Munster vs Gloucester, Sat 20th Oct 1pm, VM One / BT Sport 2

shootermacg

joseywhales wrote: »

I mean he only had to bend over another 10 degrees and it would have been below the armpit, it's not somekimpossible adjustment to make, just because he doesn't have the balls to make low hits

The fact that he straightened his arm to his side prior to contact meant he at least considered leading with the shoulder.

You be worried for the ABs in the upcoming game. If this law was in place last year you'd have seen 3 straight reds in dublin.

joseywhales

shootermacg wrote: »

joseywhales wrote: »

I mean he only had to bend over another 10 degrees and it would have been below the armpit, it's not somekimpossible adjustment to make, just because he doesn't have the balls to make low hits

The fact that he straightened his arm to his side prior to contact meant he at least considered leading with the shoulder.

You be worried for the ABs in the upcoming game. If this law was in place last year you'd have seen 3 straight reds in dublin.

Ah they will adjust of course but it is an advantage that our guys have to play under that kind of scrutiny every week, less chance of a slip up, pun intended

uptherebels

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

My difficulty with the way the laws are being applied is that the tackler...and the ref can now possibly be conned...you see a tackle coming... and duck at the last second...take a hit to the head...and opposing player gets a yellow or red

if the ball carrier can duck at the last second and take a shoulder to the face on purpose it means the defender wasn't attempting a tackle.
So in what scenario do you see this occurring?

Mookie Blaylock

uptherebels wrote: »

if the ball carrier can duck at the last second and take a shoulder to the face on purpose it means the defender wasn't attempting a tackle.
So in what scenario do you see this occurring?

I do hope you're joking

blackdog1

uptherebels wrote:

why would you stand in the way? either make a tackle or move out the way. Its not difficult to get your arms up so that there is no question of leading with the shoulder. You cant have a situation where a shoulder to the face is open to interpretation if you are trying to look after players. Everyone knows the situation now, any contact and a card.

You can't escape making contact with the head, especially with people ducking into tackles, charging and opponents with their head down or just simply great feet. The question should be was it aggressive or intentional. To me cipriani just braced for the impact Scannell ran into him. What officials should do is get rid of the choke tackle so people can keep their head up while going into contact without the risk of being held up.

The Lost Sheep

blackdog1 wrote: »

You can't escape making contact with the head, especially with people ducking into tackles, charging and opponents with their head down or just simply great feet. The question should be was it aggressive or intentional. To me cipriani just braced for the impact Scannell ran into him. What officials should do is get rid of the choke tackle so people can keep their head up while going into contact without the risk of being held up.

How would you change the laws to remove the choke tackle?

blackdog1

The Lost Sheep wrote:

How would you change the laws to remove the choke tackle?

I'm not sure but refs could call ruck instead or tackle release fairly easily. If it wasn't rewarded people would stop doing it. Just don't call maul, tackler will eventually get to ground and ruck will be called.

yerrahbah

Maybe I'm being harsh but I wasn't impressed by todays performance.

A few of the lineouts were really bad, it seemed like a total breakdown in communication 


Discipline was very poor, POM attempting a steal on the deck after being told three times by the ref to leave it, Rory Scannell was even telling him to leave it and the Archer "attempt" at a tackle stand out in the mind


At times it looked like Glaws had the extra man


I think Haley played his best game for Munster, Sweetnam looked dangerous and Beirne was just being Beirne. 


Some of Williams passing went astray, but he was very good in defense.


We got what sounds like three more serious injuries today, looking light at openside. Fingers crossed Cloete has an inury free few months

The Lost Sheep

blackdog1 wrote: »

I'm not sure but refs could call ruck instead or tackle release fairly easily. If it wasn't rewarded people would stop doing it. Just don't call maul, tackler will eventually get to ground and ruck will be called.

But it is a maul. I dont see why mauls shouldnt be called. It would still happen in the game.
Tackler would get to ground but if held up and turnover isnt called like in choke tackle situation you are opening games to potential flashpoint thats not needed

swiwi_

Total and utter BS RC in my opinion.

