Is Taniela Tupou now just being penalised for being too big and strong for the smaller kids in the playground?
It’s an astonishing question to throw up when Super Rugby Pacific is populated by giant bodies of 110-120kgs who would break in half every scribe on The Roar website with one brutal, front-on tackle.
The thing is the Queensland Reds and Wallabies prop is built more like a monster truck at around 130kg and with the strength to go with it.
This week’s crazy case of the cleanout that was or wasn’t worth a suspension is worth dissecting. Tupou was all clear on Friday during the match, cited by Sunday, facing a three-week ban on Monday and all clear again by Wednesday.
How could there be so many mixed assessments by pros at this sort of thing?
His thundering, low cleanout on Brumbies backrower Jahrome Brown made fans wince from Cairns to Cooma and they were just the ones watching on TV, not those going “ouch” at the ground.
Taniela Tupou (Photo by Getty Images)
Brown is a muscular 105kg-plus, so no small fry himself, yet he was blown away at that breakdown in Canberra on March 18 like he was a pubescent yet to hit the gym.
Tupou is a force of nature. His centre of gravity is so low that few in the world could have cleaned out Brown in the fashion he did with such power.
Saturday, March 26 is A Day in Union, a national day of celebration across all levels of rugby. Learn about its origins in this week’s The Roar Rugby Podcast.
A couple of things. Tupou didn’t take a running leap and turn airborne torpedo to connect with Brown. That would have deserved a suspension for dangerous play.
He thrust from his feet on the turf so by that mere fact there was a degree of control.
Referee Damon Murphy and his TMO crew deemed it a “shoulder-on-shoulder” contact during the game. Play on.
The Brumbies did not initiate a post-game citing. The Citing Commissioner requested all his regular player reports on the Saturday. His view of it was that the incident met the red card threshold when applying the law that “a player must not make contact with an opponent above the line of the shoulders.”
Hitting Brown’s right shoulder from above does not mean the same as “contact above the line of the shoulders.”
Was there a flick of contact to Brown’s head or his neck? The Judicial Committee studied every angle and saw no evidence of direct contact to the head. If there was secondary contact to the neck if was of “insufficient danger” to warrant any action, the Committee found.
The sheer shunting force of the locomotive that Tupou turns into in those moments makes the collision look enormous. It was.
Did every fibre of Brown’s upper body feel like a cement wall had just hit him? Yes. That is not yet in the law book as an offence.
Is rugby now trying to adjudicate on the amount of force you can direct into a cleanout?
With no case now to answer, Tupou’s cleanout might actually be rated as technically perfect with the additional push of both hands to get rid of Brown from the scene. Old-timers would have thought so.
This is 2022 so different standards do apply and we know and respect what they are to protect a player’s head health. Because of his power, Tupou does have to be technically spot-on because an off-course missile will cause damage.
It’s interesting to go back to 2018. Tupou got off again without suspension in front of the Judicial Committee after a thumping front-on hit on Stormers winger Craig Barry in Cape Town.
There were no wrapping arms but it wasn’t high or exactly a shoulder charge either. It looked like Tupou hit him with his giant upper chest and heaved those arms at Barry again to fell him on the spot.
Tupou got off a late or dangerous tackle charge but there was no threshold for a ban reached by being found guilty under Law 9.11 “Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others.”
That’s really where officials are at.
Tupou hits with such force that nobody wants to be on the receiving end. Citing commissioners and other adjudicators flinch at the sight but you can’t legislate to hit softer just because he’s the biggest in the playground.
There is another element in play. If in a spot of bother, holler for Mark Martin QC. He’s two-from-two in saving Tupou from bans.
Now for Heritage Round. Tupou’s presence as a scrum weapon mean the Reds’ chances of victory are so much higher against the NSW Waratahs at Suncorp Stadium on Saturday night.
BigRed
Guest
Simple, make it so the Jackal can not bind to the ball carrier before contact with the tackler/defender.
Short Arm
Roar Rookie
Wouldn't call it a job when he couldn't protect his hooker, Fa'ainga, getting popped two or three times. Though Slipper went alright. It was a bit hard to get a read on what was going on thanks to the lottery of Murphy's calls.
Jack
Guest
It was more shoulder to the neck area of a planet player too late to the ruck. No bind the ruck and went off his feet. The 7 was unprotected down over the ball. No sport series about preventing spinal and head injuries can let that sort of clean out be OK.
Jezdexter
Roar Rookie
Head and neck are far worse, but this would definitely increase knee and other leg injuries to reduce the impact of jackals. I'd rather no change. Protect the Jackal. its an art in itself, why take it out of the game?
adam smith
Roar Rookie
Thanks Pete, yup…I’m aware that’s the current situation. Maybe I should have been more specific or explained what I meant a bit better…I’m thinking no hands, even for a “jackler”. Just pushing/binding/driving off/past the ball, like previously?!
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
That’s plain silly. He was injured last week and due a rest. That he’s aimed up for bench time speaks for him. That you are handing out schoolyard insults does likewise for you
PeterK
Roar Guru
if that was the case then a penalty for hands in the ruck should have been awarded
PeterK
Roar Guru
No hands in the ruck doesn't stop the jackler getting in first whilst it is a tackle and then the rucks forms over him. By law hands are NOT allowed in the ruck now, if a ruck is already formed then it should be a penalty unless they already had a hold of it.
TC
Roar Rookie
PeterK I believe the law change should be to the Jackler , they should have to have one leg past the ball, before having rights to it. This would stop Bridging, increase height and most thier head would be East-West..Much easier for refs to Judge everything
mzilikazi
Roar Pro
"I think the law should be changed to allow side entry as long as you enter from behind the feet." Spot on, Peter...totally agree.
mzilikazi
Roar Pro
Thanks for this article, Jim. Certainly will raise some interesting discussion. Watching the game, I immediately thought "That is a high risk hit, rash, and will be looked at by the TMO. Was surprised it was not, and was not overly surprised TT was cited. My view having watched it over again a few times is that it was a legal hit, but was def. very high risk, and as a coach I would be talking to TT very seriously about repeating that sort of cleanup in the future. A yellow or red card in a tight match is not wanted. With a player so low in a ruck, such a cleanup should never, imo, be attempted. One movement upwards suddenly by the player will result in the cleaner making neck or head contact. TT is today a lucky man. He could so easily be sitting on the sidelines this weekend.
adam smith
Roar Rookie
I like your idea PeterK, which got me thinking…would it be better for the game, if there were no hands in the ruck allowed at all? Teams would have to drive through each other like back in the day?!?!
Bobby
Roar Rookie
Tooly, THAT i s so true. Thors supporters expect him to get a scrum penalty every time. The only time I actually saw that was against the Brumbies third stringers. THAT was a bloodbath.
carnivean
Roar Rookie
Welcome to every justice system in the world. The prosecutors allege a crime, the defendants and counsel argue their innocence. This is no different.
Gepetto
Roar Rookie
I hear that Brad Thorn tells his team to go out there and have fun and be nice to the other guys; it's not whether you win or lose it's how you play the game.
Tim J
Roar Rookie
Thank you Jim, for the in depth explanation in your article. On another article I stated that I saw him being banned, but acknowledged that the judiciary checked every footage available and obviously this was the right outcome. My problem is that the judiciary were going to give him an automatic two week ban, before the Reds and their lawyers stepped in to challenge this. I have a problem with SANZAAR! Because if the Reds did not appeal, then he would received the two week ban. Did they come up with extra angles miraculously? Something does not seem right, also this adds to the confusion with their original stance to then clearing him.
Crusher_13
Roar Rookie
Agreed, he's probably off of his feet. Advantage or penalty probably should have been called. But that doesn't legitimise a clean out.
Busted Fullback
Roar Rookie
G’day Gary. I made a comment earlier about old fashioned rucking earlier as a comment to Rhys Bosley. I agree with you that changes to Law, or adjustments to Law, seem more often than not, to have what might be considered unforeseen knock on effects. Then there is another tinker and further consequences. When I was playing and first started refereeing in 1972, there was a Law Book of 21 Laws. In 1845 the Rules at Rugby School consisted of 37 sentences. By 1871 the RFU proposed Laws consisting of about 59 paragraphs. (The Original Rules of Rugby, Penguin Group Aust. 2011. Originally published by The Bodleian Library 2007) These days the Laws are so complicated that the interpretations and guidelines are far longer than the Laws themselves. Perhaps a complete re-write of the Laws is required, with a re-introduction of some of the more simple aspect of the game, as you say, hands in the ruck, the ball is out when the half puts his hands on it.
Busted Fullback
Roar Rookie
G’day Rhys. So what happened to the game for all shapes and sizes? My introduction to A Grade rugby in Brisbane came at the hands of GPS Rugby Club. My 75 kg frame called for a mark, not granted, and was met by Lloyd Graham, then Q’ld fullback, knocking me five metres back. The forward pack then used me like a door mat. So many penalties under today’s Laws but all good fun then. As I said my introduction to five years of, I’d do it all again, A Grade rugby. Truth is, I’d do whatever I could to evade the big boys when I had the ball and use technique and my understanding of physics to take down the big uns when making tackles. But every now and then you’d get caught, you’d get knocked down, you’d get back up and try to do it better next time. It’s a contact sport.
Geoff
Guest
Tinker- Bell has taken the soft option and is coming off the bench.Kid if you want to be taken seriously as a starting LHP for the Wallabies you gotta man up and face your fears.