June International Test: South Africa vs. Ireland [3rd Test] (25/06/2016)

[Gavin]

For consistency surely that had to be a red

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Pffff. In What parallel universe is that a yellow

 

[Which Tyler]

Clear accident, going for the ball.

Given that that is completely irrelevant these days; and the outcome is that the Irishman landed on his head (not back TMO, that's the head).
It's a red card.

 

[Aotearoa_]

His eyes were fixed but he went with just one arm. How was he ever going to catch the ball with just one hand.

- - - Updated - - - @Aotearoa_
He was clearly never going to catch the ball with just reaching out with one arm.

So players can jump into other players in the air, catch the ball and get the other player sent off if they land awkwardly? He was clearly going for the ball to tap it back and his eyes were clearly fixed on the ball.

Common sense prevailed here thank god.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Given that that is completely irrelevant these days; and the outcome is that the Irishman landed on his head (not back TMO, that's the head).
It's a red card.

The difference is we was off his feet too. It was an unlucky but fair challenge. Neither red nor yellow

 

[Which Tyler]

So players can jump into other players in the air, catch the ball and get the other player sent off if they land awkwardly? He was clearly going for the ball to tap it back and his eyes were clearly fixed on the ball.

Common sense prevailed here thank god.

Yes.
Common sense may have been applied (much more a value judgement) but not the laws of rugby.

The difference is we was off his feet too. It was an unlucky but fair challenge. Neither red nor yellow

Which makes no difference in the laws of the game.
He was not in a fair challenge for the ball - he'd lost his challenge. The fact that he didn't know that, or was in the air, or whatever else is utterly irrelevant. These things are judged on outcome these days; not intent, and not mitigation.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Happy with the yellow given common sense but it had to be a red given precedent. Hope O'Halloran can return as I'd love to see what he can do in an Ireland shirt.

 

[Aotearoa_]

Nice! Come on Ireland.

 

[Groundhog]

That's it. Bash through.

 

[munstermuffin]

The difference is we was off his feet too. It was an unlucky but fair challenge. Neither red nor yellow

Absolute BS. If Stander was red this was twice as bad. Jackson and TMO bottled it and Le Roux sgould be cited after. It was a blatant red for clumsyness and he never got near ball

 

[Brabander]

So players can jump into other players in the air, catch the ball and get the other player sent off if they land awkwardly? He was clearly going for the ball to tap it back and his eyes were clearly fixed on the ball.

Common sense prevailed here thank god.

Grey area for me. Looked to me he flew in without much chance of actually catching the ball in that situation.

 

[Aotearoa_]

SA miles offside, jesus Jackson is bad.

 

[Tony Manx]

The difference is we was off his feet too. It was an unlucky but fair challenge. Neither red nor yellow

That WAS the situation but now each player has to consider his actions and the effect it may have on another!

The Stander incident and the one with Hogg come to mind but both "Penalty" Skelton and Willie LR had no realistic chance of getting the ball with their one hand and both should have been red - Skelton was not even carded for that (or a swinging arm later)!!

 

[munstermuffin]

Super carrying from forwards.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Stander's keen to make the most out of this test. What an athlete. Him and Henderson are both monsters.

 

[Aotearoa_]

Awful kick, wtf was that

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Yes.
Common sense may have been applied (much more a value judgement) but not the laws of rugby.

Which makes no difference in the laws of the game.
He was not in a fair challenge for the ball - he'd lost his challenge. The fact that he didn't know that, or was in the air, or whatever else is utterly irrelevant. These things are judged on outcome these days; not intent, and not mitigation.

BS.
Tell me what part of the law states that is a yellow card.

 

[munstermuffin]

BS.
Tell me what part of the law states that is a yellow card.

The law states if it a tackle and TOH lands on back its a yellow. Neck, shoulder or head is red. He landed on his shoulder or neck region. Its a red by the laws. The ref got it wrong but sadly it has gone that it is called on outcome.

 

[Which Tyler]

Law 10.4 (e) IIRC; and it doesn't say yellow; it says red.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

The law states if it a tackle and TOH lands on back its a yellow. Neck, shoulder or head is red. He landed on his shoulder or neck region. Its a red by the laws. The ref got it wrong but sadly it has gone that it is called on outcome.

That was NOT a tackle ffs