Its absolutly clear from the video clips that the Warburton tackle is a dangerous one according tot he laws and the other one is not.
The firat bit I agree with the second bit? why? read the rules. Your first comment was that he landed on his head, he didnt.
Its daft to sayif Radike had been a smaller player like Clerc they'd have properly broken him. The fine line between bans and a good tackle shouldnt come down to how the tackled player rides the tackle.
ThE tackle is judged on what did happen not what could have happened.
Are you not able to see the wider picture?
You do seem yo lack any feel for the game in almost all of what you say about it.
I have read the rules and they are quite clear. Feet above head, lifted high (above waist) and dropped on his head.
Warburtons tackle was illegal and dangerous - the other one you mention was not. Its really very clear and simple
😆
Ditto. Welshies were beaten by SA, France and Aus. If they had that many brilliant players they'd have a little golden cup in their hands right now.
This list can only contain brilliant players.
A brilliant player is defined by the possession of the World Cup.
Said list contains only New Zealand players?
Or are there other losers in there too?
Or are there other losers in there too?
Only one... the only non-Welshie or non-New Zealander in that list is Victor Matfield, and he IS a world cup winner.
A brilliant player is not defined by holding the RWC, nice leap you've made there. But a team with 7(!) of the 15 best players at the RWC would not have lost 3 times and failed to make the final, and they lost to a team who have no players in that list, and another who have only one.
You're just picking a fight, but whatever.
But unless he has his hands on the World Cup now, he shouldn't be on the list either according to doof_doof, and anyway it's just a readers' choice and as we can see here people will vote with their hearts and not with their heads and spout the usual rubbish.
Feet above head, lifted high (above waist) and dropped on his head.
for god sake TJ you showed me this in the first place:
Law 10.4(j) reads: Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player’s feet are still off the ground such that the player’s head and/or upper body come into contact with the ground is dangerous play.A directive was issued to all Unions and Match Officials in 2009 emphasizing the IRB’s zero-tolerance stance towards dangerous tackles and reiterating the following instructions for referees:
- The player is lifted and then forced or ‘speared’ into the ground (red card offence)
- The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the player’s safety (red card offence)
- For all other types of dangerous lifting tackles a yellow card or penalty may be considered sufficient
nothing to do with feet above head, Radike's head/and or upper body certainly hit the deck first and no question Clerc was rotated further the height thing is hard to judge as warburton and clerc are smaller than the people in the second incident.
You also havent explained why the ref's and touch judges all thought differently from Rolland and the IRB in the other cases in which players were banned, its massively inconsistent.
Only one... the only non-Welshie or non-New Zealander in that list is Victor Matfield, and he IS a world cup winner.A brilliant player is not defined by holding the RWC, nice leap you've made there. But a team with 7(!) of the 15 best players at the RWC would not have lost 3 times and failed to make the final, and they lost to a team who have no players in that list, and another who have only one.
Matfield didnt play that well IMO, Roussow was the best lock for SA and would be pushing a team of the tournament. As for welsh players there's no question Phillips and Roberts deserve to be there and Priestland played very well in a tournament when a lot of more vaunted tens played poorly, got injured or both in the sad case of Quade Cooper.
it's just a readers' choice and as we can see here people will vote with their hearts and not with their heads and spout the usual rubbish.
Agreed.
Phillips and Roberts deserve to be there
Can't argue with that.
Another video?
Wow!
looks a bit clearer on this dodgy video
The fine line between bans and a good tackle shouldnt come down to how the tackled player rides the tackle
Regarding the above point of how the tackle is ridden, do you really think Clerc chose to flip upside down and land on his head/back (depending on if you are AA)? How the tackle is made defines how or if it can be ridden safely.
Also just a thought, but maybe from where the referee was standing it looked like a straight red? If that was the case he would have no need to refer to his touchjudges. We had a different view at first then the opportunity to watch it several times to allow us to all come to our own opinions.
Ewwww! That does look pretty bad 😯
Hasn't the RWC finished?
