Scotland v Wallabies at Murrayfield 12.40am Mon 25 Nov

[Agent]

1. Bell 2. Faessler 3. Tupou
4. Frost 5. Skelton
6. Valetini 8. Wilson 7. Mcreight
9. Gordon 10. Lolesio 11. Jorgensen 12. Ikitau 13. JAS 14. Kellaway 15. Wright

16. BPA 17. Kailea 18. Ala'alatoa 19. LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) 20. Uru 21. Mcdermott 22. Donaldson 23. Potter

I like...

 

[JRugby2]

The inconsistency of the decision where Nic White gets hit on the head by a Welsh player flying into a clean out, he gets sent off for HIA and the player that hit him stays on, no penalty is ludicrous

The Nic White hit should have also incurred a red card for sure (at least yellow) - but I don't think it's inconsistent. Different incidents (Clean out at breakdown in close proximity vs Tackle in open play) are always going to be judged differently. It was the wrong call all on it's own

 

[Derpus]

The Nic White hit should have also incurred a red card for sure (at least yellow) - but I don't think it's inconsistent. Different incidents (Clean out at breakdown in close proximity vs Tackle in open play) are always going to be judged differently. It was the wrong call all on it's own

But why? Flying into a ruck recklessly and hitting a head seems pretty much on par with flying into a tackle recklessly and hitting a head. Certainly the same from the heads perspective.

 

[JRugby2]

But why? Flying into a ruck recklessly and hitting a head seems pretty much on par with flying into a tackle recklessly and hitting a head. Certainly the same from the heads perspective.

True -

The dynamics of each collision and how players arrive at each can be different. One example I can think of is going back to our debate the other day on the wales match thread re speed/ force.

The amount of force that Ellis Bevan could have generated in his 2 step run up into a stationary Nick White I imagine would be less than what Kerevi and Morgan collectively generated running at each other from 20+ metres. Nick white is much lower to the ground vs Morgan carrying into contact - all different variables.

I think they got the Bevan decision wrong, but its a 'different' hit and we should have seen two red cards but for different contexts

 

[LeCheese]

But why? Flying into a ruck recklessly and hitting a head seems pretty much on par with flying into a tackle recklessly and hitting a head. Certainly the same from the heads perspective.

The leniency at rucks has always been justified by the smaller target available and 'head first' positioning over a ruck.

In saying that, we've seen far more innocuous head contact at rucks than the one on White being shown a card over the last few years. Was viewed as 'bicep only' by Doleman, which is why it was only a penalty. I'd suggest he could benefit from an anatomy lesson.

 

[Strewthcobber]

But why? Flying into a ruck recklessly and hitting a head seems pretty much on par with flying into a tackle recklessly and hitting a head. Certainly the same from the heads perspective.

I guess the question is why did the commentators, TMO and ref all think "there's not a lot in that" and "very low danger"? As you say, the damage to the brain is there.

If we use the process for the White one

Yes head contact. Yes foul play.

Ref decided it was low danger.
Indirect force? No
Low force? Maybe?
Low speed? Maybe?
Passive? No
Leading head / shoulder / forearm? No, hit him with the bicep.

But why?

Is the answer in there somewhere?

 

[Derpus]

Ah I was thinking of the one where Kerevi himself copped a headbutt. My bad.

But yeah, true. I guess it is pretty obvious that a flying bicep would cause less CTE than a shoulder.

 

[Rugby Head]

Has Doran leaked any team news as yet?

 

[rugbyAU]

Has Doran leaked any team news as yet?

Not yet, the team will be announced at 3am on Saturday

 

[LeCheese]

Leading head / shoulder / forearm? No, hit him with the bicep.
View attachment 20801

I do really struggle to see how this was viewed as only the bicep when Bevan's shoulder is clearly in-line with White's head and his upper arm appears to be basically vertical.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I do really struggle to see how this was viewed as only the bicep when Bevan's shoulder is clearly in-line with White's head and his upper arm appears to be basically vertical.

