Is this a red card?

hydro11

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hooroo" data-cid="576288" data-time="1462155905">
<div>
The thing for me is that both never take their eyes off the ball at any stage. Why does one person have more responsibility to pull out over another? Does it all come down to who can jump the highest?
 
To me it is an awful accident and not even worthy of a penalty.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
It's a bit of a strange one. If both players leap, it is never penalised. You just need to make sure you jump. Even if you jump and take the other player out, you will probably get away with it.

hydro11

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="barbarian" data-cid="576337" data-time="1462164051">
<div>
Well I actually see this as progression towards a 'fair catch' law like they have in the NFL. 
 
I agree the emphasis on the landing position of the player is fraught. If Zas never had his eyes on the ball but jumped into Foley and clattered into him, forcing him to land backwards on his arse, he would have only got a YC, even though the play would have been far more reckless and cynical.
 
I think there is way too much grey area here, and there needs to be a greater emphasis on intent rather than result. IMO if your intent was to make a fair rugby play you should never be red carded, regardless of result. 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Then Emery stays on the field though. I think you should be able to get red carded if your action is dangerous. If Le Roux did a somersault and landed on his feet, then Emery would have only got a yellow which seems strange.

barbarian

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="576340" data-time="1462166397">
<div>
Then Emery stays on the field though. I think you should be able to get red carded if your action is dangerous. If Le Roux did a somersault and landed on his feet, then Emery would have only got a yellow which seems strange.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
But tackling a player in the air is not a 'fair rugby play' to me. Neither is a tip tackle. If you break the law in those ways, a red card should certainly be on the table if the outcome is dangerous.

Bones

I find it odd people think eyes only on the ball is a reason to allow dangerous play. That's a shit excuse. In any case has no one got peripheral vision?

barbarian

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bones" data-cid="576346" data-time="1462168011">
<div>
I find it odd people think eyes only on the ball is a reason to allow dangerous play. That's a shit excuse. In any case has no one got peripheral vision?
</div>
</blockquote>
 
But an action can be both dangerous and legal. You could say that about 90% of our game.

NTA

Thing is, eyes only for the ball is a fairly shit excuse - you need to be aware of your opponent in that situation (said the prop who never chased a kick in his life).

Bones

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="576355" data-time="1462169470">Thing is, eyes only for the ball is a fairly shit excuse - you need to be aware of your opponent in that situation (said the prop who never chased a kick in his life).</blockquote>
Yeah but you could just throw out a big swinging arm at neck height and claim you didn't see anyone else, just a ball being passed to just out of your vision...

Nepia

Not a red to me, the player was watching the ball the entire time and the other guy jumped when they were practically standing next to each other.

Crucial

There is quite a difference between recklessly charging toward a player in the air and having someone get airborne over you when it is too late to react.
 
Yes there is an argument that you should anticipate that another player may jump but does that mean no one can ever catch the ball on the ground if a chaser is coming? Or that you have to put yourself at risk by jumping unnecessarily?

gt12

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hooroo" data-cid="576288" data-time="1462155905">The thing for me is that both never take their eyes off the ball at any stage. Why does one person have more responsibility to pull out over another? Does it all come down to who can jump the highest? 
To me it is an awful accident and not even worthy of a penalty.</blockquote>
 
I agree. I can't see anything there except for a horrible accident. I don't see how the player who slipped is responsible.

taniwharugby

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gt12" data-cid="576391" data-time="1462175958">
<div>
I agree. I can't see anything there except for a horrible accident. I don't see how the player who slipped is responsible.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
is that another part of SA transformation policy, to include an unco too?

mooshld

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="576278" data-time="1462154754">
<div>
From the angle no way it was a red. He had his eyes on the pill the entire time.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="576281" data-time="1462155119">
<div>
I don't think it was red, as 2 things quite clearly happened - eyes were on the ball and he slipped. 
 
I don't entirely blame the ref for giving it, but it doesn't look red to me.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hooroo" data-cid="576288" data-time="1462155905">
<div>
The thing for me is that both never take their eyes off the ball at any stage. Why does one person have more responsibility to pull out over another? Does it all come down to who can jump the highest?
 
To me it is an awful accident and not even worthy of a penalty.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
Its the Jared Payne precedent. Having your eye on the ball the whole time actually acts against you as you are not aware of your surroundings. Therefore deemed more reckless.

Chris B.

Looks to me that the guy's just slipped over at an unfortunate time.
 
Did he get red-carded? Seems incredibly harsh.

