This is a thread about the 2020 Six Nations, formerly the Five Nations

razorblunt

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

A man grabbing the genitals of another man isn't the same as when a man grabs a womans breasts or genitalia - there is a big power differential between men and women and in the case of male-on-female sexual assault women often aren't in a position to defend themselves and will lose any power struggle, not the same with men.

I'm seeing a lot of people on twitter saying "if he did this to a woman the book would be thrown at him" "If he did this to your son..." etc, again there's a power differential between a man and women or even a child. That's not to say that male-on-male sexual violence doesn't exist, it does, men do get raped by other men (albeit rarely). If a random bloke (or a woman) grabbed my dick without permission, I think I'd feel its inappropriate, but I'm not sure I'd feel "threatened" like a woman certainly would.

He deserves a ban, but male-on-male crotch grabbing isn't the same thing as when a grown man sexually assaults women or minors and the reaction to this incident is getting a bit over the top.

What?

razorblunt

glasso wrote: »

re the red card yes it was a red card - correct decision but North went down in "altitude" for want of a better word just at the split second as Tuilagi came in and Tuilagi had already started his tackling motion before North went down. if not he would have ended up tackling his midriff.

https://youtu.be/YxwTOrGz0N4?t=225


From BBC - https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/51784107

Former Wales international Jonathan Davies: "As soon as you don't lead with the arm, you're putting yourself in a dangerous position but George North was going so low.

"I thought it was a bit harsh. I thought a penalty and a yellow card. A red? I am not sure."

Answer me this, how would you wrap? Palms turned to face each other as much as possible right? Tuilagi’s no wrapping arm was tucked i.e. he was bracing his shoulder for impact if he had tried to wrap from that position his knuckles would be facing his left palm.

He was never intending to wrap, essentially he may as well have had that hand in his pocket. Davies can say what he likes, he’s wrong. He’s often wrong, in fact he’s rarely right.

Pete_Cavan

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

A man grabbing the genitals of another man isn't the same as when a man grabs a womans breasts or genitalia - there is a big power differential between men and women and in the case of male-on-female sexual assault women often aren't in a position to defend themselves and will lose any power struggle, not the same with men.

AWJ wasn't really in a position to defend himself though, I'm sure his initial thought was to deck the guy touching his penis but doing so would have seen him sent off. There is no doubt Marlers intentions were not sexual in any way but he was taking advantage of the situation. He knew he and his team could gain an advantage from it by AWJ getting himself sent off or at least unsettling him. Trying to downplay it by comparing it to a perceived power struggle between men and women is wrong, Marler knowingly crossed a line because he knew AWJ could do very little about it at that moment. Just because he didn't overpower a woman in the course of touching the other person's genitals doesn't make it right.

Burkie1203

glasso wrote: »

Former Wales international Jonathan Davies: "As soon as you don't lead with the arm, you're putting yourself in a dangerous position but George North was going so low.

"I thought it was a bit harsh. I thought a penalty and a yellow card. A red? I am not sure."

Davies has form here. He promotes the games gone soft stuff all the time

Tuilagi was always going to be illegal. Therefore IMO mitigation goes out the window.

lawred2

North is lucky to not have a severed spinal chord really.. had his head been in a marginally different position... Doesn't bear thinking about. Tuilagi is a lunatic.

swiwi_

swiwi_ wrote: »

I see Marler’s gone from being the darling of the forum for having a go at Folau to being a devil for having a go at AWJ.

In both cases he was wrong IMO, and I hope he gets a decent ban. The 200 weekend top end ban is probably stretching it though.

Fairly odd meta commentary here. When he does something decent people think he's decent and when he acts like a toerag people think he's a toerag. Imagine.

scott1974

swiwi_ wrote: »

I see Marler’s gone from being the darling of the forum for having a go at Folau to being a devil for having a go at AWJ.

In both cases he was wrong IMO, and I hope he gets a decent ban. The 200 weekend top end ban is probably stretching it though.

He called Samson Lee gypsy boy a few years ago.
He may be a bit quirky but hardly a poster boy for English Rugby.

ionadnapokot

Tom Curry was exceptional again yesterday
His power, tackle technique and temperament are all first class.
His haircut though??

I would say he's the most complete best back-row in the world. And Still only 21. 22 caps and has played across the back-row.

EmmetSpiceland

Anyone else feel like the TMO has been “asleep” for this tournament?

Couple that with “ineffectual”, cowardly, linesmen and you just get far too much being missed off the ball, at the scrum and at the breakdown.

It’s great to see high hits getting “called“, and punished, but there’s been numerous tackles made where the shoulder is the main “impactor”, then a weak arm is flung around after the hit and that’s considered an attempt to wrap.

