Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland
-
@derm-mccrum wow your right - I just assumed it was same incident. Apologies.
So instead he got cited for an aerial challenge neither the ref or TMO had an issue with?
An aerial challenge??? I can get a punch or neck roll or something, but an aerial challenge?
This is horse shit.
-
@majorrage said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@derm-mccrum wow your right - I just assumed it was same incident. Apologies.
So instead he got cited for an aerial challenge neither the ref or TMO had an issue with?
An aerial challenge??? I can get a punch or neck roll or something, but an aerial challenge?
This is horse shit.
Eh no sorry, but he didn’t get cited for an aerial challenge either. Maybe have a look at the incident, (2nd of the three), read what the citing was for, and the result of citing panel review.
-
@pukunui said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
I don't know how anyone can seriously argue that Folau didn't take the irish jumper in the air in that situation. Look at his arm wrapped around the guys chest. It is nowhere near the ball which he is trying to catch with his other hand.
As far as the lift goes. If you remove the contact from Folau he comes down fine. Its like blaming BB for jumping too high against france.He took the Irish jumper in the air, without a doubt. Clear penalty. The real question IMO should be if it deserves further sanction.
The problem World Rugby have created is the current Laws judge situations by outcome and not action. It could be the lightest feather touch on a jumper, but if he lands on his head you are off. If you charge blindly into his legs and he flips completely and lands on his feet it's just a penalty.
That, to me, is completely ridiculous.
I'm not outraged about Folau, but I think the judgement is a tad harsh. Clearly the actions of a third party (Stander) had an influence on the outcome, as the actions of ALB had an impact on the Fall/Barrett situation.
His actions deserved a penalty, maybe even a yellow. But I think the mitigating factors should have prevented a red card or suspension, as it clearly wasn't reckless or careless.
Regardless of this situation, the guidelines around aerial challenges are an absolute mess and need to be fixed ASAP. I'd suggest a move to base decisions around intent and action rather than outcome, and an acceptance that sometimes fair challenges will result in dangerous situations.
-
Bullshit. Fuck rugby.
-
@derm-mccrum said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@majorrage said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@derm-mccrum wow your right - I just assumed it was same incident. Apologies.
So instead he got cited for an aerial challenge neither the ref or TMO had an issue with?
An aerial challenge??? I can get a punch or neck roll or something, but an aerial challenge?
This is horse shit.
Eh no sorry, but he didn’t get cited for an aerial challenge either. Maybe have a look at the incident, (2nd of the three), read what the citing was for, and the result of citing panel review.
Got a link?
Every article I’ve read since you corrects me said it was about a challenge on P O’M in the air, as do gifs, links, pics from earlier in the thread.
So I’m lost now with what you are talking about.
-
@majorrage said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@derm-mccrum said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@majorrage said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@derm-mccrum wow your right - I just assumed it was same incident. Apologies.
So instead he got cited for an aerial challenge neither the ref or TMO had an issue with?
An aerial challenge??? I can get a punch or neck roll or something, but an aerial challenge?
This is horse shit.
Eh no sorry, but he didn’t get cited for an aerial challenge either. Maybe have a look at the incident, (2nd of the three), read what the citing was for, and the result of citing panel review.
Got a link?
Every article I’ve read since you corrects me said it was about a challenge on P O’M in the air, as do gifs, links, pics from earlier in the thread.
So I’m lost now with what you are talking about.
I suspect he's trying to say that it's about the use of the arms in the air? Or, I'm lost too.
So, IOW, what you are talking about.
Personally, I think that it's a dangerous way to use him, because (from memory) he put hands on the other jumping player two of the three times. What I don't get is why this is worth a yellow, but the same penalty at a contested line out is only a penalty - or has that also been added to this 'danger in the air' thing?
-
Maybe another way to deal with these situations (and other dangerous play) is to make is completely judged on effect. If your action(s) is judged on field to be the cause of an injury that takes another player out of the game, you are also out of the game (able to be replaced) and will face judiciary for further punishment based on how reckless it was.
If you do the same action twice but don’t cause injury that’s a warning first, then a yellow.
What we have at the moment is the strange situation where you can injure someone out of the game but go off for 10 minutes only. -
@crucial said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
Maybe another way to deal with these situations (and other dangerous play) is to make is completely judged on effect. If your action(s) is judged on field to be the cause of an injury that takes another player out of the game, you are also out of the game (able to be replaced) and will face judiciary for further punishment based on how reckless it was.
