Match Thread - Do we need one?

[Raggs]

Whilst a letter-of-the-law Red, I’d feel slightly aggrieved if that was say Josh or Zach hitting their 9, who bounced up.  I know it’s not how these things are decided, but clearly Will was ok and it didn’t look malicious, just a fraction off.  As a Wasps fan, I’d have accepted a Yellow. 

We got our rub of the green yesterday in having 75 mins playing 14 men as I’m not convinced we’d have won it otherwise - Montpellier took their chances

Yes I did think possibly Brace could have given a yellow,especially as it was early on.

However the player would have been cited and banned for some games. So why should another team benefit from him not playing,when the misdemeanour was against us?

I think it was a clear red, but agree that the ref may have tried to make it a yellow, but a citing would have probably come (confirming it should have been a red).

Just because Porter was lucky enough not to be seriously hurt shouldn't change anything. We're changing behaviours, it was dangerous behaviour.

How often now do we see players taken out in the air so badly that they land on their back/head? That was the big thing (full of games gone soft types) a few seasons back, with cards appearing semi regularly, but now players have adapted and we have a much safer game, and rarely see those incidents. High tackles are mostly going the same way, look how many cards there were in the world cup when it was first starting to be enforced.

[RogerE]

Whilst a letter-of-the-law Red, I’d feel slightly aggrieved if that was say Josh or Zach hitting their 9, who bounced up.  I know it’s not how these things are decided, but clearly Will was ok and it didn’t look malicious, just a fraction off.  As a Wasps fan, I’d have accepted a Yellow. 

We got our rub of the green yesterday in having 75 mins playing 14 men as I’m not convinced we’d have won it otherwise - Montpellier took their chances

Yes I did think possibly Brace could have given a yellow,especially as it was early on.

However the player would have been cited and banned for some games. So why should another team benefit from him not playing,when the misdemeanour was against us?

Radical thought - if a player is cited, and found guilty, then not only should there be a ban, which gives an advantage to other teams in the future, but retrospectively the team they were playing against should be awarded extra points. For example if there was a maximum of a penalty awarded on-field the opposition team should be awarded 14 points (2 penalty tries), if given a yellow then 7 points (1 penalty try).

This really would discourage reckless and dangerous play

[hookender]

Whilst a letter-of-the-law Red, I’d feel slightly aggrieved if that was say Josh or Zach hitting their 9, who bounced up.  I know it’s not how these things are decided, but clearly Will was ok and it didn’t look malicious, just a fraction off.  As a Wasps fan, I’d have accepted a Yellow. 

We got our rub of the green yesterday in having 75 mins playing 14 men as I’m not convinced we’d have won it otherwise - Montpellier took their chances

Yes I did think possibly Brace could have given a yellow,especially as it was early on.

However the player would have been cited and banned for some games. So why should another team benefit from him not playing,when the misdemeanour was against us?

Radical thought - if a player is cited, and found guilty, then not only should there be a ban, which gives an advantage to other teams in the future, but retrospectively the team they were playing against should be awarded extra points. For example if there was a maximum of a penalty awarded on-field the opposition team should be awarded 14 points (2 penalty tries), if given a yellow then 7 points (1 penalty try).

This really would discourage reckless and dangerous play

Yes I’d go along with something along those lines.

[Horusthewasp]

Whilst a letter-of-the-law Red, I’d feel slightly aggrieved if that was say Josh or Zach hitting their 9, who bounced up.  I know it’s not how these things are decided, but clearly Will was ok and it didn’t look malicious, just a fraction off.  As a Wasps fan, I’d have accepted a Yellow. 

We got our rub of the green yesterday in having 75 mins playing 14 men as I’m not convinced we’d have won it otherwise - Montpellier took their chances well.

I would of been fuming if it was yellow. It was a red clear as day. Extremely lucky that Porter was able to bounce right back up (maybe the adrenaline?). What if it had gone the other way and Porter suffered a serious injury that had him out for an extended period of time or worse. I agree it was unintentional but it was definitely a reckless move that deserved a red.

As for the comment that we were ‘lucky’ to win (which is a view shared by a few), I respectfully disagree. Yes the red gave us an advantage but:

 - We were able to execute the plan Blackett set out and we kept the game flowing and wide. Yes we made errors but I didn’t mind because we were playing with flair and pace.

 - We were missing our heavy weights and reliant on an 8 who up until that point had only played in that position twice and two inexperienced lads at half back. They, along with West and Odogwu, really stepped it up a gear and were instrumental in the win.

 - For all the talk of the Montpellier pack, we were relentless and did exceptionally well in the set piece. Heck that game could of been lost with those 5m defending scrums in the last 10 minutes.

Credit where credit is due.

[hopwood]

As these young players grow and evolve...can we get them all on the park at the same time?

