Gammy_Knee
County: USA
Posts: 337

_________________
ITV are atrocious when it comes to the coverage of major sporting events, I hope and pray that they never get the Olympics. You are absolutely right, the post match discussion was mired in how wrong Rolland was and how his decision effectively condemned Wales to almost certain defeat, bullsh*t I say, the Welsh had a glorious opportunity and shot themselves in the foot, there on field decision making was there undoing.

brendtheredhand (Tyrone) - Posts: 10897 - 16/10/2011 17:03:35    1052821

So every time a team misses a few penalty kicks they have choked? I would say Jones choked when he had the chance around the 72 minute mark but it's very unfair to blame the whole Welsh team. The final play was far too out for a drop goal attempt, there's no way he would have made it. As for the French they are in complete disarray, they're in a World Cup final and the manager is slagging off his players in the press. But would it not be typically French for them to pull out a sensational 80 minutes and somehow shock the Rugby World by beating NZ

pplocal (Tyrone) - Posts: 5878 - 16/10/2011 17:49:22    1052848

pp hopefully so. Will make me a few quid richer if the french nick it against the all blacks.

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 16/10/2011 19:07:24    1052905

Directly from IRB website: link

A directive was issued to all Unions and Match Officials in 2009 emphasizing the IRB's zero-tolerance stance towards dangerous tackles and reiterating the following instructions for referees:

- The player is lifted and then forced or 'speared' into the ground (red card offence)

- The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the player's safety (red card offence)

- For all other types of dangerous lifting tackles a yellow card or penalty may be considered sufficient

Warbutron clearly committed the second offence, for which a red card is the prescribed offence. They can whinge all they want, but Rolland was 100% correct.
Wales are every bit as poor a set of losers as the English soccer team.

Any posters on here claiming it was a poor decision are just showing how ignorant of the rules (and of player safety) they really are.

black&white (Sligo) - Posts: 1628 - 17/10/2011 12:50:11    1053290

I dunno about the red card. I'm aware rules are rules but I think red cards in rugby should be reserved for acts of foul play that arent an actual part of the game ie striking, gouging, headbutts, trips, kicks. A yellow card should cover eveything else.

For me Warburton was making an honest tackle that ended up reckless. He didn't spear him into the ground, I know he should've ensured he was grounded safely but he didn't drop him from a dangerous height either.

Fair enough some very dangerous spear tackling deserves a red but I think it should be up to the citing commissioners to decide that afterwards. A yellow at the time and a citing review after. Throw the book at them then if they are found to be spearing the player to the ground. As it is I think the punishment of a red card for an ill-advised heat of the moment tackle is too severe.

Breffni40 (Cavan) - Posts: 12452 - 17/10/2011 13:08:25    1053304

That rule is slightly stupid it has to be said, are you meant to gently place a 15 stone player on the ground after tackling him. 99% of the time tackles like that receive a yellow or a warning. So either Rolland is wrong or the majority of other referees are. I see a clear distinction in pushing the player towards the ground with force and letting go of him after making the tackle. For me the former is a red, the latter is a yellow. To be fair Rolland gave a red card in a HC match last year for something similar so he at least is showing consistency. But if that is a red card, and I think that is incredibly harsh, then other referees need to follow those rules. Consistency is key

pplocal (Tyrone) - Posts: 5878 - 17/10/2011 13:44:10    1053358

I don't think it was a red card. Don't get me wrong, it was a bad tackle and did warrant a spell in the bin but as Pomeroy said, Rolland has been consistent and all of the refs have rowed in behind him.

ITV basically blamed Rolland for ruining the game on Saturday. I don't think it ruined the game. It was a battle and at the end of the day France scored more points and made the final.

I do not know what to make of the final. New Zealand, on paper, on form and the in the eyes of every Rugby fan in the world should win the game. But France are in my opinion the only team that can have no form, been kicking lumps out of each other, barely talk to each other and then turn up, rip up the form book and produce a World Cup winning performance. The French are the biggest enigma in rugby, you really can't tell what team will turn up. I really hope the All Blacks win it, but i'd be more worried about France than i would have been about the Aussies.

tribeinbrum (Galway) - Posts: 4155 - 17/10/2011 14:17:12    1053395

Thuggery.