If you do the same action twice but don’t cause injury that’s a warning first, then a yellow.
What we have at the moment is the strange situation where you can injure someone out of the game but go off for 10 minutes only.That's an odd way to approach it. Injury is completely random - a bloke can fall square on his head and get up as if nothing had happened, but someone else could fall on their feet and roll an ankle.
Under your system, the first scenario (the far more dangerous one) has no sanction, while the second bloke is off the field?
-
@gt12 said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@majorrage said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@derm-mccrum said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@majorrage said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@derm-mccrum wow your right - I just assumed it was same incident. Apologies.
So instead he got cited for an aerial challenge neither the ref or TMO had an issue with?
An aerial challenge??? I can get a punch or neck roll or something, but an aerial challenge?
This is horse shit.
Eh no sorry, but he didn’t get cited for an aerial challenge either. Maybe have a look at the incident, (2nd of the three), read what the citing was for, and the result of citing panel review.
Got a link?
Every article I’ve read since you corrects me said it was about a challenge on P O’M in the air, as do gifs, links, pics from earlier in the thread.
So I’m lost now with what you are talking about.
> I suspect he's trying to say that it's about the use of the arms in the air? Or, I'm lost too.
So, IOW, what you are talking about.
Personally, I think that it's a dangerous way to use him, because (from memory) he put hands on the other jumping player two of the three times. What I don't get is why this is worth a yellow, but the same penalty at a contested line out is only a penalty - or has that also been added to this 'danger in the air' thing?
Correct - yes I am. Both competed on the challenge for the ball - . No problem there.
Grabbing onto POM with both hands to steady himself on way down that caused POM to tip backwards and fall - problem.
-
@barbarian said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@crucial said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
Maybe another way to deal with these situations (and other dangerous play) is to make is completely judged on effect. If your action(s) is judged on field to be the cause of an injury that takes another player out of the game, you are also out of the game (able to be replaced) and will face judiciary for further punishment based on how reckless it was.
If you do the same action twice but don’t cause injury that’s a warning first, then a yellow.
What we have at the moment is the strange situation where you can injure someone out of the game but go off for 10 minutes only.That's an odd way to approach it. Injury is completely random - a bloke can fall square on his head and get up as if nothing had happened, but someone else could fall on their feet and roll an ankle.
Under your system, the first scenario (the far more dangerous one) has no sanction, while the second bloke is off the field?
True. Any system will throw out anomalies though. Currently (as others have described) you could take someone out and make them do a full flip back to their legs and it would be a penalty.
I'm simply throwing ideas out for others to riff off because it is clear that the current system doesn't work well.
-
So since last weekend, we know that Folau has been cited. Apparently, there were three similar incidents, involving Folau and an Irish player, O'Mahony, contesting for the ball in the air (both jumping). In all three incidents, Folau "touched" the Irish jumper, causing the Irish player to lose balance and fall awkwardly (not all to the same degree). One of the incidents led to a yellow card; another to a Citing Commissioner warning. A yellow card and a warning in one game automatically mean an appointment with the judiciairy. A lot of Aussie media, coaches and players have incorrectly stated that he was cited for just one of the incidents; that's not true. It's the combination of YC and warning that got him there under the WR laws.
Yesterday, Folau was slapped with a one-week ban. Without having seen the decision, we don't know exactly how they have applied sanctions, but my guess is that if it had been just one incident, he'd come off without a suspension. I think it's the aggravating factor that he repeated the dangerous play that got him the one week off.
There may or may not have been a mitigating factor in one of the incidents. It would be interesting to know if there only being one player lifting the Irish jumper is used by the judicial committee as an excuse in the same way ALB touching Fall before he took out B Barrett of the air. It certainly has been used by the Aussie media & fans.
Anyway, Folau/ARU has appealed the ban and we're waiting for that decision.
Here are the clips. Watch Folau's arms.
This still is from one of the incidents. Folau's arm or the single Aussie lifter?
-
@crucial said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
Maybe another way to deal with these situations (and other dangerous play) is to make is completely judged on effect. If your action(s) is judged on field to be the cause of an injury that takes another player out of the game, you are also out of the game (able to be replaced) and will face judiciary for further punishment based on how reckless it was.
If you do the same action twice but don’t cause injury that’s a warning first, then a yellow.
What we have at the moment is the strange situation where you can injure someone out of the game but go off for 10 minutes only.To be honest i don't have as much of a problem with how a player lands being taken into account as most people. Infact i think it is pretty relevant.