The fact that there is no longer any offside line has really ruined my “enjoyment” of the game in the last while. Players 3 steps offside, ref says to move back, players take 1 back and still offside. Linesmen doing nothing. Consistently.

The lads being ahead of the kicker on restarts has gone beyond a joke at this stage too.

sydthebeat

TMO role has been deliberately reduced over a year ago

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/six-nations-talking-points-reduced-role-of-tmo-not-protecting-players-1.3789732%3fmode=amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/rugby/world-rugby-set-trial-new-tmo-changes-weekend-184046

Weepsie

glasso wrote: »

re the red card yes it was a red card - correct decision but North went down in "altitude" for want of a better word just at the split second as Tuilagi came in and Tuilagi had already started his tackling motion before North went down. if not he would have ended up tackling his midriff.

https://youtu.be/YxwTOrGz0N4?t=225


From BBC - https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/51784107

Former Wales international Jonathan Davies: "As soon as you don't lead with the arm, you're putting yourself in a dangerous position but George North was going so low.

"I thought it was a bit harsh. I thought a penalty and a yellow card. A red? I am not sure."

He didn't commit to the tackle til north was going down. It was a cheap and dangerous shot.

EmmetSpiceland

sydthebeat wrote: »

TMO role has been deliberately reduced over a year ago

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/six-nations-talking-points-reduced-role-of-tmo-not-protecting-players-1.3789732%3fmode=amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/rugby/world-rugby-set-trial-new-tmo-changes-weekend-184046

Oh yeah, I remember that.

I thought that was just for the World Cup after the SANAAR lads put pressure on World Rugby to do it as it would favour their “style” of play more?

Limiting the TMO seems counter productive, somewhat reckless considering just how useless, and ineffective, the linesmen are.

Former Former

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Oh yeah, I remember that.

I thought that was just for the World Cup after the SANAAR lads put pressure on World Rugby to do it as it would favour their “style” of play more?

Limiting the TMO seems counter productive, somewhat reckless considering just how useless, and ineffective, the linesmen are.

The complaints were that TMOs were ruining the game with too many interruptions.

Conclusion : people are never happy.

prawnsambo

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Oh yeah, I remember that.

I thought that was just for the World Cup after the SANAAR lads put pressure on World Rugby to do it as it would favour their “style” of play more?

Limiting the TMO seems counter productive, somewhat reckless considering just how useless, and ineffective, the linesmen are.

I often think the role of the AR (Assistant Referee) is down to how the referee sets the tone. Some referees take and heed a lot of input from the ARs and others seem to ignore them (at best) or seem to tell them they don't want to hear from them unless it's an egregious offence (at worst). Nigel Owens and Wayne Barnes seem to like a lot of input from their ARs, Jaco Peyper (for one) seems to pretty much exclude them. This is just an opinion of mine, but based on listening to them on ref mic, so not a big sample size.

razorblunt

razorblunt wrote: »

Answer me this, how would you wrap? Palms turned to face each other as much as possible right? Tuilagi’s no wrapping arm was tucked i.e. he was bracing his shoulder for impact if he had tried to wrap from that position his knuckles would be facing his left palm.

He was never intending to wrap, essentially he may as well have had that hand in his pocket. Davies can say what he likes, he’s wrong. He’s often wrong, in fact he’s rarely right.

of course reckless but he wouldn't have been sent off if north didn't dip at that moment. then again if he hit his head could have been serious

it's also a factor of size - Tuilagi is 110kg . a smaller player would not pose the same danger


on balance, James Ryan got away with firing himself recklessly into several rucks, head first and no arms against England but no mention on this forum of it being dangerous.

prawnsambo

glasso wrote: »

of course reckless but he wouldn't have been sent off if north didn't dip at that moment. then again if he hit his head could have been serious

it's also a factor of size - Tuilagi is 110kg . a smaller player would not pose the same danger


on balance, James Ryan got away with firing himself recklessly into several rucks, head first and no arms against England but no mention on this forum of it being dangerous.

It was mentioned on the match thread by a few posters that he could be in trouble. I noted it myself and thought he was a lucky boy at times. But Jaco Peyper is not exactly the ref you're looking for in a game like that.

Bazzo

I'm a bit confused because I've had about 13 pages of only 3 or 4 posts; all of which I agree with.

Bazzo

ionadnapokot wrote: »

Tom Curry was exceptional again yesterday
His power, tackle technique and temperament are all first class.
His haircut though??

I would say he's the most complete best back-row in the world. And Still only 21. 22 caps and has played across the back-row.

He looks like he was trying to level his sideburns and things got out of hand

Faugheen

glasso wrote: »

of course reckless but he wouldn't have been sent off if north didn't dip at that moment. then again if he hit his head could have been serious

it's also a factor of size - Tuilagi is 110kg . a smaller player would not pose the same danger


on balance, James Ryan got away with firing himself recklessly into several rucks, head first and no arms against England but no mention on this forum of it being dangerous.

