Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Poll: Was it a Red Card

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Someone else has posted the youtube link to the Florian Fritz red card in the Wasps Toulouse HEC game last January.

    The ref was Alain Rolland, the offence was a spear tackle, less scary than the Warburton one in the RWC SF. In the youtube clip you can see Rolland had no hesitation and does not consult, straight red.

    The Wasps and Wales coach Shaun Edwards was well warned about that ref and that type of tackle.
    Munster – Champions of Europe 2006, 2008, 2020.

    Comment


      I think if Ruckall were to trawl back through the relevant threads you'll find that A. R. has indeed created precedent for issuing red in almost identical circumstances.

      If the issue though is precedent in RWC terms well then I think Ruckall's ire would be better directed at other officials and not A. R.

      Comment


        Yes, Rathbaner, but where was the intent, the precedence, and did he have to ruin the spectacle? There was no malice.

        Comment


          http://www.irb.com/mm/document/tourn...a(georgia).pdf

          Rolland reffed this match and unfortunately missed the tackle.
          I've no doubt he would have red carded the Georgian...

          If you look at the RWC site and match highlights, you see the start of the tackle at about 38 seconds into the highlights.
          You can see how the ref may have missed it (Contemponi offloaded)
          (Argentina/Georgia)
          Last edited by 3Crowns3Stars; 17th-October-2011, 11:55.

          Comment


            Originally posted by ruckall View Post
            I think you get 'worried' too easily :-)

            In a politically correct world, the Welsh players can come out and criticise Rolland in the press and he won't hold it against Wales. Yeah right... I'm afraid it doesn't work like that.

            I am not arguing that tip tackles or spear tackles should go unpunished. But I think precedent has to be acknowledged. This red card came out of the blue AND WAS WITHOUT PRECEDENT - only if you don't watch much rugby, there are regular sending offs for this exact offense, and Roland has sent people off for it this year so there is most definitely a very strong precedent.

            Furthermore, I don't think there was any intent and as tip tackles or spear tackles go this was far from the worst I've seen. Intent is irrelevant, referees deal in facts. As an aside there is no such thing as a spear or tip tackle in union. I don't think the actual tackle in this case was particularly dangerous. Rugby by its nature is dangerous. This was a tackle that went wrong but there was no intent. I think this is important -not to referees it's not, you cannot rule on intent, that is a huge difference between being a ref and a supporter. Yes it was a bad tackle and yes it deserved to be punished but a red card was far too harsh. You claim earlier it wasn't dangerous - there are only two type of tackle in rugby, fair tackles or dangerous tackles. Bad tackles that are not dangerous is not an option.

            The biggest issue I have with this decision is consistency. AR was consistent with the laws and his previous actions as a ref Because there was no precedent -see above, no one on the Welsh side would have expected a red card for that. Players play based on what has gone before. I think that in the circumstances of this world cup where similar offences have not been punished(those cases where the players were incorrectly not red carded, cited, banned and the referee admonished for not sending them off ?) it was an extremely harsh decision, if even zealots can argue that it was to the letter of the law.

            I think a yellow card would have dealt with the matter sufficiently(player would have been cited, banned and referee would have been admonished for not sending him off - loads of your favourite word(precedent) on this at the RWC) and if it had been yellow I don't think you guys would be on here saying it should have been red -I think some would have, just as some now argue that it should have been yellow. I don't think you would have batted an eyelid.
            Responses in red above.

            What people fail to recognise is how differently a referee looks at a game compared to a supporter or rugby player. Words such as intent and precedent are largely irrelevant to refs who deal with what happens in front of them and rightly ignore what players/supports/commentators think of these situations.

            AR performance will be reviewed by the IRB and referee's assessors and they will discuss his performance with him on where he can improve or did poorly. This red card is not likely to be mentioned other than to say "Good call, dealt with promptly." and the banning of the player backs up his decision.

            If only other ref's were as decisive and consistent we would not be having this discussion as it is the flaws of other ref's in similar situations which is, IMHO, the cause of this discussion.

            Comment


              Originally posted by Kavy View Post
              I think if Ruckall were to trawl back through the relevant threads you'll find that A. R. has indeed created precedent for issuing red in almost identical circumstances.

              If the issue though is precedent in RWC terms well then I think Ruckall's ire would be better directed at other officials and not A. R.
              There is plenty of precedent in this RWC.

              On a number of occassions yellow cards were given. Citing officers referred the matter to disciplinary officers who held that the sanction on the pitch was insufficient and meeted out bans. Based on this the correct decision for any ref to take in future games was to issue a red card.

