Archie_tect
De Skieven Architek... aka Penfold + Horace
- Location
- Northumberland
Referee's decision is final, move on... respect from the players for the referee is laudable in rugby, were it so in football .
Rugby World Cup
- Thread starter Blue
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
As a (sort of ex-)ref I said straight red, as do most of my fellow local society members. As an ex-player, and a fan I said yellow. THe IRB ruling from 2009 reiterated by POB before RWC is pretty explicit.
F-I-L will know the expression "You just know (when it is a red card.)" Rolland knew, didn't need to consult, didn't need to wait. It is an instinctive/experience thing. You see something happen and think "Oh no, that's a red, s/he's got to go for doing that." Far too many refs at all levels of the game and including others that have reffed RWC 2011 bottle RC's for dangerous tackles btw. I have too.
Trouble is what the players in the community game see people getting away with on TV is what they try on a Saturday afternoon/Sunday morning
trustysteed
Guest
rugby has so much more going for it than football. respect for the refs, players don't roll around in 'agony', play continues if someone does need medical treatment, TMO decisions add to the drama\suspense of the game much as in cricket without any undue delay, etc. When a player is given a penalty or yellow\red card, there's no surrounding the ref or abusing him, it's usually just the capatain and offending player at most and they always accept the decision and walk away.
I used to enjoy football but now I hate it. I'd love to watch real rugby such as Super 15 or Tri\Quad Nations but I refuse to pay Sky Sports outrageous subscription fees to do so. All they care about is football but are happy to snap up other sports viewing rights to screw everyone over. self-gratification artists.
Need to track down some live internet feeds of the games next year...
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Rolland applied an interpretation of the Laws issued by the IRB. He didn't have to decide for himself. What the IRB said (my italics);
To summarise, the possible scenarios when a tackler horizontally lifts a player off the ground:
The player is lifted and then forced or “speared” into the ground. A red card should be issued for this type of tackle.
The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the player’s safety. A red card should be issued for this type of tackle.
For all other types of dangerous lifting tackles, it may be considered a penalty or yellow card is sufficient.
Referees and Citing Commissioners should not make their decisions based on what they consider was the intention of the offending player. Their decision should be based on an objective assessment (as per Law 10.4 (e)) of the circumstances of the tackle.
trustysteed
Guest
"The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the player’s safety. A red card should be issued for this type of tackle."
and that perfectly sums up the incident so the ref got it right.
and that perfectly sums up the incident so the ref got it right.
U
User482
Guest
I'm not saying the ref was right or wrong. I am saying that he reached for his pocket far too quickly, and that the decision is the subject of debate, even amongst referees. As you've proven!
What do you think about putting players on report?
Edited to add: I understand that this type of tackle is perfectly legitimate in rugby league. If that's the case, are more injuries caused as a result?
What do you think about putting players on report?
Edited to add: I understand that this type of tackle is perfectly legitimate in rugby league. If that's the case, are more injuries caused as a result?
trustysteed
Guest
perhaps he reached for his pocket in the exact amount of time it took him to reach the right decision?
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Soccer values, as we rugby snobs call them are know endemic in union at community level.
Commonest reason fit and healthly refs give up reffing is abuse from players, spectators, CTP's (crazy touchline parents) and non-playing club staff (coaches) during and after games. Attrition rates are hideously high, reffing has a massively steep learning curve even if you've played for years, the only way to learn to referee is to go out and referee and you'll hack hundreds of players off whilst you learn, and, iirc, the RFU say most newly qualified refs don't make it past the end of their second season; most often citing the reasons above for stepping down.
U
User482
Guest
Given the importance of the decision, don't you think he should at least count to 5? If he still feels the same way, issue the card.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Not sure I know what you mean....
Archie_tect
De Skieven Architek... aka Penfold + Horace
- Location
- Northumberland
That's a real blow to my blinkered view of the world Greg... another reality bubble burst
trustysteed
Guest
i'm not sure why people are still bleating like welsh sheep about warburton's sending off. the fact is that despite playing with 14-men, wales had two clear chances to win the game.
first, the conversion attempt by stephen jones following mike phillip's try. he bottled it.
secondly, the possession near frances's try-line and over 22-odd phases of play from which they didn't even attempt a drop goal. they ran out their own time and the chance at winning. they bottled it.
so they got what they deserved.
first, the conversion attempt by stephen jones following mike phillip's try. he bottled it.
secondly, the possession near frances's try-line and over 22-odd phases of play from which they didn't even attempt a drop goal. they ran out their own time and the chance at winning. they bottled it.
so they got what they deserved.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
When you know, you know.
U
User482
Guest
U
User482
Guest
All you're losing is a few seconds. Are you telling me that you've never made a decision you were absolutely sure was right at the time, only to find out later that it wasn't? I've certainly done so as a cricket umpire.