Cipriani didn’t even really attempt a tackle. He was following behind his teammate who did tackle and the Munster player basically fell into his shoulder. I really don’t think Cipriani could have done anything else.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out at the judiciary.

uptherebels

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

I do hope you're joking

No.
What sceneario do you see it happening?

uptherebels

blackdog1 wrote: »

You can't escape making contact with the head, especially with people ducking into tackles, charging and opponents with their head down or just simply great feet. The question should be was it aggressive or intentional. To me cipriani just braced for the impact Scannell ran into him. What officials should do is get rid of the choke tackle so people can keep their head up while going into contact without the risk of being held up.

Its not just about makingng contact with the head, its making contact with head with your shoulder. This is about the tackler not using arms in a tackle. The point is to protect players from unnecessary hits to the head. Aggressiveness and intent doesn't nor shouldn't come into it.

uptherebels

swiwi_ wrote: »

Total and utter BS RC in my opinion.

Cipriani didn’t even really attempt a tackle. He was following behind his teammate who did tackle and the Munster player basically fell into his shoulder. I really don’t think Cipriani could have done anything else.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out at the judiciary.

that he didn't really attempt a tackle is the problem!

how was he following behind his teammate? they were both in the defensive line!
and ciprianis teammate had just began to make a tackle when when the collision occurred so no fall involved at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgW9t6UdnTg&t=69s

irishbucsfan

How on earth are players supposed to follow the rules that they all know exist and are enforced time and again?

Mookie Blaylock

irishbucsfan wrote: »

How on earth are players supposed to follow the rules that they all know exist and are enforced time and again?

Do like Munster and POM did in the last 15 mins...go offside, hit low, give a lot of penalties away...
but make sure you don't tackle above waist height....
or you end up like Archer...

I was fairly annoyed at the red at the time because it did ruin the game as a contest but yeah, it's a red. There was no wrap of the right arm, shoulder to face, no option for the ref.

There's more and more evidence now that staying high in the tackle is just straight up dangerous and cards are being dished out constantly now. Players need to get the message to tackle lower.

Burkie1203

Dax Polite Tenseness wrote: »

I was fairly annoyed at the red at the time because it did ruin the game as a contest but yeah, it's a red. There was no wrap of the right arm, shoulder to face, no option for the ref.

There's more and more evidence now that staying high in the tackle is just straight up dangerous and cards are being dished out constantly now. Players need to get the message to tackle lower.

Twelvetrees should be cited as I thought his one was worse. Archer might get a citing too.

shotgunmcos

ionadnapokot wrote: »

Joe Schmidt must be jumping up and down on his couch

He was at the game with Andy Farell. Seemed happy enough to be there

pickarooney

The only way to really encourage low tackling is to ban offloads somehow. Do we want that?

Burkie1203

pickarooney wrote: »

The only way to really encourage low tackling is to ban offloads somehow. Do we want that?

You can tackle legally and prevent offloading

pickarooney

Burkie1203 wrote: »

You can tackle legally and prevent offloading

Legally, but not low.

The Lost Sheep

pickarooney wrote: »

The only way to really encourage low tackling is to ban offloads somehow. Do we want that?

it isn't the only way

irishbucsfan

pickarooney wrote: »

Legally, but not low.

Ireland’s approach to stopping offloading has nothing to do with tackle height.

And there are perfectly legal and safe ways to prevent offloads as long as you’re willing to lose a couple of meters

razorblunt

There's a gif doing the rounds (think it's Treacy) showing Cipriani had a similar tackle attempt on Stander, where the ball was knocked on.
So while the intent was never there on the head he was definitely bracing with the shoulder.

pickarooney

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ireland’s approach to stopping offloading has nothing to do with tackle height.

And there are perfectly legal and safe ways to prevent offloads as long as you’re willing to lose a couple of meters

Does it not involve two defenders, one low and one high, choke tackling and forcing a maul?

leakyboots

Not often you go to a game with 8 or 9 tries, two yellows and a red and come home saying it was awful, but it was.

I don't think there was a single person there who thought Cipriani deserved red. First yellow was harsh and Archer probably could have gotten red too. Ref was woeful, ruined the match as a spectacle. Going to tmo 7 times, even when the incident happened in front of him, called over 20 penalties. The whole match was so disjointed.

Good result for us, even if Gloucester nearly left with 2. Kudos to their fans, travelled in numbers and were great craic in the pubs last night.