Real Kerry Fan (None) - Posts: 2957 - 17/10/2011 15:28:32    1053473

So either Rolland is wrong or the majority of other referees are'

Thats it Rolland had the balls the make the decision and not leave it up to citing commissioners after.

Finsceal (None) - Posts: 559 - 17/10/2011 16:10:39    1053508

That rule is slightly stupid it has to be said, are you meant to gently place a 15 stone player on the ground after tackling him

There's nothing wrong with the rule. It's quite possible to tackle someone without taking the hips through the horizontal. Every other player who made a tackle in the game managed to do it. Take a look at the video of Warburton's tackle. after grabbing Clerc near the knees he proceeded to raise the legs in the air. At the point Warburton released him, Warburton had raised Clerc's legs to above Warburton's head. That's the dangerous act there. When tackling you grab hold and drive back. Once you lif tthe player into the air it's your responsibility to bring him back down again safely.

99% of the time tackles like that receive a yellow or a warning. So either Rolland is wrong or the majority of other referees are.

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/forumdisplay.php?96-Rugby-World-Cup-2011-New-Zealand
You might want to check out this site if you think that 99% of referee's believe this sort of tackle should only be a yellow. The vast majority of referees on this are praising Rolland. The only reason that ref's sometimes show yellow for these tackles is because they "bottle" it. The IRB have stated clearly that this type of tackle is a red card. It's not the perogative of referees to decide that they don't like the rule and change it.
Fabrice Estebanez was given a yellow for a similar tackle earlier in the tournament. The citing commissioner hauled the referee over the coads for not giving a red, and the Independent Judicial Officer was equally clear in his decision. Tackles of this nature are a red card, and only a red card.


I see a clear distinction in pushing the player towards the ground with force and letting go of him after making the tackle. For me the former is a red, the latter is a yellow.

The rules of the IRB also disginguish these types of tackle. Both are identified seperately, and both are red card offences. Driving the player into the ground will get you a few extra weeks onto your suspension. Your opinion on whether it is a yellow or red is irrelevent, as the rules do not give the referee the option to give yellow, only red.

To be fair Rolland gave a red card in a HC match last year for something similar so he at least is showing consistency. But if that is a red card, and I think that is incredibly harsh, then other referees need to follow those rules. Consistency is key.

There's nothing harsh about it. Rolland is to be praised for actually implementing the rules as instructed, and not hoping for the citing commissioner to do his job for him.
If you get hauled up in court for driving at 100mph down the M1 you won't get away with the defence that somebody else did it and wasn't punished.

One or two inches either way could have resulted in Vincent Clerc spending the rest of his life in a wheelchair. The IRB are doing their best to stamp out tackles which have a high probability of resulting in such serious injuries.
These tackles need to be stamped out of the game, and red cards are the only way this will happen.

black&white (Sligo) - Posts: 1628 - 17/10/2011 17:31:46    1053587

LADS AND LASSIES YOU HAVE ALL MISSED THE POINT. That Irish ref was born in Cork of FRENCH PARENTAGE. He was continually speaking to the French players in their native tongue. Get this, ROLLAND is actually a French surname pronounced ROLLAN. When I found out he was reffing ,myself and 5 buddies put a shed load on France to win against Wales. He didnt get the final cos of his French lineage. Trixy happy bunny, yeah ,and well informed.Paddy Power puts up a crucifix in front of me when I enter one of his shops.

