RWC: AUS v ENG (Twickenham): POOL A; 6am (AEDT) Sunday 4 October

[Dewald Nel]

I'm with qwerty. It looks fucking awful, and slowmo doesn't make it any better.

Then Hooper got off lightly with 1 week.

 

[notapatrioticboneinme]

Love Fardy and Pocock (and Simmons) getting between Sio and Cole; and smart Giteau pulling Sio out of the 'altercation' (53:00). Ben Kay, wish he did Aust. commentary

 

[cyclopath]

Look at all these sprinters trying to decapitate each other - amazingly none of them got banned!

Strangely, in the videos above, Tuilagi raises his knee appreciably higher on the stride immediately before most of those contacts. As opposed to the sprinters in that last video, which has about zero relevance here. Maybe he's trying to hurdle the tackler, but physics is fucking with him?

 

[Dewald Nel]

Strangely, in the videos above, Tuilagi raises his knee appreciably higher on the stride immediately before most of those contacts. As opposed to the sprinters in that last video, which has about zero relevance here. Maybe he's trying to hurdle the tackler, but physics is fucking with him?

It's a running motion. Nothing more, nothing less. And it has total relevance, since this is what Tuilagi was doing there. How do you suggests he runs forward if he can't lift his knee as if he's running - oh, wait, he IS running. Summersaults? Backflips? Hahaha

Anyway, the point was regarding consistency. If that was 5 weeks, then Hooper's was supposed to be 5 weeks too, at least.

 

[notapatrioticboneinme]

Change of pace by the impressive Martin did Beale; Beale had done so much good defence in the previous few phases

 

[cyclopath]

It's a running motion. Nothing more, nothing less. And it has total relevance, since this is what Tuilagi was doing there. How do you suggests he runs forward if he can't lift his knee as if he's running - oh, wait, he IS running. Summersaults? Backflips? Hahaha

Anyway, the point was regarding consistency. If that was 5 weeks, then Hooper's was supposed to be 5 weeks too, at least.

He lifts his knee more just before he contacts players ( that's what "appreciably higher" means) - it isn't a consistent stride pattern. I didn't suggest he runs without lifting his knees, but I'm glad your simplistic post amused yourself. So no, it isn't a simple running pattern, it's a deliberate change in knee lift to take into contact. Maybe he does it unconsciously, but it's pretty plain to see.

 

[qwerty51]

I suppose you think this was ok too.

 

[notapatrioticboneinme]

It's a running motion. ....How do you suggests he runs forward if he can't lift his knee as if he's running - .

Dewald the point the others are making is the difference between the offending knee lift with all the other knee lifts before

 

[Dewald Nel]

He lifts his knee more just before he contacts players ( that's what "appreciably higher" means) - it isn't a consistent stride pattern. I didn't suggest he runs without lifting his knees, but I'm glad your simplistic post amused yourself. So no, it isn't a simple running pattern, it's a deliberate change in knee lift to take into contact. Maybe he does it unconsciously, but it's pretty plain to see.

Well I guess anyone can see what they want to see. I don't see what you're seeing.

And again, even if you're right, why is it that he got 5 weeks and Hooper got only one week? Both would be equally malicious.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Well I guess anyone can see what they want to see. I don't see what you're seeing.

And again, even if you're right, why is it that he got 5 weeks and Hooper got only one week? Both would be equally malicious.

Hooper was charged with an offense that carried a 2 week penalty (foul play contrary to Law 10.4(f) (playing an opponent without the ball) and that was reduced by 1 week.

Tuilagi was charged with an offense that carried an 8 week penalty (foul play contrary to Law 10.4(a) (striking with the knee) and had it reduced by 3 weeks.

 

[cyclopath]

Well I guess anyone can see what they want to see. I don't see what you're seeing.

And again, even if you're right, why is it that he got 5 weeks and Hooper got only one week? Both would be equally malicious.

I have no idea, nobody knows how the judiciary comes up with these numbers, least of all me. I wasn't commenting on the length of their suspensions, just on whether Tuilagi was lifting his knee into contact.

