[June Tests 2018: 3rd Test] Australia vs. Ireland (23/06/2018)

[munstermuffin]

Objectively true.

On which part. It is actually part of reason is that Folau was 100% the cause of POM turning in the air

 

[Hanley!]

He clearly committed two yellow card offenses by the letter of the law (maybe three, I haven't seen clear footage of the second chronological incident). So the ban was warranted under the rules, yes? Does anyone have a valid argument to dispute this?

That people are still whining about the ruling is baffling to me, given he got off with a single week ban, and the situation has no real impact on the game or the test series. And given that it was clearly the correct interpretation of the law.

If you want to claim it's a bullshit law then that's fair enough. But I'm curious as to what the law could be changed to that would be practical, keep players safe, and stop the Aussies from whining the next time around.

Seems a tall order.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

The laws are horse ****

 

[RedruthRFC]

So is trying to catch the ball, yet if someone jumps into you you can get red carded and banned

Nobody is suggesting that anyone should be banned for trying to catch the ball. What is being suggested is that if you fail to catch the ball, you should return to the ground safely, not use your left hand to pull a player in a vulnerable position off balance causing them to crash to the ground.

 

[RedruthRFC]

The laws are horse ****

Re: the incident that Folau actually got a card for, what is wrong with the laws and how they were applied?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

https://twitter.com/MariaFolau/status/1012557409493979137?s=19

Consistency

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

https://twitter.com/MariaFolau/status/1012557409493979137?s=19

Consistency

It was a penalty and Folau lands hip first there...

A rule based on outcome is absolutely normal, I don't get why people don't like it.
If you go drink driving and make it home without meeting a checkpoint or causing a collision you won't be punished, if you kill three people you're a murderer, a law made on outcome and not intent.

If you tackle someone in the air and they land perfectly on their feet it'll be a penalty at most, if they land on their head it's a red card. Intent shouldn't matter as much as outcome, it'd be a bizarre way to officiate.

Ban the one man lift if needs be but what Folau did - pulling with one hand - was a lot more dangerous than Kearney grabbing with two and resulted in a more dangerous fall and would have had it been a one man jump too. As a result he copped a harsher punishment for the same crime, absolutely normal.

 

[ratsapprentice]

It was a penalty and Folau lands hip first there...

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

You're actually right to laugh, on further viewing it's his left foot...

 

[TRF_Olyy]

If you go drink driving and make it home without meeting a checkpoint or causing a collision you won't be punished, if you kill three people you're a murderer, a law made on outcome and not intent.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

You've s nice echo chamber lads, not a smart one but a nice one.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

No but seriously that drink driving argument might be the dumbest argument I've ever read on these forums.


I mean you're literally disagreeing with yourself with it.
Drink driving is punishable no matter what the outcome, you could be having the safest drive home ever, if you get randomly breathalised you're losing your license.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

No but seriously that drink driving argument might be the dumbest argument I've ever read on these forums.


I mean you're literally disagreeing with yourself with it.
Drink driving is punishable no matter what the outcome, you could be having the safest drive home ever, if you get randomly breathalised you're losing your license.

But if you kill someone you're facing a worse punishment even though the guy who doesn't was fully capable of. If you take someone out in the air it's a penalty, if they land on their head it's a red. The outcome affects the punishment.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

But they're two different crimes,
Competing for the ball is legal, the actions of someone else can turn it illegal.
It's more like driving down a single car lane and going headfirst into a speeding car round a blind corner and being charged with premeditated homicide.
It's an unfortunate accident in a dangerous situation, there doesn't have to be blame.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

But they're two different crimes,
Competing for the ball is legal, the actions of someone else can turn it illegal.
It's more like driving down a single car lane and going headfirst into a speeding car round a blind corner and being charged with premeditated homicide.

What? He played the man in the air, that's clear and established...

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I'm talking about contests in the air in general

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

If it's done right, which admittedly it rarely is because the laws are so strict, outcome doesn't matter. Currently if you contest with a realistic chance of getting the ball you're ok, it's just not likely for a contest to happen where something dangerous happens in that case.

While the laws are in place I don't feel too bad for anyone who gets on the wrong side of them, they're harsh for everyone.

 

[munstermuffin]

I'm talking about contests in the air in general

The thing you are massively ignoring here though. Folau isn't been punished for contesting in air. He is being punished for clearly pulling a player in the air on 3 occasions. If he contested the ball and didn't pull the player he'd be ok.

 

[Hanley!]

I don't even know why we're still talking about competing for the ball being legal, as that wasn't the issue in any of these incidents.

 

[smartcooky]

Which part aren't you getting.

The part they don't want to get.