It should be a two step process.- Was it an illegal challenge? If yes then:
- What was the severity of the result?
If the player only fell down to his feet or knees it probably wasn't that dangerous but still an illegal challenge. Penalty only.
If he falls on his side or back the danger is higher but still not severe. Yellow card
If he falls on his head/shoulder it is pretty bloody dangerous. Red Card.
This is pretty much how they are reffing it and i think it is about right. The problem i have is with the decision making when it comes to Step 1. Sometime a guy slips or is genuinely beaten to the ball in a genuine contest but they are judged to have illegally contested.
-
@pukunui said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@crucial said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
Maybe another way to deal with these situations (and other dangerous play) is to make is completely judged on effect. If your action(s) is judged on field to be the cause of an injury that takes another player out of the game, you are also out of the game (able to be replaced) and will face judiciary for further punishment based on how reckless it was.
If you do the same action twice but don’t cause injury that’s a warning first, then a yellow.
What we have at the moment is the strange situation where you can injure someone out of the game but go off for 10 minutes only.To be honest i don't have as much of a problem with how a player lands being taken into account as most people. Infact i think it is pretty relevant.
It should be a two step process.- Was it an illegal challenge? If yes then:
- What was the severity of the result?
If the player only fell down to his feet or knees it probably wasn't that dangerous but still an illegal challenge. Penalty only.
If he falls on his side or back the danger is higher but still not severe. Yellow card
If he falls on his head/shoulder it is pretty bloody dangerous. Red Card.
This is pretty much how they are reffing it and i think it is about right. The problem i have is with the decision making when it comes to Step 1. Sometime a guy slips or is genuinely beaten to the ball in a genuine contest but they are judged to have illegally contested.
I have noticed the refs mentioning 'owning the space'. To me that is a very relevant piece of the puzzle. I have advocated previously the concept of first player in position being a factor.
If you are set under the ball on your feet the safety onus is on any approaching player including those that try and leap over you. If you are first into the aerial catching 'area' the safety onus is again on anyone coming second.
Eyes on the ball doesn't matter because you are expected to look to see if you are going to be first into the 'area'. If you aren't you have to ensure safety of the player that beats you there.
The only mid air collisions should be either near simultaneous leaps or ones where the second man thinks they can out leap you. -
@derm-mccrum said in [Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland]
Eh no sorry, but he didn’t get cited for an aerial challenge either. Maybe have a look at the incident, (2nd of the three), read what the citing was for, and the result of citing panel review.
@derm-mccrum said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
Correct - yes I am. Both competed on the challenge for the ball - . No problem there.
Grabbing onto POM with both hands to steady himself on way down that caused POM to tip backwards and fall - problem.
I didn't see Bruce Lee fight Chuck Norris in Way Of The Dragon.
-
@stargazer thanks for posting that - much clearer.
FWIW, Here's what I think.
Challenge 1 - Folau is in textbook position to go for the ball. It's a fucking fantastic, perfectly positioned athletic jump, which I don't want to see ruled out of the game. Look at the height on him, it's magnificent. POM jumps for it as well, and (unsurprisingly) Folau clatters into him. As POM has a fulcrum on his arse of a supporter, the clash upends him.
Challenge 2 (the yellow card) - first half is same again, however once the ball is gone, Folau naturally balances himself by bringing his arm down. This may or may not (as you can't say he clearly and obviously GRABBED him) swing POM around. However, that is the end result, and the evidence does suggest that. So I actually agree with the yellow card with no further sanction here.
Challenge 3 (citing warning) - Folau jumps and bats the ball back. As doing so, his arms come to rest on an already massively unbalanced POM whose being held by his arse only about 2.5 metres above the pitch. As he's already completely unbalanced, any action from Folau is going to upend him.
So, its' quite obvious in my view what needs to change.
- You CANNOT lift players outside lineouts. Absolute no-no. It puts them in dangerous positions.
- Folau should win his appeal. I'm not saying the YC is wrong, in fact I think it's right as he grabbed him in the air. But realistically, if he was either standing on his feet, or jumping by his own momentum without support, he would have been fine.
I'm not going to go all NH media like and suggest the Irish players should be punished - of course not, they did nothing wrong. BUT, their actions contributed just as much as Folau to the up-endings. Aerial battles should NOT be taken out of the game - they are a joy to watch. But why should less athletic forwards be able to compete by artificial methods?
-
@MajorRage key thing in your post above is that some situations can be avoided if lifters are taken out of the equation. If you want to keep the aerial contest then it is much easier to adjudicate if players are expected to make decisions based on what one other player is doing and not complicating things with 'quality of lift'
I would be pissed off if I was expected to pre-judge a poor lift.
