2022/23 Champions/Challenge Cup

[Torquemada 1420]

Anyone got a working stream for Stormers v Quins please?

https://www.vipbox.lc/stormers-vs-harlequins-4-live

Cheers for the persistent malware bro. Laptop is fucked today.

Never go near vipbox. If you use fbstream
https://tm.fbstream.tv/stream/rugby
in Firefox with the correct add ons:
- ublock origin
- privacy badger
- https everywhere
it works most of the time with only the occasional reload or switch required.

vipbox won't let you load if you use any blockers and no way would I let it run unchecked.

[TheNatalShark]

Vipbox can be a ballache to get going

To be honest, the below for me has delivered great quality and consistency, and if it has ads they are well beaten by adblock. Doesn't always have smaller games like those involving Stormers though

https://tgo-tv.co/sports.php

[Torquemada 1420]

Vast majority of refs are cheats tbf, myself included.

We certainly deserve abuse via our dad's memorial page.

Anyone who was involved in taking to that an an approach to express anger at Brace should be ashamed.

As an aside, I don't understand why anybody exposes himself to meejuh like Tw*tter, let alone anyone in a public profile. You know exactly what you are going to get and the higher the profile, the more the extremists and nutterss.

I didn't see most of the game but by all accounts the red was yet another dismal decision by Brace against a Fre team.

I thought it was a reasonable decision. Since the 'level of force/degree of danger' mitigations came in we've seen refs give a lot of yellows for incidents that really should have been reds and were reds 18 months ago. The problem for Brace here is other officials not wanting to issue reds rather than his being harsh.

I've not found a clip yet. It just seemed to give rise to a lot of this
https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/watch- ... 00662.html?

with even Baxter (who is one of the fairest guys out there) saying he thought it was harsh.

A couple of ironies
- I probably dislike MH more than I dislike Brace and so his efforts have not caused me to lose any sleep on this one
- I skipped the game because MH are rugby-cancer and Chiefs haven't been much better on the eye this season and yet it appears to have been something of a cracker!

[JM2K6]

It was "harsh" in that it could be argued down to yellow, but the facts are he went into a tackle upright and drove up, hitting someone flush in the head with his shoulder.

A significant number of refs would red card that.

[sockwithaticket]

Anyone who was involved in taking to that an an approach to express anger at Brace should be ashamed.

As an aside, I don't understand why anybody exposes himself to meejuh like Tw*tter, let alone anyone in a public profile. You know exactly what you are going to get and the higher the profile, the more the extremists and nutterss.

I didn't see most of the game but by all accounts the red was yet another dismal decision by Brace against a Fre team.

I thought it was a reasonable decision. Since the 'level of force/degree of danger' mitigations came in we've seen refs give a lot of yellows for incidents that really should have been reds and were reds 18 months ago. The problem for Brace here is other officials not wanting to issue reds rather than his being harsh.

I've not found a clip yet. It just seemed to give rise to a lot of this
https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/watch- ... 00662.html?

with even Baxter (who is one of the fairest guys out there) saying he thought it was harsh.

A couple of ironies
- I probably dislike MH more than I dislike Brace and so his efforts have not caused me to lose any sleep on this one
- I skipped the game because MH are rugby-cancer and Chiefs haven't been much better on the eye this season and yet it appears to have been something of a cracker!

Despite Mercer's protestations over the ref mic that he bent his knees, that didn't change his height appreciably and he was hitting up with his shoulder, so not a passive tackle, which made contact with Tshiunza's head. I don't really see what mitigation there is to make it anything other than a red. Pretty much exactly what Brace says.

I don't place much stock in what head coaches/DORs say around these cards tbh. They're a big part of the reason we're still seeing so many.

Cracker might be overdoing it, but it was certainly very compelling and tightly fought.

[CM11]

There was clear mitigation. No idea why Joy didn't point it out.

Made for a cracking game though. Really feel for Montpellier. Dug deep to get the draw and then had it all but won only to have it grasped from their hands at the death.

[Uncle fester]

Vast majority of refs are cheats tbf, myself included.

We certainly deserve abuse via our dad's memorial page.

Anyone who was involved in taking to that an an approach to express anger at Brace should be ashamed.

