Discussion
DocJock said:
TopTrump said:
Why are we not allowed oh mighty one? It totally changed the game, he was bracing for an illegal impact. Well played both sides!
FTFY.Or that he had heard the whistle and made a split second decision to avoid contact and make himself as small a target as possible?
Challo said:
C70R said:
Indeed. Imagine thinking you can tell people what they are allowed to discuss.
I, like every single ex-player who has posted on social media, thought that was an utterly nonsense red card. It wasn't a tackle, there was no foul play, and there was no force. A yellow would have almost been harsh.
Issue is they are trying to protect players, and Steward was unlucky but he turned his shoulder and elbow smashed the Irish player straight in the head. In todays rules it’s a red. I, like every single ex-player who has posted on social media, thought that was an utterly nonsense red card. It wasn't a tackle, there was no foul play, and there was no force. A yellow would have almost been harsh.
Follow the head contact framework, and point out the foul play to me (quoting the appropriate law).
That also ignores the mitigation of a sudden drop in height, which would have made it a yellow at most anyway.
It's a real pity that he copped a concussion, but you can't legislate for rugby incidents like that. There's simply no coaching point for Steward to avoid that one.
Kermit power said:
C70R said:
TopTrump said:
Kermit power said:
Jesus! Can people stop sprouting such utter bloody nonsense just because there's been a card???
We've just had a decent tussle, Ireland have had to fight hard for the win, and it's not the card that made the difference, it was just Ireland's ability to finish their relatively few opportunities more clinically.
Whining about cards is just disrespectful to the players on both sides and the effort they put in.
As for the card itself, if Steward had enough time to turn away like that, then he had enough time to dip and tackle. His fault, end of.
Why are we not allowed oh mighty one? It totally changed the game, he was bracing for impact. Well played both sides! We've just had a decent tussle, Ireland have had to fight hard for the win, and it's not the card that made the difference, it was just Ireland's ability to finish their relatively few opportunities more clinically.
Whining about cards is just disrespectful to the players on both sides and the effort they put in.
As for the card itself, if Steward had enough time to turn away like that, then he had enough time to dip and tackle. His fault, end of.
I, like every single ex-player who has posted on social media, thought that was an utterly nonsense red card. It wasn't a tackle, there was no foul play, and there was no force. A yellow would have almost been harsh.
Whoever said "Oh, it's okay to pick up a forward pass and run into someone now, is it", yes! Of course it bloody is, and always has been! That's what rugby is! It'll be a mantra at clubs across the country in the morning... "Run straight, take the contact, go to ground and present the ball". No club in the land is going to be leading with "be careful not to run into anyone when you've got the ball"!
One of the very first things we teach kids is "play to the whistle". If Keenan had decided it looked forward so he'd better just leave it, then Steward had picked the ball up on the advantage and run the ball up the pitch to score, he would've been quite rightly criticised for it. The only option available to him was to pick up the ball and go.
Once Keenan had picked the ball up and gone, the only option available to Steward was to tackle him, and the fact that he didn't, and instead tried to turn round is just utterly incomprehensible. It's not as though the risk of facing a red card for head contact - whether intentional or otherwise - is new, and Steward isn't a plumber playing at level 6 for the love of the game, he's supposed to be a professional at the peak of the game. If he has the time to turn sideways on to the oncoming player, then he also had time to dip in to make the tackle.
Forget your feelings and hand-wringing, and actually follow the laws as they are laid out.
Where is the foul play, specifically (quote the actual law)? Why isn't the sudden dip in height mitigation to a yellow?
PhilboSE said:
DocJock said:
TopTrump said:
Why are we not allowed oh mighty one? It totally changed the game, he was bracing for an illegal impact. Well played both sides!
FTFY.Or that he had heard the whistle and made a split second decision to avoid contact and make himself as small a target as possible?
Dangerous tackle? No wrap, shoulder to the head, so yes.
Avoid contact? Not enough time, but he could have taken contact with a passive tackle. The fact he opted to decline a legal tackle and lead with his shoulder without attemting to wrap was (by the current letter of the Law) foul play.
I have some sympathy for Freddie, he had very little time to react, but unfortunately for him, he made the wrong decision and paid the price.
PhilboSE said:
Bonefish Blues said:
The ref indicated and blew up for the forward pass just before contact occurred. See here:
https://www.planetrugby.com/news/watch-fans-divide...
Makes no difference in the light of the subsequent foul play, of course.
Which is why, quite possibly (or probably) Steward was pulling out of the tackle and trying to protect himself from the imminent collision. Quite obviously there was no intent.https://www.planetrugby.com/news/watch-fans-divide...
Makes no difference in the light of the subsequent foul play, of course.
