WATCH: Jasper Wiese cited for Kerevi clear out shocker

Do you agree?

World Rugby has deemed the hit ok.

Fair enough Lazy :thumbup:

So again to all those defenders of poor Refereeing- for how long should we cop this without open public reviews of performance?

Referee Carney was acting like he had money on the score or just wanted to even up the game.

The physical abuse charge! Maybe a rename, how many spouses watch some players getting off charges and think look they can do it. A tongue in cheek comment, but yes he premeditated the action just look at where he was looking and dropped both his head and shoulders. We need to stamp out this crap in our game, not a good look when you have children watching also.

I thought the ref was awfully slow in awarding the penalty, should've done it sooner. Kerevi had obviously had hands on the ball & won the pilfer and was waiting for the ref to blow it. He just was giving the Boks a free hit by delaying it. Thankfully Kerevi came out of it unscathed.

It doesn’t work that way, though. I agree that Banks’ arm breaker was crook but it is a false equivalence

Spot on, except for the “almost”. He absolutely meant it and didn’t miss.

I believe it’s because they’ve deemed he used his head as a weapon. If you look at the footage. He almost consciously lines up Kerevi then lowers his head - it’s like a striking charge. Fact the refs dismissed the red without even talking about it but considered it for Swinton is mind boggling

Absolutely! In my opinion the Swinton tackle was a probably a penalty – contact was shoulder to shoulder, it wasn’t late or reckless. Just a simple shoulder to shoulder collision that resulted in a head clash. Penalised as he didn’t get his arms around properly. The Wiese incident was far worse. Aimed his head and shoulder at Kerevi’s head and neck after the whistle had gone. The fact the refs spoke about Swintons being a red and never once mentioned Wiese as a red… unbelievable. I think it shows complete and utter confusion about what is dangerous and what isn’t

I don't see a problem with this, hands on the ball a cuts the player off from playing it. Reckless yes. Red no. If you're going to cite him cite Tom Banks as well for a swinging arm to the head of Nkosi. He had enough force behind it that he ended breaking his arm.

Yeah, it's a fair question Paul. For reference, the 9.12 Physical Abuse charge was used three times during Super Rugby, and two of them were for punches (Ready and Naisarani). The other one was Ofa Tu'ungafasi charging into a ruck against the Crusaders - he was not carded, then was cited, but then cleared..

I imagine that it was because of the angle of entry. He came in from the side rather than through the ruck. He only had eyes for Kerevi’s head. The ruck is tricky as it is low to the ground. A player over the ball doesn’t leave much else than his head exposed. But Jasper didn’t even attempt to clear Kerevi, just bash his head

I’m curious about the charge. Not dangerous conduct in a ruck or mail, but physical abuse?? Does that suggest some intent is being suggested, or that the fact it’s after the whistle might make this pretty serious?

The mitigating factor from the ref was Kerevi was low and he thought he had bound onto Kerevi before hitting him. I mean...WTF?

I was stunned that Swinton’s tackle warranted such detailed examination then almost ended up as a red if not for the TMO talking the ref off the ledge. Yet this one, which looked far worse on both initial viewing and replay, was just a quick yellow. The fact that the game was done an dusted is not an excuse for a slap-dash review process. We have to apply the laws and sanctions consistently and evenly regardless of the time these occur in the game. This is one of those instances that people will look at and go ‘I’m not letting my kid play rugby’ and it has to be wiped out completely.

How? I think it's completely different. Swinton's Red was a hit that went in higher than it should but moved up to contact the head and unfortunately for him one view looked as though it started there. This is a clear dive down into the head out of frustration. should have been Red on the day

You need to choose the sarcastic font mate. Been caught out with this a few times myself

Yeah, kinda the point I was trying to make. I think it got lost in translation, there was nothing justifiable in my mind - it was just an attack to an unprotected head. A one look red for me at the time. I've got no idea what the ref was looking at. Who'da known that sarcasm wasn't the best way to get my point across?!? :silly: