Springboks v Pumas RC WK 3
-
Interesting test match. Lots of passion and commitment from both teams. Unfortunately also lots of inaccuracy from both. If you were a neutral, probably a thrilling game to watch. Could have gone either way. The Boks will be grateful the Pumas missed a few penalty shots.
As a Bok fan, it was a frustrating. We just can't be that sloppy. I guess one could say it's all still build up for RWC but frankly I'd expect us to be in a better place by now.
Have to say I really feel for Grant Williams. Must have been so thrilled with a first test start only to last about 15 seconds before getting knocked out cold. Hope he's ok. That looked like a nasty blow.
-
-
@Tordah said in Springboks v Pumas RC WK 3-:
Argentina full back cited. It was basically the definition of "reckless".
Good and the correct decision
-
@MiketheSnow said in Springboks v Pumas RC WK 3-:
@Tordah said in Springboks v Pumas RC WK 3-:
Argentina full back cited. It was basically the definition of "reckless".
Good and the correct decision
Except it should've been red in game, a bit late on the call!
Kirwan had an interesting take on how to card this, and high tackles, on Breakdown
-
@Machpants said in Springboks v Pumas RC WK 3-:
Kirwan had an interesting take on how to card this, and high tackles, on Breakdown
what was that?
My initial reaction was 'red' - but then I kinda got the argument that he charged down the ball. I didn't necessarily agree, but could see it.
It is a weird one; seems like there's only 'Red' or 'Play on' with nothing in between. There are some weird rules about players jumping though, highlighted in Lions 2 2017 with the final penalty...
-
The league rules where you have to aim at the feet with a dive, not leap into the air and turn your hip into their head. The tackle one was make the card basically based on how low the tackler is. Not sure I totally agree. It's on YouTube, last ten mins or so
-
So the Argentinian fullback got 2 week ban for cleaning out the Bokke 9.
Basically, they concluded that while he smoked the kicker, he charged the ball down, so it was a low end penalty. Honestly don't know what I think about it; it feels like a weird zone in the laws.
-
@nzzp said in Springboks v Pumas RC WK 3-:
So the Argentinian fullback got 2 week ban for cleaning out the Bokke 9.
Basically, they concluded that while he smoked the kicker, he charged the ball down, so it was a low end penalty. Honestly don't know what I think about it; it feels like a weird zone in the laws.
Jesus, they really need to make their fucking minds up
-
They have to sort out the risk reward ratio
Pronto
-
@MiketheSnow said in Springboks v Pumas RC WK 3:
They have to sort out the risk reward ratio
Pronto
World Rugby just want to look like they're doing something, not actually doing something
-
First time I've seen it.
Makes me think about players competing under a high ball.
Player jumping in has responsibility to protect players in position to catch the ball. You don't get a free pass just for keeping your eye on the ball.
Similar in a tackle. Players have responsibility to avoid the head.
Not sure if I have articulated That well.
That was reckless. Red and 4 weeks.
-
such a shambles really, he actually made the charge down too, yet he has knocked someone out...
-
@booboo said in Springboks v Pumas RC WK 3:
Player jumping in has responsibility to protect players in position to catch the ball. You don't get a free pass just for keeping your eye on the ball.
Yeah - wondering if the degree of responsibility needs to be tied to horizontal velocity. If you are stationary or moving slowly/jumping upwards, then you introduce low risk. People flying in at full speed and jumping are where the real risks happen - maybe that should be a contributing factor to responsibility.
Have not thought this through, just musing. The high ball work seems an absolute lottery at the moment.