The ref could have easily called it as a rugby incident.
Or he could have gone to the protocol and decided that the mitigation was that there had been a forward pass, the ref had blown, Steward was upright and trying to avoid a collision, lack of intent, and Keenan was head down already. Could have called it as a penalty or yellow.
But he decided that it was in the same bracket as the Houas head on head clearout a few games earlier, one with premeditation against an opponent who was out of the game and not expecting contact, and with a huge degree of risk.
If that last interpretation is how the rules are expected to operate then it needs to be changed or the TMO needs to look at all the other arm on head interactions that take place during any game. Bizarrely I can see almost no mention of the neck wrap tackle on Watson that led to the second Irish try.
There are two specific pieces of mitigation which should have seen that given as a yellow at most. I'd still argue that it wasn't even worth a penalty.
If you actually follow the laws, rather than your emotions, you can't disagree with these pieces of mitigation:
1. Sudden drop in height of the ball carrier (red down to yellow)
2. Reactionary tackle (red down to yellow)
It was a terrible red.
DocJock said:
PhilboSE said:
DocJock said:
TopTrump said:
Why are we not allowed oh mighty one? It totally changed the game, he was bracing for an illegal impact. Well played both sides!
FTFY.Or that he had heard the whistle and made a split second decision to avoid contact and make himself as small a target as possible?
Dangerous tackle? No wrap, shoulder to the head, so yes.
Avoid contact? Not enough time, but he could have taken contact with a passive tackle. The fact he opted to decline a legal tackle and lead with his shoulder without attemting to wrap was (by the current letter of the Law) foul play.
I have some sympathy for Freddie, he had very little time to react, but unfortunately for him, he made the wrong decision and paid the price.
As for your point about "passive tackles" (which aren't mentioned once in the head contact framework, by the way), Steward was leaning back at point of contact. How much more "passive" can he be?
C70R said:
It's a real pity that he copped a concussion, but you can't legislate for rugby incidents like that. There's simply no coaching point for Steward to avoid that one.
They have legislated for contacts like that, and so it was clearly a red by the laws of the game. And the reason they've legislated for incidents like that is because concussions have real long term impacts on health.C70R said:
You're not actually following the laws there, you know?
As for your point about "passive tackles" (which aren't mentioned once in the head contact framework, by the way), Steward was leaning back at point of contact. How much more "passive" can he be?
Steward had both feet in the air and was travelling forward, leading with shoulder. How is that passive? As for your point about "passive tackles" (which aren't mentioned once in the head contact framework, by the way), Steward was leaning back at point of contact. How much more "passive" can he be?
Evanivitch said:
C70R said:
It's a real pity that he copped a concussion, but you can't legislate for rugby incidents like that. There's simply no coaching point for Steward to avoid that one.
They have legislated for contacts like that, and so it was clearly a red by the laws of the game. And the reason they've legislated for incidents like that is because concussions have real long term impacts on health.I'm one of the biggest defenders of head contact in rugby, but that was farcically handled to the point of completely ignoring the head contact framework that World Rugby put in place. There was clear mitigation for it not to be a red, but Peyper decided not to follow the framework.
I'm not even English, and I'm disappointed in how it was handled.
Evanivitch said:
C70R said:
You're not actually following the laws there, you know?
As for your point about "passive tackles" (which aren't mentioned once in the head contact framework, by the way), Steward was leaning back at point of contact. How much more "passive" can he be?
Steward had both feet in the air and was travelling forward, leading with shoulder. How is that passive? As for your point about "passive tackles" (which aren't mentioned once in the head contact framework, by the way), Steward was leaning back at point of contact. How much more "passive" can he be?
Far too many folks in this thread are demonstrating poor knowledge of the laws.
You can't just say "that's a red all day under the current laws", when the laws themselves show clear and obvious mitigation for it to have been a yellow.
For what it's worth, I'm fairly confident Ireland would have eventually won that game without the help of the referee.
I'm just infuriated, as a neutral fan, of having yet another contest ruined on the biggest day of rugby in the calender, by a referee determined to ignore the laws.
After the farce of Gardiner deciding to only referee one side earlier in the day, that's two out of three matches spoiled by poor officiating.
I'm just infuriated, as a neutral fan, of having yet another contest ruined on the biggest day of rugby in the calender, by a referee determined to ignore the laws.
After the farce of Gardiner deciding to only referee one side earlier in the day, that's two out of three matches spoiled by poor officiating.
C70R said:
You're not actually following the laws there, you know?
Always happy to learn...???C70R said:
As for your point about "passive tackles" (which aren't mentioned once in the head contact framework, by the way), Steward was leaning back at point of contact. How much more "passive" can he be?