The ref looked at a couple of other angles, not just this one.

As BH said above though, another ref might see some shoulder there, and then it's a reddish yellow. Margins are thin

 

[LeCheese]

The ref looked at a couple of other angles, not just this one.

As BH said above though, another ref might see some shoulder there, and then it's a reddish yellow. Margins are thin

It was that angle and the one from behind, which didn't really show anything - a side on would've been the most telling, but obviously they can be hard to come by.

Agreed - if nothing else, I did like that Doleman was very decisive and quick in making his judgment.

 

[Brumby Runner]

True -

The dynamics of each collision and how players arrive at each can be different. One example I can think of is going back to our debate the other day on the wales match thread re speed/ force.

The amount of force that Ellis Bevan could have generated in his 2 step run up into a stationary Nick White I imagine would be less than what Kerevi and Morgan collectively generated running at each other from 20+ metres. Nick white is much lower to the ground vs Morgan carrying into contact - all different variables.

I think they got the Bevan decision wrong, but its a 'different' hit and we should have seen two red cards but for different contexts

That's not thw way I remember the incident JR2. Nic was crouched waitng for the ball to come out of the ruck. the Welsh No 9 (assume it was Morgan) came around offside and took Nic out without the ball, and in the process hit him head on head. Should have been :

i) penalised for offside,
ii) penalised for taking out a player without the ball,
iii) penalised for taking out the halfback in the vicinity of the ruck; and
iv) carded for head on head contact foul play.

EDIT: And what of Wainwright(?) lying across the back of the ruck interfering with Nic's ability to get into position?

 

[JRugby2]

That's not thw way I remember the incident JR2. Nic was crouched waitng for the ball to come out of the ruck. the Welsh No 9 (assume it was Morgan) came around offside and took Nic out without the ball, and in the process hit him head on head. Should have been :

i) penalised for offside,
ii) penalised for taking out a player without the ball,
iii) penalised for taking out the halfback in the vicinity of the ruck; and
iv) carded for head on head contact foul play.

EDIT: And what of Wainwright(?) lying across the back of the ruck interfering with Nic's ability to get into position?

Morgan was the ball carrier in the Kerevi send off, not the player who hit Nic White (Ellis Bevan) - sounds like we agree on the facts of the white tackle.

 

[HogansHeros]

Is this the Wallabies vs Wales thread?

 

[stillmissit]

I think your premise is wrong.

Kerevi and others in this situation aren't being found to have done anything intentional. They are being found to be reckless

I only copied what you wrote ie foul play, not the edited version.

 

[emuarse]

Is this the Wallabies vs Wales thread?

Nope, it's actually the 'Refereeing Decisions' discussions thread..er..that is???

 

[Tomthumb]

I think that's just inherent in having discreet penalties and punishments, for foul play that is on a continuum and probably normally distributed. There are always going to be a lot more events that are dark yellow and/or light red compared to the obvious cases.

All the game can do is develop process and stick to it. Consistency is impossible, because different people are judging unique and exceptional events.

I agree it's much better than it used to be, and the Kerevi result appears to me to be very consistent with how these are being judged at the moment.

Consistency is certainly not impossible, if they actually followed their own rules that they set down

“initial contact” was what they kept going on about, yet Kerevis initial contact was shoulder to shoulder yet that equals a red and a ban, yet initial contact to the head of Nic White is not even a yellow

They are just making decisions based on what looks like it hurt more, which is ludicrous. There needs to be exact parameters. And there was, until they decided there wasn’t

 

[Tomthumb]

The Nic White hit should have also incurred a red card for sure (at least yellow) - but I don't think it's inconsistent. Different incidents (Clean out at breakdown in close proximity vs Tackle in open play) are always going to be judged differently. It was the wrong call all on it's own

How is tackling a halfback considered a clean out?
And why would they be judged differently? Is the brain affected more in a tackle situation?

 

[dru]

Guys, this is not refereeing thread, nor the Wales v Wallabies thread.