Scotland v Wales - Lee Byrne

[SimplySimon]

Both incidents in the first half of the Scotland v Wales fixture involving Lee Byrne.

First the Lee Byrne leap and catch in which Hugo Southwell got injured. I think most of us would be in agreement that Mr Southwell was lucky not to get a YC for taking the player out in the air, however does anyone else think that Lee Byrne was lucky not to be penalised for dangerous play for the way he jumped with his studs up hanging his leg out?

Personally I was always coached to jump for a high ball like that with a knee up and slightly sidewards on, so that anyone challenging would "hit the hard parts", but studs up??!!

Secondly, I think George Clancy had a cracking game, and I think Byrne deserved a YC for the high tackle - but if the referee see's an offence, plays an advantage and is happy that a sufficient advantage has been played to call "advantage over" should he then go back to an AR's call and take further action? I don't know the answer to this so, am open to suggestion.

PS, I think the ref was quite possibly the best person on the park during this game - worrying for both nations :Nerv:

 

[OB..]

I agree Byrne's action was dangerous play.

I have seen people try to justify it as keeping his balance (rubbish!) or protecting himself against an illegal tackle. The latter is equal nonsense, since it also prevents an opponent from legally challenging for the ball in the air.

I felt Southwell initially thought he might be able to challenge for the ball, but then realised he would not get there in time. At that moment he saw the boot and failed to get out of the way. Byrne was brought down by the contact with the (illegal) boot. I think it would be right to penalise Southwell for his misjudgement, but Byrne's action was worse.

At least you couldn't blame Andy Nicol of being biased!

 

[SimonSmith]

Largely agree with OB.
Also think the handling of the YC was quite correct.

My one gripe was his handling of the back rows/scrum halfs. The law is quite specific in what the s/half throwing in must do.

Last I checked, that didn't include backing into his opposite number to help create a channel for his No 8 to run into. I thought that that was poor in an otherwise OK performance

 

[SimplySimon]

OB, what decision would you have given in the Southwell/Byrne situation then?

I must admit that at the time, I thought Southwell would have at least 10 minutes to have his injury dealt with :yc:

Anywhere else on the park, a player putting their studs into somebody's face :rc: what was so different?

 

[OB..]

OB, what decision would you have given in the Southwell/Byrne situation then?

Two yellow cards

Anywhere else on the park, a player putting their studs into somebody's face :rc: what was so different?

He unnecessarily put his studs where a player was likely to run into them. That is not as bad as deliberately putting his studs into somebody's face.

 

[SimplySimon]

Two yellow cards



He unnecessarily put his studs where a player was likely to run into them. That is not as bad as deliberately putting his studs into somebody's face.

So you would have initially penalised and carded Southwell, and then reversed the penalty and carded Byrne. I think that would have been about right to be honest. Not many Welshmen would agree though :swet:

 

[pedr]

I was tempted to post here querying the high tackle penalty. No qualms about the yellow card, and it wasn't clear if Clancy thought sufficient advantage had accrued to Scotland or not - was it 'advantage over' in his head, even if he didn't say it, before the breakdown at which he blew and went to discuss with the AR?

It does raise the issue, though: what if there's a high tackle close to opposition goal-line, a breakaway which goes nearly the length of the pitch before a try-saving tackle (perhaps by the to-be-yellow-carded player!)... do you go back for the penalty? Or do you now wait until the ball goes dead before giving the yellow card? What if the offending side go back up and score?

I would think that the most sensible solution is to stop play as soon as you'd say 'advantage over' even if the offended team are still in a strong position, but there are times when that wouldn't work either. (Ice hockey has a useful delayed penalty rule: the penalty is enforced as soon as, and no sooner than, the offending side touch the puck, even if minutes elapse. Though given the speed of that game it's never going to be that long that you're holding the 'advantage').

 

[crossref]

i thought the general rule for foul play is not to play advantage at all ... unless the non-infringing team really are on the point of scoring.

In this case
- both teams were guilty of foul play
- PLUS there was two guys on the floor who might have been quite seriously injured
- PLUS an impressive FOUNTAIN of blood!

I'd blow my whistle, for sure.

 

[Toby Warren]

i thought the general rule for foul play is not to play advantage at all ... unless the non-infringing team really are on the point of scoring.

In this case
- both teams were guilty of foul play
- PLUS there was two guys on the floor who might have been quite seriously injured
- PLUS an impressive FOUNTAIN of blood!

I'd blow my whistle, for sure.

When you start out this is the (good) advice that you are given. It can stop flash points and also ensures players get treatment.

As you gain more experiance (and sides have dedicated physios) then you start to make judgement calls about when to blow and when to play advantage.

