Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 61 to 70 of 70

Thread: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

      
  1. #61
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Yet to join
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    08 Oct 11
    Posts
    113
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    11

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    I am only considering the first action as this thread seems to be about the potentially dangerous play.

    So could Itoje have taken the same blocking stance maybe 3 metres away?

    If he'd dived on the floor and slid forward to gather a loose ball that the attacking side had tried to hack on, a frequently seen tactic at this time of year on wet pitches, would that also be considered dangerous? But who would have been the person put in danger and who would have been the source of the danger?

    If the ball was scudding into touch and he dived/dropped to stop it with an outstretched left foot but was 2 m away from any attacker, or possibly the kick was being followed up by the winger who impinged on Itoje's safe space. What would be the decision?

    In a slightly different situation, ball in air rather than on the ground, he could have jumped and put a power header forward. Where would we all cast that. Skill or dangerous.

    We applaud players that trap the ball to control it rather than knock it on when the surface is slippery. Is the fact that he applied some effective intelligence and a fair degree of athleticism in a high skill, high pressure test match where split second decisions sway the outcome not also something to applaud.

    As with all these situations it is about the absolute, the space and time in that specific situation must be part of the decision and you cannot judge everything by setting cast iron interpretations. Comparison with scrum and line out is not even in the same scope as they very clearly have a discrete set of laws far more prescriptive than for open play.

    We ask our back row players to be committed to challenge and fight for all the loose ball on the ground and in the air, we ask them to grapple, wrestle and gain any advantage possible, we ask them to show that edge that gives them the upper hand over their opponents and if they achieve this for the majority of the game then the team might come out on top.

    I see this event as nothing more than blocking the ball as part of that intense competition.

  2. #62

    Referees in New Zealand
    Ian_Cook's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Retired player and referee
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    12 Jul 05
    Posts
    12,930
    Thanks (Received)
    98
    Likes (Received)
    1327

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    Quote Originally Posted by BikingBud View Post
    I am only considering the first action as this thread seems to be about the potentially dangerous play.

    So could Itoje have taken the same blocking stance maybe 3 metres away?

    If he'd dived on the floor and slid forward to gather a loose ball that the attacking side had tried to hack on, a frequently seen tactic at this time of year on wet pitches, would that also be considered dangerous? But who would have been the person put in danger and who would have been the source of the danger?

    If the ball was scudding into touch and he dived/dropped to stop it with an outstretched left foot but was 2 m away from any attacker, or possibly the kick was being followed up by the winger who impinged on Itoje's safe space. What would be the decision?

    In a slightly different situation, ball in air rather than on the ground, he could have jumped and put a power header forward. Where would we all cast that. Skill or dangerous.

    We applaud players that trap the ball to control it rather than knock it on when the surface is slippery. Is the fact that he applied some effective intelligence and a fair degree of athleticism in a high skill, high pressure test match where split second decisions sway the outcome not also something to applaud.

    As with all these situations it is about the absolute, the space and time in that specific situation must be part of the decision and you cannot judge everything by setting cast iron interpretations. Comparison with scrum and line out is not even in the same scope as they very clearly have a discrete set of laws far more prescriptive than for open play.

    We ask our back row players to be committed to challenge and fight for all the loose ball on the ground and in the air, we ask them to grapple, wrestle and gain any advantage possible, we ask them to show that edge that gives them the upper hand over their opponents and if they achieve this for the majority of the game then the team might come out on top.

    I see this event as nothing more than blocking the ball as part of that intense competition.
    All the other examples you quote where players are some distance away from an opponent are interesting, but ultimately irrelevant to the question here. If White 6 had got the ball, but brought down Blue 10 and broken that player's ankle, would you still think his action was OK?

    I don't care what White 6 was trying to do, I only care about what he actually did. He swung his leg at the ball, in the near vicinity of Blue 10 and makes definite contact with that player's foot. That is dangerous play in my book... all day, and every day.

    10.4 DANGEROUS PLAY AND MISCONDUCT
    (c) Kicking. A player must not kick an opponent.
    Sanction: Penalty kick
    (d) Tripping. A player must not trip an opponent with the leg or foot.
    Sanction: Penalty kick


    If we allow this to develop, then how long before a player of less skill tries the same thing and brings an opponent down? How long before a player trips a an opponent and pleads he was going for the ball? How long before someone ends up with a broken ankle or a broken leg from this act.

    Better to nip it in the bud.
    "Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed"
    - Jay "Utah" Windley

  3. #63

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,044
    Thanks (Received)
    91
    Likes (Received)
    1282

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    Ian - I don't see Itoje's action as a kick in any normal sense - he even ends up with his back to the opponent. I think you are trying to simplify the matter by putting his action into a pigeonhole where it doesn't really fit.

