• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Investec Champions Cup 23/24 - Rd 4

You can ramble on about duty of care until the cows come home, it was a dynamic movement with two points of contact, as you stated it happens and there is potential for this to happen every ruck of which there are plenty every game. Of course there is always a duty of care, Don't shoulder charge to the head or tackle high, don't fly into a ruck with a leading shoulder all very controllable most of the time, as you know rucking is a core part of the game, if you don't challenge to slow opposition ball or secure your own it's going to be a tough day at the office, calling duty of care doesn't suddenly enable the player to predict the freak event of a players head being in an awkward position or give him the ability to defy natural movement and pull out mid way though a dynamic movement. Really need to accept that applying a phrase doesn't change the physical reality of things. This isn't to say I'm unsympathetic toward Ahern I am it was horrible unfortunate and really wish him a speedy recovery.

The more I think about it the more the commentary boils my ****, he felt contact so should have stopped (with limbs all over the shop why would he assume it's with the head), you can't just stop a dynamic movement it easy to say when you put it clip by clip in slow it happened so quickly, to play judge, jury and executioner in the manor does a disservice to the sport and those that play it, I expect better from those that have plaid the sport, id put money on them having a different view were it the other way around.
But it wasn't not sure if you saw game as you missed 1 or 2 things. He positioned himself then powered 2nd knee forward. Again no malice but that is 2 seperate movements.
Not sure how you are arguing the duty of care bit as that pretty clear. If a mans head is on floor then of course the player going in has to be aware. Its the same as rucking can include stamping feet down to ground yet you catch player that a red.
Like there was a look down between the 2 hits so wasn't as dynamic as you make out as if all 1 movement. The more I seen it the more clearer it gets as an offence. The red card comes as like a red card once it becomes head it goes red. Like if knee hit body or that it yellow.
 
I hope the folks reviewing it have a better grasp of the game
I think having reviewed it in slow and normal time it gets clearer and ref explained it clear. First knee is ok as in accident then 2nd is not intentional but reckless. Factors are clear too.
1. He looking down and can see clear. So no obstruction.
2. His left knee hits. Then he plants that and then drives right knee. Not all 1 movement the more I see.

Like it actually is clear within rules
 
But it wasn't not sure if you saw game as you missed 1 or 2 things. He positioned himself then powered 2nd knee forward. Again no malice but that is 2 seperate movements.
Not sure how you are arguing the duty of care bit as that pretty clear. If a mans head is on floor then of course the player going in has to be aware. Its the same as rucking can include stamping feet down to ground yet you catch player that a red.
Like there was a look down between the 2 hits so wasn't as dynamic as you make out as if all 1 movement. The more I seen it the more clearer it gets as an offence. The red card comes as like a red card once it becomes head it goes red. Like if knee hit body or that it yellow.
Hypocrisy of the tallest order this, you presented NH not complaining about potential head contact during their last try that was nonsense as fact and proof it didn't happen, they clearly did, I'm afraid you need to stop with the blinkered vision, if I was the only one that struggles to see how the player could have done much differently I'd concede, you however appear to be in the minority here! If you slow any incident down frame by frame you can give the impression things happen a lot more slowly than they do in reality. Clearly we won't agree on this and it's a hill you are prepared do die on. We move on.
 
Hypocrisy of the tallest order this, you presented NH not complaining about potential head contact during their last try that was nonsense as fact and proof it didn't happen, they clearly did, I'm afraid you need to stop with the blinkered vision, if I was the only one that struggles to see how the player could have done much differently I'd concede, you however appear to be in the minority here! If you slow any incident down frame by frame you can give the impression things happen a lot more slowly than they do in reality. Clearly we won't agree on this and it's a hill you are prepared do die on. We move on.
Again I said I didn't see the complaints in stadium. But noted TMO did say all clear. And again said Frisch got feet up and to side. Didn't defend him to hills.
Again on the red. There is 3 seperate movements not sure what you are arguing.
Movement 1. Left knee hits head.
Movement 2. Left leg plants to ground. And looking down.
Movement 3. Right leg powers forward.

Like what is your argument I still don't get. It is extremely clear and obvious it is not all 1 movement. Like what part of the ref do you disagree with.
 
Screenshot_20240121_104853_YouTube.jpg
 
View attachment 18767

Is this legal? (For reference why I mention Simmons went off after with an eye injury)
Simmons should get his eye out of Lowe's finger.

Ehhh, while hand offs to the face are legal I can't see that being anything but an accidental rugby incident. Accidental v Reckless is the question (for all of these, I looked it up) and I don't think that's reckless.

Langdon being so far away from the ball and clearing out a player who is off his feet and illegally playing the ball doesn't really help his case but I'm sympathetic with how quickly it all happened and how messy the contact area was. I'm really flipping back and forth on it.
 
Simmons should get his eye out of Lowe's finger.

Ehhh, while hand offs to the face are legal I can't see that being anything but an accidental rugby incident. Accidental v Reckless is the question (for all of these, I looked it up) and I don't think that's reckless.

Langdon being so far away from the ball and clearing out a player who is off his feet and illegally playing the ball doesn't really help his case but I'm sympathetic with how quickly it all happened and how messy the contact area was. I'm really flipping back and forth on it.
I think that is what hurt Langdon was too many factors against him as you said. Like and when it gets borserline and head is involved it rarely ends well. Like the counter argument. For yellow if Nash doesn't put out hand to break fall that could turn to red based on landing. It a clear rule for tip tackle but stupid so like Nash could argubally take land and player get red. Just using that as example it wasn't a red and again was no malice or force in it
 
For Frisch moment I think if you slow it down his arse hits ribs not a knee to head. And he was clearly getting body put of way
Your missing my point here, regardless of if contact was made or not, I can't be arsed to go back and find your comment, if I recall correctly it was along the lines of NH not complaining (they did) you then accuse me of missing bits when you clearly missed that (hence my remark of hypocrisy). The red in slow mo, it looks far more intentional and less fluid there are dynamics though, if your moving forward with momentum you don't suddenly stop statically, natural balancing and all sorts come into play here. It is what it is mate, we move on, let's just hope it was genuinely completely accidental and a freak incident (I genuinely believe it was) and most importanly Ahern has a speedy and full recovery.
 
Simmons should get his eye out of Lowe's finger.

Ehhh, while hand offs to the face are legal I can't see that being anything but an accidental rugby incident. Accidental v Reckless is the question (for all of these, I looked it up) and I don't think that's reckless.

Langdon being so far away from the ball and clearing out a player who is off his feet and illegally playing the ball doesn't really help his case but I'm sympathetic with how quickly it all happened and how messy the contact area was. I'm really flipping back and forth on it.

True but also any contact with the eye area is illegal
Last I checked their is 3 tiers for eye contact
Intentional - 12 weeks +
Reckless - 6 weeks +
General contact - 4 weeks +

I don't personally think Lowe should be cited for it, nor even carded. But at the same time Simmons went off injured for it (I have sympathy for Simmons since he always gets injury)

I guess it's what does eye contact mean
 
Your missing my point here, regardless of if contact was made or not, I can't be arsed to go back and find your comment, if I recall correctly it was along the lines of NH not complaining (they did) you then accuse me of missing bits when you clearly missed that (hence my remark of hypocrisy). The red in slow mo, it looks far more intentional and less fluid there are dynamics though, if your moving forward with momentum you don't suddenly stop statically, natural balancing and all sorts come into play here. It is what it is mate, we move on, let's just hope it was genuinely completely accidental and a freak incident (I genuinely believe it was) and most importanly Ahern has a speedy and full recovery.
I wasn't watching on tv. I was there live. And owned up once I said. On same incident you said there was knee to head that clearly wasn't near, said red incident was 1 movement that clearly wasn't and I spotted that in real time not just slow motion. But TMO reviews on slow and real time so again the argument you made of 1 movement is not true. He did stop planted left leg and drove with right.

I'm not here to get in a *** for tat and was one who said from start noone in stadium demanded a red. Most thought yellow and move on but on rules it is as clear a red as can be the more you see it. I referenced CJ red vs South Africa and late hit on Lambie years ago. Similar criterie even though CJs was a charge down that went wrong so.it not as if this law is just in
 
Is that screenshot not from after he hit him in the face?

Just watched the clip of the try on twitter and they don't show the reverse angle, which I think was the one that showed the contact cause the posts are in the way from pitch view
Also shows Saints captain immediately go to the referee to raise it
 
True but also any contact with the eye area is illegal
Last I checked their is 3 tiers for eye contact
Intentional - 12 weeks +
Reckless - 6 weeks +
General contact - 4 weeks +

I don't personally think Lowe should be cited for it, nor even carded. But at the same time Simmons went off injured for it (I have sympathy for Simmons since he always gets injury)

I guess it's what does eye contact mean
Yeah that's fair. Rules are a mess in certain areas tbh.
 
No that was at exact point of 1st contact. I watched few times and as you can see there he got everything up. There a wide out angle too that shows but even take in physics. If he hits in head body would turn other way on skid.
I do see the captain going to ref and I do know TMO looked and said all clear. I presume going to.ref was on basis of seeing slide and knowing it had potential to be dangerous. Don't get me wrong. IF Frish did connect with head he'd get red too
 
Is that screenshot not from after he hit him in the face?

Just watched the clip of the try on twitter and they don't show the reverse angle, which I think was the one that showed the contact cause the posts are in the way from pitch view
Also shows Saints captain immediately go to the referee to raise it
Should add just rewatched. If you look after score Saints player stays down a few secs and it looks like he holds head but think he was a tad gassed. Like he up in the few seconds and not 1 ill effect. If he did get it in face he would have felt it some bit in that weather especially.but have seen 3 angles and think they all clear there was no knee near head and Frisch did get out of way safely. Now knowing him he is not a dirty player so never had doubt regardless. However if he did try all his movements getting out of way and still fid connect with head then that is a different story. Similar to red card incident but thankfully here he did clear the mans head and clearly had no intent and did not connect anywhere near head.
 

Latest posts

Top