Rugby Championship 2019 chat

Exclamation Marc

NeonWolf wrote: »

that's absolute rubbish lads. that's how everyone tackles near their own line. absolute rubbish

Shoulder to the head and face with force with little evidence of trying to wrap... shouldn't be a red card??

awec

bilston wrote: »

I don't get why the commentators think that's harsh.

That was clearly a red card. Elbow to the side of the head.

Yea they’re going on about force.

Have they seen the size of Scott Barrett?

NeonWolf

Bridge93 wrote: »

It wasn’t a tackle, there was no use of the arms

Argentina basically tackle like that every week. don't mind it if its reds consistently . it's like the Cipriani one against Munster. soft as ****.

shootermacg

Morris Moss wrote: »

That's a soft red, hardly any force, a yellow would have been enough

Da fug,,,

NeonWolf

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

Shoulder to the head and face with force with little evidence of trying to wrap... shouldn't be a red card??

if it is there should be 4 or 5 lads off per game.

Exclamation Marc

NeonWolf wrote: »

if it is there should be 4 or 5 lads off per game.

You're clearly watching different games to me and most of the world.

BonnieSituation

NeonWolf wrote: »

Argentina basically tackle like that every week. don't mind it if its reds consistently . it's like the Cipriani one against Munster. soft as ****.

So the defence is "whaddabout Argentina/Munster/[other rugby team]?"

NeonWolf

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

You're clearly watching different games to me and most of the world.

The consensus on planet rugby is that it is soft. I must not be going completely mad. Why wasn't farell carded against SA in twickenham? Snyman last week?

NO consistency to this stuff.

There is no force in that.

Sean Fitzpatrick says its harsh on sky.....

NeonWolf

Greenwood just said if that's a red card there are red cards every break down.

He hatcheted Garces too, saying he's at it every game with big calls.

BonnieSituation

NeonWolf wrote: »

The consensus on planet rugby is that it is soft. I must not be going completely mad. Why wasn't fare carded against SA in twickenham? Snyman last week?

NO consistency to this stuff.

There is no force in that.

Sean Fitzpatrick says its harsh on sky.....

Sean Fitzpatrick the former AB captain?

"It's a red, technically by the laws"- What's the point of the laws then?

shootermacg

The abs have been getting away with cheap shots for far too long.

Morris Moss

NeonWolf wrote: »

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

Shoulder to the head and face with force with little evidence of trying to wrap... shouldn't be a red card??

if it is there should be 4 or 5 lads off per game.

Exactly, it's happened more than once already in this game, garces making a balls of another game.

HighLine

https://twitter.com/RonanOGara10/status/1160138278768656390

uptherebels

NeonWolf wrote: »

Argentina basically tackle like that every week. don't mind it if its reds consistently . it's like the Cipriani one against Munster. soft as ****.

Cipriani didn't tackle properly either, nothing soft about it.

NeonWolf

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So the defence is "whaddabout Argentina/Munster/[other rugby team]?"

Not my defence, I just think its inconsistent and the letter of the law doesn't cover any mitigating or dynamic factors.

I can watch what Farrell did and be told that's safe and the watch what Cipriani or Barrett did and be told that dangerous.

I can't reconcile the supposed differences between the tackles.

NeonWolf

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

Shoulder to the head and face with force with little evidence of trying to wrap... shouldn't be a red card??

i didn't see force at all to be honest. Knee height, cane swinging him around, hwe left the shoulder in. Its OTT

NeonWolf

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Sean Fitzpatrick the former AB captain?

"It's a red, technically by the laws"- What's the point of the laws then?

And greenwood , world cup winning english man.

Weepsie

That's only the 4th Red Card New Zealand have ever received apparently. That's seems preposterously low

swiwi_

So...Rhys Ruddock? Anyone?

ClanofLams

It was a harsh red. Yellow would have been fair enough. If it happened against Ireland suspect there would be different views on here

bilston

HighLine wrote: »

https://twitter.com/RonanOGara10/status/1160138278768656390

To be fair Garces was right next to the incident and did see it live and called it immediately.

NeonWolf

HighLine wrote: »

https://twitter.com/RonanOGara10/status/1160138278768656390

Thank you ROG. Common sense at last.

Cookiemunster

NeonWolf wrote: »

Not my defence, I just think its inconsistent and the letter of the law doesn't cover any mitigating or dynamic factors.

I can watch what Farrell did and be told that's safe and the watch what Cipriani or Barrett did and be told that dangerous.

I can't reconcile the supposed differences between the tackles.

When it comes to the head there are zero mitigating factors. World Rugby has been quite clear on the recently.

The inconstancy in decisions doesn't mean that that this wasn't a red, it means that other incidents should have been red too. If it means 2 or 3 red cards a game it will mean that players will be more careful in the future

NeonWolf

Cookiemunster wrote: »

When it comes to the head there are zero mitigating factors. World Rugby has been quite clear on the recently.

The inconstancy in decisions doesn't mean that that this wasn't a red, it means that other incidents should have been red too. If it means 2 or 3 red cards a game it will mean that players will be more careful in the future

Well im expecting a few Aussies to see the claret card in the second stanza so.

testtech05

Cookiemunster wrote: »

When it comes to the head there are zero mitigating factors. World Rugby has been quite clear on the recently.

The inconstancy in decisions doesn't mean that that this wasn't a red, it means that other incidents should have been red too. If it means 2 or 3 red cards a game it will mean that players will be more careful in the future

Have to agree with this. With all the focus on reducing tackle height and contact with the neck head etc it had to be a red.

The issue is it's not given enough. The other examples given of Farrell etc should be red too imo.

awec

NeonWolf wrote: »

Well im expecting a few Aussies to see the claret card in the second stanza so.

If they tackle with shoulders directly to the head they definitely will.

NeonWolf

Watch how people defend pick and goes close to the line and if there are attempts to wrap .

awec

NeonWolf wrote: »

Watch how people defend pick and goes close to the line and if there are attempts to wrap .

It wasn’t the lack of wrap that caused the red. It was the lack of wrap AND direct head contact with his shoulder.

If he had just not wrapped and caught Hooper in the chest or something he’d have been fine. Yellow at worst.

Cookiemunster

Cookiemunster wrote: »

When it comes to the head there are zero mitigating factors. World Rugby has been quite clear on the recently.

The inconstancy in decisions doesn't mean that that this wasn't a red, it means that other incidents should have been red too. If it means 2 or 3 red cards a game it will mean that players will be more careful in the future

So every player will run in like Stander, head down and low. We don't want to make it so difficult that a player can't realistically be tackled.

The red was harsh, but whatever. Thems the rules. In that situation, the person assisting in the 'tackle' can't do a wrap, they can only realistically try to bind to their own player. It happens all the time, though, and it's a lottery whether it's completely missed, right through to a red.

Great game for the AB's, though. Up against it with a man down is gonna be a good experience leading into the RWC.

Clegg

Australia please.

You're only making them angry. They'll take that out in the World Cup.