How the feck wasn't that a penalty against Fickou?
Currently you don't have lift the ball, touching it with your hands is enough. The ref wasn't supposed to prevent Fickou from tackling.
Ah right my bad. I heard the ref warn him and assumed he was illegal but was let away with it.
If France win a grand slam, noone will careWhatever happens Wales were the better team tonight.
If France win a grand slam, noone will care
This may be sexist but national anthems are better when it's a man singing them. Even our shambles of an away anthem
I thought the TMO comments said it all to Raynard “I agree with the facts” … he didn’t say I agree with your decision (and I don’t like refs asking TMO to agree with them. You’re ref, your call.)This is a red all day isn't it?
I thought the TMO comments said it all to Raynard “I agree with the facts” … he didn’t say I agree with your decision (and I don’t like refs asking TMO to agree with them. You’re ref, your call.)
I get the responsibility is on the tackler and I know there’s a push to reduce/eliminate head injuries but for me, he doesn’t LEAD with his head, they’re two tall guys who are similar heights. Tackler is wrapping arms too.
Letter of the law, ok. My team (England aren’t), I’d be pissed
The point is it is the letter of the law. You just can't tackle like that anymore. Intent is gone out of it so it's just poor technique, given how strict the rules are on head contact.
I do wonder if there is room in sport for a red card for the player but a substitute is the answer. So the player gets red-carded but the player can be replaced.
This game has been ruined by an overly punitive punishment. 14 guys did nothing wrong. It still has the desired result of encouraging lower tackling because you punish the individual.
Was it Wales that had a World Cup red card a few years back and it was similarly based on a flavour of the month IRB protocol aimed at reducing a particular tackling technique.
Clear cut red card.
It seems to give no accommodation for how Rugby is played. That play developed and the guy was just on him quicker than he could adjust his technique. I’m fairly sure he was distracted by the other tackle happening in front of him as well.
It's a good idea. Maybe a 10 minutes sin bin accompanied with a substitution?
No, he had plenty of time to get low. What english players are trying to do is to get players high enough to lock the ball and create a maul.
It seems to give no accommodation for how Rugby is played. That play developed and the guy was just on him quicker than he could adjust his technique. I’m fairly sure he was distracted by the other tackle happening in front of him as well.
I know that idea. The Irish did it for years.
As an England fan I don't feel too hard done by by the decision. But the game is utterly pointless now.
I know, hence why I said letter of the law, ok.The point is it is the letter of the law. You just can't tackle like that anymore. Intent is gone out of it so it's just poor technique, given how strict the rules are on head contact.
I know, hence why I said letter of the law, ok.
But there are decisions in every game where officials dont (the not given yellow at the end of the Wales England game for example). Consistency would be good.
Curry off is a huge blow for England.
If Ireland keep their focus and are ruthless (like a NZ team would be), this could/should be 20-30 points win.
i do. for me, it’s a rule made by people who have never played rugby before. he looks like he’s got ages to get low in slow mo but in full speed he’s probably hesitated by a fraction of a second and got sent off for it. rugby is a game where you get hurt. it’s the game. you can send someone off every 2 minutes if you’re worried about that. they sent him off because of the outcome, not the intent.
No, he starts his run from pretty far, it wasn't one of those short run/reaction type of action.
England will win this, Ireland look clueless.