Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland v England Grand Slam Decider 2023

Options
13334353739

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,325 ✭✭✭cuttingtimber22


    It was not a black and white decision. I think it was a red but I can also see why there are alternative arguments. Not sure any of that panel are apologists for dangerous play.



  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 8,124 ✭✭✭fitz


    All of the alternative arguments ignore the entire point of severe sanctions though...to disincentivize the riskier tackling. People talk a good game about player safety, "but..."

    Looking at incidents in isolation without the broader context and intent and making cases for mitigation based on players being "unlucky" is effectively advocating for more of the same. Players need to not be putting themselves in positions where they'll be "unlucky" to have clobbered someone in the head.

    Obviously there will still be accidents, but what is it going to take for folks to stop letting players off the hook for dangerous play that's avoidable? Do we have to have a head injury related death in a high profile game? It's not like it hasn't happened over the last couple of years at lower levels.

    See what something like that does to ruin the "spectacle".



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,146 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    I'm like a broken record at this stage - where did I say it was ROG's fault? You're another who is tripping over themselves to defend him while not actually reading my posts.

    I am pointing ROG's description of his approach to coaching is a symptom of the issue - I've consistently highlighted the change needs to come from those who make the laws, which is World Rugby.

    I'd much rather the game didn't need to shift further but clearly certain coaches, players, pundits, fans still can't wrap their head around what needs to happen to avoid things getting even tougher.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,472 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    If World Rugby sees nothing wrong with choke tackles they don't have much credibility and no coach is going to stop his players attempting them.

    They also need to take some actual action on the (illegal) practice of charging into rucks with the shoulder. James Ryan should probably have seen a red card (and not for the first time) for smashing Ludlam in the head in a ruck.

    But nothing is said, nothing is done.

    Post edited by pickarooney on


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,399 ✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    This is exactly what he should have done. Difficult to do it in the heat of the moment. The hope is that players faced with similar scenarios in the future will err on the side of caution to reduce serious head collisions. It will take time. We will never ever eliminate serious head collisions but hopefully we can reduce them. I would like to know how many HIAs we had in the whole 6N and how it compares to previous years.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,106 ✭✭✭✭Interested Observer


    I just cannot see any argument for it being anything other than red. If we look at the situation:

    1. Ireland are on the attack and in possession of the ball
    2. Hansen tries to pass to Keenan
    3. It goes forward, ref still hasn't stopped the play (I think, would need to double check that)
    4. Steward has taken a somewhat deep position presumably to cut off a stabbed through kick, he's not in the defensive line anyway
    5. He comes forward at pace when the ball goes to Keenan
    6. He is ALWAYS a tackler in this situation and should position himself as such
    7. He does not make a tackle, he ploughs into Keenan, shoulders him in the face, and forced him out of the game

    People keep saying he only had a split second to make a decision, imo this is total nonsense. He had from the moment he started moving forward to make a decision. His decision should have been that he was going to make a legal tackle on Keenan. I really don't think I can be convinced otherwise. You cannot, and should not be allowed to, make head contact like that and get away with it these days.



  • Subscribers Posts: 41,644 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ey also need to take some actual action on the (illegal) practice of charging into rucks with the shoulder. James Ryan should probably have seen a red card (and not for the first time) for smashing Ludlam in the head in a ruck.

    but he didnt though. he bound on entry to two ireland players and pushed forward. Ludlum was off his feet yet still slowing the ball down. The fact ryan made contact with ludlums head was unfortunately, but in no way malicious or even foul play.

    people need to get this idea out of their head that every head contact is foul play. The sport is based on collisions and in a collision based sport there will always be head contacts. The question is what can the law makers do to REDUCE th enumber of head contacts. There is no way they could possibly amend any law to prevent james Ryan from doing what he did (text book rucking to be honest, bound and pushed directly forward) and still retain the game as it stands.



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,500 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Donal Lenihan has been speaking and writing about the concussion issue with a good while. As per Aloof, Ireland show you can play great and winning rugby whilst largely avoiding dangerous tackling.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,582 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Yes , but they aren't a TMO , it's a different role.

