Slim margins
- Thread starter crossref
- Start date
Nilo
Referees in Wales
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.
Personally 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”
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 sanctions
It's not proportionate
BikingBud
Referees in England
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2011
- Messages
- 723
- Post Likes
- 260
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
Not proportionate?
I wonder if the people with life-changing head injuries will think that?
Some people always seem to be bleeding from head injuries, eg Curry but there appeared to be a few more yesterday. So not sure that is the measure we should look at.
I would also offer that it seems the offended players are staying down, this might be to bring the ref and TMO attention to a potential incident, they even clarified that Kolbe wasn't down due to foul play!
But if the player is staying down and needs assistance how are they then allowed to continue without off-field independent assessment, HIA?
Something needs to be sorted to protect the players and the RWC has to me indicated that head contact protocols are, at the moment, a lottery
If you hit shoulder to shoulder and ride up you are too high! Force the tackle height down by effective sanctions.
It was great to see Underhill back tackling low, and extremely effectively and his buddy loitering to clear up loose ball.
I wonder if the people with life-changing head injuries will think that?
Some people always seem to be bleeding from head injuries, eg Curry but there appeared to be a few more yesterday. So not sure that is the measure we should look at.
I would also offer that it seems the offended players are staying down, this might be to bring the ref and TMO attention to a potential incident, they even clarified that Kolbe wasn't down due to foul play!
But if the player is staying down and needs assistance how are they then allowed to continue without off-field independent assessment, HIA?
Something needs to be sorted to protect the players and the RWC has to me indicated that head contact protocols are, at the moment, a lottery
If you hit shoulder to shoulder and ride up you are too high! Force the tackle height down by effective sanctions.
It was great to see Underhill back tackling low, and extremely effectively and his buddy loitering to clear up loose ball.
I do not believe we need more sanctions, but we need clarity.
If the rule is, if you are illegal, there is no mitigation for head contact, then apply that.
If not, clarify exactly what the rules are.
Then players can adapt.
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.
But I would also like to see that the non-offending player goes off for a HIA - or, in lower leagues, be replaced.
Because, if this is about safety, then we need to keep the players safe.
If the rule is, if you are illegal, there is no mitigation for head contact, then apply that.
If not, clarify exactly what the rules are.
Then players can adapt.
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.
But I would also like to see that the non-offending player goes off for a HIA - or, in lower leagues, be replaced.
Because, if this is about safety, then we need to keep the players safe.
Volun-selected
Referees in America
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2018
- Messages
- 558
- Post Likes
- 305
- Location
- United States
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 8
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.)
But this requires forethought, planning, and a well thought through plan which, as noted by Didds
Or at best cobble together a knee jerk reaction and leave the rest of us to pick through and try and work it out.
shebeen
Avid Rugby Lover
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2015
- Messages
- 191
- Post Likes
- 57
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
Very 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.
belladonna
Rugby Expert
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2018
- Messages
- 449
- Post Likes
- 119
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
For that one, I think we need a new category of intent, somewhere between "accidental" and "deliberate"...
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
Last edited:
For me that was way the most reckless, most unpleasant and and egregious act in the game. Indeed perhaps the tournament.
It could easily have permanently damaged his knee ... perhaps it even did, we shall see.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 9,365
- Post Likes
- 1,466
No, because he fell, and didn’t do a Darcy.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 9,365
- Post Likes
- 1,466
Remind me, did the SA hooker pass his HIA?
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 ?
Or am I forgetting something
You thought there was no foul play, play on?
Accidentally on purpose ?
Dickie E
Referees in Australia
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2007
- Messages
- 14,132
- Post Likes
- 2,153
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 2
I think we do. The hierarchy is unavoidable, accidental, careless, reckless, deliberate