Pretty simple law change as well. No lifting outside of lineouts. -
@crucial I don't even necessarily think the Irish lifts were poor. They were just taking on Folau, who is an absolute master in these situations.
I do know that without any lifting, Folau would have won all 3 contests 3-0 and it's highly unlikely that in any situation the Irish fella would have come down hard.
-
This link goes to a pdf-file with the Judicial Committee's decision: https://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/worldrugby/document/2018/06/28/309afac7-797d-4fcc-9c92-5401ec0ee38f/180627-WR-Decision-Israel-Folau.pdf
This is NOT the appeal decision, but the original decision against which Folau has lodged his appeal.
The decision only discusses the most serious incident, the one that led to the Citing Commissioner Warning. The reason for that is that once the CCW is upheld, there is no need to discuss the other ones.
These are IMO the most interesting paragraphs:
This how they determined the sanction (didn't admit guilt, didn't show remorse, nevertheless a 50% reduction):
-
@majorrage said in Who does the TSF want to Win? Aus vs Ireland:
@stargazer thanks for posting that - much clearer.
FWIW, Here's what I think.
Challenge 1 - Folau is in textbook position to go for the ball. It's a fucking fantastic, perfectly positioned athletic jump, which I don't want to see ruled out of the game. Look at the height on him, it's magnificent. POM jumps for it as well, and (unsurprisingly) Folau clatters into him. As POM has a fulcrum on his arse of a supporter, the clash upends him.
Challenge 2 (the yellow card) - first half is same again, however once the ball is gone, Folau naturally balances himself by bringing his arm down. This may or may not (as you can't say he clearly and obviously GRABBED him) swing POM around. However, that is the end result, and the evidence does suggest that. So I actually agree with the yellow card with no further sanction here.
Challenge 3 (citing warning) - Folau jumps and bats the ball back. As doing so, his arms come to rest on an already massively unbalanced POM whose being held by his arse only about 2.5 metres above the pitch. As he's already completely unbalanced, any action from Folau is going to upend him.
So, its' quite obvious in my view what needs to change.
- You CANNOT lift players outside lineouts. Absolute no-no. It puts them in dangerous positions.
- Folau should win his appeal. I'm not saying the YC is wrong, in fact I think it's right as he grabbed him in the air. But realistically, if he was either standing on his feet, or jumping by his own momentum without support, he would have been fine.
I'm not going to go all NH media like and suggest the Irish players should be punished - of course not, they did nothing wrong. BUT, their actions contributed just as much as Folau to the up-endings. Aerial battles should NOT be taken out of the game - they are a joy to watch. But why should less athletic forwards be able to compete by artificial methods?
Just so you know, the order in which Stargazer posted the clips is 3, 2, 1 in terms of their occurrence in the match.
Folau came in from side on POM with his elbow striking his face in opening minute of match - incident 1 - not commented on at all as far as I’m aware. (First time I’ve seen this clip).
Second time was around 9 minutes into match - nothing done by ref or TMO. But it was picked up by CCW and which Folau was subsequently suspended for a week and this was maintained despite Folau’s subsequent appeal. I agree that he unnecessarily pulled POM down.
Third time was around 20 minutes and for which POM had to go off and Folau received a YC.
Looking at the third incident again, the ball quite clearly goes in POMs hands. Folau’s rising right hand whacks into back of POMs hands causing him to lose ball and it falls. Folau’s right hand then closes on POMs right wrist and holds there whilst Folau’s left arm/hand goes around POMs chest (logo on shirt) and pulls sufficiently for POM to rotate in the direction of Folau’s arm as well as backwards from Folau’s hand on POMs wrist. As I see it, he used POM to steady/balance his own descent. YC fully deserved.
Despite what appears my obvious green bias, the question arises as to what happens the next time? None of us mind the competition for the ball, it’s what happens between the two players as a result.
In theory, could POM or any other player use one of his hands to grab hold of Folau to balance himself or indeed to fend him off going for the ball? And in so doing unbalance Folau causing him to fall badly or use him to break his fall?
If lifters were to be banned then does the opposing team decide to not jump and just wait for Folau to land and all pile in?
What’s the position with offside? POM batted/dropped the ball forward towards Aus goal line - so if any Irish player picks it up they’re offside anyway? In which case, what’s the value in jumping in the first place if you’re unlikely to catch and retain it?
-