As an aside, I don't understand why anybody exposes himself to meejuh like Tw*tter, let alone anyone in a public profile. You know exactly what you are going to get and the higher the profile, the more the extremists and nutterss.

I didn't see most of the game but by all accounts the red was yet another dismal decision by Brace against a Fre team.

Didn't see the game but confidently making statements about incidents that happened in that game...

[Torquemada 1420]

Vast majority of refs are cheats tbf, myself included.

We certainly deserve abuse via our dad's memorial page.

Anyone who was involved in taking to that an an approach to express anger at Brace should be ashamed.

As an aside, I don't understand why anybody exposes himself to meejuh like Tw*tter, let alone anyone in a public profile. You know exactly what you are going to get and the higher the profile, the more the extremists and nutterss.

I didn't see most of the game but by all accounts the red was yet another dismal decision by Brace against a Fre team.

Didn't see the game but confidently making statements about incidents that happened in that game...

Incident is singular. As in brain cell.

I assume you read absolutely no news reporting of any kind?

[Torquemada 1420]

Despite Mercer's protestations over the ref mic that he bent his knees, that didn't change his height appreciably and he was hitting up with his shoulder, so not a passive tackle, which made contact with Tshiunza's head. I don't really see what mitigation there is to make it anything other than a red. Pretty much exactly what Brace says.

I don't place much stock in what head coaches/DORs say around these cards tbh. They're a big part of the reason we're still seeing so many.

Cracker might be overdoing it, but it was certainly very compelling and tightly fought.

Thanks for posting time stamped link.

That's a very, very soft red for me. Still far too many inconsistencies in the way foul play is being reffed. It's not in the highlights so I can't return the favour but there was a ridiculously late hit on BB by Cane on Saturday that did not even draw a pen. In another game (can't recall which), a Fre ball carrier went so low, a head on head was almost unavoidable. Carrier was at least to blame but it seems if you have the ball in hand, you are now immune from any responsibility into contact.

I've not seen a media comment yet supporting the decision e.g.
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/zach-mer ... -red-card/

{EDIT} I can barely find a comment supporting the decision

and even if everyone there is wrong, the game really does have a problem if its audience cannot understand how the most serious of decisions is reached. We all take it for granted that the laws make the rest of the game unfathomable!

[Torquemada 1420]

There was clear mitigation. No idea why Joy didn't point it out.

Made for a cracking game though. Really feel for Montpellier. Dug deep to get the draw and then had it all but won only to have it grasped from their hands at the death.

The one upside of it for me

[JM2K6]

There was clear mitigation. No idea why Joy didn't point it out.

Made for a cracking game though. Really feel for Montpellier. Dug deep to get the draw and then had it all but won only to have it grasped from their hands at the death.

What's the clear mitigation?

[Simian]

There was clear mitigation. No idea why Joy didn't point it out.

Made for a cracking game though. Really feel for Montpellier. Dug deep to get the draw and then had it all but won only to have it grasped from their hands at the death.

What's the clear mitigation?

Dunno about ‘clear’, but I’d have thought this part of the mitigation considerations would have warranted some discussion: “late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact”. Probably this one too: An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust.

Even before you get to the mitigations, I’d have thought the implied interpretation that there was a high degree of danger would have been debatable.

We’ve seen similar reds get downgraded in the premiership (Hislop’s one, for example) so I’ll be interested to see what happens next.

[JM2K6]

There was clear mitigation. No idea why Joy didn't point it out.

Made for a cracking game though. Really feel for Montpellier. Dug deep to get the draw and then had it all but won only to have it grasped from their hands at the death.

What's the clear mitigation?

Dunno about ‘clear’, but I’d have thought this part of the mitigation considerations would have warranted some discussion: “late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact”. Probably this one too: An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust.

Even before you get to the mitigations, I’d have thought the implied interpretation that there was a high degree of danger would have been debatable.

We’ve seen similar reds get downgraded in the premiership (Hislop’s one, for example) so I’ll be interested to see what happens next.

As someone whose instinct was that it was yellow I'm finding it hard to find any real mitigation beyond "it honestly didn't look that dangerous in real time", i.e. that the level of danger wasn't that high. The change in dynamics is minor - this isn't a case of a legal tackle attempt being turned into an illegal one by a big last second drop in height.

The time to adjust was before he went in high.

[Simian]

What's the clear mitigation?