    Your view also raises an interesting question - how far away must an opponent be before he is allowed to really kick an opponent's grubber kick?

    I think there are situations where we have to allow the referee to judge if a particular action was dangerous or not.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  4. #64

    Referees in New Zealand
    Ian_Cook's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Retired player and referee
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    12 Jul 05
    Posts
    12,930
    Thanks (Received)
    98
    Likes (Received)
    1327

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    Ian - I don't see Itoje's action as a kick in any normal sense - he even ends up with his back to the opponent. I think you are trying to simplify the matter by putting his action into a pigeonhole where it doesn't really fit.
    He swung his foot at the ball, in the direction of a player, and his foot struck that player. That sounds like a kick to me

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    Your view also raises an interesting question - how far away must an opponent be before he is allowed to really kick an opponent's grubber kick?
    I would say as long as he is not "near" the opponent ("near" being, under the Law, within 1 m)

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    I think there are situations where we have to allow the referee to judge if a particular action was dangerous or not.
    I agree, and in this case, I think it was dangerous play.

    I would not like to see this sort of action become common practice.
    "Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed"
    - Jay "Utah" Windley

  5. #65
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Yet to join
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    08 Oct 11
    Posts
    113
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    11

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian_Cook View Post
    He swung his foot at the ball, in the direction of a player, and his foot struck that player. That sounds like a kick to me
    Sounds just like hooking the ball in the scrum.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ian_Cook View Post
    I would say as long as he is not "near" the opponent ("near" being, under the Law, within 1 m)
    So how far away was Itoje when he blocked the ball?



    Quote Originally Posted by Ian_Cook View Post
    I agree, and in this case, I think it was dangerous play.

    I would not like to see this sort of action become common practice.
    So we have a different interpretation all fine and dandy makes the game fun.

    St Nigel only mentioned knock on white, nothing more.
    Last edited by BikingBud; 04-12-17 at 05:12.

  6. #66

    Referees in Australia
    menace's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    ACTRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    20 Nov 09
    Posts
    3,332
    Thanks (Received)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    380
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    once upon a time..players were allowed to lift an opponent and turn them past horizontal...BUT if they corrected that error AND put the opponent down safely then all was good and we carried on. Then someone realised that if you put a player in that prone position then eventually sh*t might go wrong and in just a matter of time someone could get a broken neck. So WR got tough and before that happened said, for the safety of players, YC a minimum for a lift past horizontal - regardless of the outcome.

    I see this very similar with players diving feet first at other players ankles. Do we have to wait until someone gets stretchered off with a compound fracture the lower legs before we do anything and declare it dangerous play?

    I would suspect that was the first time NO ever saw such action in rugby....and as he trawled through his mind the full 4000 page law book in 15seconds he's said "f@ck, I can't find a law for that..I better play safe here and stay out of The Sun papers...'knock on gents..white can't have the ball'"
    Last edited by menace; 04-12-17 at 07:12.
    Tell em it's Law 23 and smile

  7. #67

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,044
    Thanks (Received)
    91
    Likes (Received)
    1282

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    Quote Originally Posted by menace View Post
    I see this very similar with players diving feet first at other players ankles. Do we have to wait until someone gets stretchered off with a compound fracture the lower legs before we do anything and declare it dangerous play?
    That is the fallacious "if one step, why not fifty?" argument which claims you should make the first step illegal if the fiftieth would be harmful.

    Everybody knows that tackling can injure players even when done legally. Ask Danny Hearn (and Ian Macrae).
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  8. #68

    Referees in Australia
    menace's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    ACTRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    20 Nov 09
    Posts
    3,332
    Thanks (Received)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    380
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    But surely "near a player" is the key to the dangerous here.

    Just like the law about kicking the ball out of the hands of a player attempting to score. It's not the kick at the ball on its own that is dangerous, it's because it's near a players body/head that makes it dangerous?

    Why is this diving feet first at an opponent not the same?
    Tell em it's Law 23 and smile

  9. #69

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,044
    Thanks (Received)
    91
    Likes (Received)
    1282

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    Quote Originally Posted by menace View Post
    Why is this diving feet first at an opponent not the same?
    It may become a trip, but it is not a kick, which requires directed force towards a person.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  10. #70

    Referees in America
    thepercy's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    New York State Rugby Referees Society
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    21 Sep 13
    Posts
    527
    Thanks (Received)
    10
    Likes (Received)
    68

    Default Re: Itoje chargedown v Samoa

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian_Cook View Post
    He swung his foot at the ball, in the direction of a player, and his foot struck that player. That sounds like a kick to me.
    Did he really strike the blue player with his foot? For me, it looked like there was either no contact or maybe he made incidental contact. Would you call a dangerous tackle if the tackler swung his arm, mostly missing the players head, but just brushed by? Just touching his ear with a finger tip?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •