• Please bear with us. We have moved to a new provider, and some images and icons are not working correctly. We are working hard to fix this

Lood De Jager permanent red card vs France/Franco Mostert permanent red card vs Italy

S

shebeen

Active member
following on from this thread,
Ian_Cook

Thread 'Ireland v New Zealand'

How on Earth is this a red card....


Seriously, what is the game coming to?

This one is still up for debate. I am incredibly grateful that this comes from a game where the 14man team won, so there can be no "sour grapes" accusations and we can just look at the facts and decision taken.

It's shoulder/upper arm on head, and looks horrific. I do wonder if the smart gumguard readings will ever tell this sort of story because the player did play on fine (no judging for staying down initially).

We have a straight red card been given to the player.
It is a little bit odd since there was 21 seconds left in the half, and Angus Gardiner (referee) was right on the spot and had to be convinced from a yellow to a full red - perfect opportunity to go to the bunker if there ever was one.

(I'm not sure if there is an update to this process flow graphic to include the 20min red card, but the principles would be similar)

1762755766058.png


Mitigation will be waived if it is "intentional" or "always illegal".
Let's look at those individually.

intentional
head contact:We have a player listed at 2.05m tackling a 1,78m player. The ball carrier slips the initial tackle, but is then pulled down off his feet and dips incredibly late. The head contact can't be intentional as he has dropped his level incredibly low to normal waist height of this player who is on his knees (and bum on knee).
no arms:there has to be an attempt to wrap. The right arm is successfully wrapped, so his intention was to wrap.

always illegal: let's look at the left arm now. Since the on field call was that the left arm was tucked, and that's what would make it a shoulder charge and always illegal. If you actually look the first contact is left arm on left arm and Ramos left arm slides all the way down to the wrist. On full contact of White upper arm on Blue head this arm is then fully tucked and Ramos arm remains pinning it to the waist (maybe not relevant, but during this incredibly short sequence the ball is thrown into the tackler's face). You can drive a million buses through the always illegal clause since this all happens in an instant.

Tackling a player on the ground?
Technically this is what actually happens, but it's a second tackler and the ball carrier does slip the initial tackle so still needs a second tackle.

So what next.....
Citing?
How many weeks?
Will Ramos write his own evidence and subject a mitigation letter a la Berne/Barrett (that would be unexpected!).
 
Last edited:
Can we deconstruct this?
shebeen said:
This one is still up for debate. I am incredibly grateful that this comes from a game where the 14man team won, so there can be no "sour grapes" accusations and we can just look at the facts and decision taken. - Unfortunately all the SM indicates that this is about SA feeling persecuted by WR and the rest of the rugby playing world. I feel this so often clouds the objectivity.

It's shoulder/upper arm on head, and looks horrific. It was horrific I do wonder if the smart gumguard readings will ever tell this sort of story because the player did play on fine (no judging for staying down initially). Would be interesting as part of the study but let's not focus on outcomes but actions

We have a straight red card been given to the player.
It is a little bit odd, since there was 21 seconds left in the half, What was odd, a offence can be reviewed and sanctions be given at any time and Angus Gardiner (referee) was right on the spot Yet he missed it, if you look at the still he was looking down and trying to negotiate White 9's legs, and was advised by the TMO what is your point? and had to be convinced from a yellow to a full red - perfect opportunity to go to the bunker if there ever was one. The team of 4 should work as one, I observed that effect being appropriately deployed.

(I'm not sure if there is an update to this process flow graphic to include the 20min red card, but the principles would be similar) Principles should be exactly the same only the facts need slightly longer to assess.

View attachment 4916


Mitigation will be waived if it is "intentional" or "always illegal".
Let's look at those individually.

intentional
head contact:We have a player listed at 2.05m tackling a 1,78m player. As on the other thread so what - you want big players to boss the game you need to consider how they tackle the smaller players, sometimes they will overstep. The ball carrier slips the initial tackle, but is then pulled down off his feet and dips incredibly late. The head contact can't be intentional How did you determine intent? as he has dropped his level incredibly low to normal waist height of this player who is on his knees (and bum on knee). If White 5 was hitting a ruck would he have achieved a lower position without too much difficulty? I would strongly suggest that reviewing the rest of the game yes he was able, therefore there was a choice to hit where he did.
no arms:there has to be an attempt to wrap. The right arm is successfully wrapped, so his intention was to wrap. Right did not wrap, left arm was tucked and at impact left shoulder was rotated much further forward.

always illegal: let's look at the left arm now. Since the on field call was that the left arm was tucked, and that's what would make it a shoulder charge and always illegal. If you actually look the first contact is left arm on left arm, is that like suggesting the first point of collision is the front of a car? White 5's arm is trailing not leading, it was never leading as in a wrap tackle. and Ramos left arm slides all the way down to the wrist. On full contact of White upper arm on Blue head this arm is then fully tucked and Ramos arm remains pinning it to the waist (maybe not relevant, but during this incredibly short sequence the ball is thrown into the tackler's face). You can drive a million buses through the always illegal clause since this all happens in an instant. Not if you are objective.

Tackling a player on the ground? Perhaps a penalty but not a red card event so not really relevant, this is about foul play.
Technically this is what actually happens, but it's a second tackler and the ball carrier does slip the initial tackle so still needs a second tackle. Fair call. But the second tackle must be low and legal, it was neither so we are back to Red Card.

So what next.....
Citing?
How many weeks?
Will Ramos write his own evidence and subject a mitigation letter a la Berne/Barrett (that would be unexpected!).
Click to expand...
The whole game is a series of actions that occur in an instant. It is widely recognised that the difference between average players and world class players is not their fitness but their speed of thought. Ability to react in an instant to; side step, take the pinch kicks into space, transfer a pass in the face of high pressure defence all demonstrate that international players can operate at a level most of us can only wonder at. That speed of thought and reaction time must also be the bench mark for adjusting to occurrences that unfold in front of them.

Was it clumsy - possibly.
Was it reckless - I would say yes.
Was it dangerous - very much so.

And should that not be the discussion, focussing on player safety?
 

Attachments

  • 20251110_101626.jpeg
    20251110_101626.jpeg
    896.7 KB · Views: 8
dickell said:
Far worse was the Feyi-Waboso incident which was exceedingly dangerous. Should have been straight red. Reason for yellow was said to be because he landed on his back. Only red if he ended up with a broken neck?
Click to expand...
Ive said exactly that fro years.

So if the upended player sticks an arm out and lands on the forearm first its not a red. But if instead tucks the arm into the body and lands on his head, its a red.

Nonsensical.
 
didds said:
and I agree.

nailed on I would say. the only mitigation potemntially on offer was that blue was on his knees. But trheres no mitigation available anyway cos its fopul play. And its foul play because that aint an attempt at an arm wrap in a month of Sundays.
Click to expand...

I think you're being very uncharitable: there was clearly a wrap, and it was also too fast a changing situation to wrap, and anyway he couldn't wrap because his arm was being blocked by the player he wanted to wrap, and besides that the French player threw a ball in his face so you can't expect him to wrap ;) (Jokes aside: clear red)

I thought the IFW air challenge was red too, although I can understand the reasoning as he was more or less horizontal by the time he hit the ground. I think he landed on his shoulder though.
 
shebeen said:
always illegal: let's look at the left arm now. Since the on field call was that the left arm was tucked, and that's what would make it a shoulder charge and always illegal. If you actually look the first contact is left arm on left arm and Ramos left arm slides all the way down to the wrist. On full contact of White upper arm on Blue head this arm is then fully tucked and Ramos arm remains pinning it to the waist (maybe not relevant, but during this incredibly short sequence the ball is thrown into the tackler's face). You can drive a million buses through the always illegal clause since this all happens in an instant.
Click to expand...
LDJ is never legal in the slightest.
Had the point of contact been the chest, it would have been a penalty; poc was the head, and that makes it red.

I think you're looking at things through a very green - or white - lens
 
No problem with the red card really, we have to have a safer game that that.



Having said that, is wrapping with the right, but hitting with a braced left shoulder generally ok or illegal? I'm sure I've seen that before

Do you have to have both arms up "attempting to grasp"?
 
Last edited:
SimonSmith said:
LDJ is never legal in the slightest.
Had the point of contact been the chest, it would have been a penalty; poc was the head, and that makes it red.
Click to expand...
So you're inferring that it was going to be legal/penalty only but Ramos dropping so significantly was what made it a straight red? Therefore it's only "always illegal" at the last instant....Do you see how this becomes so problematic? The player has altered his tackle technique so much go this low, which is what has been asked for.

SimonSmith said:
I think you're looking at things through a very green - or white - lens
Click to expand...
Not hiding behind any natural bias, but will always call out double standards. I wonder if any here would admit to not being impartial against the green the other way?

Balones said:
He was always looking to do ‘damage’ with his leading shoulder regardless of where it made contact. Unfortunately for him it made contact with a head. If you have this mindset sometimes you’ll get away with it and sometimes you won’t.
Click to expand...
I can agree with this - there are thin margins in this, but if the outcome is that it's not worth tackling as a second tackler then we'll have a different sport. All the mitigations that got Beirne off would apply here. Barrett stayed down and was visibly dazed and play was stopped, Ramos got back up once he saw play was on and charged in at the next ruck, never went for HIA. Beirne got downgraded to a yellow, which is what AG was going for initially.
 
shep said:
No problem with the red card really, we have to have a safer game that that.



Having said that, is wrapping with the right, but hitting with a braced left shoulder generally ok or illegal? I'm sure I've seen that before

Do you have to have both arms up "attempting to grasp"?
Click to expand...
You probably saw it most famously here first.


Coincidentally AG was the ref here too.
 
shebeen said:
So you're inferring that it was going to be legal/penalty only but Ramos dropping so significantly was what made it a straight red? Therefore it's only "always illegal" at the last instant....
Click to expand...
No. It was "always illegal" because the shoulder hit was illegal irrespective of what body part of the ball carrier was struck. Given that, a head strike has to be RC
 
shep said:
No problem with the red card really, we have to have a safer game that that.



Having said that, is wrapping with the right, but hitting with a braced left shoulder generally ok or illegal? I'm sure I've seen that before

Do you have to have both arms up "attempting to grasp"?
Click to expand...

hitting with a braced shoulder with the tacklers arm tucked behind the back is illegal regardless of what the other hand is doing.
 
Jz558 said:
hitting with a braced shoulder with the tacklers arm tucked behind the back is illegal regardless of what the other hand is doing.
Click to expand...
Is there guidance anywhere from WR on that, or is it something you just have to know?

Korobiete's famous covering tackle against SA was a bit similar (not because it was high, but because the attempt to grasp was with the other arm)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top