Beirne and Carbery were excellent, POM too. I get the sense there's a couple of fellas on here with an agenda to get Ruddock ahead of him, ye must be missing the turnovers and lineout steals. POM is in great form and is no way losing his place to Ruddock. I'd put Beirne on the bench, I wouldn't break up the Leinster partnership

Pool is there for the taking now

Faugheen

leakyboots wrote: »

Not often you go to a game with 8 or 9 tries, two yellows and a red and come home saying it was awful, but it was.

I don't think there was a single person there who thought Cipriani deserved red. First yellow was harsh and Archer probably could have gotten red too. Ref was woeful, ruined the match as a spectacle. Going to tmo 7 times, even when the incident happened in front of him, called over 20 penalties. The whole match was so disjointed.

Good result for us, even if Gloucester nearly left with 2. Kudos to their fans, travelled in numbers and were great craic in the pubs last night.

Beirne and Carbery were excellent, POM too. I get the sense there's a couple of fellas on here with an agenda to get Ruddock ahead of him, ye must be missing the turnovers and lineout steals. POM is in great form and is no way losing his place to Ruddock. I'd put Beirne on the bench, I wouldn't break up the Leinster partnership

Pool is there for the taking now

If POM keeps giving away penalties the way he has been then he absolutely will lose his place no matter how well he's doing elsewhere. Ireland loses nothing by putting a more disciplined and in form Ruddock in there and we all know which one Joe would prefer.

Having said that, I'm interested to see if POM gives away as many penalties in a green jersey. The reason I say that is because I pointed out yesterday I feel something isn't quite right in the Munster camp because 6 penalties in two games is very out of character for POM.

However don't kid yourself into thinking he'll be nailed on if he keeps giving away penalties like he has been doing.

Mookie Blaylock

There's a few people kidding themselves in here, and it's not the locals.

pickarooney

Can we not just put SOB back in at 6 and forgo the POM v Ruddock craic?

Mookie Blaylock

pickarooney wrote: »

Can we not just put SOB back in at 6 and forgo the POM v Ruddock craic?

A fit SOB is the reason Ruddock won't even make the 23

Faugheen

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

There's a few people kidding themselves in here, and it's not the locals.

Give me reasons why POM won't lose his place if he continues to give away 3 penalties a game?

Any player who does that is going to be under pressure. It's a fact.

If he had no competition I'd absolutely get it, but Ruddock is playing at an exceptionally high level and, as we've seen before, Joe is happy to drop players due to ill-discipline if he knows he has someone who can come into the side without affecting it overall.

You can tell me that POM won't lose his place all you want, but the amount of penalties he's giving away is worrying and I've already said I'd be interested to see if he's better disciplined in a green jersey. I'm not convinced by JVG and it could well be something isn't well in the Munster camp, because it is out of character.

Don't make this a provincial ****e. I've raised a very valid point and, true to your previous form from your multiple accounts over the years, you have nothing to say only smart-hole comments.

Mookie Blaylock

Faugheen wrote: »

Give me reasons why POM won't lose his place if he continues to give away 3 penalties a game?Any player who does that is going to be under pressure. It's a fact.If he had no competition I'd absolutely get it, but Ruddock is playing at an exceptionally high level and, as we've seen before, Joe is happy to drop players due to ill-discipline if he knows he has someone who can come into the side without affecting it overall.You can tell me that POM won't lose his place all you want, but the amount of penalties he's giving away is worrying and I've already said I'd be interested to see if he's better disciplined in a green jersey. I'm not convinced by JVG and it could well be something isn't well in the Munster camp, because it is out of character.Don't make this a provincial ****e. I've raised a very valid point and, true to your previous form from your multiple accounts over the years, you have nothing to say only smart-hole comments.

As usual...you've given nothing...not a jot
Look at how POM plays for Ireland, the difference he makes, then look at the job be does for Munster...and when you realise that it's a different role , and you realise the absolute faith Joe has in him...then you will admit that you are wrong ...and your wild suppositions about the Munster camp are laughable ...

