New Zealand v Wales - Saturday 26 June 2010 - Hamilton

[TRF_Olyy]

Looked like a straight forward dump tackle to me.
If that happened to me on the pitch i wouldn't think twice about it, just dust myself off and play on

 

[smartcooky]

Well, you can't crticise Kaplan's decision if he was just following instructions. There is no way that that kind of tackle should get a red card. That is way to harsh for my liking.

Looked like a straight forward dump tackle to me.
If that happened to me on the pitch i wouldn't think twice about it, just dust myself off and play on

Just one question....

Would you still think that if, as a result of such illegal tackle, your neck was broken, ending your career, and putting you in a wheelchair for the rest of your life?

This memorandum came about after the huge media storm and enormous amount of criticism of the iRB over its lack of action as regards the O'Driscoll - Umaga - Mealamu incident on the 2005 Lions tour of New Zealand.

It is now effectively illegal to lift an opponent off the ground in a tackle or an attempted tackle because if you read the way the memorandum is worded.....

for a spear tackle, i.e. driving the player head first into the ground.

for dropping the player carelessly

OR a Penalty Kick for ANY other tackle where you lift your opponent off the ground.

Moral of the Story:

DO NOT LIFT YOUR OPPONENT OFF THE GROUND. The iRB means to stamp this type of tackle out of the game completely, and so it should. There is nothing to be gained by lifting a player off the ground, and everything to lose, for both the tackler and the tackled player.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Wait, are dump tackles not allowed anymore then?
I've seen a fair few in GP/Magners that went unpunished, but they're lifting the player off of the ground?

 

[SelimNiai]

This memorandum came about after the huge media storm and enormous amount of criticism of the iRB over its lack of action as regards the O'Driscoll - Umaga - Mealamu incident on the 2005 Lions tour of New Zealand.

There is a world of difference between what they did and Byrne's tackle.

 

[MindofMykyta]

Wait, are dump tackles not allowed anymore then?
I've seen a fair few in GP/Magners that went unpunished, but they're lifting the player off of the ground?

Yeah, I always thought dump tackles were allowed as long as the tackler "puts the player down" so to speak. As soon as he drives the player head-first and simply drops him, then a yellow/red card should be drawn.

I think Bryne deserved the yellow because it did look like he dropped the other player on his neck (or close to it).

 

[smartcooky]

Wait, are dump tackles not allowed anymore then?
I've seen a fair few in GP/Magners that went unpunished, but they're lifting the player off of the ground?

There is no such thing as a "dump tackle". You won't find it mentioned anywhere in the Laws of the Game.

Lifting a player BEYOND horizontal is going to get you penalised. What you do after that will determine how severe that penalty will be.

Knocking a player off his feet in the act of tackling, then dumping him on his back is one thing and its perfectly legal. Its quite another to lift a player up so that his feet are above horizontal and then let him fall head downward, feet upwards; its going to get you a card, because it is very, very dangerous.

If you have seen tackles in the ML & GP where the tackler has let the player fall head-first, and the tackler has not been penalised, then the referee is defying the iRB memorandum

I find this sequence pretty conclusive. Byrne grabs him by one leg, lifts him up and turns him over so that he is legs up head down

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Fair enough, you can clearly see it in the screencaps,
When i saw it in the game it looked like he'd lifted the guy, then both had fallen down

 

[cyRil]

I'd like to post something, but the memory of what Mealamu and Umaga did without getting punished at all riles me so much that I'd just write something silly. I know it's 5 years on, but still...

 

[Thingimubob]

Screens look worse than the video imo, I thought it was a little harsh to bin him when I saw the highlights. Doubt there was any malicious intent in that tackle.
Meant to ask, how did Will Harries get on? My dad said from listening on the radio Harries was popping up everywhere. Hope he gets more chances soon, he's a class player and tbh I still dont get why Prydie was picked ahead of him for the match v SA and the two against the All Blacks.
Even though we lost both tests, I still say Wales can be proud that they gave a good showing of themselves, especially considering the injury problems they've had. I thought Wales fronted up physically and they gave everything in both tests. There's a lot of potential in this Welsh side, and things are looking promising for the future. Hopefully we can put the muck-ups of this season behind us and get things right next season ready for the World Cup. Come on Cymru!
Fair play to the All Blacks too, you guys are just ridiculously good, hats off to you for yet another series win.

 

[jawmalawm24]

Omg what a boring game this was I fell asleep on it because it just wasn't good to watch especially after seeing a free flowing game like the Nz Maori vs England.

 

[Draggs]

Harries had quite a few touches of the ball and was quite involved. HE made decent distance and was contributing factor to the build-up to Jamie's try.
Hope to see him this fall against Fiji and perhaps the others.