Maybe by next season we might see a bit of Atkinson at 10 and Umaga at 15.
Jacob has played 15, including when he was in New Zealand.
He’s great under the high ball, has excellent tackle technique, reads the game really well and has got good pace.

Great to have these options.

And imagine a centre partnership of Barbeary and Fekitoa!!
If you were the opposition centres, you would call in sick on that day wouldn’t you.

[Neils]

As these young players grow and evolve...can we get them all on the park at the same time?

Maybe by next season we might see a bit of Atkinson at 10 and Umaga at 15.
Jacob has played 15, including when he was in New Zealand.
He’s great under the high ball, has excellent tackle technique, reads the game really well and has got good pace.

Great to have these options.

And imagine a centre partnership of Barbeary and Fekitoa!!
If you were the opposition centres, you would call in sick on that day wouldn’t you.

It's not can we get them on the park - it's can we keep them! They are compiling a very good advert for themselves.

[Hymenoptera]

Whilst a letter-of-the-law Red, I’d feel slightly aggrieved if that was say Josh or Zach hitting their 9, who bounced up.  I know it’s not how these things are decided, but clearly Will was ok and it didn’t look malicious, just a fraction off.  As a Wasps fan, I’d have accepted a Yellow. 

We got our rub of the green yesterday in having 75 mins playing 14 men as I’m not convinced we’d have won it otherwise - Montpellier took their chances

Yes I did think possibly Brace could have given a yellow,especially as it was early on.

However the player would have been cited and banned for some games. So why should another team benefit from him not playing,when the misdemeanour was against us?

I think it was a clear red, but agree that the ref may have tried to make it a yellow, but a citing would have probably come (confirming it should have been a red).

Just because Porter was lucky enough not to be seriously hurt shouldn't change anything. We're changing behaviours, it was dangerous behaviour.

How often now do we see players taken out in the air so badly that they land on their back/head? That was the big thing (full of games gone soft types) a few seasons back, with cards appearing semi regularly, but now players have adapted and we have a much safer game, and rarely see those incidents. High tackles are mostly going the same way, look how many cards there were in the world cup when it was first starting to be enforced.

It wouldn't have been dangerous behaviour had Porter not dipped, that was mitigation enough for me, so not as clear for me.

[Bloke in North Dorset]

It wouldn't have been dangerous behaviour had Porter not dipped, that was mitigation enough for me, so not as clear for me.

As I said at the time, if you look at the side on replay and use he seats in the background as a reference he hardly dips at all, certainly not significant.

And as has been said elsewhere, Courtney Lawes is taller and still gets down low enough.

[Shugs]

The debate may be whether we think it was a red or not. But for me there is no doubt Brace was always/had to give a red. They are slightly different things. Overall if players don't have in their mind the focus on contact to the head by now it's partially there fault. Having said all that I've just seen Tom Wood get away with a worse one v Leinster without it even getting a yellow!

[jamestaylor002]

The debate may be whether we think it was a red or not. But for me there is no doubt Brace was always/had to give a red. They are slightly different things. Overall if players don't have in their mind the focus on contact to the head by now it's partially there fault. Having said all that I've just seen Tom Wood get away with a worse one v Leinster without it even getting a yellow!

Yes I saw that too and I'm surprised a yellow wasn't given as minimum.
I thought the commentary by Brian O'Driscoll and Dylan Hartley (I think it was Hartley) came up with a good debate about where you draw the line for so called rugby incidents and genuine acts of foul play. I think the argument for Tom Wood was "how much lower can Wood get realistically".

[Hymenoptera]

It wouldn't have been dangerous behaviour had Porter not dipped, that was mitigation enough for me, so not as clear for me.

As I said at the time, if you look at the side on replay and use he seats in the background as a reference he hardly dips at all, certainly not significant.

And as has been said elsewhere, Courtney Lawes is taller and still gets down low enough.

Using background to judge close objects doesn't work due to distance translation, so the only thing i need to look at is the player, so i'll stick with my opinion, i'd have been happy with a yellow.
Courtney laws wasn't playing and he has been pinged for a high tackle in his career so i don't see the relevance.

[Rossm]

Well, I think it was a red. But if the position had been reversed, I would have argued about it

[Brandnewtorugby]

The referee said that there wasn't a sudden   change in Porter's height. Porter didn't dip into the tackle. The daft thing is that in this instance a very low tackle would have been effective, so why flirt with danger for you and the opposition. Montpellier cocked up, and we benefited, that's sport.

[coddy]

He's caught Porter in the face with his shoulder so it's a clear Red card, I can't see why this is in dispute.


As others have said, really pleased with the performances of the youngsters in the decision making positions of 8, 9 and 10. Bodes really well for the future of the club.

[Hymenoptera]

He's caught Porter in the face with his shoulder so it's a clear Red card, I can't see why this is in dispute.

See JL Du Preez yellow, Tom Wood's no sanction, both shoulders to the head plus more - Thats why its a dispute.