Rugby World Cup 2011

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

yeh but .... thinking back over the game didn't Hook miss two penalties and a drop goal, Jones miss a conversion and a drop goal and the Full back just missed a long shot penalty ... France did not miss .... wales should have won man short or no .... any one of those attempts converted would have won the game ....

[Anna]

Is that tackle the only black mark against Wales? A dodgy ref's opinion? compare that to England's catalogue of tackles that resulted in citings and bannings. Oh, and Ballgate. What will the Red Rose suits decide?

[amateur51]

Surely the point is that even without malice that kind of tackle (turning a player upside down and dropping him on his head) can break a player's neck and maim him for life. Matt Dawson on Five Live fully supported the red card as did the chief referee, Ed Morrison.

Matt Dawson? - Aah, Tesco's cookery and prawn & fish pie specialist?

http://www.tescorealfood.com/recipes/creamy-fish-pie.html#real_food_cta_2

That explains everything!

[aeolium]

At a subsequent IRB High Performance Referee Seminar at Lensbury referees were
advised that for these types of tackles they were to start at red card as a sanction and
work backwards.

What on earth does that mean - work backwards? Either it is a red card tackle or it is not, surely. If it means anything it means that there is a category of tackles, within these 'dangerous play' tackles mentioned in the previous paragraph, that does not deserve a red card sanction, as well as a more dangerous category that does. Had the IRB advice stated that the sanction for these tackles was invariably to be red card, then that would have been unambiguous.

The guidance clearly confused some referees, as the post-match analysis showed some similar tackles, e.g. the one in the Tonga v France game, which if anything were worse than Warburton's yet were not penalised with a red card.

I agree with Calum that Wales' kicking ultimately cost them the game, especially a relatively simple penalty miss by Hook when he slipped and a none-too-difficult conversion.

[Anna]

OK, let us not argue. Look forward. Six Nations 2012. Wales v France. February 13th. Be there or be a beignet.

[LHC]

The guidance clearly confused some referees, as the post-match analysis showed some similar tackles, e.g. the one in the Tonga v France game, which if anything were worse than Warburton's yet were not penalised with a red card.

What the post-match 'analysis' failed to mention was that those players were subsequently cited and banned - a clear signal that the tackles were considered to be red card offences and that the referees had got it wrong during those games. Indeed, the judgements in two cases specifically criticised the referees for not awarding red cards.

The tip tackler in the France Tonga game was subsequently banned for 3 games and won't play again during the world cup.

Rolland would have been aware of this signal from the RWC authorities that tip tacklers were not being dealt with seriously enough. It might also be noted that earlier this year Rolland correctly handed out a red card to a French player in the Heineken cup for the same offence, so he has been entirely consistent.

[aeolium]

Then what does the advice 'start with red and work backwards' mean, in your view?

I think this article on the subject is sensible, recognising that if you make no distinction between different types of tip tackle (the O'Driscoll one was imo much worse, given that he was driven into the ground deliberately) then you will be sending a lot more players off, and ruining many more games. If that's the way it's to go, then clearly a lot more Alain Rollands are needed. I'd rather see some judgement used - the referee could have consulted with his touchjudge, at least.

As for those players cited, their teams did not suffer their loss during the game, and can play 15 players in subsequent games, so refereeing has not been consistent across the board.

Anyway, it's gone now. Let's hope for a good game between the All-Blacks and the Wallabies, as it certainly won't be a good game next Sunday.

[amateur51]

OK, let us not argue. Look forward. Six Nations 2012. Wales v France. February 13th. Be there or be a beignet.

A haaaaair-net?

http://alfgrumblemp.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/coronation-street-ena-sharples.jpg

[LHC]

Then what does the advice 'start with red and work backwards' mean, in your view?

I think it means that the default position is that the offence should usually attract a red card and the referee needs to have very strong reasons not to award a red. For other offences a red might be appropriate, but only where there are other aggravating factors and the incident is considered to be towards the more severe end of such offences. But for tip tackles, on the other hand,only the most innocuous incidents should be given a penalty lower than a red card.

