NH club rugby
-
@Bones said in NH club rugby:
@Nepia said in NH club rugby:
@Bones
Pisi was clearly going for the ball.He was on a running line that saw him arrive under the ball.
As MR notes the other guy jumped higher and not jumping as high shouldn't be a red card offence.
Furthermore Pisi braced for the impact of a guy leading with his legs.
Eh no. Pisi ran underneath him and took him out. Is a high tackle ok if it's a tall guy on a short guy? It's not the tall guys fault the other fella is short. If the short guy was taller there'd be no issue eh. Or if the tall guy was shorter.
Pisi should have been aware of the danger, the bullshit about going for the ball screams reckless to me. What kind of a player thinks he's the only guy on the field going to catch a ball? Do players all of a sudden lose all ability to scan and/or use peripheral vision in these circumstances?
I like how people scream the game is becoming soft and then it's proposed we remove jumping. How about we just drill it into players to take responsibility for their actions?
He took him out? How on earth did you come up with that?
He's running for the ball but is only looking to jump slightly in order to maintain his momentum - a move seen probably 10-20 times per game. Just as he leaps he still has eyes on the ball:
Go forward a frame, he still has eyes on the ball:
Another frame you finally see his head start to turn to avoid being kicked in the face.
There are many arguments of which some have merit. I think it's an unfortunate collision, but I also acknowledge that world rugby have changed rules in order to try and take out dangerous unfortunately collisions out of the game - the players do need to be aware of that.
But a RED card, sending off a player? Thats just plain bullshit. As is your "he took him out" call.
-
@MajorRage Hah, yeah a slight jump. Not a fake jump at all.
Again, "he only has eyes for the ball" is bullshit. What player at any level has tunnel vision this limited, let alone pro level. Even if it were the case that he only has eyes for the ball, that's the bloody problem - it's reckless and careless, again, what player thinks they're the only one in the field taking the ball?
-
-
@Bones said in NH club rugby:
@MajorRage Hah, yeah a slight jump. Not a fake jump at all.
Again, "he only has eyes for the ball" is bullshit. What player at any level has tunnel vision this limited, let alone pro level. Even if it were the case that he only has eyes for the ball, that's the bloody problem - it's reckless and careless, again, what player thinks they're the only one in the field taking the ball?
Same argument can be made for the other jumper. He put himself in a dangerous position.
-
@MajorRage said in NH club rugby:
@Bones I agree. That a guy is labelled reckless, careless and is subsequently given a red card for trying to catch a ball is a bloody problem alright.
Nah the problem is you young fellas and your pass the blame culture.
The reason why the other bloke ended up on his noggin is Pisi. Pisi fucked up. Pisi had plenty of opportunity to do things differently, rather than run directly into the path of a jumping player. Pisi pretended to not look or see anywhere else but the tiny ball in the sky, Pisi even pretended to jump to try and sell it. But Pisi saw the other player coming and carried on regardless, knowing the danger.
-
@antipodean Only if someone disregards the laws of rugby.
Am I putting myself in a dangerous position when I fall down next to the ball when tackled? Someone might have every right to kick at that ball. They might fuck up and kick me in the face. Oops sorry my fault!
-
@Bones You make it sound like he did it on purpose knowing he'd get a red card. Not a buyer of that. Just like my wife isn't a buyer of the whole young fella thing.
But it's nice to be called young every now and again. So I'll upvote your post, purely for that.
You old bastard.
-
@Bones said in NH club rugby:
@MajorRage said in NH club rugby:
@Bones I agree. That a guy is labelled reckless, careless and is subsequently given a red card for trying to catch a ball is a bloody problem alright.
Nah the problem is you young fellas and your pass the blame culture.
The reason why the other bloke ended up on his noggin is Pisi. Pisi fucked up. Pisi had plenty of opportunity to do things differently, rather than run directly into the path of a jumping player. Pisi pretended
I'm not pretending to know the intent of Pisi. Particularly when the footage shows him looking for and jumping towards the flight of the ball.
With 20/20 vision, Pisi should have laid immobile on the ground letting his captain complain bitterly that the opposing player ran straight into him and took him out. The only resolution to this current madness is to jump and karate kick the fluffybunny coming at you. Make sure you catch the ball.
@Bones In your analogy, you're not competing for the ball. As the current interpretation stands, any contest is now judged on the outcome.
-
He's not competing for the ball. He's trying to put the other player off doing so. Or did someone remove his blinkers from those screenshots?
Just like a player doing a hard late hit on another player to make him think twice. It's not the tacklers fault, he wasn't even looking at the ball he was looking at where he was going to hit the player!
-
Looking at the video rather than selective screenshots, what nails Pisi is the he turns his back on the collision. It's difficult to argue going for the ball or managing the collision safely in that position. This is not arguing whether the decision was right but under the current guidance to refs it was a red all day long.
-
@Catogrande dunno, I reckon as he leaps he then realises, too late he isnt gonna get it first, so braces for the impact.
-
@taniwharugby Yeah, I'd agree TR but this then means he is not then paying due care and attention to the collision (under the current guidelines). So he's almost automatically a goner. Similar to the Daly red v Argentina. Can't really argue with either..
Whether that's right or wrong is another matter.
-
@Catogrande From that point of argument, your not wrong.
But it's wrong that it's gotten to the point that you have to think about how you jump to catch a ball to avoid being sent off. Not penalised, not yellow carded, sent off.
The sanction, for punching a bloke in the face off the ball, is the same for not jumping high enough to catch a ball.
-
@MajorRage Yep, IMO you're right but it is two different arguments at the moment.
- Was the Pisi incident a red card? yes.
- Are the laws and guidelines around contest for the ball in the air fair to both sides? No
The real poser though is how to make the answer to question 2 a yes.
This sort of thing was never much of an issue back in the day and I've been wondering why that was so. Jumping for the ball was always allowed (I think) and it was certainly prevalent in AFL. So it's not a new thing. Perhaps it is the effect of more intensified coaching, where the coaches feel they can have an immediate impact, sort of "if you jump higher, you'll either get the ball or win a penalty. So that's what you must do". Dunno but maybe blokes didn't used to do this because it is potentially dangerous?
-
@Catogrande has it right IMO.
Personally I think that WR has gone about trying to change thinks for the right reasons but in a clumsy way just as the new tackle laws will play out.
Instead of looking for a solution to a normal part of playing the game that has become dangerous due to the increased abilities and strength of players, they have thrown all responsibility to foresee outcomes on the players. The odd cynical act aside most accidents are happening when two players have both calculated in their own minds that they have the best chance in a competition (isn't that what sport is about?). They are being forced to throw the dice in a normal act of playing the game.
One simple rule change could reduce the number of these accidents and that is to make it that the onside player closest to the place the ball comes down at the time it is kicked has first rights to the ball. If you want to kick and chase then you need to time your run to cover the player on the ground and not take a flying leap at the incoming ball. Defensively midfield bombs would then be encouraged to be taken by any player close by rather than an outside back steaming into the picture from behind.
-
Our sport is getting fucked up when a guy jumping forward with his knee raised is considered fine but a guy who arrives at the ball at the same time is red carded because he turned to shield himself from impact.
Or Pisi did it all deliberately as Bones is implying.
-
@Catogrande 3 really - the "pisi took him out" argument, i.e it wasn't a collision from 2 guys going for the ball.
But to argue the world rugby stance - I think the whole things bullshit. yes, there has been accidents here and though, but it's a contact sport. Surely having 8 strong guys pushing against each creates much more danger for the props/hookers of the world than the collisions in the air. Why aren't world rugby ruling out scrums then? Surely thats safer?
World Rugby have completely fucked this up in my opinion.
Penalise - sure. Yellow Card for obvious, ok I get that. But straight red card. Nup, fuck that.
-
Aki not declaring for Ireland reeks of a negotiation tactic. To squeeze the last few euros out of them that he can.
Nothing more he won't come back to NZ where he has no guarantee of anything and won't play for peanuts for Samoa.
Just his agent earning his paycheck if you ask me.
-
@MajorRage said in NH club rugby:
@Catogrande From that point of argument, your not wrong.
The sanction, for punching a bloke in the face off the ball, is the same for not jumping high enough to catch a ball.
Difference is you can get serious long term injury - especially to the neck, from being taken out in the air, not so much from a punch in the face.
All the law changes are aimed at stoping the really bad injuries - the tackle area will move down due to the increase in high front on tackles meaning head clashes keep happening, the neck roll thing came in to help rucks, the bomb issue to stop guys landing on their head from 5 feet up etc.
Its all about stopping someone eventually breaking his neck in a test. Or George North being a vegetable by 28. Go back to the 80's & early 90's guys got punched a LOT, and rucked shitless, but there were less injuries because most tackles were low, guys were smaller, jumping & catching was only done by Tim Horan, no one got lifted (and dropped) etc.
-
@mooshld said in NH club rugby:
Aki not declaring for Ireland reeks of a negotiation tactic. To squeeze the last few euros out of them that he can.
Nothing more he won't come back to NZ where he has no guarantee of anything and won't play for peanuts for Samoa.
Just his agent earning his paycheck if you ask me.
Not at all. He's signed a new contract - there isn't anything to squeeze. Player payments for test matches are fixed team amounts, there is no difference in these either. He could declare for Samoa and there would be nothing to stop him contractually.
