Page 14 of 21 FirstFirst ... 4101112131415161718 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 209

Thread: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

      
  1. #131

    Referees in Australia
    menace's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    ACTRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    20 Nov 09
    Posts
    3,533
    Thanks (Received)
    59
    Likes (Received)
    481
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    That's not an argument I have made .
    In the OP I am not sanctioning the outcome, I am sanctioning the reckless, dangerous intent
    Precisely my point Sherlock.

    By your reasoning by the outcome I should have sanctioned the tackler that knocked himself out. It was dangerous because he was injured and it was reckless (to himself) because he knew the consequences of putting his head in the wrong position but did it anyway. So under your logic of applying 9.11 (??) i should have sanctioned him


    Do you get it yet?
    Tell em it's Law 23 and smile

  2. #132
    Rugby Club Member Rich_NL's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Rugby Nederland
    Grade
    WR level 2
    Join Date
    13 Apr 15
    Posts
    1,070
    Thanks (Received)
    15
    Likes (Received)
    286

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    The reason this seems backwards is because we don't sanction adult players for doing things that are dangerous to themselves. In fact, law 9.11 specifically forbids "anything that is reckless or dangerous to others", so it's not a good counterexample. Kids we do sanction for their own safety, in some cases - here in Holland the squeeze ball is illegal for age grade because of the danger to the squeezer, for example.

    If the tackler had targeted someone else's head like he targeted his own, I'd hope you'd probably card him.

    If your argument is that the original tackler *couldn't have known* that he was likely to seriously endanger a much smaller player by his chosen tackling technique, then it's not reckless. You can agree or disagree with that, it's perfectly reasonable to have judgement calls around grey areas. And it's not about intent or outcome; it's just that outcome-based calls are easier to spot and easier to make, as the evidence that it was dangerous is already presented.

  3. #133

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    16,842
    Thanks (Received)
    128
    Likes (Received)
    1619

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Quote Originally Posted by menace View Post
    Precisely my point Sherlock.

    By your reasoning by the outcome I should have sanctioned the tackler that knocked himself out. It was dangerous because he was injured and it was reckless (to himself) because he knew the consequences of putting his head in the wrong position but did it anyway. So under your logic of applying 9.11 (??) i should have sanctioned him


    Do you get it yet?
    I am not reaoning based on outcome (read my posts)
    I am sanctioning the player in the OP based on his reckless and dangerous intent .. he went out to smash an inattentive opponent after the ball had gone

    Do you get it yet ?

    It's you that is talking about outcome ...
    Last edited by crossref; 02-04-19 at 12:04.

  4. #134

    Referees in Australia
    menace's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    ACTRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    20 Nov 09
    Posts
    3,533
    Thanks (Received)
    59
    Likes (Received)
    481
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Yes..I concede I misread your post. Apology for that.

    My point is aimed at using 9.11 to turn legal actions into a sanction is a disengenuine use of the intent of the laws.
    Tell em it's Law 23 and smile

  5. #135

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    9,493
    Thanks (Received)
    57
    Likes (Received)
    879

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Quote Originally Posted by menace View Post

    By your reasoning by the outcome I should have sanctioned the tackler that knocked himself out. It was dangerous because he was injured and it was reckless (to himself) because he knew the consequences of putting his head in the wrong position but did it anyway. So under your logic of applying 9.11 (??) i should have sanctioned him
    Leigh halfpenny wouldn;t stay on the pitcyh very long either way then... ;-) Concussed or carded!

    didds

  6. #136

    Referees in Australia
    menace's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    ACTRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    20 Nov 09
    Posts
    3,533
    Thanks (Received)
    59
    Likes (Received)
    481
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Quote Originally Posted by Flish View Post
    Going off tangent, is the Blue Card working? I'm meaning post match, proper rest, enforcement etc? Glad to report no ones's arguing when I tell a player he's staying off here in the UK, but I have no idea whether they're playing again the next week or adhering to the protocols.
    Yes and hard to say.

    Everyone is more atuned to head knocks and what the blue card means. They get reported on game sheets but weren't really tracked so is/was possible that players/clubs allow players back without proper return protocols BUT people particularly players now seeing the card know they shouldn't see that player for a couple of weeks so the players/clubs didnt seem to risk it. This year we are using apps to record game sheets and cards so presumably they have the data electronically and so can more easily track and cross check players cards and game appearances. (Whether they are actually checking the data I cant say?).
    Tell em it's Law 23 and smile

  7. #137

    Referees in America
    thepercy's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    New York State Rugby Referees Society
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    21 Sep 13
    Posts
    663
    Thanks (Received)
    13
    Likes (Received)
    97

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    I am not reaoning based on outcome (read my posts)
    I am sanctioning the player in the OP based on his reckless and dangerous intent .. he went out to smash an inattentive opponent after the ball had gone

    Do you get it yet ?

    It's you that is talking about outcome ...
    So your problem is that he intended to smash the ball carrier, and the ball carrier wasn't paying enough attention? A PK for an otherwise legal tackle that is too hard? The inattentiveness of the BC is not the Tackler's responsibility, rather the BC's.

  8. #138

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    16,842
    Thanks (Received)
    128
    Likes (Received)
    1619

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Quote Originally Posted by thepercy View Post
    So your problem is that he intended to smash the ball carrier, and the ball carrier wasn't paying enough attention? A PK for an otherwise legal tackle that is too hard? The inattentiveness of the BC is not the Tackler's responsibility, rather the BC's.

    I think his act was illegal because it was intentionally, ie deliberately reckless and dangerous.

    It's similar to charging into a ruck. Hitting a ruck is legal, charging recklessly and dangerously is illegal

    We are talking U14 or U15 rugby (accounts differ).

    f you think that is 'play on' you would be saying that it is perfectly OK for it to happen a second time, and a third time, and a fourth time . Is that really your view ?

    I don't think that would be acceptable, so would out a stop to it using the tools I have available in the Law .. PKs and cards.

    I think that giving permission for that sort of incident to happen a second time in the same game would be failing in your first duty as a ref in a youth game .. safety .
    Last edited by crossref; 02-04-19 at 18:04.

  9. #139

    Referees in America
    thepercy's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    New York State Rugby Referees Society
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    21 Sep 13
    Posts
    663
    Thanks (Received)
    13
    Likes (Received)
    97

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    We are talking U14 or U15 rugby (accounts differ).

    I think his act was illegal because it was intentionally, ie deliberately reckless and dangerous.
    If you think that is 'play on' you would be saying that it is perfectly OK for it to happen a second time, and a third time, and a fourth time . Is that your view ?

    I don't think that would be acceptable, so would out a stop to it using the tools I have available in the Law .. PKs and cards.

    I think that allowing that sort of incident to happen would be failing in your first duty as a ref in a youth game .. safety .
    At what level would you stop giving PKs and Cards for otherwise legally "smashing" an inattentive opponent?

  10. #140

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    16,842
    Thanks (Received)
    128
    Likes (Received)
    1619

    Default Re: South African schoolboy rugby viral tackle video

    Quote Originally Posted by thepercy View Post
    At what level would you stop giving PKs and Cards for otherwise legally "smashing" an inattentive opponent?
    I will always give a PK for being intentionally reckless and dangerous. That might well be an example. Charging into a ruck is another possibility
    Last edited by crossref; 02-04-19 at 18:04.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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