Blyth's reckless charge down attempt was (rightfully) a red during Super season, as this should also beI must admit I thought it was not too bad when watching game live, but after seeing it again I not sure.
Watching this with my wife, I immediately said that it would be a red, maybe a yellow. Could not believe it got nothing - it's not like there isn't precedent for this.
This is quite unbelievable that there was no sanction during the match.
It has correctly been cited and the Pumas player will almost certainly be suspended.
Unbelievably reckless from the Pumas player.
John Kirwan goes through how he thinks this should be officiated on the newest edition of the Breakdown on Stan and youtube.The saving grace was he got the ball, but there needs to be a rule change about contact with a kicker. Yes it's dangerous, but I understand why it was considered ok when he got the ball. Don't know how you change the rule as the game is so quick to avoid all contact with a player kicking.
Yeah but that's the inconsistency.The saving grace was he got the ball, but there needs to be a rule change about contact with a kicker. Yes it's dangerous, but I understand why it was considered ok when he got the ball. Don't know how you change the rule as the game is so quick to avoid all contact with a player kicking.
Two week suspension for what was deemed a "low level" offence:
Pumas fullback cops 2-week ban for aerial collision with Bok No 9 Williams | Sport
Argentina fullback Juan Cruz Mallia has received a two-week suspension for his aerial challenge on Springbok scrumhalf Grant Williams.www.news24.com
"The Committee considered all relevant factors of World Rugby's Head Contact Process and sanctioning table, but given the evidence from both the referee and the coach as to how successful charge downs of kicks are viewed by match officials and as to how coaching of players is conducted as a consequence, the Committee decided that a mid-range sanction would be wholly disproportionate to the player's fault and that the foul play merited a low-range entry point of two weeks."
The Argentinian player successfully charged the ball down, Blyth didn't. Not sure how you think Blyth had a more legitimate attempt when he failed...a more legitimate attempt.
Valid point. Reckless may be a more appropriate termThe Argentinian player successfully charged the ball down, Blyth didn't. Not sure how you think Blyth had a more legitimate attempt when he failed...
For those who shoot people down for calling out wrong calls from AR's, like they don't happen. The AR totally got it wrong for Dupont's should have been try in at the ~28min mark in the France v Scotland game. If that'd been a RWC game and that's 7 points wiped.
While it was the wrong call, you can't say it definitely stopped the try. The Scottish players on that sideline had basically stopped playing and gave Dupont a free run in support.For those who shoot people down for calling out wrong calls from AR's, like they don't happen. The AR totally got it wrong for Dupont's should have been try in at the ~28min mark in the France v Scotland game. If that'd been a RWC game and that's 7 points wiped.
I think the (IMHO) clanger of the weekend was Steward not getting a red for his tackle in the air?
Maybe he did land on his side, but the risk/danger was high - he tried to wrap, but around the legs in the air - there was no way Adams was going to land any other way than on his side and potentially head. It didn't look great. I'm sure I've seen a red for less, but I can't recall so not going to rely on that in my defence.
If he did hit his head on the ground - he should have gone off (don't think he did?).
The landing is what determines the severity of the card. If he'd landed closer to his head/neck it would have been a red card.