Dunno about ‘clear’, but I’d have thought this part of the mitigation considerations would have warranted some discussion: “late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact”. Probably this one too: An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust.

Even before you get to the mitigations, I’d have thought the implied interpretation that there was a high degree of danger would have been debatable.

We’ve seen similar reds get downgraded in the premiership (Hislop’s one, for example) so I’ll be interested to see what happens next.

As someone whose instinct was that it was yellow I'm finding it hard to find any real mitigation beyond "it honestly didn't look that dangerous in real time", i.e. that the level of danger wasn't that high. The change in dynamics is minor - this isn't a case of a legal tackle attempt being turned into an illegal one by a big last second drop in height.

The time to adjust was before he went in high.

Yeah, I’m thinking along the same lines as you, I reckon (tho if it wasn’t high degree of danger that would mean it was a YC without any need to go to the mitigation, I think).

I agree that the time to adjust was much earlier (go lower to avoid risk, basically), but that’s really where I think there is potentially a case for taking the presence of the first tackler into account and their effect on the dynamics (he couldn’t really have gone any lower).

My point wasn’t really that there was a clear case for mitigation, more that I was surprised they didn’t seem to discuss any of those issues. Basically, I don’t think a red was really OTT (given the framework), but thought it was a bit more debatable than the officials did.

(I was pretty surprised the Hislop red in the Prem was downgraded to yellow after the fact)

[CM11]

There was clear mitigation. No idea why Joy didn't point it out.

Made for a cracking game though. Really feel for Montpellier. Dug deep to get the draw and then had it all but won only to have it grasped from their hands at the death.

What's the clear mitigation?

Low level of danger. He was standing still waiting to absorb the hit. The other tackler moved the position of the attacker's head into his shoulder.

Personally I think any opportunity to mitigate should be taken. It's why I'm in favour of the 20 min red card bin and the trial they've implemented in the SH.

[OomStruisbaai]

There was clear mitigation. No idea why Joy didn't point it out.

Made for a cracking game though. Really feel for Montpellier. Dug deep to get the draw and then had it all but won only to have it grasped from their hands at the death.

What's the clear mitigation?

Low level of danger. He was standing still waiting to absorb the hit. The other tackler moved the position of the attacker's head into his shoulder.

Personally I think any opportunity to mitigate should be taken. It's why I'm in favour of the 20 min red card bin and the trial they've implemented in the SH.

Even the TV had it wrong. They show the red card for Exeter and changed it afterwards.

Its pretty shite if you have the possession and the tackler goes high and the heads clash.

[sockwithaticket]

There was clear mitigation. No idea why Joy didn't point it out.

Made for a cracking game though. Really feel for Montpellier. Dug deep to get the draw and then had it all but won only to have it grasped from their hands at the death.

What's the clear mitigation?

Low level of danger. He was standing still waiting to absorb the hit. The other tackler moved the position of the attacker's head into his shoulder.

Personally I think any opportunity to mitigate should be taken. It's why I'm in favour of the 20 min red card bin and the trial they've implemented in the SH.

His feet may have been stationary, but he was hitting forward and up. Not low level of danger imo.

[Dinsdale Piranha]

https://www.vipbox.lc/stormers-vs-harlequins-4-live

Cheers for the persistent malware bro. Laptop is fucked today.

Never go near vipbox. If you use fbstream
https://tm.fbstream.tv/stream/rugby
in Firefox with the correct add ons:
- ublock origin
- privacy badger
- https everywhere
it works most of the time with only the occasional reload or switch required.

vipbox won't let you load if you use any blockers and no way would I let it run unchecked.

vipbox works fine with adblockers running. You have to enable javascript for two sites max usually.

[Morton]

Anyone got a working stream for Stormers v Quins please?

https://www.vipbox.lc/stormers-vs-harlequins-4-live

Cheers for the persistent malware bro. Laptop is fucked today.

Here in Germany there is streaming site called more than sports TV. It has been showing many Heineken cup games and is free. Quarter finals will be shown. You might need a VPN though and the commentary might be in German. During the week they are showing repeats of some of last weekend's games. Worth a try maybe as a last resort.

[PornDog]

Probably this one too: An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust.

Nah, calling bollox on that one. If we're being incredibly generous, his arm was at most at 45° angle (more like 30°) from his body. Now I don't think there is a definition for when a shoulder becomes a wrapped tackle, but for my money that's not enough (feel the hardness of your own shoulder at 45° vs 70° - big difference, in hardness and contact area).

PLUS - he clearly twists his body entering into the actual contact, meaning instead of being directly to his side his arm goes back and shoulder goes forward, negating what little benefit that even 45° brought to the collision in the first place. He leads with his shoulder. That's an act of foul play and more than any other single aspect of the collision (well besides the actual head contact), means its was correct to be a red card.


More than any individual player, this is a consistent failing fo coaches, and by extension, a failure by World Rubgy to properly communicate HOW NOT TO FUCKING TACKLE SOMEONE!!

Players are doing these stupid things more from instinct than actual deliberate thought, because this stupidity hasn't been coached out of them yet. World Rugby needs to step up and start doing instructional videos like they did with the "forward pass" "momentum" clarifications a few years ago.

Don't stick your fucking shoulder into someone, let alone their head!

[Torquemada 1420]

Cheers for the persistent malware bro. Laptop is fucked today.

Never go near vipbox. If you use fbstream
https://tm.fbstream.tv/stream/rugby
in Firefox with the correct add ons:
- ublock origin
- privacy badger
- https everywhere
it works most of the time with only the occasional reload or switch required.

vipbox won't let you load if you use any blockers and no way would I let it run unchecked.

vipbox works fine with adblockers running. You have to enable javascript for two sites max usually.

Yup: and running jscript falls into my category of not fine!

[Torquemada 1420]

https://www.vipbox.lc/stormers-vs-harlequins-4-live

Cheers for the persistent malware bro. Laptop is fucked today.

Here in Germany there is streaming site called more than sports TV. It has been showing many Heineken cup games and is free. Quarter finals will be shown. You might need a VPN though and the commentary might be in German. During the week they are showing repeats of some of last weekend's games. Worth a try maybe as a last resort.

Cheers

[Simian]

Probably this one too: An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust.

Nah, calling bollox on that one. If we're being incredibly generous, his arm was at most at 45° angle (more like 30°) from his body. Now I don't think there is a definition for when a shoulder becomes a wrapped tackle, but for my money that's not enough (feel the hardness of your own shoulder at 45° vs 70° - big difference, in hardness and contact area).

PLUS - he clearly twists his body entering into the actual contact, meaning instead of being directly to his side his arm goes back and shoulder goes forward, negating what little benefit that even 45° brought to the collision in the first place. He leads with his shoulder. That's an act of foul play and more than any other single aspect of the collision (well besides the actual head contact), means its was correct to be a red card.


More than any individual player, this is a consistent failing fo coaches, and by extension, a failure by World Rubgy to properly communicate HOW NOT TO FUCKING TACKLE SOMEONE!!

Players are doing these stupid things more from instinct than actual deliberate thought, because this stupidity hasn't been coached out of them yet. World Rugby needs to step up and start doing instructional videos like they did with the "forward pass" "momentum" clarifications a few years ago.

Don't stick your fucking shoulder into someone, let alone their head!

I mean, I've said it was probs a red, don't get me wrong. As I said, my issue was that I didn't think it was as clear cut as the officials seemed to.

but, hang on, it sounds like you think it was an illegal tackle even if it wasn't high? Or have I misunderstood you?

[OomStruisbaai]

[OomStruisbaai]

Leinster Rugby
v
Leicester Tigers

Friday 7 April 2023 20:00 Heineken Champions Cup Quarter Finals Aviva Stadium Ref: Nika Amashukeli (Georgia) Assis Ref 1: Pierre Brousset (France) Assis Ref 2: Tual Trainini (France) TMO: Eric Gauzins (France)

Stade Toulousain
v
Cell C Sharks

Saturday 8 April 2023 16:00 Heineken Champions Cup Quarter Finals Stade Ernest Wallon Ref: Karl Dickson (England) Assis Ref 1: Christophe Ridley (England) Assis Ref 2: Jonathan Healy (England) TMO: Tom Foley (England)

Exeter Chiefs
v
DHL Stormers

Saturday 8 April 2023 17:30 Heineken Champions Cup Quarter Finals Sandy Park Ref: Mathieu Raynal (France) Assis Ref 1: Ludovic Cayre (France) Assis Ref 2: Jonathan Gasnier (France) TMO: Thomas Charabas (France)

Stade Rochelais
v
Saracens

Sunday 9 April 2023 16:00 Heineken Champions Cup Quarter Finals Stade Marcel Deflandre Ref: Andrew Brace (Ireland) Assis Ref 1: Frank Murphy (Ireland) Assis Ref 2: Chris Busby (Ireland) TMO: Joy Neville (Ireland)

[Kawazaki]

It was "harsh" in that it could be argued down to yellow, but the facts are he went into a tackle upright and drove up, hitting someone flush in the head with his shoulder.

A significant number of refs would red card that.

Pearce didn't in the Sarries v Quins match did he.

[CM11]

I have no skin in the game so not going to argue too much between yellow and red but these discussions get killed dead with what they're trialling in the SH. Just a no brainer for me, to be honest.

[PornDog]

Probably this one too: An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust.

Nah, calling bollox on that one. If we're being incredibly generous, his arm was at most at 45° angle (more like 30°) from his body. Now I don't think there is a definition for when a shoulder becomes a wrapped tackle, but for my money that's not enough (feel the hardness of your own shoulder at 45° vs 70° - big difference, in hardness and contact area).

PLUS - he clearly twists his body entering into the actual contact, meaning instead of being directly to his side his arm goes back and shoulder goes forward, negating what little benefit that even 45° brought to the collision in the first place. He leads with his shoulder. That's an act of foul play and more than any other single aspect of the collision (well besides the actual head contact), means its was correct to be a red card.


More than any individual player, this is a consistent failing fo coaches, and by extension, a failure by World Rubgy to properly communicate HOW NOT TO FUCKING TACKLE SOMEONE!!

Players are doing these stupid things more from instinct than actual deliberate thought, because this stupidity hasn't been coached out of them yet. World Rugby needs to step up and start doing instructional videos like they did with the "forward pass" "momentum" clarifications a few years ago.

Don't stick your fucking shoulder into someone, let alone their head!

I mean, I've said it was probs a red, don't get me wrong. As I said, my issue was that I didn't think it was as clear cut as the officials seemed to.

but, hang on, it sounds like you think it was an illegal tackle even if it wasn't high? Or have I misunderstood you?

I mean they only ever get called when its high, despite being incredibly common, but yes I absolutely do. Just before contact he clearly slightly twists his body and leans his shoulder into the contact point. The arm is barely away from his side. So yes, it was absolutely an illegal contact regardless.

Now, I have a lot of sympathy for players in these situations because they've been allowed get away with this type of contact for so long that they have become almost ubiquitous - hence why I think World Rugby need to come out at this stage and clearly tell people to stop dropping the shoulder into people.

[Paddington Bear]

Have now watched the Exeter game. Brace honestly isn’t terrible at all, at one stage Montpellier had a penalty count heavily in their favour. Exeter probably got lucky on a couple of scrum pens but that’s all but the sum of it.

The red is a soft one but you can’t tackle like that. This isn’t new and Mercer can do better than get himself into that situation, none of this is new now. I wouldn’t have been shocked to see it given as a yellow but equally he can have few complaints. Entertaining game overall

[OomStruisbaai]

Braai Army to support the Stormers in Exeter

https://www.braainationtravel.com/exete ... rs-tickets

[Simian]

Nah, calling bollox on that one. If we're being incredibly generous, his arm was at most at 45° angle (more like 30°) from his body. Now I don't think there is a definition for when a shoulder becomes a wrapped tackle, but for my money that's not enough (feel the hardness of your own shoulder at 45° vs 70° - big difference, in hardness and contact area).

PLUS - he clearly twists his body entering into the actual contact, meaning instead of being directly to his side his arm goes back and shoulder goes forward, negating what little benefit that even 45° brought to the collision in the first place. He leads with his shoulder. That's an act of foul play and more than any other single aspect of the collision (well besides the actual head contact), means its was correct to be a red card.


More than any individual player, this is a consistent failing fo coaches, and by extension, a failure by World Rubgy to properly communicate HOW NOT TO FUCKING TACKLE SOMEONE!!

Players are doing these stupid things more from instinct than actual deliberate thought, because this stupidity hasn't been coached out of them yet. World Rugby needs to step up and start doing instructional videos like they did with the "forward pass" "momentum" clarifications a few years ago.

Don't stick your fucking shoulder into someone, let alone their head!

I mean, I've said it was probs a red, don't get me wrong. As I said, my issue was that I didn't think it was as clear cut as the officials seemed to.

but, hang on, it sounds like you think it was an illegal tackle even if it wasn't high? Or have I misunderstood you?

I mean they only ever get called when its high, despite being incredibly common, but yes I absolutely do. Just before contact he clearly slightly twists his body and leans his shoulder into the contact point. The arm is barely away from his side. So yes, it was absolutely an illegal contact regardless.

Now, I have a lot of sympathy for players in these situations because they've been allowed get away with this type of contact for so long that they have become almost ubiquitous - hence why I think World Rugby need to come out at this stage and clearly tell people to stop dropping the shoulder into people.

Can you tell me what law it was an illegal tackle then? Leading with an elbow or so, sure. I’m unclear why you are saying leading with a shoulder is illegal? If you get your arm up, it’s fine, no? You said leading with the shoulder was foul play, but I’m wondering why and, specifically, why you’re asking for WR to clarify it as foul play. They’ve previously clarified that it’s an attempt to wrap that matters. I just don’t get your argument that leading with the shoulder is foul play? They’ve literally clarified that that is fine (as long as you try to wrap). And their clarification made it clear they view it differently than leading with a forearm or elbow. That’s what I’m not getting.

[Simian]

Have now watched the Exeter game. Brace honestly isn’t terrible at all, at one stage Montpellier had a penalty count heavily in their favour. Exeter probably got lucky on a couple of scrum pens but that’s all but the sum of it.

The red is a soft one but you can’t tackle like that. This isn’t new and Mercer can do better than get himself into that situation, none of this is new now. I wouldn’t have been shocked to see it given as a yellow but equally he can have few complaints. Entertaining game overall

This is kinda my point. A few seasons ago, those were nailed on reds. And should be. I don’t really understand how that’s a red and hislop’s was ruled after the fact as a yellow? Same thing, to me?

It’s a right old mess.

[Kawazaki]

Chisholm hit Earl in the head with his shoulder with an upright active tackle in the first minute of the league match last week. Not even looked at or cited. Plenty of hush from the usual suspects in here about it as well.

[JM2K6]

Too busy laughing at you doing your thing on the Quins board, I expect.

It's not clear that Chisholm actually hits his head - the problem is because it wasn't picked up we get no slowmos and no reverse angle. You can freezeframe and it looks like it's gone under the chin entirely. Still high and dangerous but not actually proof it was direct to head and not the same as the Mercer incident, where there is zero doubt it's a clean shot to the head.

And before you lose your mind again, I'm also not saying it's not a headshot. Just that we, as observers with limited information, can't be certain. One might suggest that the fact he wasn't cited suggests there's enough doubt there too, but I'm not duplicitous enough to pretend that citing officers don't make mistakes.

[PornDog]

I mean, I've said it was probs a red, don't get me wrong. As I said, my issue was that I didn't think it was as clear cut as the officials seemed to.

but, hang on, it sounds like you think it was an illegal tackle even if it wasn't high? Or have I misunderstood you?

I mean they only ever get called when its high, despite being incredibly common, but yes I absolutely do. Just before contact he clearly slightly twists his body and leans his shoulder into the contact point. The arm is barely away from his side. So yes, it was absolutely an illegal contact regardless.

Now, I have a lot of sympathy for players in these situations because they've been allowed get away with this type of contact for so long that they have become almost ubiquitous - hence why I think World Rugby need to come out at this stage and clearly tell people to stop dropping the shoulder into people.

Can you tell me what law it was an illegal tackle then? Leading with an elbow or so, sure. I’m unclear why you are saying leading with a shoulder is illegal? If you get your arm up, it’s fine, no? You said leading with the shoulder was foul play, but I’m wondering why and, specifically, why you’re asking for WR to clarify it as foul play. They’ve previously clarified that it’s an attempt to wrap that matters. I just don’t get your argument that leading with the shoulder is foul play? They’ve literally clarified that that is fine (as long as you try to wrap). And their clarification made it clear they view it differently than leading with a forearm or elbow. That’s what I’m not getting.

