Official 2011 Rugby World Cup Thread

[Creag]

Yeah. Great news. At least one Saffer into the final

 

[DJ...]

Those of you trying to make a correlation between injuries and punishment are being rather daft. Injuries, or lack thereof should never, ever dictate the form of punishment imposed. If Clerc had have broken his neck, would we be having this discussion? Unlikely. The fact that he didn't does not mitigate him, and rightfully so. The reverse is true too.

I have no problem with the red card shown, nor with the way in which players and teams are punished. Picking a player up, tipping him 90 degrees and dropping him like a dead weight on his head/neck is uncalled for and is rightfully dealt with by a red card. There is no law that states that a red card should only be issued if the player drives him into the ground.

And why change the red card rule and other penalty rules so drastically? I do not believe that a penalty try should be awarded for penalisable infringements in the red zone, purely because refs can and do make mistakes. That kind of rule could potentially hand refs even more dictation over the game. Repeat offences in the red zone on the other hand should be dealt with more severely. As it stands it's at the ref's discretion, however IMO it should be a 3 strike rule, and only 3 for each half. Thereafter any repeat infringes result in a penalty try and a sin bin. Then it's fair and it will result in fewer deliberate infringements to prevent tries from being scored.

I haven't read all of the suggestions in the thread yet, but I don't have an issue with the way that cards are handled. Unless of course it's Bryce Lawrence on the pitch.

My money says that Bryce Lawrence will not ref another Super15 match, which is what it looks like our SA ref association is pushing for. His days of reffing competitive rugby are over. Andre Watson has already publicly stated that he won't ever ref another RWC match and that they're submitting their own report to the IRB relating to his refereeing overall. I think a lot can be read into that. The one IRB dictatorship rule I'd like to see done away with is the public discussions of refereeing performances. Every player and coach is entitled to his opinion and they should not be banned from voicing it...

 

[DJ...]

My beef with the call is that it was totally accidental. The guy slipped out of his grasp. It was a yellow and not a red card offense.

He most certainly didn't slip and turn 90 degrees. Warburton quite clearly tipped him intentionally. The fact that he slipped so he couldn't place him safely is irrelevant in terms of safety. At the end of the day, he tipped him intentionally and dropped him on his head. The rules dictate that is a straight red, or at least the strict enforcement directive issued by the IRB (to all teams) states so.

The forces of one's own body weight combined with the kinetic energy of being tipped are immense and that sort of tackling does not belong in the game, unless you're happy with life threatening injuries being prevalent in the game. The red card was entirely fair in terms of the rules and in terms of eradicating that sort of malicious play from the game...

 

[DJ...]

I'm all for rugby being a physical game and not for crying French nancys. But tipping a player on his head means you were only trying to do one thing - severely injure him.
Preventing neck and back injuries is welcomed by every single rugby player and that is why red cards are being shown for such tackles.

Remember that the rules aren't only there because paralysis and death make for bad business. They're also there to prevent paralysis and death in junior, amateur and provincial rugby too. I remember when I played rugby I had absolute disregard for my opponents and would tip-tackle only to injure. There was no deeper thinking in it than that...

 

[sand_man]

I have no problem with the red card shown, nor with the way in which players and teams are punished. Picking a player up, tipping him 90 degrees and dropping him like a dead weight on his head/neck is uncalled for and is rightfully dealt with by a red card. There is no law that states that a red card should only be issued if the player drives him into the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YlcJ_1qXA0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpM0N...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zeyVlNJOI0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZchPz1xQII

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZchPz1xQII

And why change the red card rule and other penalty rules so drastically?

Red carding or yellow carding the player after the dangerous tackle is not going to prevent the severe injury. That's why I consider it counter productive. Censorship needs to come but not by sending the player off the field as this changes the dynamic of the contest to the point where it now becomes potentially dangerous for the 14 playing 15.

I do not believe that a penalty try should be awarded for penalisable infringements in the red zone, purely because refs can and do make mistakes.

Like on Saturday. A mistake that in all likelihood cost Wales the game and deprived the audience of a fair contest. A red card it was not, yellow most definitely.

My money says that Bryce Lawrence will not ref another Super15 match, which is what it looks like our SA ref association is pushing for. His days of reffing competitive rugby are over. Andre Watson has already publicly stated that he won't ever ref another RWC match and that they're submitting their own report to the IRB relating to his refereeing overall. I think a lot can be read into that. The one IRB dictatorship rule I'd like to see done away with is the public discussions of refereeing performances. Every player and coach is entitled to his opinion and they should not be banned from voicing it...

RWC and international rugby maybe, NPC and Super 15 I reckon he will be there next year..

