will see fewer red cards for head collisions as players adjust.

One thing's for sure though. Red cards do spoil the contest.

For context - WR had published a memo about tip tackles the previous year (or was it 2009) and AR was following it.
But it took that incident for people to really take the memo seriously (or notice it)

I am sympathetic to the current trial of letting a RC player be replaced after 20 mins.

 

[didds]

One thing's for sure though. Red cards do spoil the contest.

Nope.

Player illegaility leading to a RC spoils the contest.

 

[dave_clark]

Especially satisfying after watching Francois Pienaar et al having a cataclysmic meltdown (during the HT interval) at the initial decision!:biggrin:

Ref: Warren Gatland - er yes!

Almost as funny as listening to Jonathan Davies trying to pronounce Imanol Harinordoquy

toss up between him or Eddie Butler on that pronunciation i reckon!

back to the Warburton red - i remember ranting at the television about how that was a nailed on red, and how it was a shambles that it was only a yellow. (and upsetting my club chairman by putting a long explanation of why it was right on our club website, which he couldn't remove because i was an admin).

i thought by the end of the game though that the pundits had calmed down somewhat, and had accepted that the red card was correct. maybe that was during the second semi final the next day or the final the following week. it was a long time ago...

 

[SimonSmith]

Nope.

Player illegaility leading to a RC spoils the contest.

Yup. A point that I think Joubert made when he sent that numpty Aussie winger Drew Mitchell off for two yellows for throwing the ball away

 

[dave_clark]

quite.

"Rocky, I am not responsible for the effect this has on the game" or something like that.

 

[Rich_NL]

One thing's for sure though. Red cards do spoil the contest.

Generally... but England-Argentina in 2016 had a red card in the first 5 minutes, and was a cracker of a match

 

[Phil E]

For context - WR had published a memo about tip tackles the previous year (or was it 2009) and AR was following it.
But it took that incident for people to really take the memo seriously (or notice it)

It's interesting that we rarely see tip tackles now (compared to 10 years ago), and when we do everyone expects a card and it's no surprise. I wonder if the same will happen with head contact and stand up tackles?

I am sympathetic to the current trial of letting a RC player be replaced after 20 mins.

Not so sure about this. "Can we manage for 20 minutes a man down if I take out their superstar/olympic sprinter/winger (who scores all their tries) early on, then we play the rest of the game at 15 a side without him?"

 

[crossref]

Not so sure about this. "Can we manage for 20 minutes a man down if I take out their superstar/olympic sprinter/winger (who scores all their tries) early on, then we play the rest of the game at 15 a side without him?"

But on the other hand the RC player still goes through the same disciplinary process, and if there was a suspicion of a RC offence being committed deliberately , for advantage , the ban would presumably be very long indeed

 

[Phil E]

But on the other hand the RC player still goes through the same disciplinary process, and if there was a suspicion of a RC offence being committed deliberately , for advantage , the ban would presumably be very long indeed

Hard to prove and the team on the day still benefits. Maybe I'm just to cynical?

 

[didds]

Not so sure about this. "Can we manage for 20 minutes a man down if I take out their superstar/olympic sprinter/winger (who scores all their tries) early on, then we play the rest of the game at 15 a side without him?"

Back in 1993 in Taranaki at levels below senior 1st, there was a replacement law for red cards ie a red carded player could be replaced from the bench if you had a bench player available. The rationale as i recall was that the TEAM shoudnt bear the consequence of an INDIVIDUAL action, in what was accepted as a social level of rugby (I can assure you we didnt view as merely siocial but hopefully you understand the point that was being made here).

Our side "needed" that provision once in a season as i recall. We did win that game but then we won 14 out of 19 and drew 3 so maybe being a man down wouldn't have made any odds anyway ;-) I cant recall if any opposition we played "needed" it. Bascially across the entire season it didnt seem to be an abused "opportunity" ...

Now... that's not to say that i dont agree wholeheartedly with Phil ... because it seems the most OBVIOUS tactic frankly (whilst not condoning it lest there be any confusion! ;-) )

 

[crossref]

Hard to prove and the team on the day still benefits. Maybe I'm just to cynical?

I think perhaps yes - -- it seems to me that a player would normally be very reluctant to get himself deliberately RC, that's quite a personal cost -- and also, more optimistically, I think the vast majority of rugby players would find it unthinkable to deliberately set out to commit a RC offence.

but you may be right. Hopefully the trial will provide some data on this.

 

[Phil E]

I think perhaps yes - -- it seems to me that a player would normally be very reluctant to get himself deliberately RC, that's quite a personal cost -- and also, more optimistically, I think the vast majority of rugby players would find it unthinkable to deliberately set out to commit a RC offence.

but you may be right. Hopefully the trial will provide some data on this.

Is that like the vast majority of rugby players would find it unthinkable to use a fake blood capsule or let a doctor cut their mouth so they could prove they had been blood binned legitimately?

That's a rhetorical question.

 

[crossref]

Is that like the vast majority of rugby players would find it unthinkable to use a fake blood capsule or let a doctor cut their mouth so they could prove they had been blood binned legitimately?
.

well, not sure what that's got to do with it, it's rather different from going out to get a RC
but as it happens yes - the deliberate cut was pretty extraordinary..

anyway for the RC they are trialling it, so we'll see.

 

[SimonSmith]

well, not sure what that's got to do with it, it's rather different from going out to get a RC
but as it happens yes - the deliberate cut was pretty extraordinary..

anyway for the RC they are trialling it, so we'll see.

Ice hockey has known enforcers. Rugby will gravitate to the the most expedient solution. If teams find it works, they’ll do it. It’s the same idea as in NRL when the teams will deliberately give away a set restart if it allows their defense to rearrange