Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Match thread: Ulster v Munster, Ravenhill 09/05/15 14:40

Options
1…141516171820»

Comments

  • Options
    #572
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,556 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    The game's too physical
    Players are getting concussed too often
    blah blah blah

    Some player hits another guy with his head on the head while going off his feet by himself into a ruck.

    Ah sure it's grand!

    There's a lot of talking out of both sides of your mouth going on here so.

    To be fair to me, I've consistently said the referee was wrong and today was vindication for my long struggle.


  • Options
    #573
    Swiwi.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,415 ✭✭✭Swiwi.


    awec wrote: »
    To be fair to me, I've consistently said the referee was wrong and today was vindication for my long struggle.

    And the Nobel prize in recognition of your heartfelt struggle will follow in due course :p

    They've basically said he lead with his arm instead of his head. Not a red so, but still not something I hope will feature in rugby in the long term.

    And most definitely not deliberate on that I 100% agree.


  • Options
    #574
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,556 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Swiwi. wrote: »
    And the Nobel prize in recognition of your heartfelt struggle will follow in due course :p

    They've basically said he lead with his arm instead of his head. Not a red so, but still not something I hope will feature in rugby in the long term.

    And most definitely not deliberate on that I 100% agree.

    Tonight I will sleep soundly for the first time in a long time (since Friday night) knowing that my struggle is now over and the tyrannical forces of evil have been defeated.


  • Options
    #575
    finatron
    Registered Users Posts: 270 ✭✭finatron


    Buer wrote: »
    The 9 didn't have the ball when Henderson started to go in to clear out. In fact, he doesn't even appear to be looking at the ball. You can see ROM stooping into the ruck with his foot beside the ball. He was absolutely in a position that you'd expect a flanker to clear him from. Louis Ludik is already trying to dislodge him.

    Henderson%20Pre_zpso8zdloxo.jpg

    There's nothing to suggest that Iain Henderson went into that ruck to deliberately hurt another player. Especially given that the reason their heads connected was because Ludik rolled ROM backwards and he was falling back with his head raised when Henderson's head went in.

    Just watched it again yes the 9 does have his hand on the ball. Marshall 21 was not playing scurm half.
    I stand by what I said it was reckless and dangerous


  • Options
    #576
    QuinDixie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 843 ✭✭✭QuinDixie


    Tox56 wrote: »
    On this subject, maybe in all of human history

    Apology acknowledged and accepted


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #577
    QuinDixie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 843 ✭✭✭QuinDixie


    Interested Observer wrote: »
    Most ridiculous post made on the subject so far?

    you were saying, munster will be raging.


  • Options
    #578
    QuinDixie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 843 ✭✭✭QuinDixie


    finatron wrote: »
    Just watched it again yes the 9 does have his hand on the ball. Marshall 21 was not playing scurm half.
    I stand by what I said it was reckless and dangerous

    say what you want, it was not dangerous and today proved that.


  • Options
    #579
    Buer
    Registered Users Posts: 24,197 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    finatron wrote: »
    Just watched it again yes the 9 does have his hand on the ball. Marshall 21 was not playing scurm half.
    I stand by what I said it was reckless and dangerous

    You're right. Didn't cop that Pienaar was in at the ball. But you can see how ROM is in a position to disrupt and should be cleared out. I'd agree it was reckless going in with that body position and don't disagree with the card but that's quite a distance from saying he deliberately went in to inflict harm to a player.


  • Options
    #580
    finatron
    Registered Users Posts: 270 ✭✭finatron


    QuinDixie wrote: »
    say what you want, it was not dangerous and today proved that.

    No today he got let off the hook
    Diving into ruck is dangerous .leading with your forearm and head is dangerous . When a player is hit on the head it's dangerous!


  • Options
    #581
    aimee1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,290 ✭✭✭aimee1


    finatron wrote: »
    No today he got let off the hook
    Diving into ruck is dangerous .leading with your forearm and head is dangerous . When a player is hit on the head it's dangerous!

    playing rugby is dangerous. Henderson didnt dive in any more or less then many players clear out rucks. He didnt target the guy's head and video evidence provided to the panel has proved that he didnt deliberately intend to do anything wrong

    Gethin Jenkins in 6n. No card/citing at all.

    http://www.andymcgeady.com/no-arms-clearout-needs-shown-door/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #582
    QuinDixie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 843 ✭✭✭QuinDixie


    finatron wrote: »
    No today he got let off the hook
    Diving into ruck is dangerous .leading with your forearm and head is dangerous . When a player is hit on the head it's dangerous!

    As others have posted, what Henderson did happens all the time in rugby without red cards.
    He was left off the hook because the tackle was not dangerous.


  • Options
    #583
    vienne86
    Registered Users Posts: 17,075 ✭✭✭✭vienne86


    QuinDixie wrote: »
    As others have posted, what Henderson did happens all the time in rugby without red cards.
    He was left off the hook because the tackle was not dangerous.

    I agree with you completely here - justice was done. Delighted for Henderson and for Ulster.


  • Options
    #584
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    finatron wrote: »
    Just watched it again yes the 9 does have his hand on the ball. Marshall 21 was not playing scurm half.
    I stand by what I said it was reckless and dangerous

    Regardless the red player is still 'alive' in the ruck. He was a valid target for a clear out. Just a few unfortunate things happened, including a sloppy clear out attempt from Hendo and ROM popping up.


  • Options
    #585
    total former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    QuinDixie wrote: »
    As others have posted, what Henderson did happens all the time in rugby without red cards.
    He was left off the hook because the tackle was not dangerous.

    Well, the disciplinary committee said that it was not a red card offence; that isn't quite the same as "not dangerous".


  • Options
    #586
    QuinDixie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 843 ✭✭✭QuinDixie


    total former wrote: »
    Well, the disciplinary committee said that it was not a red card offence; that isn't quite the same as "not dangerous".

    I am delighted justice was done, gives ulster a great chance now of winning
    the pro 12.
    It was not a red card offence and was not dangerous play.


  • Options
    #587
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,556 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    For what it's worth apparently Nigel Owens reversed his own opinion of it during the citing, admitting that he got it wrong when he reviewed it after the game.


  • Options
    #588
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    awec wrote: »
    For what it's worth apparently Nigel Owens reversed his own opinion of it during the citing, admitting that he got it wrong when he reviewed it after the game.
    In the Top14 referees are interviewed post match by Canal+ if there's been a questionable call. They will replay the footage to the refs who are generally happy to admit they got a decision wrong and/or explain their reasoning for the decision at the time.


  • Options
    #589
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    In the Top14 referees are interviewed post match by Canal+ if there's been a questionable call. They will replay the footage to the refs who are generally happy to admit they got a decision wrong and/or explain their reasoning for the decision at the time.

    Ugh not sure how that sits with me... Interesting tho!


  • Options
    #590
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    .ak wrote: »
    Ugh not sure how that sits with me... Interesting tho!
    I should clarify. I don't know whether the refs are obliged to respond to an interview request or not.


Advertisement