Tuilagi is running in at full pelt with absolutely no control of himself.

He doesn’t even attempt to wrap his arms and has gone in for no other reason but to hurt North there.

It’s a red all day every day. There is zero mitigating factors here. Tuilagi can count himself lucky that he didn’t connect with North’s head, not unlucky that North dipped at that moment.

Former Former

glasso wrote: »

of course reckless but he wouldn't have been sent off if north didn't dip at that moment. then again if he hit his head could have been serious

it's also a factor of size - Tuilagi is 110kg . a smaller player would not pose the same danger


on balance, James Ryan got away with firing himself recklessly into several rucks, head first and no arms against England but no mention on this forum of it being dangerous.

North didn't dip, he was tackled by Slade.

Tuilagi has a career's worth of form in this regard.

joseywhales

In fairness tuilagi could have passively tackled north safely, he choose to try to nail him and is responsible for the trajectory of his no arms missile, I don't know what EJ was on about,"he was trying to kill the tackle" , can you find that in the law book about "killing" tackles?

P.Walnuts

glasso wrote: »

of course reckless but he wouldn't have been sent off if north didn't dip at that moment. then again if he hit his head could have been serious

it's also a factor of size - Tuilagi is 110kg . a smaller player would not pose the same danger


on balance, James Ryan got away with firing himself recklessly into several rucks, head first and no arms against England but no mention on this forum of it being dangerous.

What on earth does his size have to do with it?

Peter Stringer could have made that tackle and it would still have been very dangerous and a clear red.

Buer

glasso wrote: »

on balance, James Ryan got away with firing himself recklessly into several rucks, head first and no arms against England but no mention on this forum of it being dangerous.

It was pointed out a number of times by posters on here.

P.Walnuts

P.Walnuts wrote: »

What on earth does his size have to do with it?

Peter Stringer could have made that tackle and it would still have been very dangerous and a clear red.

Physics

Hermy

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

...there is a big power differential between men and women...

There's a big power differential between Joe Marler and most people.

AdamD

stephen_n wrote: »

While I think some of the rhetoric here about Marler is way over the top. This is really unacceptable behavior, but it stems from Jones and it’s something he is happy for his players to engage in. This wind up **** they have been up to through out the 6N needs to be clamped down on, it’s getting ridiculous.

Agreed with this. Some of the outrage is over the top but its obviously something they can't condone. England's wind up tactics are a joke though, Itoje was holding players down all game against Ireland.

CMcsporty

Bazzo wrote: »

He looks like he was trying to level his sideburns and things got out of hand

That’s it!
Couldn’t figure what it reminded me of. Don Mattingly

CMcsporty

What’s the weather like in Murrayfield?

If it stays dry France could win this easy

Buer

Buer wrote: »

It was pointed out a number of times by posters on here.

mild mentions compared to the outrage for Tuilagi.

Ryan's actions could have seriously hurt someone also and could be given a red by plenty of refs.

shrapnel222

why did north not go off for an HIA? he was out cold for a split second.

Dwarf.Shortage

shrapnel222 wrote: »

why did north not go off for an HIA? he was out cold for a split second.

You know this based on what?

Faugheen

glasso wrote: »

mild mentions compared to the outrage for Tuilagi.

Ryan's actions could have seriously hurt someone also and could be given a red by plenty of refs.

I never understand why people refer to whataboutery as a means to try and belittle someone’s point.

I don’t know what exactly you’re talking about with regards to James Ryan (happy to be shown footage for clarity) but even if his actions are on the extreme scale it doesn’t suddenly mean Tuilagi’s challenge is ok.

We’re talking about Tuilagi’s clear red card challenge and you’re blathering on about Ryan like some injustice has been done.

shrapnel222

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

You know this based on what?

based on video footage. point is, any hint of a concussion, and there clearly was, then player goers off for an HIA, especially North who's brain is probably fried cauliflower by now, so should be looked after even more carefully.

Midfield Major

Midfield Major wrote: »

Joe Molloy shocked at ROG’s view on the Mahler incident.

what did he say?

technocrat

Midfield Major wrote: »

Joe Molloy shocked at ROG’s view on the Mahler incident.

ROG is a bigger clown defending Mahler!

Faugheen

Midfield Major wrote: »

Essentially Mahler did it for sheetz and gigglez and the game needs more characters.

‘Wet-the-Bed’ Molloy was aghast. Wouldn’t suit his SJW views at all.

How dare Joe Molloy have a different view.

Like I said, I’ll fondle your genitals and see how you like it.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

I never understand why people refer to whataboutery as a means to try and belittle someone’s point.

