Manu Tuilagi

[ddjamo]

if it was the tackle at the beginning of the match - watching it live I thought it was at MOST a yc. if it was so bad why didn't the AR on that side hang his flag?

the replay looks worse. I don't think it will be an issue for WB.

 

[Account Deleted]

What would a white card add?

(hint - nothing unless the TMO could rule DURING the game). Look at the recent Amlin final WB went yellow later Hayman has a 4 week ban - all sorted without the aid of the WC.

For me it wasn't red - yellow would be more like it.

What if the CO did not cite it? Hayman would not have a ban. Woudl you still say it was "sorted"?
The WC ensure that the offence is looked at and not subject to the CO's opinion. The ref (if he uses it properly and not as a cop out) Says: "I can't be sure but I'd like it checked out, just to be sure".

(hint - don't ask the question and tell people the anwer thet have to give. It smacks of arrogance, andI'm sure you would not wish to convey such a stance.)

 

[Toby Warren]

Attr it was a hint of irony - clearly not well received.

WC doesn't mean that the CO takes any action - so what does the WC add?

(no hints this time!)

Ps if CO didn't then both clubs have the right to cite as well. Can you name an example when the CO has missed something to cite (let's be clear missed it rather than seeing it and deciding not to cite - I can't think of an example - happy to be educated.

 

[Phil E]

Phil

While I don't disagree with your assessment of THIS tackle (now there's something!), I do believe that if the iRB is really serious about completely eradicating this type of tackle from the game, then they should be dealing with every instance of a player being lifted, rotated beyond horizontal and subsequently making contact with the ground head/shoulders first, by sending off the tackler.

While I don't disagree with your suggestion, if that is their intention, then they need to issue a new memorandum, stating this. If they do that I will follow it. Currently I can only follow the last piece of advice.......start at RC and work down, using the criteria already posted.

 

[dave_clark]

surely the criteria is that, in order to be able to work down from a red card, there has to be a credible attempt to stop the player landing upper body first? therefore, the tackler falling with the tacklee still upside down should still be a red card.

(this is hypothetical now - one poster has already said that Care didn't land upper body first which until i see another video of it i can't comment further on).

 

[JohnP]

Just watched it on sky + and am convinced it should have been red over horizontal ( ok just) but MT then follows him down adding his momentum/ weight as he didn't let go, which to be frank could have made it worse not better as the espn commentators seem to think!
DC puts arm out to protect ( luckily) which I understand is irrelevant in the decision process. Apologies though to WB as I when watching live didn't think he'd even given it a penalty but watching the recording he clearly does and then replaces it with the offside call.
Will be interesting if citing follows, WB has IMHO a history of not taking the ultimate sanction of RC in these situations, Amlyin cup final ( didnt see it so going on comments here) Newcastle game earlier in season ( watched it on tv live). Is he right and IRB wrong? Those of you who have met, know him, etc how does he react when asked re these situations?

 

[Account Deleted]

Attr it was a hint of irony - clearly not well received.

WC doesn't mean that the CO takes any action - so what does the WC add?

(no hints this time!)

Ps if CO didn't then both clubs have the right to cite as well. Can you name an example when the CO has missed something to cite (let's be clear missed it rather than seeing it and deciding not to cite - I can't think of an example - happy to be educated.

Many cases where the clubs do not cite. I know of clubs who have a policy not to cite and clubs who don't when playing certain sides since the other side is known to cite "tit for tat".

As for the COs. They generally dont mention things that the have not seen. . Would be a bit strange if a CO said: "I did not cite White 10 for the punch he threw in the 10th minute at Green 7 15 mtrs in from touch and 14 mtres from Greens goal line because I did not see it.".

Re incidents where he sees nothing wrong how many would result in a ban if they had been cited. All the WC does is allow the ref who has seen something (possibly not on the TV angles) to have the whole incident reviewd. After all he may have missed the number and whilst the TV may not show the offence clearly enough it could ID the culprit. So two angles can work together.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Care didn't get injured as, allegedly, he practises falling over face first - a lot. :biggrin:

 

[Simon Thomas]

Care didn't get injured as, allegedly, he practises falling over face first - a lot. :biggrin:

LLP - fair comment, but I do hear he is a reformed character now. He did have a cracking match on Saturday - back to his best.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Is he right and IRB wrong? Those of you who have met, know him, etc how does he react when asked re these situations?

WB has a philosophy of only blowing for clear & obvious offences and with direct negative outcomes - an excllent discussion he has held at many Soceities over the last few seasons.

He is is highly self-analytical and critical, and will have detailed de-brief with RFU Match Observer, match analyst, and his boss Ed Morrison. From what I have seen in the past and knowing him a bit, he will be open forthright and honest both with himself and with his boss / peer group.

 

[PaulDG]

• The player is lifted and then forced or “speared” into the ground. A red card should be issued for this type of tackle.
• 
  The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the player’s safety. A red card should be issued for this type of tackle.
• 
  For all other types of dangerous lifting tackles, it may be considered a penalty or yellow card is sufficient.

I don't believe it was a Red Card, or even close.

Did he lift the player = yes
Did he take him past the horizontal = yes

Did he drive him into the ground = no
Did he drop him = no

So we are in the last bullet point. Penalty or yellow card is sufficient.

No Phil,

Penalty or yellow card may be sufficient (the last bullet point from the IRB allows the referee discretion, it does not prevent the referee giving a red).

I haven't seen the tackle, but my eldest was at the game and he was "amused" that it wasn't a Red. He felt Barnes was under instructions not to "ruin the game" by sending people off if it could be avoided.

Our friend from Cornwall would have been pleased, I expect.

 

[Toby Warren]

Many cases where the clubs do not cite. I know of clubs who have a policy not to cite and clubs who don't when playing certain sides since the other side is known to cite "tit for tat".

As for the COs. They generally dont mention things that the have not seen. . Would be a bit strange if a CO said: "I did not cite White 10 for the punch he threw in the 10th minute at Green 7 15 mtrs in from touch and 14 mtres from Greens goal line because I did not see it.".

Re incidents where he sees nothing wrong how many would result in a ban if they had been cited. All the WC does is allow the ref who has seen something (possibly not on the TV angles) to have the whole incident reviewd. After all he may have missed the number and whilst the TV may not show the offence clearly enough it could ID the culprit. So two angles can work together.

ATTR - but the current system ensures that this happens already. CO has a say teh two teams has a say (I'm sure that the ref has a say post match as well) - teh WC adds nothing in my view (other than giving an option to 'opt out' of some big calls.

I can't remember any incident that has not been seen (live by the ref) not being cited if worthy. My view on the WC is that any beenfit gained (of which there may be some) is outweighed by the risk of the 'opt out'

 

[Account Deleted]

Well the "opt-out" theory will be tested during the trial. Indeed IF refs are opting out of red cards then there is an argument for not adopting them full time.

Regarding your second paragraph I repeat: How would you know that things had happened that the CO missed? I have seen incidents that were not cited that I, and others, felt strongly were red cards. How do we know whether the CO saw and dismissed them or missed them? We don't!

 

[Toby Warren]

Well the "opt-out" theory will be tested during the trial. Indeed IF refs are opting out of red cards then there is an argument for not adopting them full time.

Regarding your second paragraph I repeat: How would you know that things had happened that the CO missed? I have seen incidents that were not cited that I, and others, felt strongly were red cards. How do we know whether the CO saw and dismissed them or missed them? We don't!

This is the bit that I don't have any examples of. I can't think of any issues that have been totally missed (some I thought should have been cited but a positive NO action required call has been made (and well communicated) Radio 5 live is very good at relaying these).

 

[Ian_Cook]

ATTR - but the current system ensures that this happens already. CO has a say teh two teams has a say (I'm sure that the ref has a say post match as well) - teh WC adds nothing in my view (other than giving an option to 'opt out' of some big calls.

I can't remember any incident that has not been seen (live by the ref) not being cited if worthy. My view on the WC is that any beenfit gained (of which there may be some) is outweighed by the risk of the 'opt out'

OOOH, I can...

Umaga - Mealamu - BOD

Ring a bell?

BTW, there is no evidence whatsoever that the WC has been used as a cop-out for red cards.