Stargazer

Zas gets 2 week ban, misses one Super Rugby game v Sunwolves
 
Article on Planet Rugby website: 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
Two-week ban for Zas after red card 
 May 2 2016 
 Stormers winger Leolin Zas has been suspended for two weeks following his red card for tackling a player in the air last weekend. 
 The SANZAAR Duty Judicial Officer Nigel Hampton QC accepted a guilty plea from Zas for contravening Law 10.4 (i) â€“ Tackling, tapping, pushing or pulling an Opponent jumping for the ball in a lineout or in open play â€“ after he was red carded. 
 Zas made contact with Waratahs fly-half Bernard Foley who was in the air attempting to catch a ball during the match between the Stormers and Waratahs at Newlands on Saturday. 
 Zas has been suspended from all forms of the game for two weeks up to and including Saturday, May 14. 
 SANZAAR Duty Judicial Officer Nigel Hampton QC assessed the case. In his finding, Hampton ruled the following: â€œLeolin Zas (the player) and his representatives appeared before me and admitted a breach of the Law 10.4(I) charge. 
 â€œI found it was a lower end offence on the basis that the video footage showed the playerâ€™s right foot slipping as he was readying to compete for the ball in the air. This resulted in him moving on through and under the opposing player, causing that player to fall dangerously to the ground. Fortunately the opposing player was uninjured. 
 â€œThe low end entry point for the sanction was a three-week suspension. There were no aggravating factors. 
 â€œAs to mitigation, I took into account the playerâ€™s youth and his early guilty plea, as well as his already expressed apology and his contrition. 
 â€œI allowed a reduction of one week, making a suspension from all rugby of two weeks, up to and including Saturday, May 14.â€ 
 â€œThe Stormers have a bye next weekend. I was provided written evidence that the player would have been chosen to play for Western Province in a Currie Cup match against the Natal Sharks that forthcoming weekend. So that match should be, and is, taken into account as a match which he will be unable to play in. In addition, he will be ineligible to play in the Super Rugby match against the Sunwolves on May 14.â€
</blockquote>
 
Ha, there's the "evidence" again ...

antipodean

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="576355" data-time="1462169470">Thing is, eyes only for the ball is a fairly shit excuse - you need to be aware of your opponent in that situation</blockquote> That argument applies to the bloke doing his Nureyev impersonation as well. You can't blindly leap without consideration for your own health.

Baron Silas Greenback

if they are so concerned about these sorts of things.. why not just ban jumping for the ball from a kick from hand? Easier to police, safer.. and not much loss of spectacle.

Rancid Schnitzel

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mooshld" data-cid="576406" data-time="1462179844">
Its the Jared Payne precedent. Having your eye on the ball the whole time actually acts against you as you are not aware of your surroundings. Therefore deemed more reckless.</blockquote>
 
Doesn't that then apply to the other guy as well?

WillieTheWaiter

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crazy Horse" data-cid="576301" data-time="1462157365">
<div>
Not sure I would want to see it but if they are really serious the only way they can fully protect players is to ban jumping. There is something theatrical in seeing a well taken leaping catch that I would hate to see removed from the game.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
can't remember what show it was on but last week at some stage I heard while I was fecking around with kids and tv was on in the background (and sorry I can't remember who...) saying that NZ guys are specifically trained to jump and only lift one knee keeping the other one straight - lowers your centre of gravity and keeps you more stable in the air...
 
SA guys seem to lift both knees up when they go up.

Stargazer

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="WillieTheWaiter" data-cid="576600" data-time="1462251606">
<div>
can't remember what show it was on but last week at some stage I heard while I was fecking around with kids and tv was on in the background (and sorry I can't remember who...) saying that NZ guys are specifically trained to jump and only lift one knee keeping the other one straight - lowers your centre of gravity and keeps you more stable in the air...
 
SA guys seem to lift both knees up when they go up.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Richard Kahui (Breakdown)?

Catogrande

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="576571" data-time="1462242772">
<div>
if they are so concerned about these sorts of things.. why not just ban jumping for the ball from a kick from hand? Easier to police, safer.. and not much loss of spectacle.
</div>
</blockquote>
I was thinking the self-same thing. If the act (jumping) is causing so much grief then simpler to outlaw the practice. Jumping into tackles is contrary to the law still I believe, so why not this also? It would take away the lottery that we have at the moment. Basically if you jump early enough then you are effectively removing the contest for the ball as things stand.

The Silver Fern

Is this a red card?