Faugheen

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

Give me reasons why POM won't lose his place if he continues to give away 3 penalties a game?Any player who does that is going to be under pressure. It's a fact.If he had no competition I'd absolutely get it, but Ruddock is playing at an exceptionally high level and, as we've seen before, Joe is happy to drop players due to ill-discipline if he knows he has someone who can come into the side without affecting it overall.You can tell me that POM won't lose his place all you want, but the amount of penalties he's giving away is worrying and I've already said I'd be interested to see if he's better disciplined in a green jersey. I'm not convinced by JVG and it could well be something isn't well in the Munster camp, because it is out of character.Don't make this a provincial ****e. I've raised a very valid point and, true to your previous form from your multiple accounts over the years, you have nothing to say only smart-hole comments.

As usual...you've given nothing...not a jot
Look at how POM plays for Ireland, the difference he makes, then look at the job be does for Munster...and when you realise that it's a different role , and you realise the absolute faith Joe has in him...then you will admit that you are wrong ...and your wild suppositions about the Munster camp are laughable ...

Wrong about what, actually?

Am I wrong in saying POM could be dropped if he keeps giving away penalties? I don't think I am personally.

Have I said that POM should be dropped now? No, I haven't.

In fact, if you bothered to read my posts, you'd see that I've said that I'd like to see if that transforms to the green jersey, so you can wind your chest-pumping neck in there.

All I have said is POM could find himself under pressure if he keeps giving away 3 penalties per game. I have not said he will be dropped off the back of what he's doing for Munster, I've said he could (key word) be if he brings that to an Irish jersey.

Absolutely no issue with POM holding on to the 6 jersey if he doesn't give away as many penalties as he has done for Munster, so really you're arguing a completely different point that I haven't made

Mookie Blaylock

Faugheen wrote: »

Wrong about what, actually?

Am I wrong in saying POM could be dropped if he keeps giving away penalties? I don't think I am personally.

Have I said that POM should be dropped now? No, I haven't.

In fact, if you bothered to read my posts, you'd see that I've said that I'd like to see if that transforms to the green jersey, so you can wind your chest-pumping neck in there.

All I have said is POM could find himself under pressure if he keeps giving away 3 penalties per game. I have not said he will be dropped off the back of what he's doing for Munster, I've said he could (key word) be if he brings that to an Irish jersey.

Absolutely no issue with POM holding on to the 6 jersey if he doesn't give away as many penalties as he has done for Munster, so really you're arguing a completely different point that I haven't made

No...it's simple... And you didn't comprehend..so


As we have seen before, It's irrelevant how many penalties POM gives away in a Munster shirt...it has nothing to do with him being the first forward on Joe's teamsheet...is that clear enough for you?

" But...but... Ruddock....but...but he's brilliant" .... doesn't come into it at all....if SOB is fit ..he doesn't even make the 23 and that is something you'll have to come to terms with.... support group maybe?

Burkie1203

Stander could be cited for this

https://twitter.com/barker316/status/1053641668208013317?s=19

Hurrache

razorblunt wrote: »

There's a gif doing the rounds (think it's Treacy) showing Cipriani had a similar tackle attempt on Stander, where the ball was knocked on.
So while the intent was never there on the head he was definitely bracing with the shoulder.

They've had a chat about the tackle laws on BT prior to the Newcastle game and they showed clips of Cipriani's tackle technique and did say he does brace with his shoulder.

Kauto

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

No...it's simple... And you didn't comprehend..so


As we have seen before, It's irrelevant how many penalties POM gives away in a Munster shirt...it has nothing to do with him being the first forward on Joe's teamsheet...is that clear enough for you?

First name on Joe's team sheet?

Would think there are 3 nailed on starters in the Irish forwards and he is not one of them. Will come under serious pressure for his place this season.

OldRio

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Stander could be cited for this

https://twitter.com/barker316/status/1053641668208013317?s=19

Read the comments. The bitterness. The Whataboutery.

Mookie Blaylock

Kauto wrote: »

First name on Joe's team sheet?

Would think there are 3 nailed on starters in the Irish forwards and he is not one of them. Will come under serious pressure for his place this season.

It's just some mere mortals cannot see his brilliance....even yesterday, when his ear was bleeding after the game
..the blind touched his wound...and could see
...the deaf touched....and could hear
BOD touched....but unfortunately he was still boring as fck...

2 out of 3 ain't bad though!!

Faugheen

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

Wrong about what, actually?

Am I wrong in saying POM could be dropped if he keeps giving away penalties? I don't think I am personally.

