• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Refereeing decisions

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
I missed the second but the first was a red card any day of the week under the system we've been using.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I missed the second but the first was a red card any day of the week under the system we've been using.


Hopefully this link works: https://www.facebook.com/foxrugby/v...t3lJWRbQXFZIPUA_GKESws88FvlPPaXwHVlMS6K19Snh4

In both incidents the referee/TMO used the mitigating circumstance that the player dropped in height suddenly.

If we look at a still of the second one, this is clearly not the case. The ball carrier has low body height well before the tackle is effected. His body height doesn't get any lower prior to the hit.

Motuu yellow.jpg
 

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
In considering all the available evidence, including multiple broadcast angles and submissions from Hodge and his legal representative, the committee deemed that the incident was an act of foul play and warranted a red card in line with the high tackle sanction framework. In following the framework, the committee determined:

There was an act of foul play (which was reckless, rather than deliberate)
The act of foul play was a high tackle
There was contact with the head
There was a high degree of danger

Full descision at the link
https://www.world.rugby/news/483026
 

molman

Jim Lenehan (48)

Hard to argue not the right outcome based on current framework if the categories were identified as such. All we can ask for now is consistency, including both in the citing process of other foul play incidences and a similar application of the framework and other laws.

I do wonder around this incident in so far as the high tackle framework is meant to affect a change in the tackler (the individual more at risk). I think you replay that highly dynamic situation again and again with Hodge and Yato and things turn out rather similar.

For Hodge, I guess the silver lining is that this happened game one of the pool, so there is a chance that he could still play another world cup game vs. this occuring later in the tournament.
 

Ignoto

Peter Sullivan (51)
I don't have too much sympathy for Hodge. If you don't want to be suspended, don't give the Ref or Citing commission an opportunity to rest you. Sure this one was borderline, but that's the risk you take when you make borderline tackles.

The was unnecessarily high and poor technique. Hodge had a number of missed tackles or poor tackles because he went high in the contact rather than low. I can only imagine he did it in an attempt to stop the offload. But, when you're playing big blokes, you tackle them first and trust your cover to get the next tackle.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
I don't have too much sympathy for Hodge. If you don't want to be suspended, don't give the Ref or Citing commission an opportunity to rest you. Sure this one was borderline, but that's the risk you take when you make borderline tackles.

The was unnecessarily high and poor technique. Hodge had a number of missed tackles or poor tackles because he went high in the contact rather than low. I can only imagine he did it in an attempt to stop the offload. But, when you're playing big blokes, you tackle them first and trust your cover to get the next tackle.


I think you are spot on, the goal of tackling "ball and all" was the plan (and quite sensible), it was the clumsy execution of the plan that has clear consequences
 

Dan54

David Wilson (68)
nah, they'll get 6/2 = 3 as well. Everyone starts at mid-range which is 6, even those like Hodge who are probably at the lower end of the mid-range.

Yep, and so Hodge will feel a little better as 3 weeks for the Samoans is the end of the tournament for them.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
All the debated "High tackles" would've immediately attracted red cards at the U20 WC and this was discussed heavily there and we all thought there'd be a spate of Reds at this RWC. I was very surprised that at the referee's decision making processes under the framework, but one things really must be noted and that is they have been very very consistent in all the games. That speaks to a pre tournament directive/agreement on the framework. If so its pretty bad of World Rugby to come out making statements about it compromising the referees.

That said IMO all the "tackles" including Hodge's attempt were red straight up under the framework published months ago. A key thing not mentioned anywhere that I can see is that before contact Hodges clenches his right hand and that is very telling as to intent and regardless of the arm action post contact the contact is made with no initial attempt to grasp. Poor action and poor technique, even as the lowest offence in terms of recklessness/intent/technique the outcome shows that we must as a sport take strong action to protect players and Hodge has deservedly been suspended. Cheika as usual with his comments done nothing to enhance his image.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dru
Top