              Precedent should always be based on past decisions made at the the highest level the matter has been adjudicated on.

              Comment


                AR was perffectly positioned to see what happened and he did blow straight away with no obvious timelag. Generally I find him to be a good ref, never seems to let the occassion get to him. To me it was the right decision it did of course impact on the game but the Welsh still had their chances so blaming the ref in isolation is jibberish.
                If need be it could be that if the ref is a little undecided then it could go to a TMO but if this had I think it woudl still have been red.
                I am one of the 5 clowns woo hoo

                Comment


                  Originally posted by DONC View Post
                  AR was perffectly positioned to see what happened and he did blow straight away with no obvious timelag. Generally I find him to be a good ref, never seems to let the occassion get to him. To me it was the right decision it did of course impact on the game but the Welsh still had their chances so blaming the ref in isolation is jibberish.
                  If need be it could be that if the ref is a little undecided then it could go to a TMO but if this had I think it woudl still have been red.
                  Don't think he is allowed to consult with the TMO? If he was undecided then he could consult with his touch judges and no one else.
                  Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by bugler View Post
                    Yes, Rathbaner, but where was the intent, the precedence, and did he have to ruin the spectacle? There was no malice.
                    I thought the red card actually improved the spectacle. it certainly added to the drama. And it didn't affect the result one whit. Wales could have and should have won that came with 10 men, never mind 14.

                    Hook, Halfpenny and especially Jones should be grateful to Rolland because he's getting all the flak but it was their failure to take their opportunities that destroyed Welsh hopes.
                    Munster – Champions of Europe 2006, 2008, 2020.

                    Comment


                      The reality is that there should be more red cards. But if the red is handed out to a player who reacts to foul play the original offence should also merit the appropriate sanction. E.g Healy should have got yellow when Hayes got his deserved red. McCaw should also have got yellow when heaslip got sent off .

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by McCloud View Post
                        Don't think he is allowed to consult with the TMO? If he was undecided then he could consult with his touch judges and no one else.
                        Badly phrased sorry I meant if could consult TMO
                        I am one of the 5 clowns woo hoo

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by bugler View Post
                          Yes, Rathbaner, but where was the intent, the precedence, and did he have to ruin the spectacle? There was no malice.
                          1sr& 3rd points are irrelevant and 2nd is incorrect but other than that you are spot on

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by nuke View Post
                            1sr& 3rd points are irrelevant and 2nd is incorrect but other than that you are spot on
                            Knock on the sarcasm detector, there.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by nuke View Post
                              Responses in red above.

                              What people fail to recognise is how differently a referee looks at a game compared to a supporter or rugby player. Words such as intent and precedent are largely irrelevant to refs who deal with what happens in front of them and rightly ignore what players/supports/commentators think of these situations.

                              AR performance will be reviewed by the IRB and referee's assessors and they will discuss his performance with him on where he can improve or did poorly. This red card is not likely to be mentioned other than to say "Good call, dealt with promptly." and the banning of the player backs up his decision.

                              If only other ref's were as decisive and consistent we would not be having this discussion as it is the flaws of other ref's in similar situations which is, IMHO, the cause of this discussion.
                              Lot of nonsense.

                              A condescending tone doesn't improve your argument either, although you probably think it does, which says a lot about you.

                              Can you point us to the games/incidents where Rolland has sent people off for this? I watch a fair bit of rugby actually and don't recall many reds for similar incidents. I have seen reds for much worse tackles though.

                              At this world cup no player has been sent off for a similar offence.

                              Also if you think this was a very dangerous tackle then good luck to you. Bingo is a non contact sport, right up your street.

                              Your second last paragraph is hilarious. So the referee assessment is the be all and end all is it? Why is there so much inconsistency in the first place if that is so? Why do we see patently incompetent refs continuing to get big games? Why do New Zealand get fewer red/yellow cards than anyone else, even though they are guilty as much as any other team? COuld it be because POB is oversees referees?

                              And if you think intent is irrelevant, you have no clue, nevermind pontificating like a genius you seem to think you are. Pick up a law book.
                              Leinster rugby - standing on the shoulders of giants

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by bugler View Post
                                Yes, Rathbaner, but where was the intent, the precedence, and did he have to ruin the spectacle? There was no malice.
                                What has the spectacle got to do with it? I don't see anyone complaining about a ruined spectacle or suggesting it should have been a factor in any decision.
                                Leinster rugby - standing on the shoulders of giants

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X