Folau suspension: Let's applaud, not sanction, skilful feats

Folau only grabbed O'Mahoney because the lifter let go or lost control of O'Mahoney who then fell into Folau. Folau grabbed O'Mahoney as he had been knocked off balance because of the lifters actions. And how do you suggest that players do not touch each other in the air when contesting a kick?

Surely Read isnt... the Green Arrow?

Exactly Perth, the game does evolves, for safety and for improvement. I assume the argument here for change is safety. The number of instances of people getting hurt due to high ball contests is growing, but I don't know if removing the contest would help so much. Look at Koroibete's hit on Murray as an example of the future of a no jumping contest, you will have more people standing stock still, watching the ball, arms up for a catch, being completely blindsided by 100+ kgs of opposition player. As the first person in position under the ball will have the rights to the catch. Oppostion will deem it is better to hit the catcher as hard as possible and hope for a spill, hopefully a knock on. The injuries wont be the same from a high ball contest, but you can be sure there will be more long and short term injuries as a result, they will just be (potentially) less severe in comparison. As far as I am aware concussions are the worst injuries from a high ball contest I can recall. Rucks were removed, more for optics than anything else, I don't think the were inherently dangerous as such, yes they hurt like buggery, but it was largely superficial. I walked away with my fair share of 'tiger stripes'. Scrums were breaking necks. Having lived with a quadriplegic front rower who did not walk away from one scrum, I am aware of this all to well. I think a rule change here would be for optics at this stage and reactionary. The instances where people are hurt where all parties kept within the rules a few and far between.

Wow, way to miss the point. Fall caused Barret to rotate due to how and where the contact was made. The ball has nothing to do with physics of the contact - as in the ball is not involved in the forces at play in the contact. These laws and the high ball contest have been in place for a while now when people adhere to them we have no issue normally. There is the odd occasion when things go wrong but no one in particular was in the wrong. This is not one of those cases. As has been decided by two independent officiating panels. I agree with you about two or more players running at each other to compete can occur safely, I still disagree in using the AFL as a template, just use Rugby. It happens in every rugby match, of every round, of every grade, of every season. When people compete legally, there is normally not an issue. Sometimes accidents happen, as in every contact sport which has a high speed dynamic contest. Typically, if everyone obeys the rules, these don't tend to happen. If a continued pattern keeps occurring, then a rule needs to be changed, and it can be reviewed. But change is slow. As far as I am aware there is not a continued pattern of lifters causing injury in open play. It has only been highlighted here due to the impact on Folaus ability to compete for kick offs, as he has recently begun doing, and primarily due to the issues his contact which has been deemed illegal in 2 out of the 3 contests.

Compared to AFL it is more likely in Rugby players contesting a high ball are coming together face-to-face, the risk of injury or poor contact is increased when one of the player is lifted - as in the incident in the Test. The Laws must be changed to restrict the lifting of a player to assist them to take the ball. Constant video analysis by TMOs and referees allows an incident to be blown up. I refereed grade in Melbourne and Sydney - I had two touch judges who I could consult if needed if I needed their information on an possible breach. I was the sole judge of fact and I had to make a decision and get on with the game. Consequently if a game went overtime it would be no more than about 5 minutes unless their had been a stoppage for injury. As a spectator now, I find the game becoming drawn out by four way discussions. The VAR in soccer is now becoming as bad. Get back to having the referee run the game and reduce the TMO interference.

My Take on the 3 is #1 Body on body contact and a fair contest for the ball, in this one O'Malley actually falls the most awkwardly and amazingly isn't hurt. In this instance, he isn't lifted Outcome: Play On #2 Folau wraps his trailing arm around O'Malley as He and Stander are moving forward. O'Malley falls on his head. Outcome: Cited One week Ban - O'Malley and Stander also contributed hence Folau only gets one and not 3-4 Weeks #3 Folau after the ball contest again grasps O'Malley on the way down. O'Malley falls on his shoulder. Outcome: Yellow Card on-field punishment deemed to be acceptable.

Yea but Read gets the ball.

Actually a good point Drongo - it's very likely any potential jumpers will be cautious about their approach to these situations going forward. If Folau can just keep his hands up he won't be liable for sanction.

Paulo Thousands of scrums before engagement rules changed. Thousands of rucks before stopped use of feet. Thousands of line-outs before allowed lifting. Thousands of tries scored before points increased to 5. The game evolves. Either for safety or a perceived improvement.

In the third (YC) incident, O’Mahony did catch the ball. Folau’s right hand then hit the back of his hands and it fell. Folau then grabs O’Mahony’s wrist with his right hand and puts his left hand around onto his chest.

Another Kiwi with a chip the size of the great southern land. Who cares what you or your crew of haters think?

Speaking as one myself, I think you'll find there are least two drongos on this site :)

It’s a split second brush of the hand. Not a ‘pull down’. It is incidental contact. But hey, who cares, it will be easy for Izzy to avoid such issues in future and his potency will only be enhanced by these strict interpretations. Wait and see.

There is only one Drongo mate.

Except these rulings will increase Folau’s potency as a weapon with a few minor modifications to method. It’s players like Read that will be neutralised because he usually smashes into his opponent on purpose.

Problem is he wasn't skillful - his grasping at other players chest and shoulders and his drapping arm were interferring with others and hence illegal...

Hey Boattie, So the solution to dangerous play with be to encourage two players to run towards each other at speed and then leap into the air after the same ball. Yeah no dangerous play there ......

Sorry Jacko, but I am more concerned about any player in future getting placed in a dangerous position than I am about a post-game red card for Folau. That match result is in the book, move on mate.

No, Fall caused Barrett to rotate because he (Fall) wasn't in a position to compete for the ball. The existing laws already cater for that situation, which is why Fall was sent off. Remember, his subsequent exoneration wasn't because Fall's action wasn't dangerous, it was because they determined it wasn't his fault that he ended up where he did. And to say that AFL is not analagous because "most of the time" the jumpers are not moving in opposite directions ignores the fact that sometimes they are, in every match, of every round, of every grade, of every season. If the result was as dangerous as the situation that O'Mahony ended up in on the weekend, then AFL would have gone the way of bare-knuckle boxing and death match Sumo wrestling.

It disproves your theory about AFL players running into each other at speed. The suspension was for an elbow to the head (clearly well deserved), not for the aerial contest.