His arm wasn't up - that's the point. Wrapping an arm after you've made contact means fuck all, the arm has to be up BEFORE contact is made.

The whole point of the law is that when your arm is up, muscle covers the hardest parts of your shoulder, cushioning the impact. That's why the law is there and has been for 100+ years. tucking your arm down by your side, even if not directly tucked and there is some space between where your arm is and your abdomen, leaves you with a very hard and sharper point of impact.

World Rugby has slowly allowed this principal to be degraded over the last decade or so and it is one of the major contributing factors to the current shit show we are having to deal with re concussions and cards. Just as hookers have forgotten how to hook due to World Rugby being shit, it seems that now players are forgetting how to tackle as well!

[Simian]

I mean they only ever get called when its high, despite being incredibly common, but yes I absolutely do. Just before contact he clearly slightly twists his body and leans his shoulder into the contact point. The arm is barely away from his side. So yes, it was absolutely an illegal contact regardless.

Now, I have a lot of sympathy for players in these situations because they've been allowed get away with this type of contact for so long that they have become almost ubiquitous - hence why I think World Rugby need to come out at this stage and clearly tell people to stop dropping the shoulder into people.

Can you tell me what law it was an illegal tackle then? Leading with an elbow or so, sure. I’m unclear why you are saying leading with a shoulder is illegal? If you get your arm up, it’s fine, no? You said leading with the shoulder was foul play, but I’m wondering why and, specifically, why you’re asking for WR to clarify it as foul play. They’ve previously clarified that it’s an attempt to wrap that matters. I just don’t get your argument that leading with the shoulder is foul play? They’ve literally clarified that that is fine (as long as you try to wrap). And their clarification made it clear they view it differently than leading with a forearm or elbow. That’s what I’m not getting.

His arm wasn't up - that's the point. Wrapping an arm after you've made contact means fuck all, the arm has to be up BEFORE contact is made.

The whole point of the law is that when your arm is up, muscle covers the hardest parts of your shoulder, cushioning the impact. That's why the law is there and has been for 100+ years. tucking your arm down by your side, even if not directly tucked and there is some space between where your arm is and your abdomen, leaves you with a very hard and sharper point of impact.

World Rugby has slowly allowed this principal to be degraded over the last decade or so and it is one of the major contributing factors to the current shit show we are having to deal with re concussions and cards. Just as hookers have forgotten how to hook due to World Rugby being shit, it seems that now players are forgetting how to tackle as well!

ok. so, you're saying it should have been reffed according to imaginary laws.

Can you tell me which law for 100+ years says you can't lead with you shoulder? There are legit law clarifications saying it's fine,. Common misunderstanding.

tbc, I don't think it should be ok.

("his arm wasn't up" : half of tackles would be foul play if that's not an effort to to wrap. I don't get your point. The problem was height. and height only)

[Kawazaki]

Too busy laughing at you doing your thing on the Quins board, I expect.

It's not clear that Chisholm actually hits his head - the problem is because it wasn't picked up we get no slowmos and no reverse angle. You can freezeframe and it looks like it's gone under the chin entirely. Still high and dangerous but not actually proof it was direct to head and not the same as the Mercer incident, where there is zero doubt it's a clean shot to the head.

And before you lose your mind again, I'm also not saying it's not a headshot. Just that we, as observers with limited information, can't be certain. One might suggest that the fact he wasn't cited suggests there's enough doubt there too, but I'm not duplicitous enough to pretend that citing officers don't make mistakes.

Well it was picked up. And replayed in slow-motion. That's what they Reddit clip is.

Then it was ignored.



Chisholm's shoulder is clearly striking the right side of Earl's head.

[JM2K6]

Entirely possible. Can you show me the other angle to confirm?
Not sure what it has to do with whether the Mercer call was red or yellow, though. Something to do with Saracens, perhaps.

[PornDog]

Saracens are the good guys and innocent of all charges. Even when the charges have nothing to do with them, Saracens innocence, and of course the conspiracies against them, must be highlighted at all times!

I think that's the point!

[Kawazaki]

Entirely possible. Can you show me the other angle to confirm?
Not sure what it has to do with whether the Mercer call was red or yellow, though. Something to do with Saracens, perhaps.

Some teams like Quins get a charmed ride from referees and tv pundits.