While not malicious, Warbuton's offence was a classic example of a player being dropped from height and therefore a fairly straightforward decision for the ref. This morning the RWC disciplinary panel agreed and banned Warburton for 3 weeks (reduced from 6 because of his previous good record).

The IRB are trying to outlaw all tip tackles because of the risk of severe injury they present to the tackled player. This is why they have removed intent from the equation - all such tackles should be met with a strong sanction. It should be remembered that a few years ago a young player in Canada died after being injured in a tip tackle.

For the record, I agree that the tackle on O'Driscoll was worse and should have been similarly penalised.

[aeolium]

LHC, I don't think we're going to come to an agreement on this one.

The Canadian example you mention was in a school game where the victim was lifted up and driven down headfirst into the ground. That is undeniably a very dangerous tackle - a genuine 'spear' tackle where someone is 'speared' downwards, and I think the IRB is right to try and stamp that kind of tackle out. But to go further and treat every kind of tackle where someone is turned over and comes down the wrongside up as having that level of danger is simply over-reacting in what Francois Pienaar rightly described as a collision sport. Warburton let Clerc go, he was not very far off the ground, and there was no deliberate intent to harm. What else could Warburton have done - if he had held on as Clerc descended it might have turned into a real spear tackle? The IRB direction seems to suggest that the tackling player has to ensure the tackled player's safety as the latter comes to ground, which is almost like saying the tackler must let him down gently - what is this, Strictly Come Dancing? It flies against every instinct of those playing the game, which I think is why the great majority of former and current players who have commented on it have felt that the red card penalty was harsh. Of course Ed Morrison is going to back the referee, and so is the disciplinary panel - that is their job.

In many years of watching club and international rugby I can only recall seeing one serious injury incurred by a tip tackle, and that was the dangerous spear tackle by two players on Brian O'Driscoll - which went unpunished. I have seen plenty of worse tackles and other skullduggery including eye-gouging, low punches etc - and many of these, too, have gone unpunished. The IRB has gone overboard on tip tackle legislation and risks making itself look an ass - they should concentrate on eliminating spear tackles and other deliberately harmful fouls.

[FWIW I don't think Wales with or without Warburton would have had a chance against the All Blacks if they had gone through to the final]

[DracoM]

NZ serial illegal rucking / mauling. Their first, and I mean their FIRST instinct as soon as a runner is taken down is for the first man there to make sure he falls just over the ball and man - woops, sorry ref, tripped as I came in - and the next two immediately half-stumble half crawl over him. Watch it: happens pretty well every single time. As Dallagliao sotto voce remarked. NZ's manipulation of the rules and the blindness of refs is astonishing. They presumably calculate that for every penalty they may give away, they wangle a dozen tackle / maul / ruck situations and won ball.

[DracoM]

I am watching with growing incredulity the first half of the World Cup final and asking myself if the referee is watching a parallel game in some other universe. The blatancy of the illegality in much of the NZ rucking and tackling is embarrassingly plain for every TV viewer round the world. Are his touch judges not talking to him? The falling over the ball of the incoming second and third NZ mauler / tackler is too obvious......!

[gurnemanz]

Exciting match. I'm pleased for New Zealand, who probably were the best team overall, though on the day I thought the French were better despite being below par up to the final.

[DracoM]

Interestingly, Lawrence Dallaglio on ITV commentary was similarly a bit gobsmacked by a distinct blindness by the referee. I bet he wasn't so mild off-mic.

[LHC]

Congratulations to both teams are due for giving us a compelling and exciting final. I imagine fingernails around NewZealand have been ground down to the knuckle by now, and I hope there were not too many heart attacks during the last ten minutes!

I'm not overly upset that NZ won the world cup; they were overall the best team at the tournament, but they were definitely outplayed by the French this morning and only limped over the finishing line with the assistance of Mr Joubert. Despite his inconsistencies at the breakdown, France had opportunities to win, but failed to take them.