[2015 Six Nations] England

[Gavin]

The tackle by Lawes on Plisson in the final match of the Six Nations was late, dangerous and thus illegal. France should have been awarded a penalty and Lawes a red card. The guilty, apprehensive look on Lawes face as the referee considered his decision confirms this view. Any tackle that results in contact when a player does not have the ball is illegal. If it is accepted that a rugby player may tackle an opponent who has released the ball then it would be equally within the rules for a player to tackle an opponent in anticipation of that player receiving the ball. Tackling a player who does not have the ball is and must remain illegal.

Eh no. Tackle was a split second after ball went. Perfectly fine

 

[TommiG88]

The tackle by Lawes on Plisson in the final match of the Six Nations was late, dangerous and thus illegal. France should have been awarded a penalty and Lawes a red card. The guilty, apprehensive look on Lawes face as the referee considered his decision confirms this view. Any tackle that results in contact when a player does not have the ball is illegal. If it is accepted that a rugby player may tackle an opponent who has released the ball then it would be equally within the rules for a player to tackle an opponent in anticipation of that player receiving the ball. Tackling a player who does not have the ball is and must remain illegal.

Go away.

 

[thechosenfamily]

Ian Ritchie has called Englands Six Nations performance unacceptable

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32035225

 

[Patchey]

Ian Ritchie has called Englands Six Nations performance unacceptable

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32035225

Oh shut up Ian.

 

[psychic duck]

I'd forgotten about that yellow. You're right that his poor discipline is more than one moment.

In fact, it's got worse. 7 penalties and 1 yellow conceded in this 6N compared to 5 penalties and 1 yellow. But I don't think that's all Hask as a lot of other players have picked up bad habits too. I think they're being encouraged to be a lot more streetwise and cynical - only problem is they lack what it takes.

Haskell claims that trip was a complete accident.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Ian Ritchie has called Englands Six Nations performance unacceptable

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32035225

Was just going to post about this.. it strikes me as quite a big thing to come out with.
For what it's worth, I agree with him insofar as the manner of our last game and its 'courageousness' risks sweeping under the rug the fact that we didn't do well enough against Ireland, Scotland, or Italy.

but saying this is big especially if construed as criticism of lancaster...

 

[psychic duck]

Oh shut up Ian.

It's just an interviewer asking leading questions for a headline.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Haskell claims that trip was a complete accident.

I wouldn't be surprised, but either way it comes back to the fact that these things just tend to happen to Haskell more than other players.
You've got to wonder...

 

[goodNumber10]

Was just going to post about this.. it strikes me as quite a big thing to come out with.
For what it's worth, I agree with him insofar as the manner of our last game and its 'courageousness' risks sweeping under the rug the fact that we didn't do well enough against Ireland, Scotland, or Italy.

but saying this is big especially if construed as criticism of lancaster...

this is a bit more enlightening of how the conversation goes.

 

[cornishpirate]

Funny how the professional referees disagreed with you completely.

The issue is......is it illegal to tackle a player who does not have the ball? Plisson did not have the ball when Lawes tackled him. So if that tackle was not illegal then it must also be legal to tackle a player in anticipation of his receiving the ball. Clearly to accept that would be wrong and so in both cases a player without the ball is tackled and that is illegal.

As you will know, as a player with the ball you expect to be tackled and are prepared for it, but as soon as you release the ball you relax and try to move to a position to support the run of the game. That is what makes a late tackle and even one that is marginally late very dangerous as the whip lash action of Plissons head and neck showed.

Only one referee disagreed. The 4th official drew the refs attention to what had happened so he must have had concerns as did the crowd in their reaction to it and so did Lawes body language. But Nigel decided not to review, quote his response was, 'I'm happy with the tackle'. A dangerous precedent!

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Plisson did not have the ball when Lawes tackled him. So if that tackle was not illegal then it must also be legal to tackle a player in anticipation of his receiving the ball.

Plisson had the ball when Lawes initiated the tackle, but he made contact after the pass.
This is legal as he was the still the ball carrier when he went to tackle him, and he had no opportunity to stop the tackle after he'd released the ball.

If you red carded everyone who made this kind of hit then players would start just throwing the ball away as soon as they saw someone going to make a tackle, knowing the other guy would get penalised for it.

But Nigel decided not to review

Except they did review.

 

[goodNumber10]

The issue is......is it illegal to tackle a player who does not have the ball? Plisson did not have the ball when Lawes tackled him. So if that tackle was not illegal then it must also be legal to tackle a player in anticipation of his receiving the ball. Clearly to accept that would be wrong and so in both cases a player without the ball is tackled and that is illegal.

As you will know, as a player with the ball you expect to be tackled and are prepared for it, but as soon as you release the ball you relax and try to move to a position to support the run of the game. That is what makes a late tackle and even one that is marginally late very dangerous as the whip lash action of Plissons head and neck showed.

Only one referee disagreed. The 4th official drew the refs attention to what had happened so he must have had concerns as did the crowd in their reaction to it and so did Lawes body language. But Nigel decided not to review, quote his response was, 'I'm happy with the tackle'. A dangerous precedent!

For a start they did review it, the 4th called in for a check and Owens took a decision after reviewing the big screen.