But in any doubt for any reason foul play = quick whistle

 

[SimonSmith]

i thought the general rule for foul play is not to play advantage at all ... unless the non-infringing team really are on the point of scoring.

In this case
- both teams were guilty of foul play
- PLUS there was two guys on the floor who might have been quite seriously injured
- PLUS an impressive FOUNTAIN of blood!

I'd blow my whistle, for sure.

I thought he did for the Byrne/Southwell incident.
Her played advantage for the high tackle by Byrne later.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykz0FsfPYvU

Have a look at the link, and about the 32 second mark. I'd suggest that what you see is a look of "holy sh!t" on Southwell's face as he realizes it's all gone a bit Pete Tong.
He's realized he can't stop AND he's about to get a face full of boot. that is seriously a YC? He made no attempt to actually "tackle" Byrne. I'd also argue if Byrne doesn't go in with his boot raised:
1) He may not have been toppled, because it's his leg that makes contact and topples him.
2) Southwell doesn't get a face full of studs.

 

[triage]

As a full back in my playing days (some of the cynics will say because I am welsh, but I assure you that isn't the reasoning behind my thought) I thought the leap with the leg out is normal practice for all full backs. I was taught it myself. The challenge by southwell (IMO) was no different to that of evans the year before (with exception of the outcome to the tackler obviously). Clancy saw it as worthy to give a yellow card then but not in this case. I do find that decision strange. I wouldn't have carded byrne for that (although do see the argument for the dangerous boot), but definitely, the high tackle deserved a card. That was gratuitous. I did however think the warning for a yellow card for infringements at the tackle area was a little late. there had been four or five in a relatively short space of time. but that is personal preference. as a game the second half was pretty rubbish, not the fault of clancy just the play from both sides was pretty awful.

any thoughts?

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

I played full back for years and have never seen anyone in my club leap like that with studs up.
It is clear, deliberate, dangerous play to prevent a legal challenge for the ball and should be wiped out of the game.
I have penalised it a few times but at my level rarely see it.

 

[Ian_Cook]

A YC against Southwell would be very harsh IMO.

I seriously doubt that Southwell would have made contact with Byrne if the latter hadn't stuck his foot out dangerously. He ran into the sole of the foot. If the foot's not there.......

I am also concerned that the commentators, both during the game and in review don't even consider Byrne's actions worth a mention.

 

[Deeps]

A YC against Southwell would be very harsh IMO.

I seriously doubt that Southwell would have made contact with Byrne if the latter hadn't stuck his foot out dangerously. He ran into the sole of the foot. If the foot's not there.......

I am also concerned that the commentators, both during the game and in review don't even consider Byrne's actions worth a mention.

Ian, you have summed up my thoughts exactly. If you watch Southwell he was fully focused on the ball and ran into the foot with such force that Byrne was spun over.

Everyone focused on the notion that Byrne had been taken out in the air but in reality they were both playing hard for the ball. Byrne's outstretched foot was quite disgraceful and warranted a YC as did his later high tackle; what happened to the zero tolerance message to high tackles put out nearly 2 years ago? What message does it send to the greater unwashed when they can see that a relatively vicious high tackle warrants only a PK? There will be trouble at mill, mark my words.

 

[Robert Burns]

Deeps,

Warrants a Penalty awarded TO the offender.

 

[temujin]

Southwell should have been carded for that, immediately after he made contact with Byrne's boot he ran through Byrne's trailing leg, no question that he took him out in the air, and no doubt that he was not competing for the ball as Southwell never left the ground. Byrne's eyes never left the ball so to say it was deliberate and deserved a card is tosh. Yellow card straight away, and it should have followed an earlier yellow card for Barclay who spent most of the first 25mins lying allover the ball/contact area.

 

[temujin]

And Andy Nicol is right up there with Stuart Barnes and John Inverdale with his complete knowledge of absolutely bugger all. How they get work.......?

 

[temujin]

rant over.

 

[OB..]

Byrne's eyes never left the ball so to say it was deliberate and deserved a card is tosh.

His eyes are irrelevant. If he does not know where his foot is without looking at it he has a problem - it is dangerous play whether he realises it or not. Ignorance is no excuse.

 

[SimonSmith]

Southwell should have been carded for that, immediately after he made contact with Byrne's boot he ran through Byrne's trailing leg, no question that he took him out in the air, and no doubt that he was not competing for the ball as Southwell never left the ground. Byrne's eyes never left the ball so to say it was deliberate and deserved a card is tosh. Yellow card straight away, and it should have followed an earlier yellow card for Barclay who spent most of the first 25mins lying allover the ball/contact area.

If you watch the video, you see Southwell trying to stop. To be fair, most of his head DID stop - because it was being impeded by Byrne's studs. YC to Southwell for headbutting Byrne's boots?