Screens look worse than the video imo, I thought it was a little harsh to bin him when I saw the highlights. Doubt there was any malicious intent in that tackle.
Meant to ask, how did Will Harries get on? My dad said from listening on the radio Harries was popping up everywhere. Hope he gets more chances soon, he's a class player and tbh I still dont get why Prydie was picked ahead of him for the match v SA and the two against the All Blacks.
Even though we lost both tests, I still say Wales can be proud that they gave a good showing of themselves, especially considering the injury problems they've had. I thought Wales fronted up physically and they gave everything in both tests. There's a lot of potential in this Welsh side, and things are looking promising for the future. Hopefully we can put the muck-ups of this season behind us and get things right next season ready for the World Cup. Come on Cymru!
Fair play to the All Blacks too, you guys are just ridiculously good, hats off to you for yet another series win.

 

[nickdnz]

There has been some debate here, and on other rugby forums regarding the Lee Byrne yellow card, and whether or not it should have been given. Opinions range from "just a penalty" to a red card.

From a referee's perspective, Byrne could and should have got a a red card, not necessarily for the inherent danger in the tackle, but because of an iRB memorandum to referees (dated June 2009) regarding Dangerous Lifting Tackles. I have attached the memorandum for anyone who wants to read it, but the essential part is the summary,


There is no doubt that Byrne lifts Donnelly off the ground; that is clear for everyone to see in the video...



He then loses control of Donnelly, who crashes to the ground.

Byrne and the Welsh captain argued that it was accidental, and to be fair, perhaps his loss of control was not intended. However, from the moment Byrne lifted his opponent off the ground, he became responsible for what happened to that opponent. It was only sheer luck, or perhaps Adam Jones' presence of mind, that prevented Donnelly hitting the ground head first.

IMO, Kaplan erred on the side of leniency. He should have red carded Byrne, and will probably get a bollocking from his Match Assessor for not doing so.

smartcookie, nice to see you and your use of the rules is back, it was missed!

smartcookie is dead right. Unless you are a mind reader, then intent is very hard to referee. What you can referee is what actually happened and what the rules say are consiquence. It does seem very hippocritical that many NH members are saying Umaga and Mealamu are, as mentioned a week or so back are "thugs", and yet Byrne just made a mistake. I would have suggested that a red card, by the rules, would be a safe decission.

 

[Haysie]

It is now effectively illegal to lift an opponent off the ground in a tackle or an attempted tackle because if you read the way the memorandum is worded.....

View attachment 235 for a spear tackle, i.e. driving the player head first into the ground.

View attachment 235 for dropping the player carelessly

View attachment 236 OR a Penalty Kick for ANY other tackle where you lift your opponent off the ground.

Moral of the Story:

DO NOT LIFT YOUR OPPONENT OFF THE GROUND. The iRB means to stamp this type of tackle out of the game completely, and so it should. There is nothing to be gained by lifting a player off the ground, and everything to lose, for both the tackler and the tackled player.

Do you mean Do not lift your opponent past the horizontal?. I can think of plenty of scenarios and tackles whereby it would be beneficial to lift your opponent off the ground, completely eliminating forward momentum.

 

[smartcooky]

Do you mean Do not lift your opponent past the horizontal?. I can think of plenty of scenarios and tackles whereby it would be beneficial to lift your opponent off the ground, completely eliminating forward momentum.

Sorry. Yes I did mean lifting past horizontal.

Anyone in NZ who has the Rugby Channel and saw Samoa v Fiji this afternoon, will have seen a similar tackle in the last few minutes of the game. The response of the referee, Roman Poite of France, was the same... a yellow card for the Fijian player.

 

[Bargoedboy]

In my View Byrne was right to recieve yellow, as ref was right there and if he is to enforce law then byrne should have gone, intent or not.Jonathan Thomas should also have gone for his stupid shoulder charge, which was stupid beyond belief, and this from the guy who bangs on about discipline the most.However i was not happy that Gavin thomas got yellow for doing exactly the same as cowan who punched phillips in front of ref which did not even warrant a talking to. Consistency !
All of this comes back to one person in my view, the refs are human (contrary to popular belief) and can only enforce the Laws. However if they are being told all the time what Paddy Obriens latest pet hate is due to current climate, it is hard to remain objective on match as a whole. Refs should enforce the laws of the game in the whole aspect , not pay particular notice to, dangerous tackles as after the lions odriscoll saga, but enforce rules that are ther in Black and White, and also enforce them the same for both teams and for both hemispheres, not interpret to suit. If refs are undermined publicly by head of refs then they will worry about how they ref the game when particular teams are involved not just enforce the laws .