    Those people are down on the sideline speaking to team managers and Doctors about Subs and HIA's etc.

    If the TMO is going to spend up to 8 minutes analysing video footage then you'll need another other to continue to monitor the game live.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    You're painting it as very black-and-white, whereas everything ROG said was filled with caveats and disclaimers. But as another poster said, you can't expect coaches to implement coaching based on laws that don't yet exist.

    Anyways, pretty clear we're not going to agree so happy to leave it there. (Fwiw, I actually agree that World Rugby need to be stronger on this. That's what will change behaviour).



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I didn't find anything hugely problematic or surprising in what ROG said in that interview, but I did find it confirmation of how I believe coaches view this.

    You often hear commentators making statements about how they can't believe how players won't learn and lower the tackle height, but ROG's comments (and I expect his views on this are representative of virtually every coach in the game) indicate that until the rules change, coaches will coach to them, and are not telling their players to lower their tackle heights.

    In the past 20 years we've seen a lot of changes and innovations to the game, most notably around the ruck, and for the most part players have adapted without a hitch. The reason players are still hitting high frequently is because they are doing so to prevent offloads, prevent quick ruck ball etc, and this is still being coached into them.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    In the past 20 years we've seen a lot of changes and innovations to the game, most notably around the ruck, and for the most part players have adapted without a hitch. 

    Two that come to mind for me, that have been adapted to, are 1) driving a player beyond the horizontal and 2) contests in the air (thinking the Jared Payne incident; that was seen as harsh at the time, but is a pretty clear red-card now). There's probably more.

    Tackling obviously occurs far more frequently than those examples, and with the dangers of a slightly mis-timed chest-high tackle, it's something World Rugby need to get right.

    Part of the issue is that when incidents like this happen, the range of outcomes is anywhere between penalty to red-card; I don't think there's much clarity. Add in the occasional disparty between what the ref decides on the field and what the discipline panel decide afterward, it all becomes muddier.

    For me, when the Stewart one happened, the Atonio yellow was the one that came to mind for me, and is a much clearer red imo. Herring had the ball significantly earlier than Keenan collected it.

    When the likes of Atonio's tackle can be deemed yellow on the field, but upgraded to a ban afterwards, it's pretty understandable some people will see Stewart's red as harsh in that context.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,864 ✭✭✭TheRona


    The problem is that a lot of red cards are in completely random situations, and the chances of a player being in that exact situation again is very rare. Steward stepped up into the line as the ball was loose after being lost forward, and then it was gathered a split second before the collision.

    Compare this to something like Porter against NZ last summer. 6'8" Retallick running in a straight line in an upright position from several metres out. Porter chooses to make a high tackle, resulting in a broken cheekbone and putting the opposition player out for several months. Even in the disciplinary hearing, it is deemed that it isn't a red card, due to it being a 'passive' tackle. My argument is that this is the type of tackle that should be disincentivized, because it is about as normal and mundane as a tackling situation gets, and there's no excuse for poor technique, passive or not.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,472 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    His first point of contact in that ruck is with Ludlam's head. He only pushes after he's clattered him and he has to have seen him sticking out of the ruck on his way in.

    As long as the sport allows this kind of thing, any pretence at putting player safety first should be ignored.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    For those that haven't seen it, this is the James Ryan incident. I think he can consider himself lucky, and I certainly don't see it as "textbook rucking", tbh Syd.




  • Registered Users Posts: 6,019 ✭✭✭Yeah_Right


    The Ryan v Ludlam is a grey area. Like so much of rugby 😁 Ryan hits the ruck, binds and drives. Yes there is head contact but he doesn't tuck his arm and go shoulder first. It's a bit like when ball carriers are picking and driving on the try line. They're so low that there is almost always head contact from the tackler but its allowed as long as they use their arms.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,106 ✭✭✭✭Interested Observer


    Hasn't really seen that before, definitely looks like there's head contact and that could have seen a card.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I was curious so I just had a search of the laws and there is no mention of a "rugby incident". I get what people are getting at with that term but what are the refs supposed to be do when it doesn't exist within the laws. The Rugby Pod lads just called it a rugby incident. It's the equivalent of saying **** happens.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,472 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    **** just does happen, though. Ringrose knocked himself out by smacking his head on another player's hip. Neither player did anything wrong but the result was a TBI.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,196 ✭✭✭✭Crash


    What monster tweets a video of a video player??



