Who'd ping this?

[Pegleg]

http://www.thescore.ie/ben-teo-bosh-...medium=twitter

 

[Accylad]

Not me....

 

[beckett50]

On what grounds?

 

[Pegleg]

The accusation is leading with the forearm. Nothing there in my opinion. But I thought I'd see if anyone could find something there.

 

[RobLev]

The accusation is leading with the forearm. Nothing there in my opinion. But I thought I'd see if anyone could find something there.

Nothing there for me - to adapt soccer terminology in another context, it's face to forearm, not forearm to face.

 

[ChrisR]

Trying to tackle like that? he had it coming. Contact is made when his arms are in then he pushes off after contact.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

The accusation is leading with the forearm. Nothing there in my opinion. But I thought I'd see if anyone could find something there.

I do find the padding on his injury a bit dubious.

 

[Pegleg]

I'm sure the padding will have been checked before the game and found to conform to WR regs.

 

[Phil E]

Nothing to see there.....move along.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Odd

Sooo, just to be DA and in fariness to both attackers and defenders

Would you equally allow a tackler to do the same to a ball carrier?

The answer is obvious, but telling. This is the game where we do not allow the receiver to enter the l/o for equity and fairness to both sides, but we now give the ball barrier the right to put a forearm on someones head, I'm beginnig to think we are protecting the Quarterback

 

[ChrisR]

NKW, if the BC's forearm is away from his body and it's swinging at the tackler's head then it's a different matter, In this instance his arms are across his chest and he pushes off after contact. So, no issue.

Sam W. must have gone to Arthur Murray's tackling school.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

NKW, if the BC's forearm is away from his body and it's swinging at the tackler's head then it's a different matter, In this instance his arms are across his chest and he pushes off after contact. So, no issue.

I agree, would you allow or coach similar contact from a defender? The answer is obvious, the equity is not. I've just chosen to look in from outside the box. It (rugby) is really quite humourous. I have to wonder how the rugby collective evolved to the point we are now.

Sam W. must have gone to Arthur Murray's tackling school.

He got caught, I'm sure whoever is paying him is thinks he can tackle. He may have also been intimidated by the prospect of having to tackle this ball carrier. Fear is not foreign to professionals.

 

[Phil E]

Would you equally allow a tackler to do the same to a ball carrier?

Yes.

Anyone can push, but not strike the ball carrier. If a ball carrier ran into an opposition player and the player just pushed him away, what's the offence?

[LAWS]Law 7 Mode of Play
Any player may tackle, hold or push an opponent holding the ball.[/LAWS]

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Yes.

Anyone can push, but not strike the ball carrier. If a ball carrier ran into an opposition player and the player just pushed him away, what's the offence?

[LAWS]Law 7 Mode of Play
Any player may tackle, hold or push an opponent holding the ball.[/LAWS]

(g) Dangerous charging. A player must not charge or knock down an opponent carrying the ball without trying to grasp that player.

Of course the ball carrier is given an exclusion by

f) Playing an opponent without the ball. Except in a scrum, ruck or maul, a player who is not in possession of the ball must not hold, push or obstruct an opponent not carrying the ball.

The unequal benefit is given to the ball carrier. Would you allow a defender push a ballcarrier by contacting with his forearms against his chest to the ball carrier head? I think most would call it a charge.

 

[Phil E]

But that's not what's happening in the video?????

The two players make contact and one pushes the other off.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

But that's not what's happening in the video?????

The two players make contact and one pushes the other off.

Back to my following question to OP, Would you allow a similar action from a defender?

I guess that you would answer no, as it is a charge, that is the folly of the law, it is w/o equity to defender akin to the protection given to a gridiron QB in the attempt to increase scoring.

I find this perception pitiful as I have read law interpretations that stress equity, such as receiver not entering l/o.

But that's not what's happening in the video?????

The two players make contact and one pushes the other off.

Let's not kid ourselves, he switches the ball to his rt arm and frees his left bandaged forearm. He may have a legitimate injury (open wound), but if it requires a bandage and he leads with said bandage, I find it questionable.

 

[Phil E]

I'm out......your in a world of your own?

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Let's not kid ourselves, he switches the ball to his rt arm and frees his left bandaged forearm. He may have a legitimate injury (open wound), but if it requires a bandage and he leads with said bandage, I find it questionable.

I haven't seen the incident in question but rather query your suspicion of a bandaged forearm and the legitimacy of the wound thereunder. Is protection of a, say, previously broken arm not legitimate? Gareth Thomas and Matthew Rees (both Wales and B&I Lions) wore a bandaged forearm(s) for years (fastened up with insulation tape or similar) and I assume at some time whilst wearing those bandages they will have lead with that. I think the referees concerned will have viewed each collision on its merits. I assume the referees were happy with the thickness of padding in each (all) cases.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I'm out......your in a world of your own?

Thanks for the help. You're in the staus quo.

 

[Simon Thomas]

In the OP video there is no offence to penalise.