NZ referees are going to have to start getting harder on high tackles. They are not doing their players any favours by being lenient. I can tell you in the Northern hemisphere or the World Cup he is Red carded every time. Edict from world Rugby is not going away.
I think playing currently does give me a unique insight because I’m getting refereed under the same interpretations this game was. If you don’t think so, no worries have a great day mate. Wish you well.
Certainly tipping some red cards, if they are in any way consistent with how they reffed SRau. That said, so long as they're consistent and there is no complaining if the PI lads oblige with a bit of head hunting of their own...
How does playing rugby make you any more knowledgeable than someone else?
You state it like badge of honour that qualifies you to be an authority on the subject, but I’m sorry, it doesn’t.
Exactly and very well laid out. I have a view too. But I’m bias so can appreciate its impacted my opinion. Just like you, I won’t be surprised if I’m wrong.
This highlights perfectly the ‘grey area’ with the mitigations. Opinion does come into it. Just like high degree of danger and low degree - how do you measure that, so refs can be more consistent on the field?
This is certainly a more interesting test for the judiciary than McKenzie the other week.
That slo-mo does two things - let's us identify that there is a slight drop but also as you say lets us think there might be an opportunity to react that perhaps isn't there.
I think a freeze frame makes it even clearer and will be what the judicial's look at. 0.29 when Lomax first comes into view and 0.33 as the connection is made.
My suspicion is the judiciary will say that Lomax is always higher than Fotuaika, has clear line of sight, never raises his arm and makes no attempt to be passive or withdraw from the contact.
They'll have to weigh that up vs the slight drop by both players and the sideways knock on Fotuaika from the first contact.
I'm very curious to see which way they go on this one. I've got a view but I won't be overly surprised if I'm wrong.
2021-06-12T00:29:53+00:00
So you didnt bother to chack any facts but if you had you would find that Australian refs are reffing the Tonga V nz and the 2 Fiji v NZ games. Even Perret gets a AR role.
So you are tipping Tonga and fiji for wins in those I gather based on your comments Andy?
It will be interesting. I think the slow motion doesn’t help. He does drop in height, his head is still going down when the contact is made. In slo-mo it looks like there is time to adjust, but in real time it’s different. It’s maybe a second or two. I don’t think a 120kg front rower can react that fast. We’ll see any way.
This is why the framework is difficult when considering mitigating factors. This is the subjective part.
*disclaimer: I actually don’t know how much he weighs, I made that figure up.
He does drop though. When hit by Numia he drops and is still dropping when hit by Lomax...have a look on replay.
I doubt very much there will be any further sanction...but we will see....
Ben, he's allowed to run low. The exact wording of the framework provides mitigation if:
"The ball-carrier suddenly drops in height (e.g. From earlier tackle, trips/falls, dives to score)"
There isn't a sudden drop in height, he's making a normal low hard carry and stays quite strong through the initial contact.
I suspect Lomax will be in trouble at the judiciary, he isn't unsighted and he makes no attempt to pull out of the tackle. Add in that it's a shoulder charge and looks to me like that will be a three week suspension.
Read the article Understanding the high tackle framework, by JCSmasher...
It was a yellow and correctly so.
Have you watched it on tv again.
Hes already running crouched and is dropping further when hit.
I guess we will see whos correct after the authorities rule post match....
Rubbish, that is his running height when carrying the ball. He doesn’t drop his height suddenly before contact, he runs at that height and gets the first hit and then Lomax takes a cheap shot into his head. His height is consistent. No one in rugby at this level runs upright or you just get held up in the tackle. The ref is saying it is okay to shoulder someone in the head if they aren’t running upright, but no one does this. It was a red.
Normal running height into the tackle?
Take a look at the photo provided....even live on tv. Watch it again. Both show what youre saying is completely wrong.
Of course it was. Ref had to make up mitigating factors to reduce to yellow. Funny how Hegarty wasn’t assessed with the same leniency and his action happened running flat out, diving and contesting for the ball and was deemed a deliberate knock out of play but a shoulder charge to the head of a stationary player where he was running at normal rugby height into the tackle was only a yellow. Player welfare went out the door when it was a Reds player in the name of keeping the game a contest but that wasn’t even factored in when handing out the two Reds yellows. The Ref was a disgrace and should be removed from the Wallabies v France match 100%, he certainly isn’t a international quality ref. He’s not even Super Rugby standard.
lilzot
Roar Rookie
NZ referees are going to have to start getting harder on high tackles. They are not doing their players any favours by being lenient. I can tell you in the Northern hemisphere or the World Cup he is Red carded every time. Edict from world Rugby is not going away.
TJ-Go Force!
