Test Match 2: All Blacks v British & Irish Lions (Wellington)

[Leonormous Boozer]

British sports media is really below par tripe on the best of days. Theyre really up there with the baddest of winners.

What's wrong with that out of interest? I could make 5 examples of NZ players deserving to be sent off and the ref bottling it off the top of my head...

 

[nik]

How the ABs midfield shapes up will be interesting. We need to improve our defence. The lions were able to create mismatches and out attack us.

 

[General Melchett]

For Mako's yellow, did anyone else hear the TMO trying to get the ref's attention just before he dished out the yellow and penalty? It seemed like the TMO wasn't finished and had more advice to give but the ref either ignored him or didn't hear him. He may well have been about to suggest upgrading the yellow to red.

 

[Maverick1987]

Living up to your username again I see!

So Naholo was milking it eh? You do realise he failed the HIA? (I'd be astonished if you even know what that is!)

I thought that Barrett was milking the penalty when Mako went for the charge down . Definitely didn't milk the atrocious clear out though ! And to suggest Naholo was milking it is just idiotic ! The guy was knocked out !

 

[galumay]

...and nobody mentioning the reason why head shot are no go area in modern game

i did mention it, but apparently I was being PC.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

For Mako's yellow, did anyone else hear the TMO trying to get the ref's attention just before he dished out the yellow and penalty? It seemed like the TMO wasn't finished and had more advice to give but the ref either ignored him or didn't hear him. He may well have been about to suggest upgrading the yellow to red.

Yep heard that as well. Garces just ignored him and had made up his mind from what he had seen on the big screen or couldn't hear him over the din of the crowd.

 

[ncurd]

i did mention it, but apparently I was being PC.

Fair enough I got a bit frustrated 2 pages in....

 

[smartcooky]

SBW's hearing started at 5pm, it took until 7:43 to get an answer... and he pled guilty!!!

SOB's hearing started at 8pm (its 9:46 now as I type this) and I understand he is contesting the charge, so it could be a while.

 

[Truth]

Why have I just had read a couple of pages Skylineard1 being completely moronic and nobody mentioning the reason why head shot are no go area in modern game.

The answer is medical science. Until recently the long term effects of concussion and repeated concussions were not really understood. We have now learnt that have a dramatic effect on someone's long term health and lead to physical and mental problems. The rugby world has seen this evidence and is doing it's level best to mitigate those factors whilst preserving the contact nature of the sport. It really ****** me off when people pull out the PC card we little regards to the facts. If you want to watch a sport where the authorities dont give a **** about players welfare in the long term go watch something else and shut up.

Absolutely and these reasons you mentioned should be exactly why SOB should get a suspension also. You can't have two different ways. SBW and SOB both hit the head. No buts.

 

[Maverick1987]

Absolutely and these reasons you mentioned should be exactly why SOB should get a suspension also. You can't have two different ways. SBW and SOB both hit the head. No buts.

Rubbish ... you CANNOT compare the 2 hits SOB has no way of knowing Naholos head is there . He simply goes to put his weight behind a tackle that hasn't come to the ground yet . SBW offers no arms to the tackle and drives his shoulder into the face of the opponent . I'm dubious to wether it was intentional or not tbh .....

SOB should be found no guilty and be free to play next week if you ask me . Imo it's an unfortunate accident

I'd compare this to 2 players jumping for a high ball both looking at the ball and ones head hitting the other and getting knocked out .

Even the fact he got KO'd shouldn't come into it . The fact Watson wasn't knocked out didn't alter how bad the "tackle" was on him

 

[Skylinerd1]

Lets look at the regulations. In all likelihood, he was charged under

10.4(g) Dangerous charging or knocking down an Opponent with the ball, including shouldering

Regulation 17 Appendix 1 says;

Low End = 2 weeks
Mid Range = 5 weeks
Top End = 10 up to a maximum of 52

Contact was made with the head, with force, so Low End is out of the question. It was not serious enough for Top End, so I reckon it was Mid Range - 5 weeks with a week off for an early guilty plea. There would be no mitigation for a clean record, because he has been yellow carded for this offence before.

Four weeks looks about right to me.

As usual you miss my point. Im saying the regulations are wrong.

4 weeks on top of a red card which had major implications for the team for that shoulder charge is totally and utterly ridiculous.

This is not rugby anymore im not saying he should get away with it im saying they are just going to far.

 

[Truth]

Rubbish ... you CANNOT compare the 2 hits SOB has no way of knowing Naholos head is there . He simply goes to put his weight behind a tackle that hasn't come to the ground yet . SBW offers no arms to the tackle and drives his shoulder into the face of the opponent . I'm dubious to wether it was intentional or not tbh .....