Secondly, once someone is committed to a tackle they are committed, that was a fraction of a second too late, even in slow mo. Lawes was head down, in the air if you think a 120kg human can defy physics by changing direction mid air...... well. The point is did he commit to a point of no return before the ball left Plissons hands or after, it is clear it was before the ball left Plissons hands.

There was nothing wrong with it, if you're going to draw a man and then pass/play flat/on the tackle don't be surprised when you get smashed.

Plisson made not complaints he just got up and got on with it.

 

[msf]

If it is truly unacceptable, then let's fire the person who gave Lancaster a contract until 2019...oh, that was Ian Ritchie. Does this mean that his performance as the head of the RFU has been unacceptable? From what I've seen so far, Ritchie is a bit of an idiot, what was the point in saying that now? And why give the coaching team contracts till 2019 if he wasn't looking to the long-term? Can't we have some rugby bugger in charge again? What kind of sport is tennis anyway?

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

The issue is......is it illegal to tackle a player who does not have the ball? Plisson did not have the ball when Lawes tackled him. So if that tackle was not illegal then it must also be legal to tackle a player in anticipation of his receiving the ball. Clearly to accept that would be wrong and so in both cases a player without the ball is tackled and that is illegal.

As you will know, as a player with the ball you expect to be tackled and are prepared for it, but as soon as you release the ball you relax and try to move to a position to support the run of the game. That is what makes a late tackle and even one that is marginally late very dangerous as the whip lash action of Plissons head and neck showed.

Only one referee disagreed. The 4th official drew the refs attention to what had happened so he must have had concerns as did the crowd in their reaction to it and so did Lawes body language. But Nigel decided not to review, quote his response was, 'I'm happy with the tackle'. A dangerous precedent!

Your logic is...interesting. By implication of what you're saying, it should be a penalty offence even if the tackle is a tenth of a second late. The implications of that would be very silly and players wouldn't be able to tackle anymore without risking being penalised .
And why is tackling in anticipation of a player having the ball the same as tackling just after? You are allowed to go to make a tackle for as long as the player you are tackling has the ball. Therefore if committed, you're justified provided your decision to tackle wasn't itself late.

By the way, tackling in anticipation of someone having ball is obviously only illegal if the tackle itself takes place before he's got the ball. These are just not the same scenarios to be comparing.

Plus, when Owens said he was happy with it the 4th referee clearly said 'I agree with that Nigel'.

Michael Lawes was fine.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Ewers doesn't seem to get in the air at lineouts (someone please show me I'm wrong).

Interesting comment. I saw Ewers play live back in November, unless he was carrying an injury at the time, I think there are real question marks over his athleticism. Having read him being talked up here and elsewhere, I made a point of looking out for him and was surprised to see that he spent most of his afternoon slowly trotting from one breakdown to the next.

I don't get to watch that many live AP games and highlights are close to useless, so I'd be interested to hear from anyone who watches him more often - maybe I just caught him on a bad day!

 

[Tony Manx]

Lawes tackle was legal and brilliant and if any namby pamby thinks different they should not be posting here or are so biased as to be irrelevant!!

Tuilagi has not proven himself to be fit enough to play nor has he shown sufficient passing ability (either skill wise or aptitude wise) to be considered as a 12!

Haskell, without question, knew exactly what he was doing in executing that trip and, for that reason alone, should not play another game for England as it is just a continuation of his poor record in penalty gifts!!

 

[Mike Rolls]

Ian Ritchie has called Englands Six Nations performance unacceptable

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32035225

Well, as a statement of the patently obvious, it stands alongside Beattie at Jutland saying 'there's something wrong with our ships today'. As for saying that we should be winning more of everything -no wonder we sometimes get accused of being arrogant. Presumably, in Mr. Ritchie's view, if England fail to win the World Cup that will also be 'unacceptable'? In case he hasn't noticed, just getting out of the group is going to take some doing.
Mike

 

[91jmay]

Read in the Guardian today that Steffon Armitage might be added to WC squad. Hope he can behave himself. Whilst he is made out to the saviour to all our woes by some in the media, which is ridiculous, having a specialist in the back row is exactly what we need. Our pack underperformed in 6Ns , Launchbury back and Armitage selected would be nice additions. Corbi if fit is a great player as well, but can't count on him due to injury so its a bonus if we get anything out of him.

Haskell adds power which we are a bit short of at times, but brainless in a lot of ways. Prefer Wood, but then I am biased.

 

[ncurd]

Read in the Guardian today that Steffon Armitage might be added to WC squad. Hope he can behave himself. Whilst he is made out to the saviour to all our woes by some in the media, which is ridiculous, having a specialist in the back row is exactly what we need. Our pack underperformed in 6Ns , Launchbury back and Armitage selected would be nice additions. Corbi if fit is a great player as well, but can't count on him due to injury so its a bonus if we get anything out of him.

Haskell adds power which we are a bit short of at times, but brainless in a lot of ways. Prefer Wood, but then I am biased.

Here we go again!

 

[Wendigo7]

Interesting comment. I saw Ewers play live back in November, unless he was carrying an injury at the time, I think there are real question marks over his athleticism. Having read him being talked up here and elsewhere, I made a point of looking out for him and was surprised to see that he spent most of his afternoon slowly trotting from one breakdown to the next.

I don't get to watch that many live AP games and highlights are close to useless, so I'd be interested to hear from anyone who watches him more often - maybe I just caught him on a bad day!

Aviva Premiership website has every game recorded and for free to watch in full.