Have I said that POM should be dropped now? No, I haven't.

In fact, if you bothered to read my posts, you'd see that I've said that I'd like to see if that transforms to the green jersey, so you can wind your chest-pumping neck in there.

All I have said is POM could find himself under pressure if he keeps giving away 3 penalties per game. I have not said he will be dropped off the back of what he's doing for Munster, I've said he could (key word) be if he brings that to an Irish jersey.

Absolutely no issue with POM holding on to the 6 jersey if he doesn't give away as many penalties as he has done for Munster, so really you're arguing a completely different point that I haven't made

No...it's simple... And you didn't comprehend..so


As we have seen before, It's irrelevant how many penalties POM gives away in a Munster shirt...it has nothing to do with him being the first forward on Joe's teamsheet...is that clear enough for you?

" But...but... Ruddock....but...but he's brilliant" .... doesn't come into it at all....if SOB is fit ..he doesn't even make the 23 and that is something you'll have to come to terms with.... support group maybe?

Again, you have not read my posts.

Learn to read and come back to me so we can have an adult conversation, until then I've no interest conversing with someone who's having a different argument.

And POM isn't the first forward on Joe's team sheet. Furlong is. If you believe otherwise then you're deluded.

Kauto

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

It's just some mere mortals cannot see his brilliance....even yesterday, when his war was bleeding after the game
..the blind touched his wound...and could see
...the deaf touched....and could hear
BOD touched....but unfortunately he was still boring as fck...

2 out of 3 ain't bad though!!

Haha. Will be interesting to see the make up of the back row. Think bar lineout the rest that are in contention are better than him. As for Sean O'Brien he is being brought back nice and slowly. As ROG said last week he will walk back into the team come November if right.
The only true world class back row we have.

Former Former

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Stander could be cited for this

https://twitter.com/barker316/status/1053641668208013317?s=19

Yeah I saw this during the game and was surprised it didn't get a review.

It's not that different from what Cipriani did, is it?

Which could spell trouble for Ireland...

Heymans

Faugheen wrote: »

Again, you have not read my posts.

Learn to read and come back to me so we can have an adult conversation, until then I've no interest conversing with someone who's having a different argument.

And POM isn't the first forward on Joe's team sheet. Furlong is. If you believe otherwise then you're deluded.

Give it up mate. You’ve said he should be dropped for Ruddock and now you’re trying to back yourself out of a corner.

Mookie Blaylock

Former Former wrote: »

Yeah I saw this during the game and was surprised it didn't get a review.

It's not that different from what Cipriani did, is it?

Which could spell trouble for Ireland...

Depends... Stander could definitely be in trouble, as could Twelvetrees... we'll know tomorrow I guess

Faugheen

Heymans wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

Again, you have not read my posts.

Learn to read and come back to me so we can have an adult conversation, until then I've no interest conversing with someone who's having a different argument.

And POM isn't the first forward on Joe's team sheet. Furlong is. If you believe otherwise then you're deluded.

Give it up mate. You’ve said he should be dropped for Ruddock and now you’re trying to back yourself out of a corner.

Show me where I said he should be dropped please

Mookie Blaylock

Faugheen wrote: »

Show me where I said he should be dropped please

So he shouldn't be dropped?! ... excellent...it took you a while but you've finally seen the light, good man.

Heymans

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

So he shouldn't be dropped?! ... excellent...it took you a while but you've finally seen the light, good man.

Haha it takes smarts like this to shut some of the experts on here up

Faugheen

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

Show me where I said he should be dropped please

So he shouldn't be dropped?! ... excellent...it took you a while but you've finally seen the light, good man.

This just proves that you haven't been reading my posts.

Heymans, I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said he should be dropped.

Heymans

Faugheen wrote: »

This just proves that you haven't been reading my posts.

Heymans, I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said he should be dropped.

I wouldn’t engage with a cretin like you. Don’t expect a reply any time soon.

Faugheen

Heymans wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

This just proves that you haven't been reading my posts.

Heymans, I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said he should be dropped.

I wouldn’t engage with a cretin like you. Don’t expect a reply any time soon.

I'll assume that means you can't find a post where I said he should be dropped.

Thanks for popping in. I'm sure your crayons and colouring book are waiting for you in the kitchen.