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,146 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    ROG absolutely spoke out of both sides of his mouth but when it came down to the straight forward question about coaching he was crystal clear that he didn't feel incentivized to divert coaching time to focus on safer tackle technique in different scenarios in the manner many would expect given the increasing sanctions.

    Time and again when there is head contact it is asked by commentators and fans how it keeps happening - many of these deemed as 'accidents' or 'unfortunate'. An element is that coaches, including ROG, aren't coaching players to be more careful.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,472 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    Coaches are simply never going to abandon techniques that are both successful and legal. ROG was simply honest about the status quo and deserves more respect for that than if he bullshitted about telling his players to avoid risky tackles while doing nothing of the sort.

    If and when chest-high tackles, choke tackles, cleaning out rucks and other risky/dangerous practices are outlawed, ROG and other coaches will adapt but the game is currently reffed entirely on the outcome and not on the techniques themselves.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,920 ✭✭✭✭stephen_n


    Instead of multiple threads getting derailed by debates around red cards. It might be handy to have a rolling thread to discuss all these incidents and elements to them?


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058289108/the-should-it-or-should-it-not-be-a-red-card-thread/p1?new=1



  • Subscribers Posts: 41,644 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    difference of opinion then. ryan is doing everything hes been coached to do since he was a chap.....

    what coaching point do you pick him up on then?



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,114 ✭✭✭✭AMKC
    Ms


    So I see Freddie Stewart will be before a disciplinary hearing this afternoon and its understood that the English Union will look to have the red card dismissed. I have looked at the incident a number of times and its very clear that Stewart made the decision to turn and use his elbow against the Irish Rugby player. No way was it an accident. He could have kept going the way he was and not turn at all in which case nothing would have happened or he could have let the Irish player hit the front of him but no he used his side and his elbow so it is quiet clearly a red card.

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    It's textbook rucking if Ludlam's head isn't where it is. But it is, and he has a pretty clear line of sight, so he needs to adapt.

    I can tell you what law I pick him up on; at a ruck, a player must not make contact above the line of the shoulders. It's pretty clear foul play.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,146 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    That is exactly my original and continued point.

    I don't think ROG deserves respect for being honest, he kept throwing out a bunch of niceties about how important player safety is at the same time. I agree he let the mask slip and was more honest about it than most coaches but plenty of bullshit in there too, which clearly some here latched on to defend him.

    I'd argue that some coaches have adapted to the new guidance. You don't regularly see Irish players putting them into a position where there is a risk of a negative outcome. They're either incredibly lucky or coached to use techniques in certain scenarios so they minimize the chance of being penalised (and the opposition injured). You'll never mitigate all risk but improving technique can substantially lower it.

    Contrast Ireland's approach to the multiple late/borderline hits from England got away during the game outside of the red card that could have been penalised. As another poster said 'sh1t happens' but you can take steps to put yourself in a position for it to be less likely to happen while also being successful.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,489 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    He has bad form for this, has similar ballistic entries in most games. It's a side of his game i wish he'd stamp out



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,582 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    To be honest that "Torpedo" style ruck entry is an issue across the board.

    Simple to fix - Penalise any player going off their feet at the ruck.

    If you can't hit it and clear out whilst keeping your feet , then tough.

    Solves a huge amount of the injury risk at the breakdown - Players will have to slow down as they approach and pick their spot to ensure they can hit and remain upright.

    That takes a lot of the velocity out of the contact and reduces injury risk - Probably increases the number of turn-overs as well.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    Has anyone thought to check the Top 14 discipline stats to see where La Rochelle are in that regard, to see what the actual evidence is with regards ROG? I might have a look later if I get the chance.



Advertisement