 

[nickdnz]

In my View Byrne was right to recieve yellow, as ref was right there and if he is to enforce law then byrne should have gone, intent or not.Jonathan Thomas should also have gone for his stupid shoulder charge, which was stupid beyond belief, and this from the guy who bangs on about discipline the most.However i was not happy that Gavin thomas got yellow for doing exactly the same as cowan who punched phillips in front of ref which did not even warrant a talking to. Consistency !
All of this comes back to one person in my view, the refs are human (contrary to popular belief) and can only enforce the Laws. However if they are being told all the time what Paddy Obriens latest pet hate is due to current climate, it is hard to remain objective on match as a whole. Refs should enforce the laws of the game in the whole aspect , not pay particular notice to, dangerous tackles as after the lions odriscoll saga, but enforce rules that are ther in Black and White, and also enforce them the same for both teams and for both hemispheres, not interpret to suit. If refs are undermined publicly by head of refs then they will worry about how they ref the game when particular teams are involved not just enforce the laws .

Ahh yes, your theory that O'Brien is bias, based purely on Dickinson's telling off. I mean, it's rubbish, but go on. Interesting how O'Brien defended Wayne Barnes after the 2007 RWC, interesting from a bias ref, huh?

 

[smartcooky]

All of this comes back to one person in my view, the refs are human (contrary to popular belief) and can only enforce the Laws. However if they are being told all the time what Paddy Obriens latest pet hate is due to current climate, it is hard to remain objective on match as a whole. Refs should enforce the laws of the game in the whole aspect , not pay particular notice to, dangerous tackles as after the lions odriscoll saga, but enforce rules that are ther in Black and White, and also enforce them the same for both teams and for both hemispheres, not interpret to suit. If refs are undermined publicly by head of refs then they will worry about how they ref the game when particular teams are involved not just enforce the laws .

I think you are being very harsh on O'Brien. You fall into the trap if seeing his name on something and then blaming him if you don't like it. This is called "shooting the messenger"

O'Brien is the iRB referees manager, but he does not have carte blanche to issue memos outlining "pet hates". He is a member of the iRB Laws Committee and as the Referee manager, he is both their spokesman and the conduit by which their decisions are conveyed to referees world-wide.

The issue of dangerous lifting tackles is not, as you suggest, a "pet hate". It was brought to the fore by three important incidents;

1. The O'Driscoll "tackle" and the subsequent media storm and witch hunt/hanging posse conducted by the British print and television media.

2. Successful application for a ruling (by the IRFU) regarding lifting tackles (you can read the ruling HERE)

3. The decision of a Judiciary hearing against the Cheetahs player Tewis de Bruyn (in May 2009) who was the first player to be suspended for a lifting tackle where the player was dropped, but not "speared". (I have the full transcript of this decision and will post it if you wish. I warn you it is tedious)

The iRB Laws committee incorporated the 2005 Ruling into the Law book in 2009 as Law 10.4 (i)

Law 10.4 (i) Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player's feet are still off the ground such that the player's head and/or upper body come into contact with the ground first is dangerous play.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

In the 2010 Law book, it has become Law 10.4 (j) as another Law on Dangerous charging has displaced it.

 

[DuncTheDoodle]

I mised the game through my D of E walk being schedualed at the same time, but just watched the highlights on S4C. Harries and McCusker looked quite good. Davies seemed like he really wanted to impress, and wasn't over-awed. If

Mind you, I don't see what the big deal about Byrne's tackle was. Penalty, maybe, card, definatly not.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

smartcooky that video you posted left a massive question even before that incident.

Why was Woodcock not penalized for entering the wrong side of the ruck and clearly clearing the ruck with his shoulder ... THAT merited a yellow card. All well and good smashing the laws out when one was not enforced prior to the 'so called dangerous tackle'. A spear tackle is technically is inverting someone ... which technically he did but he did not invert him so that he landed on his head, and therefore borders on the line of whether he was speared or not. The momentum from Adam Jones might also not have helped it either. Also there is little evidence to show that Byrne drove him into the ground either!

Oh and why you are at it look up punching a player in open play ... Cowan has gotten away with it once or twice and its about time the ref took punishment. Even if its a talking to. He gets away with it and I don't think anyone can really argue for it.

Its all well and good bringing the law book out but when they are not used correctly and are interpreted incorrectly or even interpreted which laws cannot be or should not be then there is a problem. I always dread seeing Kaplan ref because he is just utter useless. Its about time Paddy O'Brien sorted it out instead of allowing rugby to continue in this farce of a matter.

 

[Bargoedboy]

Ahh yes, your theory that O'Brien is bias, based purely on Dickinson's telling off. I mean, it's rubbish, but go on. Interesting how O'Brien defended Wayne Barnes after the 2007 RWC, interesting from a bias ref, huh?

Why do you feel the need to attack my post with nonsense, where did i say Paddy obrien was bias`ed, read my post and try and understand what i am saying , that paddy Obrien as the head of refs, is issueing to many edicts about various aspects of the laws, we can blame others if you want but he is head of rugby refs is he not ?
as for bias , i do not think he is bias`d at all , stupid and ignorant maybe, his dealing of dickinson should have seen him sacked !