own player - dangerous drop

[didds]

Ifa player jumps when running, he will mover forward in eth air. You canpredict his trajectory.
.

You can't before he start to jump/takes off.

Ask Finn Russell.

didds

 

[OB..]

You can't before he start to jump/takes off.

Ask Finn Russell.

didds

Russell was not looking and failed to read the situation.

 

[didds]

he certainly didn't read where Biggar was going to land if that's what you mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWIOPJIZpvc

He was watching the ball until the very last moment - by which time Biggar had launched himself towards where Russell was due to be standing to catch the ball.

What else was Russell supposed to be looking at?

didds

 

[OB..]

he certainly didn't read where Biggar was going to land if that's what you mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWIOPJIZpvc

He was watching the ball until the very last moment - by which time Biggar had launched himself towards where Russell was due to be standing to catch the ball.

What else was Russell supposed to be looking at?

didds

As a professional player.Russell should have been aware that an opponent might be chasing to jump for the kick. He could have had a quick look, but didn't.

We have already been round this buoy several times. You don't agree with the officials on the day, the citing officer, and the disciplinary panels. I do.

 

[didds]

I was merely using it as an example of why a single player can be launched at opponents in a similar eventuality as to lifted players. FR was merely a useful example.

I really don't see that if its "wrong" for a lifted catcher to be thrown at a defender, why a solitary jumper should be treated any differently.

And frankly its ridiculous to suggest somebody running to catch a ball should be looking anywhere but at the ball to be caught.

WADR to OB who I respect enormously!

didds

 

[OB..]

And frankly its ridiculous to suggest somebody running to catch a ball should be looking anywhere but at the ball to be caught.s

You are happy that he does not have to take account of what anyone else is doing. However apparently that does not apply to the kick-chasing player.

 

[RobLev]

You are happy that he does not have to take account of what anyone else is doing. However apparently that does not apply to the kick-chasing player.

The kick-chasing-jumping player is the one creating the danger to himself and the other player - of course he should be held to a higher standard.

 

[didds]

I think they should both be watching the ball.

Life is inherently dangerous, yet we live in an age where some ap[pear to believe they can legislate their way out of any accidents at all.


Rugby is following suit. Of course i do not want ANYBODY injured. But injuries nonetheless DO happen. We have now reached the situation where players basically jumped all but vertically for the ball - and risked a mid air collision. That was deemed far too dangerous so the onus wasa placed on the lower of the two jumpers. So that means you only jump if you really believe you can get above the other jumper, so some now watch and wait. This has now led to the chaser, with huge head of steam being able to jump not UP but OUT and OVER.

The chasing jumper is now a missile attempting to catch a ball. As opposed to a missile that has already caught the ball.

The net result to the poor bugger that gets hit by the launched player is the same.

If you can;t see the end result is the same then i am not sure what you are watching. I see 16 stones+ of dead weight with momentum landing on someone in both cases.

Perhaps to avoid any injuries to anyone we should ban players from jumping for the ball at all - its the logical progression.

didds


didds

 

[Browner]

I think they should both be watching the ball.

Life is inherently dangerous, yet we live in an age where some ap[pear to believe they can legislate their way out of any accidents at all.


Rugby is following suit. Of course i do not want ANYBODY injured. But injuries nonetheless DO happen. We have now reached the situation where players basically jumped all but vertically for the ball - and risked a mid air collision. That was deemed far too dangerous so the onus wasa placed on the lower of the two jumpers. So that means you only jump if you really believe you can get above the other jumper, so some now watch and wait. This has now led to the chaser, with huge head of steam being able to jump not UP but OUT and OVER.

The chasing jumper is now a missile attempting to catch a ball. As opposed to a missile that has already caught the ball.

The net result to the poor bugger that gets hit by the launched player is the same.

If you can;t see the end result is the same then i am not sure what you are watching. I see 16 stones+ of dead weight with momentum landing on someone in both cases.

Perhaps to avoid any injuries to anyone we should ban players from jumping for the ball at all - its the logical progression.

didds


didds

Over last weekend ( and especially) in the England Scotland match we saw lots of mid air challenging for the ball, where ALL arriving players seemed to show improved timing of their leaping , as a result I was applauding the bonafide nature of these challenges. As a result we didn't see any upending of players despite a series of wholly committed and fully contested leapings.....

The players have clearly taken in /absorbed / improved their technique considering the consequences of Russells illegal challenge , and adjusted accordingly, WITHOUT ruining the competition for the ball in the air ....... Either that or it was lucky coincidence across x3 matches ...which I don't believe it was.