Always a Wasp

Author Topic: England today  (Read 14581 times)

NellyWellyWaspy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4042
  • Getting older a couple of minutes every day
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #75 on: March 20, 2023, 03:36:28 PM »
At the time I saw it, I knew he was off. I was thinking as he came up, 'what was he doing?'

Ask yourself why he was in that spot, right there, then.

He ran there, so he clearly intended to do something.

I can only think he intended a fast up in your face tackle, before anything could be done with the ball. Had to gone down to the tackle position, I think it might have been a tad late, but he might have gotten away with it.

But at some point, indecision took hold. He had no idea why he was there, no idea what he was doing. Then, all too late, he woke up. Instead of trying not to injure the other player, he turned and placed his shoulder to protect himself.

All in all, a series of poor split second decisions. I think we call it inexperience. He will learn, we hope. Let us remember, the guy he hit failed his HIA.

When the ref was looking for mitigation, he specifically wanted Steward to go low and tackle him, even if it would be late. By not doing that he demonstrated to the ref that he did the wrong thing. Any chance he had of avoiding the red went out of the window.

Steward started off determined to make a hard hitting tackle. He pulled out way too late, and in a way that saved only himself. Can't blame the ref on that one.

WonkyWasp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5935
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #76 on: March 20, 2023, 04:41:07 PM »
Thank you NWW.  As you probably realise, I'm not ''technically aware'' but I thought exactly what you said above.  You described the action exactly as I felt it was intended.  Thank you.

Shugs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4425
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #77 on: March 20, 2023, 06:07:16 PM »
Get that NWW. But if we?re putting that argument forward don?t we have to say why was Keenan there? Two options 1) To make a hit on Steward if he gets to the ball first or 2) To scoop up the ball and run with it. Neither scenario allows Steward gently let him pass. Are we saying you can do anything whilst attacking in terms of speed/height and the defender has all of the responsibility for making the scenario safe?

NellyWellyWaspy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4042
  • Getting older a couple of minutes every day
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #78 on: March 20, 2023, 08:19:49 PM »
Get that NWW. But if we?re putting that argument forward don?t we have to say why was Keenan there? Two options 1) To make a hit on Steward if he gets to the ball first or 2) To scoop up the ball and run with it. Neither scenario allows Steward gently let him pass. Are we saying you can do anything whilst attacking in terms of speed/height and the defender has all of the responsibility for making the scenario safe?

Keenan's side had possession. They were attacking. It is up to the defence to defend safely and within the rules. My view was that Keenan was planning to tap and run through. I am certain Steward saw that and planned to flatten him as he got the ball. But he didn't and it all went south. He still should have completed the tackle, maybe pulling back on the power. Yes, it likely would have been a penalty, maybe a yellow. That's the downside when you commit yourself to an all or nothing strategy. From the moment Steward decided to go for it, he had to finish it. No turning back. I suspect that Keenan saw that and made it a bad moment for Steward, and himself. That's the problem with that type of 'hit' defence. If it doesn't come off, either way, that close to the line, you are screwed.

Which is why I think Steward sealed his own fate the moment he decided to do that. If he had not, would Ireland have scored a try? Maybe. Big risks like that, so close to the line, are not what full backs are supposed to do. They are supposed to be conservative, using sliding defences and back pedalling to buy time. But, I suspect the team had been given instructions. Hit them hard and fast as often as you can.

We can debate it, but the only person who knows what went through is head is Steward, and we can wait until his memoirs for that answer.

westwaleswasp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2019
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #79 on: March 20, 2023, 11:46:05 PM »
They did not have possession though, surely?

They knocked on. The ball was loose. The ref would have been playing advantage for the knock on to England.

The England team had the right to pick up the ball and play it from the moment it is knocked on. No Irish player could play that ball, and whilst the tackle was lined up with Ireland in possession, they were not in possession at the moment of contact.

 An England player is ran into by an Irish player whose team are no longer in possession. The England player attempts evasive action. The Irish player does not.

No foul play for me. Whereas had the England player committed a tackle that would have been a penalty.

I do not believe any ref in the world other than Jaco would have given it.





