Personally I’m no longer sure what is a YC and what is a RC when it comes to head contact.I wasn't surprised myself. Straight away for Cane I thought definite yellow, likely turn into a red. Kolisi I was immediately at a yellow card and no more. Most of the impact went through the chest from my perspective and Cane had a more obvious "always illegal" aspect to it.
My point isn't that the decisions were wrong, no doubt they were correct, it's that there was only a tiny difference between two offences yet they attract enormously different sanctionsPersonally I’m no longer sure what is a YC and what is a RC when it comes to head contact.
I saw no mitigation in SK’s tackle yet the explanation given by WB included reference to the “dynamics of the tackle”
The subsequent flak would me mitigated if there is a coordinated campaign of information, with a coherent message, all specifically tailored for the audience (Refs, look for a, b, c, and penalize with x, y, z. Coaches, the refs are looking for a, b, and c - make sure players know this or they’ll concede x, y, z etc. all with plenty of examples just either side of the borderline since the ‘easy’ calls like an upright shoulder barge to the head are too obvious to bring clarity where we need nuance.)If we want the game to change, and I think we do, then I think it needs to be the former, and referees will take some flak early on.
Or at best cobble together a knee jerk reaction and leave the rest of us to pick through and try and work it out.They make it up as they go along
Very similar, Not sure we are watching the same game?Cane, RC, Kolisi YC
Slim margins
Very similar offences
Vast difference in sanction
We need the 20 minute replacement
Only one incident that was close to a life changing injury in that game ... Frizell on Mbonambe's knee.
Just a YC for that one, because currently knees don't matter much all focus is on heads
Both tacklesVery similar, Not sure we are watching the same game?
Agree on the 20 minute though, a red card offence sanction depends on the time of if the incident. It's bizarre.
For me that was way the most reckless, most unpleasant and and egregious act in the game. Indeed perhaps the tournament.For that one, I think we need a new category of intent, somewhere between "accidental" and "deliberate"...
No, because he fell, and didn’t do a Darcy.Only one incident that was close to a life changing injury in that game ... Frizell on Mbonambe's knee.
Just a YC for that one, because currently knees don't matter much all focus is on heads
Remind me, did the SA hooker pass his HIA?Both tackles
In neither case was their any intention to impact head
In both cases players too high
Both impacts to head
Both high degree of danger
Very slight differences in height and point of contact
According to the fine differences used in the protocol, correct decisions.
But no way did those slight differences make one worth 10 mins in the bin while the merits 53 min plus a (what?) two week ban
They weren't *that* different
He wasn't involved in either tackle was he? Or in any other tackle/head contact incident... i don't think he had an HIA, did he ?Remind me, did the SA hooker pass his HIA?
You thought there was no foul play, play on?No, because he fell, and didn’t do a Darcy.
Accidentally on purpose ?For that one, I think we need a new category of intent, somewhere between "accidental" and "deliberate"...
I think we do. The hierarchy is unavoidable, accidental, careless, reckless, deliberateFor that one, I think we need a new category of intent, somewhere between "accidental" and "deliberate"...