SOB should be found no guilty and be free to play next week if you ask me . Imo it's an unfortunate accident

SBW and SOB both hit the head resulting in CONCUSSIONS to both players. Thats what happened.

 

[smartcooky]

Yep heard that as well. Garces just ignored him and had made up his mind from what he had seen on the big screen or couldn't hear him over the din of the crowd.

They had comms trouble with the wet weather... Ayoub could hear Garces but Garces couldn't hear Ayoub

 

[ncurd]

Absolutely and these reasons you mentioned should be exactly why SOB should get a suspension also. You can't have two different ways. SBW and SOB both hit the head. No buts.

Its a matter of the play it's a contact sport you won't mitigate every hit to the head. Otherwise we'll have red cards every match. SBW has no legitimate reason to why he didn't use his arms (which is the main factor to it being a Red card). SOB was using his arms and what he was trying to do was in the realms of the laws on the game. He should of been given a yellow card for it but it's level of difference why the incident occurs that warrants a different approach.

 

[Skylinerd1]

Why have I just had read a couple of pages Skylineard1 being completely moronic and nobody mentioning the reason why head shot are no go area in modern game.

The answer is medical science. Until recently the long term effects of concussion and repeated concussions were not really understood. We have now learnt that have a dramatic effect on someone's long term health and lead to physical and mental problems. The rugby world has seen this evidence and is doing it's level best to mitigate those factors whilst preserving the contact nature of the sport. It really ****** me off when people pull out the PC card we little regards to the facts. If you want to watch a sport where the authorities dont give a **** about players welfare in the long term go watch something else and shut up.

Look these guys are payed plenty of money to more than account for the danger they put themselves under. You choose to play the sport just like boxers choose to box. Everyone knows the implications. Dont drag out the jimmy is gunna get his head chopped off bullshit.

I still say we need to have a survey of every professional player in the sport and let them decide on this one.

To me the rules have been decided in a far to politically correct manner.

 

[Truth]

Its a matter of the play it's a contact sport you won't mitigate every hit to the head. Otherwise we'll have red cards every match. SBW has no legitimate reason to why he didn't use his arms (which is the main factor to it being a Red card). SOB was using his arms and what he was trying to do was in the realms of the laws on the game. He should of been given a yellow card for it but it's level of difference why the incident occurs that warrants a different approach.

The thing is for me is now that we know Naholo became concussed as a result of SOBs contact to the head, and wasn't binned for that, he should be suspended for this weeks game. That way no one gets away with it.

 

[Maverick1987]

Thinking back the lions tour has an array of thuggish behaviour on lions players . The last 3 tours have seen James Horwill get away with a sickening stamp on AWJ head, Bakkies Botha get away with a horrendous clear out on Adam Jones and the BOD incident all which should have resulted in fairly hefty bans for the 4 players involved but none served even a single week .... yet it looks like Seanie is gonna pay the price for in unfortunate accident ....

 

[ncurd]

The thing is for me is now that we know Naholo became concussed as a result of SOBs contact to the head, and wasn't binned for that, he should be suspended for this weeks game. That way no one gets away with it.

Your problem there is a citing is for a Red card offence and possible warranting of a ban. You don't get retroactive bans for a YC offence. All you get is a caution.

 

[Truth]

Your problem there is a citing is for a Red card offence and possible warranting of a ban. You don't get retroactive bans for a YC offence. All you get is a caution.

Naholo was concussed as you mentioned players health. You wrote a paragraph on players health, lets not forget YOUR words. What caused Naholos brain injury? well lets sort that.

I wonder what the citing is about if there is NO 'retroactive bans'...

The answer is medical science. Until recently the long term effects of concussion and repeated concussions were not really understood. We have now learnt that have a dramatic effect on someone's long term health and lead to physical and mental problems. The rugby world has seen this evidence and is doing it's level best to mitigate those factors whilst preserving the contact nature of the sport. It really ****** me off when people pull out the PC card we little regards to the facts. If you want to watch a sport where the authorities dont give a **** about players welfare in the long term go watch something else and shut up.

 

[ncurd]

Naholo was concussed as you mentioned players health. You wrote a paragraph on players health, lets not forget YOUR words. What caused Naholos brain injury? well lets sort that.

I wonder what the citing is about if there is NO 'retroactive bans'...

There are conflicting reports on Nahalos concussion plus I don't believe an injury on the play should be a factor into banning players. As the nature of a contact sport will be players get injured. You mitigate those factors as much as possible and punish those who don't work to mitigate it. You don't punish players for trying to compete within the realms of the laws and something unfortunate happens.

This all said I'm not going to throw a wobbly if SOB does get banned.