Ireland in NZ

Where goats go to escape
User avatar
JM2K6
Posts: 10127
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:43 am

lemonhead wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 10:50 am
JM2K6 wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 10:30 am
lemonhead wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 7:53 am We'll leave it so, both seeing different things.
Basically the point I'm making is that the same tackle made against a smaller player who is arriving with less momentum sees Porter knock them backwards. Essentially, the fact that a giant bloke burst through the attempted tackle has counted against the ball carrier who got his face smashed in. Which is a mad state of affairs.
Not disagreeing the protocol could expand to include this. It absolutely could, and probably will if these incidences keep rumbling on. Which they will.

But Ta'avao was moving forward into the hit and Porter sideways. He braced to stop and receive the contact, not drive forward into it.

Doesn't make it any less dangerous though as he went in totally upright, nor fair that a back running that line would've got smashed and Porter would've been shown red on the spot. Forward on forward always by nature has more stuff let go; it's where the majority of collisions happen and optics wise, a more equitable contest. They need to come up with something better, and fast.
Yep, ultimately we can disagree what Porter was trying to do in that last second - but we both agree he never made an effort to do anything except stop the man and certainly never made an effort to not be upright etc (why aren't players crouching a little when they're trying to cover like this? it's weird to me). Ta'avao was a clearer example for me but it's the way the laws have been interpreted that is my bugbear here; whether Porter is "just upright" or whether he's making a "dominant hit" doesn't in reality matter - he was providing enough force on his own to cause serious damage. And I say this despite wanting to encourage more soak tackles.
User avatar
Uncle fester
Posts: 5058
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:42 pm

Wouldn't have had any complaints if that was red.
Tacklers need to be getting lower.
User avatar
Kiwias
Posts: 7541
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2020 1:44 am

SaintK wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2022 7:25 am FFS!! It's head on head in a tackle. It's dangerous and broke Rettalick's cheekbone.
It should be a red every time. As should anyhead on head contact in an upright tackle
World Rugby need to sort this pronto
Yep, it is hardly rocket science.
User avatar
Gumboot
Posts: 8889
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:17 am

This pretty much sums up how I feel about the current sorry state of affairs.


https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/sport/471383 ... all-blacks
User avatar
Guy Smiley
Posts: 6820
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:52 pm

Gumboot wrote: Thu Jul 21, 2022 6:50 am This pretty much sums up how I feel about the current sorry state of affairs.


https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/sport/471383 ... all-blacks
There’s nothing wrong with that…

What shits me is they’re more likely to weasel around the issue and go half baked, throw a few under the bus like Cane and Plumtree and keep the problem there while elevating Schmidt…

And they’ll think that’ll keep everyone happy. Cnuts.
Post Reply