I don’t know what exactly you’re talking about with regards to James Ryan (happy to be shown footage for clarity) but even if his actions are on the extreme scale it doesn’t suddenly mean Tuilagi’s challenge is ok.

We’re talking about Tuilagi’s clear red card challenge and you’re blathering on about Ryan like some injustice has been done.

if you watched the match you saw it. at least 2/3 times.

multiple other posters here have acknowledged it today in posts. (Ryan's dangerous play)

don't play the whatabouterry card.

I'm not saying he (Tuilagi) didn't deserve the red.

I'm saying that it's not exactly an unbiased view here wrt to Tuilagi and that is a fair example to illustrate the point.

The fact that he routinely destroys Ireland with his legal play when playing for England may have something to do with it.

P.Walnuts

glasso wrote: »

Physics

Hate to beak it to you but a schoolboy could do serious damage by leading with their shoulder into somebody's prone head/neck.

Physics indeed.

You're talking hot garbage and everyone is calling you out on it rightly.

P.Walnuts

P.Walnuts wrote: »

Hate to beak it to you but a schoolboy could do serious damage by leading with their shoulder into somebody's prone head/neck.

Physics indeed.

.

could. yes. less likely to do so.

the physique of Tuilagi at full speed vs that of average schoolboy player.

Faugheen

glasso wrote: »

I'm not saying he (Tuilagi) didn't deserve the red.

I'm saying that it's not exactly an unbiased view here wrt to Tuilagi and that is a fair example to illustrate the point.

The fact that he routinely destroys Ireland with his legal play when playing for England may have something to do with it.

So people agree with you because they’re sore about Tuilagi’s performances against Ireland?

Going by your logic, you must think it’s a red card because Tuilagi ‘routinely destroys Ireland’ as well.

Some of the absolute nonsense that gets spouted by people who are simply looking for a row is ridiculous.

People are annoyed because it’s a horrific tackle and to see it defended by his coach is an insult to anyone who is a fan of the game. For you to suggest it’s because of bias and bitterness makes you no worse than Eddie Jones.

If you believe it’s a red card then why on Earth are you on here arguing a toss with people who agree with you?

Dwarf.Shortage

shrapnel222 wrote: »

based on video footage. point is, any hint of a concussion, and there clearly was, then player goers off for an HIA, especially North who's brain is probably fried cauliflower by now, so should be looked after even more carefully.

You can't know he's out based on video footage. Often closed my eyes and lay still for a second gathering my thoughts after taking a big shot. I think we have to trust players a bit, if he was in fact out and didn't report as much to the team doctor he's playing a dangerous game.

Heres Johnny

Hermy wrote: »

There's a big power differential between Joe Marler and most people.

Not between Marler and AWJ though is there?

Heres Johnny

Midfield Major wrote: »

Essentially Mahler did it for sheetz and gigglez and the game needs more characters.

‘Wet-the-Bed’ Molloy was aghast. Wouldn’t suit his SJW views at all.

Good man ROG, bit of perspective at least. He knows the craic it was only a joke.

errlloyd

That's a card for me.

Dwarf.Shortage

errlloyd wrote: »

That's a card for me.

Surprised Murrayfield isn't getting ratty

Rockbeast2

Could have been red.

swiwi_

That’s a lucky YC. Red card for me. Admittedly no malice.

Dwarf.Shortage

Happy with yc, dunno which of them for though lol

shrapnel222

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

You can't know he's out based on video footage. Often closed my eyes and lay still for a second gathering my thoughts after taking a big shot. I think we have to trust players a bit, if he was in fact out and didn't report as much to the team doctor he's playing a dangerous game.

It doesn't matter whether he was or not. There was enough reason to take him off for an hia. I just found it really weird he wasn't.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

So people agree with you because they’re sore about Tuilagi’s performances against Ireland?

Going by your logic, you must think it’s a red card because Tuilagi ‘routinely destroys Ireland’ as well.

Some of the absolute nonsense that gets spouted by people who are simply looking for a row is ridiculous.

People are annoyed because it’s a horrific tackle and to see it defended by his coach is an insult to anyone who is a fan of the game. For you to suggest it’s because of bias and bitterness makes you no worse than Eddie Jones.

If you believe it’s a red card then why on Earth are you on here arguing a toss with people who agree with you?

not addressing Ryan again just proves the point - just continue to ignore it.

I did not bring up Eddie Jones. not relevant to the point here.

I'm not glossing over the red card. the point is the bias on this forum.

Tuilagi could have badly injured someone but thankfully didn't

Ryan could have badly injured someone but thankfully didn't

they were both reckless.

one is glossed over / gets slight mention of him being a "lucky boy" because he is the best current Irish player we have, the other gets outrage because he's not and yes, he is and has been a game changer against Ireland.