Woah that doesnt look clever at all 🙁
Regarding the above point of how the tackle is ridden, do you really think Clerc chose to flip upside down and land on his head/back (depending on if you are AA)? How the tackle is made defines how or if it can be ridden safely.
Ever played the game? Ever taught how to take a hit?
It also helps that Radike is much bigger and heavier, how the tackle is made is not the only thing that defines the outcomes. (in these cases, obviously high tackles cannot be ridden)
****ybumpy****yglitchy
Eye gouging has as much place in rugby as dropping your knee on to someone's head, or leading in to a tackle with your fist. This sort of thing should be cited and looked in to properly.....
Blimp?
bumpyglitchy****ybump
Jesus Christ!
Glitchetyfukkery
Glitchy****nutbumpthingypainintheass
bump
when does the window for citing close? I think the citing comission shut up shop after the 1/4 finals.
Jeez, nine posts to move the thread on 🙄
O'Flashearty, I can see what you're doing there btw.
Yes I have played. But answering a question with a question doesn't help anyone does it?
But unless he has his hands on the World Cup now, he shouldn't be on the list either according to doof_doof, and anyway it's just a readers' choice and as we can see here people will vote with their hearts and not with their heads and spout the usual rubbish.
err...I didn't say that. I was implying that if Wales did indeed have 7 of the best players in the tournament then they should/would have done better than 4th place.
A brilliant player is not defined by holding the RWC, nice leap you've made there. But a team with 7(!) of the 15 best players at the RWC would not have lost 3 times and failed to make the final, and they lost to a team who have no players in that list, and another who have only one.
I agree with this.
After the Rougerie on McCaw eye-gouge, the All Blacks shook no French hands and wouldn't swap shirts after the match.
[i]New Zealand and French players didn't embrace at the end of the game, and why there was little or no mention about the French team in the speeches after the final[/i]
[url= http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10761610 ]From[/url]
After the McCaw on Parra punch and knee drop, the French shook no New Zealand hands and wouldn't swap shirts after the match.
Perspective. It's an interesting thing, isn't it?
Annoys the hell out of me, as he's such a good player.
What have I missed? Another 15 videos from A_A?
[i]After the McCaw on Parra knee, the French shook no New Zealand hands and wouldn't swap shirts after the match.[/i]
Did you watch that in normal speed, or just the slo-mo?
(rhetorical question)
Both.
Why on earth would McCaw swap his RWC winning shirt?? It's the only one he'll ever have from this event,the pinnacle of his career.
Because he has 2, one from each half?
What have I missed? Another 15 videos from A_A?
as we know reading isnt a strong point of yours would you like me to draw you a picture?
as we know reading isnt a strong point of yours would you like me to draw you a picture?
Funny that. I spend all day reading intelligent things. Not much you say falls into that category, so i don't see the need to bother.
You could post some more videos of tackles that weren't red cards if it makes you feel any better?
But a team with 7(!) of the 15 best players at the RWC would not have lost 3 times and failed to make the final,
Unless their place kicker was not one of those seven 🙂
Unless their place kicker was not one of those seven
😆 Ouch, but still 😆
Even a slight improvement in kicking - just one extra kick, which is not an outrageous expectation - would have seen us in the final. So I think the 7 best players idea can't be discounted on the basis of final position.
And another successful kick against SA would have seen another win...... Hang on! 😛
the fact one is Toby Faletau who clearly wasnt the best 8, another is Geroge North who wasnt as good as a number of others and finally one is Warburton who got red carded in the biggest game of his life.I think the 7 best players idea can be discounted on the basis of
Warburton who got red carded in the biggest game of his life
Did he? You know, I don't think anyone was aware of that - you should have made more of it at the time as we all must have missed it! 🙄
Guys, this has gone far enough now I tink.
Zokes are you this obsessed with everything in life, you came on this thread to start with seemingly spoiling for a fight and you are still banging the same drum, do you need a hug?