Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth)
-
@bones It's basically a three card system, where the third card is for "blatant filth" - the stuff you got sent off for 20+ years ago.
Punching someone in the face, running up and kicking someone on the ground away from the ball, biting, eye-gouging, Hopoate's.
I'm not going to write a rule book on it - the line will be determined in the same way as the current line between yellow and red.
-
@chris-b 20 minutes without a player is still a massive disincentive in my book. I doubt there will be many out there saying, hey I got away with [insert filth] and we only got 20 minutes.
Said filth will be dealt with by match review and judiciary. Reputation damage (unless you’re a league player) and all the unwanted media attention that makes coaches/selectors more uneasy these days.
-
@act-crusader said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@chris-b 20 minutes without a player is still a massive disincentive in my book. I doubt there will be many out there saying, hey I got away with [insert filth] and we only got 20 minutes.
Said filth will be dealt with by match review and judiciary. Reputation damage (unless you’re a league player) and all the unwanted media attention that makes coaches/selectors more uneasy these days.
@Chris-B does have a point though, although instances less likely, brain snaps will happen in emotive circumstances and you should be ready for it. Im not ok to leave blatant filth just in the hands of match reveiw judiciary, if you see someone doing a Mike Tyson, Hopate etc
-
@bayimports said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@act-crusader said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@chris-b 20 minutes without a player is still a massive disincentive in my book. I doubt there will be many out there saying, hey I got away with [insert filth] and we only got 20 minutes.
Said filth will be dealt with by match review and judiciary. Reputation damage (unless you’re a league player) and all the unwanted media attention that makes coaches/selectors more uneasy these days.
@Chris-B does have a point though, although instances less likely, brain snaps will happen in emotive circumstances and you should be ready for it. Im not ok to leave blatant filth just in the hands of match reveiw judiciary, if you see someone doing a Mike Tyson, Hopate etc
I don’t think it is though. We are already in the situation that the ref and TMO are going to make a call - penalty only, 10 minutes, 20 minutes. I just think down a man for 20 plus the consequences of the judiciary should weigh heavily on players minds.
Yes there are snaps and red mist moments and they should be 20 plus heavy suspensions.
-
Despite this ruling I also have some sympathy for Murphy, and I feel dirty saying that. In the video Owens says it was a RC, and I was reading that a group of NZ refs were divided on what they would have done (play on or RC). Unfortunately WR won't see the merit of the 20 min RC in situations like this.
-
@act-crusader said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@bayimports said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@act-crusader said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@chris-b 20 minutes without a player is still a massive disincentive in my book. I doubt there will be many out there saying, hey I got away with [insert filth] and we only got 20 minutes.
Said filth will be dealt with by match review and judiciary. Reputation damage (unless you’re a league player) and all the unwanted media attention that makes coaches/selectors more uneasy these days.
@Chris-B does have a point though, although instances less likely, brain snaps will happen in emotive circumstances and you should be ready for it. Im not ok to leave blatant filth just in the hands of match reveiw judiciary, if you see someone doing a Mike Tyson, Hopate etc
I don’t think it is though. We are already in the situation that the ref and TMO are going to make a call - penalty only, 10 minutes, 20 minutes. I just think down a man for 20 plus the consequences of the judiciary should weigh heavily on players minds.
Yes there are snaps and red mist moments and they should be 20 plus heavy suspensions.
Agree to disagree on this one then , I am all for heavy suspensions but for certain infringements I dont think a team should get a player back, 20 minutes is not long enough for me. I do see plenty of reds now that are clearly not intentional or are a tackle slipped up etc where the 20 minute rule works well, but for the intentional very bad stuff, youre also letting your team down and that should be reflected immediately. But thats my opinion.
-
@gt12 said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@kirwan said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@kiwimurph so basically it shouldn't have been a red card? Who'd be a ref these days.
After them saying that intent doesn't matter, now it does? Fun job.
its mad, so all those tackles in the air where the tackler has only watch the ball and not seen the guy jumping over the top of him...no problem, rules where the ref is having to judge what was going on in someone mind, ie intent...is just asking for trouble
-
@bovidae said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
Despite this ruling I also have some sympathy for Murphy, and I feel dirty saying that. In the video Owens says it was a RC, and I was reading that a group of NZ refs were divided on what they would have done (play on or RC). Unfortunately WR won't see the merit of the 20 min RC in situations like this.
I'd have some sympathy if he'd acknowledged it was a clear accident without malice or recklessness. He's a shit XVs ref and this is a growing problem because WR sees 7s as a pathway for refs. They're different games and refereed accordingly.
-
Yep - I feel sorry for the referees, including Murphy in this instance. How does he instantly determine if the foot out is to assist balance in landing, or to prevent an oncoming player from legally tackling him once he hits the ground, or malicious intent for the approaching player? I think they should have used common-sense and issued yellow - but if the guys reviewing them want to see a hard-line rule interpretation for a huge viewing audience, what are they to do?
Who wants to become a referee or TMO?
-
@arhs Yep I think a yellow and placed on report would be the best option in these unusual circumstances. I am just happy we had the 20 minute rule. Imagine if we had lost him for the entire game, I truly believe the players will be far less likely to switch off knowing they only need to hold on for 10/20 minutes as opposed to being down to 14 for 60 minutes.
-
@chimoaus said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@arhs Yep I think a yellow and placed on report would be the best option in these unusual circumstances. I am just happy we had the 20 minute rule. Imagine if we had lost him for the entire game, I truly believe the players will be far less likely to switch off knowing they only need to hold on for 10/20 minutes as opposed to being down to 14 for 60 minutes.
yeah I think this is exactly where the 20 minute red helps refs, many refs and commentators saying intent does not matter, but SANZAR says Jordie no further punishment because of lack of intent. The only thing clear is that the rules are not clear. The only saving grace as you mention that we did not lose a player for the whole game to an accident and not an act of direct intentional foul play.
20 minute red card has hopefully shown those who dont want it, why it is needed.
-
@act-crusader said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@chris-b 20 minutes without a player is still a massive disincentive in my book. I doubt there will be many out there saying, hey I got away with [insert filth] and we only got 20 minutes.
Said filth will be dealt with by match review and judiciary. Reputation damage (unless you’re a league player) and all the unwanted media attention that makes coaches/selectors more uneasy these days.
I 100% agree with this. The determination of the length of suspension in case of dirty, intentional offending is not only reflected in different offences or aggravating factors, but also the application of the top-end entry point. If Jordie had clearly kicked Koroibete intentionally and with malice, he would have been cited under Law 9.12 (physical abuse: kicking) and the top-end entry point for that offence is 12 + weeks with a maximum of 52 weeks.
And even then, there's this:
Notwithstanding the Sanctions in Appendix 1 and/or the provisions of Regulation 17.19 in cases where the player’s actions constitute mid-range or top end offending for any type of offence which had the potential to result and, in fact, did result in serious/gross consequences to the health of the victim, the Judicial Officers and/or Disciplinary Committees may impose any period of suspension including a suspension for life.
-
@chimoaus said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@arhs Yep I think a yellow and placed on report would be the best option in these unusual circumstances. I am just happy we had the 20 minute rule. Imagine if we had lost him for the entire game, I truly believe the players will be far less likely to switch off knowing they only need to hold on for 10/20 minutes as opposed to being down to 14 for 60 minutes.
Do you think they actually switch off? Maybe at some club game on the weekend if you’re down a man, but I’d be very surprised if they did at test level.
-
@no-quarter said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@kiwiinmelb said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@no-quarter said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
Jordie didn't lead with his foot, he kicked it out instinctively at the last second trying to avoid landing on his back.
I remember When Billy slater was on the same charge ,
Then someone with too much time on his hands made a video of him doing exactly the same thing with nobody anywhere near him ,
dangerous and deliberate are two different things
Slater was a grub though so not surprised people thought the worse. He was the king of sliding feet first into players diving to score tries.
He did and it looked fucked but it wasn’t illegal at the time, and he didn’t actually hurt anyone , just looked fucked ,
You would’ve thought a coach would’ve stepped in and said , don’t do that
-
@act-crusader said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@chimoaus said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@arhs Yep I think a yellow and placed on report would be the best option in these unusual circumstances. I am just happy we had the 20 minute rule. Imagine if we had lost him for the entire game, I truly believe the players will be far less likely to switch off knowing they only need to hold on for 10/20 minutes as opposed to being down to 14 for 60 minutes.
Do you think they actually switch off? Maybe at some club game on the weekend if you’re down a man, but I’d be very surprised if they did at test level.
Perhaps switching off isn't the best term as yes, these professionals would be unlikely to "switch off". However, I am curious how things such as an early red impact their thoughts about the likelihood of winning vs tough opposition. If a player has doubts about the outcome I wonder if this impacts how they perform. The Perth game where SB was sent off springs to mind. I'm not sure how much of that was the fact it was 14 vs 15 or if some of it was mental.
-
@kiwimurph said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@damo said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
Mark my words. They barely even need to have the hearing.
Koroibete's red resulted in no suspension and now the same story for Jordie.
Well I'll be.
Clearly I got the prediction wrong. I don't agree with the decision of the judiciary personally, but that's OK.
-
F*ck me. I hate the way the ABs control world rugby. Worse judiciary decision ever. Clear as day red card, a pre-planned assault - Koroibete could have been blinded, suffered life-changing injuries. Just shocking.
-
@billy-tell said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
F*ck me. I hate the way the ABs control world rugby. Worse judiciary decision ever. Clear as day red card, a pre-planned assault - Koroibete could have been blinded, suffered life-changing injuries. Just shocking.
He could've DOID!
-
@act-crusader said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@crucial said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@kev said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@crucial said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@taniwharugby said in Wallabies vs All Blacks 3 (Perth):
@crucial I wonder what would have happened in that scenario knocking himself out on the jumping players knee that was raised for the jump...because if you follow that process
That one is down to timing I reckon. If both players are still looking to legally compete and one jumps a split second earlier takes the space and knees the other in the head then that is dangerous play. The jumper knows full well he is jumping into another player and needs to be careful. The unusual thing here was the defender running into the 'zone' after it was clear there was no contest. He was only ever going to take the landing space or make an illegal tackle. He shouldn't have been there.
It is kind of like hitting a kid with your car on a road. The kid shouldn't be there but how much of the fault is yours as you have the onus to take care?It’s very hard to jump without raising the knee. That is fine as technique for me. Accidental contact and in that case the winger would be interfering with jumper. But stretching your leg out front with sprigs is just dangerous. As soon as you do that it’s your fault. The winger can come close as he either competes or doesn’t interfere with jumper. Issue with JB was all about technique.
If he had jumped with his foot out sprigs up then I agree. But as I see it he stuck his foot out after jumping and winning the space in a awkward instinctive way to get balance. Like how if you are walking across a log and start swinging your arms around.
It’s not unnatural for some people when they jump high for their leg to swing out high like that. I’m not a tall guy but when I was doing jump training I was taught to do this, mine never swung out far though.
Look at these guys and the difference in how far out their non landing leg goes out.
You’re welcome Jordie and all his fluffers and the DMac haters
-
Lawyer Aaron Lloyd (who wasn't involved in this case) about the Jordie decision:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1cIL770GpbG5y8XQiIPaEb?si=_WmmnOj2TLayhDL2cZHR2w&dl_branch=1&nd=1
