Because he wasn’t the tackler. It’s the tackler’s choice at what height he enters contact.
He has to enter in such away as to not risk head contact.
If Harrison puts an elbow into Vaa’i’s head he’ll get done. If he runs and the tackler impacts his head then the tackler gets done.
It’s all very simple Jacko, although I know you won’t agree.
2021-06-14T06:44:02+00:00
Head on Head IS foul play if deliberate..As in a "headbutt". Not this situation otherwise this "any contact to the head" rule leads to 30 Yellows a game.
Why was Harrison not YCd? He hit the tackler in the head as much as the tackler hit him.
Jacko, click Bill's link as that is the more up to date link and has more detail. Bottom of page two has a big blue box describing what is Foul Play. Just beneath the box, in bold and in an extra large font size just to make it extra clear it says:
"THIS INCLUDES HEAD ON HEAD"
Now I interpret that to mean it includes head on head, I'm really not sure how to interpret that differently.
2021-06-14T03:34:46+00:00
Jez you are using as much "interpreting" as I am. You interpret it as foul play I interpret it as accidental and play on.
The links above say play on from what I see yet you are seeing it differently. Happy to agree to disagree as I will never see that type of thing as a YC and I do not see anything in the above links to say that is a YC. In fact I see where they say "Play on"
What error? He followed WR’s framework.
By all means disagree with the framework but don’t follow the ignorance of the commentators.
We have the luxury of reading the links above and know what he’s been instructed to do.
2021-06-13T23:24:59+00:00
Well you are defending him for making an error. As the commentry says at the time " You may as well penalise harrison"
he made the same error...
No mate. I’m just defending the referees for following the directions from WR.
2021-06-13T06:00:00+00:00
Very clear Point 2. If it wasnt deliberate play on
2021-06-13T05:49:28+00:00
Why shouldnt the ball carrier be held responsible for head butting the tackler? Thats exactly the sort of foul play rugby is trying to stamp out. YC to the ball runner...
2021-06-13T05:47:56+00:00
The Ball carrier hits the tackler in the head. Should be YC to Ball carrier....VERY BADLY REFFEREED.
2021-06-13T05:45:32+00:00
Jez question 1/was their contact to the head? answer Yes.....Q2/ Was it deliberate? Answer NO.....Play on.....
Its black and white for sure.....
You seem to be desperate to present this as foul play which it clearly is not.
"but doesn’t make any effort to get below his shoulder height"
There's the rub. The rules are there in black and white for the big lazy dope to read and understand, or to seek help to understand; the coach has a responsibility to coach erect contact out of dimwit players just as effectively as they coached high tackling into them; and the referee has a responsibility to apply the laws (ensuring equal opportunity for 80 odd minutes, maintenance of a spectacle for the audience, responding to the toothless drongos baying for blood from the bleachers - is not for the ref to consider).
Further, captain Luke Jacobson deserves to be ordinary player Jacobson next week, for failing to instruct crybaby Tupou Vaa’i to shut his stupid gob while the referee is addressing him, and to keep it shut. The dumb captain is still presenting evidence to the court after the sentence has been carried out!
I understand the contest, I spent plenty of years playing deeper into the engine room than this dope and I loved the work. I detest these fools who treat my sport with such reckless disregard. If they don't fix it - the same applies to League - they will not have a game to enjoy.
The custodians are just one life threatening, debilitating injury away from legal action which will render rugby penniless.
Feelings can be misleading Jacko. Both the links above specifically cover head to head contact between ball carrier and tackler.
Look at my first link and the number three right in the middle of the page. It's red or yellow based on degree of danger and whether any mitigation should be applied.
Completely black and white.
It is NOT controversial. The commentators made it controversial. the tackle is EXACTLY the type that Rugby has decided must be stamped out. A rising tackle that results in the head of the tackled player being hit. If the tackler does this type of tackle he MUST ensure the tacklers head is not impacted. Automatic yellow card. Red card if with force. I do not care what Swain thinks , but he could at least know the rules if he is going to publicly comment.
2021-06-13T02:12:53+00:00
Jez I feel you are reading the laws wrong. Whats next? A player kicks a ball into a opposition player trying to charge the ball down and if it hits his head the kicker gets a YC? This 100% accidental head clash is not and never will be a YC offense.
How do you think these guys have the time to bend and twist and turn to be below the opposition player in a split second? Players with the ball duck and move as well, it’s a game of motion. Should they just be on there knees the whole game?. They aren’t robots and the game isn’t being played on paper or from your the comfort of your couch. Let common sense prevail, no injury or concussion, accidental head clash. Penalty at best.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Because he wasn’t the tackler. It’s the tackler’s choice at what height he enters contact. He has to enter in such away as to not risk head contact. If Harrison puts an elbow into Vaa’i’s head he’ll get done. If he runs and the tackler impacts his head then the tackler gets done. It’s all very simple Jacko, although I know you won’t agree.