 

[Dewald Nel]

Hooper was charged with an offense that carried a 2 week penalty (foul play contrary to Law 10.4(f) (playing an opponent without the ball) and that was reduced by 1 week.

Tuilagi was charged with an offense that carried an 8 week penalty (foul play contrary to Law 10.4(a) (striking with the knee) and had it reduced by 3 weeks.

Thanks for the info. When I looked at it at 0.25 speed on Youtube, I saw a few frames that I didn't see before. Unfortunately, you're 100% correct. He was leading with the knee higher than before.

If he's been doing this so often(that beastmode video for example), how is he still playing rugby? I'd have thought in England of all places, they'd have no tolerance for someone doing it that much.

 

[Dewald Nel]

I have no idea, nobody knows how the judiciary comes up with these numbers, least of all me. I wasn't commenting on the length of their suspensions, just on whether Tuilagi was lifting his knee into contact.

Yeah fair enough. See previous reply. 0.25 speed confirmed what you were saying. I was clearly wrong.

 

[teach]

Looking at the videos, maybe it is a way of bracing when going into contact. I think that is more likely than trying to knee an opponent. But I could be wrong. He could do it by design. But doesn't matter now, he has 5 weeks.

Thought Hooper was lucky to get one week for his little indiscretion. How the hell did his behaviour during the hearing help? Were they expecting him to swagger in saying "Fcuk you all"? I thought he should have got a yellow card at the time. If it is 5 weeks for kneeing an opponent in the head, how is 1 week for a shoulder charge consistent? (I am disagreeing with the 5 weeks not the 1 week).

 

[cyclopath]

Looking at the videos, maybe it is a way of bracing when going into contact. I think that is more likely than trying to knee an opponent. But I could be wrong. He could do it by design. But doesn't matter now, he has 5 weeks.

Thought Hooper was lucky to get one week for his little indiscretion. How the hell did his behaviour during the hearing help? Were they expecting him to swagger in saying "Fcuk you all"? I thought he should have got a yellow card at the time. If it is 5 weeks for kneeing an opponent in the head, how is 1 week for a shoulder charge consistent? (I am disagreeing with the 5 weeks not the 1 week).

As I said, I'm not saying he does it on purpose necessarily, but it is a consistent feature in those highlights. Probably ingrained technique, which has not been pinged before, so why would he suddenly do otherwise?.
As with your second paragraph, it all falls into my pet hate of the judicial process - lack of transparency and consistency as to what gets called, what doesn't, and the apparent vagaries of the sanctions imposed.

 

[Cardiffblue]

.

more importantly, it was deemed as a penalty only by 2 officiating refs at the time, after multiple replays and serious discussion prior to making a decision.

to me, this is rather insulting and undermines the authority of the ref and TMO as he has in effect overruled them to pursue a punitive charge.

i have no issue with Poite being insulted

 

[KOB1987]

Yeah fair enough. See previous reply. 0.25 speed confirmed what you were saying. I was clearly wrong.

I can see it now too that it's been pointed out. It's not obviously malicious in this instance but if it's something they do commonly and if the sanction is to act as a deterrent to avoid casualties such as the loig one exemplified previously then it's probably justified.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[pissedoffihavetoregister]

i thought foley's kicking seemed to be much longer than he has in the past!
Not so much the goal kicks but the ones off the deck. Other good results from the new coaches.

 

[Mr Doug]

According to tonight's TV news, Burgess left out of English 23 for their last match. He's now contemplating a return to Rugby league!

 

[Groucho]

Well that's true, but much of the selection criticisms of Lancaster are directed at the selection of Burgess, both in the squad and in the 23. That's essentially the fans saying that his selection cost the team. That wouldn't make feel too great if I was Burgess and that was the general sentiment coming from the public.

It's a real shame too, because in 8 months time, when England tour Australia, Burgess had the potential to be a major impact player for England. Now I doubt he'll stick around.

It's been the same with league converts here at the start of their tenure, with opinions varying dramatically depending on whether they play for your provincial team or not. I imagine some Bath fans think Burgess is the best thing since sliced bread. The rest of the England rugby watching public think he's toast.