RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A)
-
@Tim said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Was that a shoulder to the face?
Ref called it a late tackle.
-
Should have been a red card, a month suspension, and a $3bn fine
-
-
@voodoo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Should have been a red card, a month suspension, and a $3bn fine
I'm on twitter right now...
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Tim said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Was that a shoulder to the face?
Ref called it a late tackle.
How can it be a tackle when he jumped for a charge down and made no attempt to tackle the player. 🤔
-
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Victor-Meldrew said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Tim said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Was that a shoulder to the face?
Ref called it a late tackle.
How can it be a tackle when he jumped for a charge down and made no attempt to tackle the player. 🤔
Ref said it was an attempted charge-down and then a late tackle.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Victor-Meldrew said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Tim said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Was that a shoulder to the face?
Ref called it a late tackle.
How can it be a tackle when he jumped for a charge down and made no attempt to tackle the player. 🤔
Ref said it was an attempted charge-down and then a late tackle.
Surprised it wasn't yellow, he didn't use any arms in that late tackle.
-
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Victor-Meldrew said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Tim said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Was that a shoulder to the face?
Ref called it a late tackle.
How can it be a tackle when he jumped for a charge down and made no attempt to tackle the player. 🤔
Because he must have known when he jumped that he would land, and when he landed he would probably take out the kicker.
Sorry, but I do not accept that it is an excuse that he jumped before the kick.
-
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Surprised it wasn't yellow, he didn't use any arms in that late tackle.
Refs always favour SH teams. Read it on Twitter.
-
@Damo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Victor-Meldrew said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Tim said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Was that a shoulder to the face?
Ref called it a late tackle.
How can it be a tackle when he jumped for a charge down and made no attempt to tackle the player. 🤔
Because he must have known when he jumped that he would land, and when he landed he would probably take out the kicker.
Sorry, but I do not accept that it is an excuse that he jumped before the kick.
Should we ban all charge downs because in theory one must be in front of the kicker to charge the ball down?
-
@Damo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
I am happy with that. Players who jump in the air know that they will land eventually. It was very foreseeable that he would probably land and make contact with the kicker. PK is correct IMO.
I think we need to take another look at this stuff. While you're clearly right that there was a chance that he might make contact on his way down, that impact to me is entirely within the spirit of rugby. Any possible collision was NEVER going to cause a significant injury.
Compare that with a charge down attempt where you dive at a players legs or take out his landing area, where the potential for injury is so much worse. That's where penalties should be awarded for mine.
-
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Damo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Victor-Meldrew said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Tim said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Was that a shoulder to the face?
Ref called it a late tackle.
How can it be a tackle when he jumped for a charge down and made no attempt to tackle the player. 🤔
Because he must have known when he jumped that he would land, and when he landed he would probably take out the kicker.
Sorry, but I do not accept that it is an excuse that he jumped before the kick.
Should we ban all charge downs because in theory one must be in front of the kicker to charge the ball down?
No, but if someone attempts a chargedown which is reckless to the safety of the kicker, and then the kicker is taken out, then that is a PK (at least).
-
@Damo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Damo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@chimoaus said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Victor-Meldrew said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Tim said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
Was that a shoulder to the face?
Ref called it a late tackle.
How can it be a tackle when he jumped for a charge down and made no attempt to tackle the player. 🤔
Because he must have known when he jumped that he would land, and when he landed he would probably take out the kicker.
Sorry, but I do not accept that it is an excuse that he jumped before the kick.
Should we ban all charge downs because in theory one must be in front of the kicker to charge the ball down?
No, but if someone attempts a chargedown which is reckless to the safety of the kicker, and then the kicker is taken out, then that is a PK (at least).
I think this hits it - "reckless to the safety".
You're going to get hit in rugby whether you choose to run it up the guts or kick for touch. The important thing is whether the hit is sa"e and "non-reckless"
To me, a charge down attempt like that is pretty "un-reckless"
-
@voodoo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Damo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
I am happy with that. Players who jump in the air know that they will land eventually. It was very foreseeable that he would probably land and make contact with the kicker. PK is correct IMO.
I think we need to take another look at this stuff. While you're clearly right that there was a chance that he might make contact on his way down, that impact to me is entirely within the spirit of rugby. Any possible collision was NEVER going to cause a significant injury.
Compare that with a charge down attempt where you dive at a players legs or take out his landing area, where the potential for injury is so much worse. That's where penalties should be awarded for mine.
I don't buy that. A kicker after he has just kicked is extremely vulnerable. After kicking the player cannot brace for an impact because he is focussing on the kick. There was another one in the England game earlier.
The shoulder didn't miss the head by much.
Both of the types you describe are dangerous.
-
-
@Damo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@voodoo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
@Damo said in RWC: Japan v Samoa (Pool A):
I am happy with that. Players who jump in the air know that they will land eventually. It was very foreseeable that he would probably land and make contact with the kicker. PK is correct IMO.
I think we need to take another look at this stuff. While you're clearly right that there was a chance that he might make contact on his way down, that impact to me is entirely within the spirit of rugby. Any possible collision was NEVER going to cause a significant injury.
Compare that with a charge down attempt where you dive at a players legs or take out his landing area, where the potential for injury is so much worse. That's where penalties should be awarded for mine.
I don't buy that. A kicker after he has just kicked is extremely vulnerable. After kicking the player cannot brace for an impact because he is focussing on the kick. There was another one in the England game earlier.
The shoulder didn't miss the head by much.
Both of the types you describe are dangerous.
Same as a player passing in contact! Unless you brace for an aggressive carry, you're vulnerable. That's not the defenders fault?