I never said they were part of the framework, but if he had taken that option,rather than turning his shoulder into the impact then no dangerous contact would have occurred and the protocols would not have needed to be invoked. Turning to hit someone in the face with your shoulder/upper arm, leaning back of not, is in no way 'passive'.To make it even worse, there were two pieces of head contact on English players that weren't even reviewed by the TMO.
Sexton on Curry in a tackle, which could have easily been yellow, was quite bad. But Ludlam got absolutely smashed in the face by a charging shoulder while trapped in a ruck, which was a stone-cold red.
I'm sure the officials didn't set out to be biased, but incompetence like this ruins our sport.
Sexton on Curry in a tackle, which could have easily been yellow, was quite bad. But Ludlam got absolutely smashed in the face by a charging shoulder while trapped in a ruck, which was a stone-cold red.
I'm sure the officials didn't set out to be biased, but incompetence like this ruins our sport.
DocJock said:
C70R said:
You're not actually following the laws there, you know?
Always happy to learn...???C70R said:
As for your point about "passive tackles" (which aren't mentioned once in the head contact framework, by the way), Steward was leaning back at point of contact. How much more "passive" can he be?
I never said they were part of the framework, but if he had taken that option,rather than turning his shoulder into the impact then no dangerous contact would have occurred and the protocols would not have needed to be invoked. Turning to hit someone in the face with your shoulder/upper arm, leaning back of not, is in no way 'passive'.There was clear justification for a mitigation to yellow, and it was ignored by an incompetent refereeing team. I'm annoyed, and I'd imagine England fans are incensed.
There was no 'player lowering' mitigation.
Keenan was not lowering his height into contact. He had bent to pick up the ball, and if anything was slightly rising into the contact. Steward should have anticipated the height at contact as he could see that Keenan would have to bend to collect the ball.
Keenan was not lowering his height into contact. He had bent to pick up the ball, and if anything was slightly rising into the contact. Steward should have anticipated the height at contact as he could see that Keenan would have to bend to collect the ball.
DocJock said:
Intentionally leading with the shoulder? Well, yes. He actively turned to make his shoulder the point of contact.
Dangerous tackle? No wrap, shoulder to the head, so yes.
Avoid contact? Not enough time, but he could have taken contact with a passive tackle. The fact he opted to decline a legal tackle and lead with his shoulder without attemting to wrap was (by the current letter of the Law) foul play.
I have some sympathy for Freddie, he had very little time to react, but unfortunately for him, he made the wrong decision and paid the price.
You think Steward was trying to tackle Keenan?Dangerous tackle? No wrap, shoulder to the head, so yes.
Avoid contact? Not enough time, but he could have taken contact with a passive tackle. The fact he opted to decline a legal tackle and lead with his shoulder without attemting to wrap was (by the current letter of the Law) foul play.
I have some sympathy for Freddie, he had very little time to react, but unfortunately for him, he made the wrong decision and paid the price.
DocJock said:
There was no 'player lowering' mitigation.
Keenan was not lowering his height into contact. He had bent to pick up the ball, and if anything was slightly rising into the contact. Steward should have anticipated the height at contact as he could see that Keenan would have to bend to collect the ball.
He did anticipate. He was thinking, bugger, this guy is going to hit me at full pelt I'm the ribs and the whistle has gone. He was on a lose, lose situation. He could have taken the tackle and they both got hurt. However, due to him bracing and moving his body to try and mitigate the impact, he actually made it worse for the Irish player. So it's a res card. A very unfortunate one. I don't agree with it though, and I think refs should be able to take account of the situation. The Irish players and crowd didn't help.Keenan was not lowering his height into contact. He had bent to pick up the ball, and if anything was slightly rising into the contact. Steward should have anticipated the height at contact as he could see that Keenan would have to bend to collect the ball.
Road2Ruin said:
DocJock said:
There was no 'player lowering' mitigation.
Keenan was not lowering his height into contact. He had bent to pick up the ball, and if anything was slightly rising into the contact. Steward should have anticipated the height at contact as he could see that Keenan would have to bend to collect the ball.
He did anticipate. He was thinking, bugger, this guy is going to hit me at full pelt I'm the ribs and the whistle has gone. He was on a lose, lose situation. He could have taken the tackle and they both got hurt. However, due to him bracing and moving his body to try and mitigate the impact, he actually made it worse for the Irish player. So it's a res card. A very unfortunate one. I don't agree with it though, and I think refs should be able to take account of the situation. The Irish players and crowd didn't help.Keenan was not lowering his height into contact. He had bent to pick up the ball, and if anything was slightly rising into the contact. Steward should have anticipated the height at contact as he could see that Keenan would have to bend to collect the ball.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff