@mimic Haha, I've heard another one today: Jordie only accepting a contract until the end of 2019, because that's when Beauden leaves for Europe; when that happens, Jordie wants to play in the same team as his other brother and will go back to Chch to join the Crusaders.
@taniwharugby All the decisions of the Foul Play Review Committee are published on SANZAAR's website (after a few days, presumably because there's an appeal period): https://sanzarrugby.com/superrugby/documents/judiciary/
The fact that fans don't read decisions doesn't make the decisions inconsistent. If they appear inconsistent, who's fault is that? Certainly not SANZAAR's but everyone just loves to blame them or their judicial officers/committees. I think a lot of fans, and media, just don't realise that they may not understand what they're reading (or the way judicial procedures work). And the media, well, they're often lazy and manipulate "facts" to get more clicks. But most readers know that, don't they? Certainly on the Fern, everyone knows how shit some journos are.
That's why I never post the Stuff, NZH or other media articles about the judicial decisions, because often they do not contain (all) the relevant considerations of the judicial committees. I only post the texts that seem to be quoted literally from the decisions (or press releases that we don't get to see). That makes Planetrugby, for example, a good site, because they usually publish the text, instead of trying to give their own spin on it. But there's nothing I can do, of course, to make people understand what they're reading, except by replying to comments that IMO are incorrect ... (I have a legal background (a.o.), btw).
@mariner4life Have you already seen the decision of the Foul Play Review Committee regarding that red card that was given to Ed Quirk? (I haven't)
@taniwharugby I have read all decisions this year and they haven't been inconsistent at all. Referees have been, but not the Foul Play Review Committee.
@taniwharugby I don't see the head making contact first, I see clearly a shoulder making contact with the head. But for the sake of the argument, for the offending it doesn't make much of a difference. It was a dangerous tackle, without arms, and he made contact with the head. Law 9.13 (A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders) has a mid-range entry point of 6 weeks. It doesn't distinguish between a player being hit in the head with a shoulder or a head clash, considering it was always dangerous. His intent was clear, too. There was nothing accidental about it.
And if you didn't watch that Reds v Sunwolves game, you may want to have a look at this clip. That was a clear head clash, but whether it will make a difference for the outcome of the citing?
@shark Ennor was indeed injured but apparently recovered in time for this game.
I still think Mataele was stopped by Ben Smith because he didn't see him coming (or underestimated Smith's speed?) and therefore didn't run full speed himself. Just a rookie mistake from which he'll learn.
@kiwimurph Yeah, but why dit NZR agree? Jordie really isn't going overseas if they refuse a one-year deal.