Subbies 2023!

[The Waverley Walrus]

 

[CoinboxSoldier]

So everyone who comes to support grassroots rugby is a drunken clown? Very out of touch flitzy. Seems like you’re the biggest keyboard warrior on this forum.

So that would make you the biggest wanker on this forum

 

[Pfitzy]

- European holidays - the answer to any club that has a shit colts program and has realised too late…..

Given Mosman have had between 2-3 Colts in the last few years, you'd hardly call them a shit program. They seem to have their ducks in a row.

Colleagues have had one team in Halligan in addition to Barbour recently. This year they're averaging 17.5 players according to their team sheets, and after a full 23 in week 1 their max has been 18.

Sure, things are going to ebb and flow over time but that's a pretty big indicator not all is well.

 

[Waterloo_Ned]

I was disappointed in this earning a red card yesterday. How is everyone finding the issuing of yellow and red cards this year?

 

[Doritos Day]

I was disappointed in this earning a red card yesterday. How is everyone finding the issuing of yellow and red cards this year?

Take someone past horizontal it's your responsibility to make sure they come down safely. Landed on head/neck. Why would it not be a red card?

 

[Pfitzy]

Past horizontal. Dropped to ground Head/shoulder contact (notwithstanding he tried to brace with his arm).

That's red every day of the week.

Ref had advantage, consulted with two (experienced) ARs, and made the correct call IMHO.

 

[Pfitzy]

I'm told that Subbies and the judiciary have been finding the video useful for many of their incidents.

To my mind, Iggies should find a better spot for the camera, as that light pole concealed the tackle given a yellow immediately before, and could be a point of contention in the event of another serious incident.

 

[Waterloo_Ned]

Thanks for your thoughts. I felt our player eased him to the ground which would have made a penalty. There were 3 red cards in all top grade matches yesterdays. There was one at Mountains but the footage is unclear. This is red at Colleagues/Pats. I am not sure how I feel about it:

 

[Pfitzy]

I know what you mean, but the refs get a split second. The Judiciary get time to go over it.

 

[Doritos Day]

I think they're generally going to lean on the side of 'too harsh' given the risk of losing control of the match in an amateur setting where some players just don't give a damn.

 

[Ref_Ted]

Thanks for your thoughts. I felt our player eased him to the ground which would have made a penalty. There were 3 red cards in all top grade matches yesterdays. There was one at Mountains but the footage is unclear. This is red at Colleagues/Pats. I am not sure how I feel about it:

For me YC. Even if I deem technically RC would still look to mitigate to YC due to low height of the tackled player who appeared to land on the ball/arm with benefit of replay.

 

[Pfitzy]

due to low height of the tackled player

Can you elaborate on what you mean @Ref_Ted ?

 

[21mm]

Just quietly, the scrum that colleagues put down to earn themselves a shot at winning the game was delicious.

Outcome thereafter was decided by a ref and a Back. Neither of whom are very fun at parties.

 

[Ref_Ted]

Can you elaborate on what you mean @Ref_Ted ?

My humble opinion only. Understand why RC. Player was low for impact with 5, 12 lifted to the horizontal only for 5 to push him to ground which meant he went over horizontal due to 5. I try to take into account action from both players. The low height in real time means little angle for impact on head/neck, pretty sure ball and arm hit first.
Still want to sanction the lifting legs action of 12 though with YC.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

It's a reckless lifting tackle that put the player beyond the horizontal. It's only luck that he took the brunt of it on his upper arm.

 

[Ref_Ted]

It's a reckless lifting tackle that put the player beyond the horizontal. It's only luck that he took the brunt of it on his upper arm.

Fair enough.

 

[Pfitzy]

My humble opinion only. Understand why RC. Player was low for impact with 5, 12 lifted to the horizontal only for 5 to push him to ground which meant he went over horizontal due to 5. I try to take into account action from both players. The low height in real time means little angle for impact on head/neck, pretty sure ball and arm hit first.
Still want to sanction the lifting legs action of 12 though with YC.

Gotcha.

On the quins red card: From my pov the tackled player was fairly upright - it appeared like the tackler knew the ball was gone and stood up in contact without grasping, which caused the past-horizontal due to momentum. He could have stayed low and grasped the player and maybe got a different outcome.

I think the arm going out to the ground first marks the danger of the angle. Could easily break your collarbone trying to take all your weight like that as well. That's why driving a player is as bad as dropping a player sometimes.

EDIT I'll give the Pats one a look

 

[BundyBear]

Gotcha.

From my pov the tackled player was fairly upright - it appeared like the tackler knew the ball was gone and stood up in contact without grasping, which caused the past-horizontal due to momentum. He could have stayed low and grasped the player and maybe got a different outcome.

I think the arm going out to the ground first marks the danger of the angle. Could easily break your collarbone trying to take all your weight like that as well. That's why driving a player is as bad as dropping a player sometimes.

I believe you are talking about the Quinns RC while Ted is referring to the Pats RC.

 

[Pfitzy]

I believe you are talking about the Quinns RC while Ted is referring to the Pats RC.

Ah right. My bad.

 

[Ref_Ted]

Quinns, late, lift above horiz, land on head/neck. RC, no mitigation.
Once the lift is clear above the horizontal, all comes down to landing. Only way for no card is if he lands on feet. Still penalty though.