 

[Ou grote]

I'm all for rugby being a physical game and not for crying French nancys. But tipping a player on his head means you were only trying to do one thing - severely injure him.
Preventing neck and back injuries is welcomed by every single rugby player and that is why red cards are being shown for such tackles.

Remember that the rules aren't only there because paralysis and death make for bad business. They're also there to prevent paralysis and death in junior, amateur and provincial rugby too. I remember when I played rugby I had absolute disregard for my opponents and would tip-tackle only to injure. There was no deeper thinking in it than that...

Ja well, we all know what a bully you are.

 

[sand_man]

Of course it will, not that particular injury but it makes players think more about the game they play. Too many players are playing dirty because they are not being punished. At the end of the day, they must feel like they let their team and country down. Rugby, like any other game, requires a cool head and proper thought.

All the more why they should get suspensions. In most cases the yellow card is the end of it.

But if that yellow comes with an automatic 3 match ban that's a significant loss of income for a pro rugby player.

So I'm saying don't send the player off cause that's creating an unsafe environment for the remaining 14 players as well as ruining the spectacle.

 

[Devill]

Ok. What does the MyBB brain trust think of the Losers final?

Wales or Aus?

I think I will be going with Aus as Curtley is back and they should start throwing the ball around, also Wales have lost their captain and neither one of the two nr 10s look very good at the moment.

But I still think it will be a tough call. What do you guys think?

 

[sand_man]

Tough one to call, very evenly matched sides. Would love to see Wales prosper but it is a tough ask considering the Warburton suspension. Also depends on the weather. If it's a bit wet around that wold suit Wales. OZ have been very ordinary this tournament while Wales have been reasonably good.

9/10 I would go with OZ but it's not that clear cut on current form.

 

[Albereth]

All the more why they should get suspensions. In most cases the yellow card is the end of it.

But if that yellow comes with an automatic 3 match ban that's a significant loss of income for a pro rugby player.

So I'm saying don't send the player off cause that's creating an unsafe environment for the remaining 14 players as well as ruining the spectacle.

The world doesn't work that way - it isn't fair. Sometimes people get a yellow card for absolutely no reason whatsoever - ask John Smit. So how would the automatic 3 week suspension work? Sorry for you, crap ref and you get to sit on the sidelines.

There is no 'unsafe' environment for the remaining 14 - they can always drop a back line player off and substitute with a forward.

Yes - we can all agree that watching 14 playing against 15 isn't much fun. I can recall a game against England where Ackerman (IIRC) was sent off for a late tackle. But the point is that Warburton made the decision to tip the Frog and the players knew the consequence of tip tackles.

Back in the early days of sport the French may have dropped a player off to have a 'match'. That world has gone.

And if players never get sent off but are censured after the event - well every game will be like playing Samoa.

Nope- send them off and if you want you money back because you had to watch crap rugby, sue Warburton. He was the reason for the red card.

 

[Devill]

Tough one to call, very evenly matched sides. Would love to see Wales prosper but it is a tough ask considering the Warburton suspension. Also depends on the weather. If it's a bit wet around that wold suit Wales. OZ have been very ordinary this tournament while Wales have been reasonably good.

9/10 I would go with OZ but it's not that clear cut on current form.

Lol, yeah also thought of the weather. Think I will go with Aus on SuperBru.

If Wales do however take it then the top 4 spots will be the same as in the very first RWC

 

[sand_man]

The world doesn't work that way - it isn't fair. Sometimes people get a yellow card for absolutely no reason whatsoever - ask John Smit. So how would the automatic 3 week suspension work? Sorry for you, crap ref and you get to sit on the sidelines.

But that supports my argument. What if Smit's yellow card cost SA the match??? If there could be a hearing after the match re the yellow card a disciplinary tribunal might find that the card was harsh and not enforce any sort of suspension.

There is no 'unsafe' environment for the remaining 14 - they can always drop a back line player off and substitute with a forward.

Assuming you have a substitute on the bench playing in the same position as the player binned.

Yes - we can all agree that watching 14 playing against 15 isn't much fun. I can recall a game against England where Ackerman (IIRC) was sent off for a late tackle. But the point is that Warburton made the decision to tip the Frog and the players knew the consequence of tip tackles.

Again, I'm not disputing the need for consequences just that it should happen post match.

And if players never get sent off but are censured after the event - well every game will be like playing Samoa.

Disagree. The potential loss of income through suspension would be a far greater deterrent than a 10 minute sin binning.

Nope- send them off and if you want you money back because you had to watch crap rugby, sue Warburton. He was the reason for the red card.

People paid in excess of $500 for their tickets alone, consider those that have come to the RWC from Europe and you realize the significant investment attending the championships entails.

 

[SinghDude]

Aus to win by 10 -15.

Wales seem tired, physically and mentally.

 

[sand_man]

Aus to win by 10 -15.

Wales seem tired, physically and mentally.

Could be saying exactly the same thing about the Ozzies...

 

[Ou grote]

So anyone think that Warbuton will tip tackle again in his career?

What about Schalks eye gouging, or that other guys ear biting?
Should they just get yellow so we can have a nice game?

 

[sand_man]

So anyone think that Warbuton will tip tackle again in his career?

What about Schalks eye gouging, or that other guys ear biting?
Should they just get yellow so we can have a nice game?

You missing the point...

 

[SinghDude]

Be dirty but dont get caught.

 

[Ronjay]

Well, I didn't see that tackle as being as bad as others I've seen. And I don't think Warburton intentionally tried to "tip" the Frenchie either. The trouble is that for the sake of consistency a dangerous tackle, regardless of intent should be carded. There in lies the problem, it's entirely at the ref's discretion. I've certainly seen more dangerous tackles then that yellow carded instead, some dangerous play even ignored by ref's. Just watch some games involving Samoa for an idea of what I mean. And I'm not for one moment saying that Samoa are dirty players, (although there have been instances) they do like to go in hard and there is nothing wrong with that. But a dangerous tackle is not always a dirty tackle as evidenced by the Warburton tackle. If intent is not a factor in a decision then the ref should have no role in the decision at all, the 4th official should review the tackle and if in a replay it is shown to be a dangerous tackle, the offending player gets a red card immediately. A review of the tackle in a hearing should then follow to determine intent. An intentional dangerous event should then result in further sanctions such as suspension, fines etc. Still, the Welsh were seriously unlucky in that game.

 

[Albereth]

But that supports my argument. What if Smit's yellow card cost SA the match??? If there could be a hearing after the match re the yellow card a disciplinary tribunal might find that the card was harsh and not enforce any sort of suspension.

So much for an automatic ban. Nope - the citing process is supposed to deal with this.

Assuming you have a substitute on the bench playing in the same position as the player binned.

There are 3 positions that matter - front row, forward and back and of those only front row is a specialised position,

Again, I'm not disputing the need for consequences just that it should happen post match.

Disagree. The potential loss of income through suspension would be a far greater deterrent than a 10 minute sin binning.



People paid in excess of $500 for their tickets alone, consider those that have come to the RWC from Europe and you realize the significant investment attending the championships entails.

So come WC final time - we put in the biggest thugs we can find and smash the opponents into a pulp. We win the world cup and take the money. Those players only get sanctioned after the game but by then they have the dosh.

In fact, you don't need a heap of thugs. Just target the opposition's flyhalf and the game is pretty much over.

Nope - being sent off in a game makes sure that we try and keep people honest. Take a look at Samoa - how much did it take before one of them was sent off? 7 minutes left in the game?

The thing about players is that they have contracts and are probably being paid even if not playing.

 

[Albereth]

Well, I didn't see that tackle as being as bad as others I've seen. And I don't think Warburton intentionally tried to "tip" the Frenchie either. The trouble is that for the sake of consistency a dangerous tackle, regardless of intent should be carded. There in lies the problem, it's entirely at the ref's discretion. I've certainly seen more dangerous tackles then that yellow carded instead, some dangerous play even ignored by ref's. Just watch some games involving Samoa for an idea of what I mean. And I'm not for one moment saying that Samoa are dirty players, (although there have been instances) they do like to go in hard and there is nothing wrong with that. But a dangerous tackle is not always a dirty tackle as evidenced by the Warburton tackle. If intent is not a factor in a decision then the ref should have no role in the decision at all, the 4th official should review the tackle and if in a replay it is shown to be a dangerous tackle, the offending player gets a red card immediately. A review of the tackle in a hearing should then follow to determine intent. An intentional dangerous event should then result in further sanctions such as suspension, fines etc. Still, the Welsh were seriously unlucky in that game.

You do raise an interesting point because a head high tackle is also dangerous. Too often we've heard about instinct having a player sticking an arm out - or we have the cases where the person being tackled ducks into, or slips. Most of the time the refs get it right and you have either cautions, penalties or yellow cards. I can't recall a red but it could happen especially if Brain Lima was involved.

But let's just say that the IRB has been particular about tip tackles because they are potentially seriously dangerous and invariably will cause damage and there is a very fine line after having tipped someone up and driving them into the ground as a spear tackle.

Having the TV ref involved in the Warburton case would not have changed the outcome in the slightest - he would have been sent off. But the downside of the TV ref is that he can see things in slow motion, and whilst slow motion is good for a lot of things it can also distort a perception.