could he have given a penalty and not a yellow there? i could understand that but personally i wouldn't have given either
I thought it was an automatic yellow. Very high tackle.If if were an england tackle it would have been a penalty at most, but its samoa so that obviously means he was trying to tackle him by the neck and cause serious injury...
So what, you're suggesting smaller players should have less of a right to safety? Tacklers can adjust the height of their tackle, carriers cannot adjust their height.they never take into consideration the difference in player heights, it must be tricky for a big guy to tackle a smaller guy without it being deemed dangerous
they never take into consideration the difference in player heights, it must be tricky for a big guy to tackle a smaller guy without it being deemed dangerous
I thought it was an automatic yellow. Very high tackle.
Your either being sarcastic/trolling, or youve jumped on the irb band wagon to make rugby a semi contact sport
No attempt to grab the player, contact above shoulder level. Leota went for the big hit and could easily have gotten lower.Your either being sarcastic/trolling, or youve jumped on the irb band wagon to make rugby a semi contact sport
If that tackle was on BOD you would be demanding the death penalty
No attempt to grab the player, contact above shoulder level. Leota went for the big hit and could easily have gotten lower.
Your either being sarcastic/trolling, or youve jumped on the irb band wagon to make rugby a semi contact sport
Really?
I felt he wrapped and was shoulder below shoulders.....
Hope 36 brings something here, I have a feeling Lancaster will be quite content with the starting midfield from today.
It's getting absolutely ridiculous. He cannot start against Australia.Another pen for Wood.