Wallace's "Stamp" on Chabal

jayteecork · 22-09-2007 1:51am #1

Anyone agree that this decision was extremely harsh. Ireland were finally getting a bit of momentum going with that forward maul, then Chabal was completely on the wrong side, and Wallace "stepped" on him as him as he was going past. A stamp surely involves some sort of direct downward force.
That decision turned the tide of the match in my opinion. Think it was 9-3 to France and Ireland were finally putting some good work together.
They France got a penalty on the half way line and they were back under real pressure.

Plus Chabal made a complete meal out of it too. We saw him in the Namibia game, too. When the amatuer player was sent off for a supposed high-tackle on Chabal.
He was rolling around on the ground like a football player.
He's actually a complete wimp.

22-09-2007 1:54am

No. It was stupid and he could easily have stepped over him. We got a similar one in the second half.

Indiscipline ruined us tonight (amongst other things)

tolosenc · 22-09-2007 1:59am

Chabal made a meal of it., but it was a ridiculous thing to do in the first place. I'm more infuriated by the Thion incident where it was Reddan's fault for throwing the ball at him!

jayteecork · 22-09-2007 2:07am

I disagree. This is rugby, not football.
If a man is your side of the maul/ruck and making no effort to move than a stamp is par for the course.
Plus Ireland were really driving forward in that maul. That was a game-changing decision by Chris ****e in my opinion.
And let's not forget Trimble getting half through and running into him. ****ing muppet of a ref.

22-09-2007 2:11am

jayteecork wrote:

I disagree. This is rugby, not football.
If a man is your side of the maul/ruck and making no effort to move than a stamp is par for the course.
Plus Ireland were really driving forward in that maul. That was a game-changing decision by Chris ****e in my opinion.
And let's not forget Trimble getting half through and running into him. ****ing muppet of a ref.

Im not gonna start blamin the ref for a 25-3 defeat.

Chabal wasnt in the maul. he was lyin on the ground behind it and Wallace used him as a step when he could easily have stepped over. It was stupid and inexcusable. Chabal made a meal of it but that doesnt matter. Id only complain about the makin a meal of it if Wally got sinbinned.

jayteecork · 22-09-2007 2:17am

Wallace used him as a step yes. Hardly call that a stamp. And yes we got a similar decision in the second half, but the game was over by then.
The first decision came at a pivotal time in the game.

Mothman · 22-09-2007 8:18am

I thought it was the linesman's call

Snickers Man · 22-09-2007 8:24am

It was stupid of Wallace. There was no need for it.

And it was the touch judge who called it. The ref didn't see it.

Having said which, I don't know what the ref's problem with Reddan chucking the ball at the lazy runner (runner? the guy was sauntering back!) was. I hate guys who disrupt fast ball by walking backwards into the scrum half's way.

Anyone know is there a new directive on this sort of thing?

jayteecork · 22-09-2007 8:38am

you got to love Chabal though -
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2z7eb_sebastien-chabal-tu-parles-francais_fun

toomevara · 22-09-2007 9:10am

According to the letter of the law White was correct. He was also consistent in that he pinged Ibanez for the same offence late in the second half. You really can't ask for any more than that and the Irish squad should have done their work on White before the game and been prepared for his refereeing style i.e. fussy and pedantic, it's no secret.

Our discipline was appalling and was one of the major factors which cost us the game. I wasn't overly impressed with Freddie 'rockstar' Michelak's frequent 'Hollywoods' though..somethng I'd hate to see becoming part of rugby......

jayteecork · 22-09-2007 9:33am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1r2vEd1_IA

batman2000 · 22-09-2007 10:40am

jayteecork wrote:

I disagree. This is rugby, not football.
If a man is your side of the maul/ruck and making no effort to move than a stamp is par for the course.
Plus Ireland were really driving forward in that maul. That was a game-changing decision by Chris ****e in my opinion.
And let's not forget Trimble getting half through and running into him. ****ing muppet of a ref.

Jayteecork: I guess you have not read the rule change lately. Rucking is now not allowed. A stamp is not part of the course, rucking a player out of the way used to be but this is now often deemed as dangerous play. Wallace just had to step over Chabal, as he was just joining the maul. Also is was not even a backward rucking motion. No complaints, the ref was consistant also.

16.3 (f) A player rucking for the ball must not ruck players on the ground. A player rucking for the ball tries to step over players on the ground and must not intentionally step on them. A player rucking must do so near the ball.

ixus · 22-09-2007 10:53am

It was stupid of Wallace, and I think he should have paid for it by being subbed (I do like Wallace as a player).
It was the first time we had real go-forward momentum and his menatality was to step on a player.

If he was concentrated on winning the game, he would have been joining that drive as fast as he could and trying to punish France while they had Chabal on the ground.

The ref displayed consistancy on the impedement, and isn't that what players are always looking for.

Your anger should be directed at Wallace for that stupidity at a crucial point in the game, not the ref for penalising the incident.

nacho libre · 22-09-2007 11:56am

Deleted User wrote:

Im not gonna start blamin the ref for a 25-3 defeat.

.

come off it! it is clearly the refs' fault Ireland lost. i mean most decisions went against Kerry when they Played Monaghan. It was his fault they still won the game:) it's always the refs' fault if you win the game.

Akrasia · 22-09-2007 12:12pm

The big turning point I saw was the inordinate amount of advantage the ref played at the end of the first hald. He gave them 4 or 5 phases of play to get over the line, and when the Irish defence held strong, he just gave them the penalty in front of the posts. It must have been soul breaking for the irish defence.

Tim Robbins · 22-09-2007 12:15pm

jayteecork wrote:

I disagree. This is rugby, not football.
If a man is your side of the maul/ruck and making no effort to move than a stamp is par for the course.
Plus Ireland were really driving forward in that maul. That was a game-changing decision by Chris ****e in my opinion.
And let's not forget Trimble getting half through and running into him. ****ing muppet of a ref.

Refs / IRB have stated that they were going to be strick on rucking / stamping.
They have been throughout the tournement. Wallace was stupid.

nacho libre · 22-09-2007 12:16pm

Akrasia wrote:

The big turning point I saw was the inordinate amount of advantage the ref played at the end of the first hald. He gave them 4 or 5 phases of play to get over the line, and when the Irish defence held strong, he just gave them the penalty in front of the posts. It must have been soul breaking for the irish defence.

yeah the ref cost them the game. none of those penalties were merited:rolleyes:

razorblunt · 22-09-2007 12:17pm

Wallace lost his head, Leamy done the same and the linesman ignored it because at the time Chabal was under the Irish legs, he was outside the maul when Wallace done it. The French were making very lazy runs all game I was telling the lads that Reddan should throw the ball at one of them to bring the referee's attention to it, he does, and Chris White blames him, that's crazy. Also two of France's first three penalties were for Irish offsides in midfield but Michalak and traille were constantly doing the same but weren't pinged. Not blaming the ref for the loss, it was mainly Ireland who didn't play well and couldn't keep their heads, whereas France didn't play well and kept theirs that was the difference.

razorblunt · 22-09-2007 12:19pm

Akrasia wrote:

The big turning point I saw was the inordinate amount of advantage the ref played at the end of the first hald. He gave them 4 or 5 phases of play to get over the line, and when the Irish defence held strong, he just gave them the penalty in front of the posts. It must have been soul breaking for the irish defence.

The use of advantage the whole tournament has been poor, France knocked on at one stage and Ireland collected about 20 yards back after 3 or 4 phases they just about get back to where the knock on happened and White called "advantage over", why they gained no yards?

philstar · 22-09-2007 1:50pm

for my twopence worth, i agree with OP idon't think it was a stamp either.

He stepped on him, but chabal was lying there he couldn't avoid him.

But having said that i don't think it was the turning point of the game, but the first try in the second half was, we were dead ducks after that.

Hugh_C · 22-09-2007 3:04pm

philstar wrote:

He stepped on him, but chabal was lying there he couldn't avoid him..[/I]

He could easily have avoided standing on him, as could Leamy

Hugh_C · 22-09-2007 3:04pm

philstar wrote:

He stepped on him, but chabal was lying there he couldn't avoid him..[/I]

He could easily have avoided standing on him, as could Leamy

Pinetree Boy · 23-09-2007 11:21pm

Mothman wrote:

I thought it was the linesman's call

You are absolutely right and once made the ref had no choice but a penalty.

admsitio · 23-09-2007 11:29pm

There is too much marketing around Chabal.Je, the frenchs love him! but he is so good like it seems to be? i think NO.But he is a big man, eh?

Diamondmaker · 24-09-2007 9:13am

Wallace was in excusable in his action! Clear and blatant and stupid standing on a player un neccesarliy - 3 points.

Easterby flaining left arm on block - 3 points

POC sin binning for offside and brinign man down 5m inside own half 7 points !!

At least 13 points dropped due to silly and school boy infringements!!

walshy123 · 24-09-2007 9:41am

jayteecork wrote:

Wallace used him as a step yes. Hardly call that a stamp. And yes we got a similar decision in the second half, but the game was over by then.
The first decision came at a pivotal time in the game.

No body called it a stamp. The linesman said he unneccesarily stood on him.

Zzippy · 24-09-2007 10:45am

Ref was right to penalise Wallace, and he had to once the touch judge made the call. It was stupid and unnecessary, he could easily have stepped over him. White was pedantic alright, and didn't penalise the French offside at all. Having said that, he didn't beat us, we beat ourselves. If we can't win our own lineout how are we going to have any platform to set up the backs?

batman2000 · 03-10-2007 7:24am

walshy123 wrote:

No body called it a stamp. The linesman said he unneccesarily stood on him.

Somehow I think that stood and stamp are the same in rugby terms

Zzippy · 03-10-2007 11:05am

batman2000 wrote:

Somehow I think that stood and stamp are the same in rugby terms

Did you see the incident?? :rolleyes:
A stamp is a hard downward movement, designed to injure someone. He stood on Chabal while moving forward, granted he could have just stepped over him, but there was no serious downward movement, and Chabal wasn't hurt. If it was a stamp the touch judge would have said that and he would have been yellow carded at least.

il gatto · 03-10-2007 5:12pm

Ireland were driving forward and Chabal "happened" to be lying in the best possible place to bring it down. I don't think that the linesman could judge if it was unnecessary or not. You're lining up where to hit the back of the maul for best effect and a player appears under your feet from a group of ten players. Even if Wallace looked down, it was probably too late to do much else (apart from throw himself to one side), and too be honest, Chabal shouldn't have been there.
I thought the worst decision of the night was where Leamy (I think) tackled Haymens? Anyway, Leamy stayed on his feet and tried to get the ball (holding on, surely) only to be pinged for hands in the ruck before a ruck was even close to being formed. That wasn't pedantic. That was just blatently wrong.
France seemed to have forever as advantage too. Always seemed to come back for a kickable penalty.
I also thought the penalty given for lifting in the maul was wrong. The force of both forward packs just raised a player off the ground. I didn't see anyone actually trying to lift anyone.
Reddan had every right to throw the ball at the retreating French player. They were consistantly slow getting on side, and slowed down the ball from the rucks. Seeing as Chris White had no intention of penalising the French, Reddan made it more obvious. "Spirit of the game" my ar$e. "Rules of the game" is what he should have been worried about.
I'm not blaming White entirely for the loss, but if Ireland were on the right end of that many dodgy decisions, I'd be embarrassed (as I was for Flannery's non-try).

Wallace's "Stamp" on Chabal

Comments