Roar Rookie
I think playing currently does give me a unique insight because I’m getting refereed under the same interpretations this game was. If you don’t think so, no worries have a great day mate. Wish you well.
RedWallaby
Roar Rookie
Great movie!!
AndyS
Guest
Certainly tipping some red cards, if they are in any way consistent with how they reffed SRau. That said, so long as they're consistent and there is no complaining if the PI lads oblige with a bit of head hunting of their own...
Paulo
Roar Rookie
How does playing rugby make you any more knowledgeable than someone else? You state it like badge of honour that qualifies you to be an authority on the subject, but I’m sorry, it doesn’t.
Paulo
Roar Rookie
Exactly and very well laid out. I have a view too. But I’m bias so can appreciate its impacted my opinion. Just like you, I won’t be surprised if I’m wrong. This highlights perfectly the ‘grey area’ with the mitigations. Opinion does come into it. Just like high degree of danger and low degree - how do you measure that, so refs can be more consistent on the field?
jeznez
Roar Guru
This is certainly a more interesting test for the judiciary than McKenzie the other week. That slo-mo does two things - let's us identify that there is a slight drop but also as you say lets us think there might be an opportunity to react that perhaps isn't there. I think a freeze frame makes it even clearer and will be what the judicial's look at. 0.29 when Lomax first comes into view and 0.33 as the connection is made. My suspicion is the judiciary will say that Lomax is always higher than Fotuaika, has clear line of sight, never raises his arm and makes no attempt to be passive or withdraw from the contact. They'll have to weigh that up vs the slight drop by both players and the sideways knock on Fotuaika from the first contact. I'm very curious to see which way they go on this one. I've got a view but I won't be overly surprised if I'm wrong.
So you didnt bother to chack any facts but if you had you would find that Australian refs are reffing the Tonga V nz and the 2 Fiji v NZ games. Even Perret gets a AR role. So you are tipping Tonga and fiji for wins in those I gather based on your comments Andy?
Great song...
It wasnt yesterday...Champ...
Ben
Guest
Listed as 193cm, 127kgs..close enough though...
Paulo
Roar Rookie
It will be interesting. I think the slow motion doesn’t help. He does drop in height, his head is still going down when the contact is made. In slo-mo it looks like there is time to adjust, but in real time it’s different. It’s maybe a second or two. I don’t think a 120kg front rower can react that fast. We’ll see any way. This is why the framework is difficult when considering mitigating factors. This is the subjective part. *disclaimer: I actually don’t know how much he weighs, I made that figure up.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Indeed we’ll see. I’ll be surprised if that is deemed a significant/sudden enough drop.
Ben
Guest
He does drop though. When hit by Numia he drops and is still dropping when hit by Lomax...have a look on replay. I doubt very much there will be any further sanction...but we will see....
jeznez
Roar Guru
Ben, he's allowed to run low. The exact wording of the framework provides mitigation if: "The ball-carrier suddenly drops in height (e.g. From earlier tackle, trips/falls, dives to score)" There isn't a sudden drop in height, he's making a normal low hard carry and stays quite strong through the initial contact. I suspect Lomax will be in trouble at the judiciary, he isn't unsighted and he makes no attempt to pull out of the tackle. Add in that it's a shoulder charge and looks to me like that will be a three week suspension.
Ben
Guest
Read the article Understanding the high tackle framework, by JCSmasher... It was a yellow and correctly so. Have you watched it on tv again. Hes already running crouched and is dropping further when hit. I guess we will see whos correct after the authorities rule post match....
Bodger
Roar Rookie
Rubbish, that is his running height when carrying the ball. He doesn’t drop his height suddenly before contact, he runs at that height and gets the first hit and then Lomax takes a cheap shot into his head. His height is consistent. No one in rugby at this level runs upright or you just get held up in the tackle. The ref is saying it is okay to shoulder someone in the head if they aren’t running upright, but no one does this. It was a red.
Ben
Guest
Normal running height into the tackle? Take a look at the photo provided....even live on tv. Watch it again. Both show what youre saying is completely wrong.
TJ-Go Force!
Roar Rookie
Lol. What a champion
Bodger
Roar Rookie
Of course it was. Ref had to make up mitigating factors to reduce to yellow. Funny how Hegarty wasn’t assessed with the same leniency and his action happened running flat out, diving and contesting for the ball and was deemed a deliberate knock out of play but a shoulder charge to the head of a stationary player where he was running at normal rugby height into the tackle was only a yellow. Player welfare went out the door when it was a Reds player in the name of keeping the game a contest but that wasn’t even factored in when handing out the two Reds yellows. The Ref was a disgrace and should be removed from the Wallabies v France match 100%, he certainly isn’t a international quality ref. He’s not even Super Rugby standard.