Head on Head IS foul play if deliberate..As in a "headbutt". Not this situation otherwise this "any contact to the head" rule leads to 30 Yellows a game. Why was Harrison not YCd? He hit the tackler in the head as much as the tackler hit him.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Jacko, click Bill's link as that is the more up to date link and has more detail. Bottom of page two has a big blue box describing what is Foul Play. Just beneath the box, in bold and in an extra large font size just to make it extra clear it says: "THIS INCLUDES HEAD ON HEAD" Now I interpret that to mean it includes head on head, I'm really not sure how to interpret that differently.
Jez you are using as much "interpreting" as I am. You interpret it as foul play I interpret it as accidental and play on. The links above say play on from what I see yet you are seeing it differently. Happy to agree to disagree as I will never see that type of thing as a YC and I do not see anything in the above links to say that is a YC. In fact I see where they say "Play on"
jeznez
Roar Guru
What error? He followed WR’s framework. By all means disagree with the framework but don’t follow the ignorance of the commentators. We have the luxury of reading the links above and know what he’s been instructed to do.
Well you are defending him for making an error. As the commentry says at the time " You may as well penalise harrison" he made the same error...
Kano
Guest
Laws are pretty clear on this one. Bar tenders ARE responsible for the shots you had.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Point 2 is about shoulder charges. Nothing to do with this - which is point 3 tacker contacting the ball carrier head to head.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Too right. We also need to hold the barman accountable for the shots I drank!
jeznez
Roar Guru
No mate. I’m just defending the referees for following the directions from WR.
Very clear Point 2. If it wasnt deliberate play on
Why shouldnt the ball carrier be held responsible for head butting the tackler? Thats exactly the sort of foul play rugby is trying to stamp out. YC to the ball runner...
The Ball carrier hits the tackler in the head. Should be YC to Ball carrier....VERY BADLY REFFEREED.
Jez question 1/was their contact to the head? answer Yes.....Q2/ Was it deliberate? Answer NO.....Play on..... Its black and white for sure..... You seem to be desperate to present this as foul play which it clearly is not.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
Roar Guru
"but doesn’t make any effort to get below his shoulder height" There's the rub. The rules are there in black and white for the big lazy dope to read and understand, or to seek help to understand; the coach has a responsibility to coach erect contact out of dimwit players just as effectively as they coached high tackling into them; and the referee has a responsibility to apply the laws (ensuring equal opportunity for 80 odd minutes, maintenance of a spectacle for the audience, responding to the toothless drongos baying for blood from the bleachers - is not for the ref to consider). Further, captain Luke Jacobson deserves to be ordinary player Jacobson next week, for failing to instruct crybaby Tupou Vaa’i to shut his stupid gob while the referee is addressing him, and to keep it shut. The dumb captain is still presenting evidence to the court after the sentence has been carried out! I understand the contest, I spent plenty of years playing deeper into the engine room than this dope and I loved the work. I detest these fools who treat my sport with such reckless disregard. If they don't fix it - the same applies to League - they will not have a game to enjoy. The custodians are just one life threatening, debilitating injury away from legal action which will render rugby penniless.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Feelings can be misleading Jacko. Both the links above specifically cover head to head contact between ball carrier and tackler. Look at my first link and the number three right in the middle of the page. It's red or yellow based on degree of danger and whether any mitigation should be applied. Completely black and white.
lilzot
Roar Rookie
It is NOT controversial. The commentators made it controversial. the tackle is EXACTLY the type that Rugby has decided must be stamped out. A rising tackle that results in the head of the tackled player being hit. If the tackler does this type of tackle he MUST ensure the tacklers head is not impacted. Automatic yellow card. Red card if with force. I do not care what Swain thinks , but he could at least know the rules if he is going to publicly comment.
Jez I feel you are reading the laws wrong. Whats next? A player kicks a ball into a opposition player trying to charge the ball down and if it hits his head the kicker gets a YC? This 100% accidental head clash is not and never will be a YC offense.
Tooly
Roar Rookie
It’s a farce . The bloke with the ball can head butt the tackler.
Croupier
Guest
How do you think these guys have the time to bend and twist and turn to be below the opposition player in a split second? Players with the ball duck and move as well, it’s a game of motion. Should they just be on there knees the whole game?. They aren’t robots and the game isn’t being played on paper or from your the comfort of your couch. Let common sense prevail, no injury or concussion, accidental head clash. Penalty at best.