See this thread...


http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread...Card-a-cop-out&p=205178&viewfull=1#post205178

It is clear that referees are not copping out of red cards

 

[Toby Warren]

OOOH, I can...

Umaga - Mealamu - BOD

Ring a bell?

BTW, there is no evidence whatsoever that the WC has been used as a cop-out for red cards.

See this thread...


http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread...Card-a-cop-out&p=205178&viewfull=1#post205178

It is clear that referees are not copping out of red cards

Would a WC card have fixed this? (Also I seem to remember that the conclusive video was a good few weeks later - but have conisged that to the dim and distant so happy to be corrected)

A white card with TMO written on it so he can review during the game - that I'd support.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Would a WC card have fixed this?

IMO, it may have. The WC tells EVERYONE that the CO WILL be looking at this

You may not think the WC adds anything for you, but I can tell you that the JO's and CO's are liking it as it gives them a specific place to look

You might like to have a read of this. It may give you some perspective on the procedure following the issue of a WC.

Sanzarrugby.com reviews the judicial affairs of the twelfth week of 2012 Super Rugby, with two White Card incidents from the weekend.
Summary of the disciplinary cards shown:
White Cards
Stormers vs Cheetahs
Both White Cards issued from Week 12 resulted out of the Stormers vs Cheetahs match.
In the 54th minute of the match Referee Steve Walsh issued a yellow card to Stormers player Elstadt Rynhardt for contact with his knee to the head of Cheetahs No.14 Cameron Jacobs. Walsh also put the incident on report by issuing a White Card following advice from the Assistant Referee Jonathon Kaplan.
Following review of the match footage the Citing commissioner determined in his opinion the incident did not meet the Red Card threshold and that the match officials had dealt with the incident on the field by way of a yellow card and therefore no further action was taken.
Following on from this incident in the 54th minute the resulting break down lead to a push and shove over the sideline between Cheetahs No. 19 Ashley Johnson and Stormers No. 2 Deon Fourie. Both players went to ground wrestling, it was then that other players from both teams joined in and the whole incident became an ugly brawl over the sideline that involved a large number of players from both teams.
Walsh following advice from his two assistant referees then put the incident on report by issuing a White Card.
Following review of the incident footage post match the Citing Commissioner determined that Johnson and Fourie had been responsible for the brawl and that whilst their actions in isolation had not met the Red Card threshold their actions could have lead to foul play by the other joining players by going on with the incident and were therefore both issued with an “Off-Field” Yellow Card.

 

[Phil E]

No Phil,

Penalty or yellow card may be sufficient........

Whatever = talk to the hand); you understood the point I was trying to make.


Incidently, there are an awful lot of people on this thread who start with "I haven't seen it, but........ :chin:"

 

[Toby Warren]

That's useful and I really like the confirmation that it's been looked at - BUT - are you telling me that the CO wouldn't have looked at these (a mass brawl and a knee to the head) without the WC?

For me it's a solution looking for a problem.

 

[scrumpox2]

I was interested to hear WB say on refmike "not dangerous play on" - it suggests to me that WB assesses the incident and its outcome before applying the letter of the law. That's an empathetic approach to refereeing the game which I like. Others may judge this tackle was dangerous by definition - the tackler lifted the player, the legs went over the horizontal and the tackled player wasn't put down gently. The referee who pedantically applies the letter of the law would immediately blow his whistle and start his thought process at red ...
To my mind, this kind of interpretation and empathy for the game is exactly what separates the best referees from the others. Whilst many seem to demand consistency in black and white terms, I would prefer empathy with the game and the players every time.

In order to eradicate the spear tackle, the law makers have regrettably set the bar much lower by defining the tip tackle as dangerous. I'm in the camp which says many tip tackles are not dangerous. It's frustrating and it's sad to see them go.

... and no, I'm not entirely in the old school camp which would bring back proper rucking cos the game's gone soft. I would like to see red cards for those who take out line out jumpers or their supporting lifters causing the jumper to fall from great heights onto head/neck/back. These have far more potential for causing injury than the majority of the tip tackles which people are clamouring to eradicate.