Brinsley Swartz (Mayo) - Posts: 2225 - 17/10/2011 18:23:48    1053642

It's well known that he comes from French stock, his first name is an even bigger clue than his second. That had no bearing on the decision however

pplocal (Tyrone) - Posts: 5878 - 17/10/2011 18:38:31    1053653

Trixy that is some load of Tosh. He is a linesman in the final by the way. He made one 50/50 call that has split opinion everywhere. He is not the reason Wales are not in the final.

jonny1951 (Mayo) - Posts: 1431 - 17/10/2011 18:50:44    1053659

jonny1951
County: Mayo
Posts: 989

1053659 Trixy that is some load of Tosh. He is a linesman in the final by the way. He made one 50/50 call that has split opinion everywhere. He is not the reason Wales are not in the final.
_______________________
Leave it jonny, cant beat a bit of the oul conspiracy theory, regardless of how outlandish it is.

brendtheredhand (Tyrone) - Posts: 10897 - 17/10/2011 21:22:42    1053770

Jaysus there is some mad waffle on that tackle. The measure of the seriousness of a foul in any sport can't be that some poor victim is lying half dead on the pitch. The true "spirit" of the rule is that the tackle is illegal and the red card is to ensure that some juvenile doesn't try and repeat the exercise in a schools match somewhere with disastrious consequences. Whether there was no intent is irrelevant - how does a referee measure that? with a lie detector? madness he won't be doing it again nor I suspect will anyone else.

arock (Dublin) - Posts: 4956 - 18/10/2011 08:58:07    1053825

Predictions for this weekend???
New Zealand should win but you never know
The french have named an unchanged team from the side that won the semi final
Teams for 3rd/4th place play-off
AUSTRALIA: K Beale; J O'Connor, A Ashley-Cooper, B Barnes, D Ioane; Q Cooper, W Genia; J Slipper, T Polota-Nau, S Ma'afu; J Horwill, N Sharpe; S Higginbotham, D Pocock, B McCalman.

WALES: L Halfpenny; G North, J Davies, J Roberts, S Williams; J Hook , M Phillips; G Jenkins, H Bennett, P James; B Davies, L Charteris; S Lydiate, T Faletau, R Jones.

Standings in the fantasy rugby before the final 2 games this weekend
1 IRAssassins 428
2 nenagh ormond 398
3 Kidney's Plan B 355
4 The Rampaging Rent Boys 346
5 Popeys Hooks 322
6 Something Else 301
7 Basil'sXV 289
8 Yeovil Town 266

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 20/10/2011 19:30:34    1055689

On their day France are the best team in the world and they have the luxury of knowing they can beat New Zealand away from home aswell because they done just that 2 years ago, but the problem is France have hardly had 'one of those days' since that bloody day itself!

New Zealand are overwhelming favourites to win this game (1/10) and deservedly so, whereas you can get France at a generous 6/1 which is a very good price considering this is a two horse race but considering how the French have played so far its also a very fair price.

NZ will win this game I have no doubt about that what-so-ever unless the French pull off a coup the likes of which has never been seen before, but thats very unlikely considering the amount of trouble in their camp at the moment. Why on earth Trinh-Duc is benchwarming is beyond me, Lievremont has completely lost the dressing room and he seems to have lost the plot aswell with his team selections and candidly criticising his players to the press.

New Zealand on the other hand are playing in their home fortess that is Eden Park, their players are firing on all cylinders and very importantly they've gotten the old RWC monkeys of Australia off their backs just before the final. Now all that surely points to an All-Blacks victory, which I think it will be by about 10pts or so.

Htaem (Meath) - Posts: 8657 - 20/10/2011 20:36:50    1055745

Australia overcame Wales 21-18 in the Bronze Final this morning despite losing both Quade Cooper and Kurtley Beale to injury early in the match, losing Beale after just 10 minutes and losing cooper early inthe second quarter of the game

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 21/10/2011 11:09:20    1055917

Sideshow over.

All the fawning over Wales was getting to me anyway, bring on the 6 Nations.......

Can't wait for the final now, just to see whether it will be an All Black procession, or whether France, from the bottom of their boots, in spite of Marc Lievremont and his ridiculous moustache can pull off THE biggest world cup upset.......

tribeinbrum (Galway) - Posts: 4155 - 21/10/2011 11:17:38    1055923

All blacks to win at a canter

duelplayers (Wexford) - Posts: 18 - 21/10/2011 12:59:23    1056023