Andywasp50

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #80 on: March 21, 2023, 12:35:13 AM »
The problem for me is when you go into the realms of reffing humans with technology as though they are robots. Slow motion, point of contact, let's look at it and look at it again etc. It's not that black and white because there is a human element involved.

It was blatantly obvious Steward had been intending to tackle or kick and was sold by the fact the ball had been knocked forward - it was a split second he had to react and he did what any human being would do when trying to avoid a collision and turned to the side. It should have been judged at normal speed, it was a rugby incident.

A further frustration is when all incidents in the game aren't adjudicated. Pick and choose isn't acceptable - the Ludlow incident is far worse and a failure to cite given the video evidence will be a huge injustice and damning of the whole system. And then there's the obvious seatbelt tackle on Watson that three international officials and a TMO 'failed' to see.

BlackAndGoldSunglasses

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #81 on: March 21, 2023, 09:14:39 AM »
Good summary in the Grauniad today:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/mar/20/freddie-steward-red-card-why-was-it-shown-what-happens-now-rugby-union-six-nations

What happened in the Steward/Keenan incident?
Freddie Steward was sent off for a dangerous tackle just before half-time after colliding with Hugo Keenan. The Ireland full-back had just stooped to gather the loose ball which had been knocked forward by Mack Hansen. Steward?s arm was tucked by his side but as he twisted his body ? with both feet briefly leaving the floor ? to brace for contact, he struck his opponent?s head with his elbow. Keenan was taken off the pitch and, after failing his head injury assessment, did not return.

What did referee Jaco Peyper do and with what reasoning?
After pausing play because of a head injury he reviewed the incident with the television match official Marius Jonker. Peyper swiftly identified head contact and determined he and Jonker had to consider if the incident was ?foul play?. Announcing that Steward ?has to take care?, Peyper evidently did so, highlighting the England full-back?s clear line of sight, how he was upright into contact and how he was turning his shoulder. Peyper then determined that there was a high level of danger, that there was no mitigation and decided a red card was warranted. Steward argued his case, stating he braced for impact and ?can?t go anywhere else?. Peyper did not take Steward?s plea into account, citing the ?current climate? and, though Steward insisted he had only ?milliseconds? to adjust, Peyper was adamant he had time to turn his shoulder and issued the red card.

Why was the decision so divisive?
Because it was both a freak incident as well as the kind of thing that can happen in a dynamic collision sport. That may sound contradictory but ultimately it is not typically the sort of incident for which World Rugby?s high-tackle framework is designed and, when putting theory into practice, anomalies such as this will always occasionally happen and always create debate. Those who argue Steward was hard done by tend to ask what else could he have done beyond vanish on the spot; those who agree with Peyper?s decision highlight how Keenan was struck in the head with force by Steward?s elbow and was unable to continue.

What will England and Steward argue at hearing?
Firstly, that this was a ?no fault? incident and that Peyper?s decision should have been to play on instead of applying the framework. In that instance they will point to trigger words listed as part of World Rugby?s law application guidelines ? that there was a sudden and significant drop in height by the ball-carrier, that the player had no time to readjust, it was an involuntary collision, that there was no leading arm when close to the body and that it was a passive action. If England cannot successfully argue that there was no foul play they must then convince the panel that the degree of danger was not high and/or that it was not highly reckless or intentional for mitigation to be taken into account. They may also point to how Ross Tucker, who helped to formulate World Rugby?s high-tackle framework, expressed his opinion on social media that a red card was not warranted.

If the red is rescinded, what does it mean for the game?
Keenan was concussed by the collision with Steward?s elbow and could not continue, at a time when the sport has millions of eyeballs on it, and you can clearly argue that rescinding the red card sends the wrong message at a time when World Rugby, the Rugby Football Union and the Welsh Rugby Union are facing class-action lawsuits from professional and amateur players who allege a negligence in their failure to protect them. World Rugby?s approach in recent years has been to strictly sanction dangerous tackles in an effort to change player behaviour but it is questionable whether this incident should even be considered a dangerous tackle. It certainly isn?t the type of incident World Rugby is targeting ? upright reckless tackles that make contact with the head of which there were better examples in the same match that went unpunished. The great shame is that the sport is so paralysed by its existential crisis that a vastly experienced referee such as Peyper did not feel empowered or emboldened enough to apply common sense and treat the incident as the accidental collision it was. That is not an indictment of Peyper, rather to illustrate how this incident is a microcosm of the crisis facing a sport of which its very nature means head injuries are unavoidable. The panel ought to also consider whether upholding the red card will change behaviour or act as a deterrent. Or to put it another way: if Steward were to find himself in the same situation in the next match he plays, is it realistic to expect a different outcome?


baldpaul101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1709
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #82 on: March 21, 2023, 09:26:56 AM »
Quote
The great shame is that the sport is so paralysed by its existential crisis that a vastly experienced referee such as Peyper did not feel empowered or emboldened enough to apply common sense and treat the incident as the accidental collision it was. That is not an indictment of Peyper, rather to illustrate how this incident is a microcosm of the crisis facing a sport of which its very nature means head injuries are unavoidable. The panel ought to also consider whether upholding the red card will change behaviour or act as a deterrent. Or to put it another way: if Steward were to find himself in the same situation in the next match he plays, is it realistic to expect a different outcome?

Spot on

coddy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1357
  • Wasps Rugby Supporter
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #83 on: March 21, 2023, 01:03:01 PM »
Although I'm sure Ireland will be mightily proud of their well deserved Grand Slam, I wouldn't be surprised if they were a bit disappointed that
such a poor decision effectively killed the game of as a contest and therefore diluted their achivement a little.

andermt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 791
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #84 on: March 22, 2023, 07:18:53 AM »
Away from the Steward red, something else I noticed at the end was a bit of an altercation between Sinkler and O'Mahony after the final whistle, it was on screen as the cameras panned around the celebrating players, and Sexton had to step in, at which point it panned away. Anyone else notice or be aware of anything that might have kicked it off?

BlackAndGoldSunglasses

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #85 on: March 22, 2023, 09:49:02 AM »
Sorry to return to it, but the Steward RC has been rescinded, and downgraded to a YC.

Still too harsh a sanction: should have been play on (albeit stopped for the head injury - scrum restart).

So, contest ruined incorrectly. As I said earlier, I don't think the result was in question; it may have been more of a game though.

baldpaul101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1709
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #86 on: March 22, 2023, 10:26:10 AM »
Unfortunately the head contact rules have been a problem ever since they came in. Too strict guidelines leaving Referees with no common sense options & fixation with "high tackles" to the exclusion of other dangerous situations like players flying into rucks etc.
Hopefully such a high profile issue will force a review?

BlackAndGoldSunglasses

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #87 on: March 22, 2023, 10:32:28 AM »
Half in agreement. I think the downgrading to a YC is a purely face saving move to protect Peyper and Jonker.

The framework is strictly structured, but before entering into the decision tree about point of contact, mitigation etc, there is the option of "No fault". This is detailed in the Law Application Guidelines as (https://twitter.com/RuckedOver/status/1638189149470507009/photo/1):

* Sudden and significant drop in height by the ball carrier
* Player had no time to readjust
* Involuntary collision
* No leading arm when close to the body

I reckon at least two of those definitely apply, and arguably all four. Sufficient leeway in the framework for refereeing discretion.

westwaleswasp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2019
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #88 on: March 22, 2023, 04:43:28 PM »
I think it was a pen. To England. Irish player was attempting to gather a ball that was knocked on (and he had no right to play) and ran into an England player who could have legally played the ball. It was the Irish player's responsibility to move out of the way to avoid impeding the England player. Instead he dipped, collided and prevented the England player from any chance of taking part in the move.

Not a red.
Not a yellow.
No foul play.

And although downgrading is rare, the downgrade to yellow is face saving.

jamestaylor002

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 795
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Re: England today
« Reply #89 on: March 22, 2023, 09:04:31 PM »
I too don't think that the decision changed the result but I don't think the score is reflective of the game prior to Steward leaving the field.

Though I do think that the RC being rescinded shows that it was the wrong decision and perhaps influenced in some way by the occasion.