Has Ashman been announced in the Scotland squad? If not he should be.

yes -in the wider squad

Elliot Dee red card, quite right.
4.28 in.

Dan Cherry, play on (well after a 15 min break to clear the mess that was James Botham off the pitch), nothing NADA.

Yes pic.twitter.com/jLJlyIr1yU

— Antony Gabe-Jones (@Gabbybach) January 8, 2022

Rugby has to do better.

The Gilroy tackle on Rogers where he got a yellow card last night was a shocker too.

Here is the Gilroy one for reference

This is a yellow in ulster pic.twitter.com/9HGyC2pzeV

— SmallClone (@Smallclone_) January 28, 2022

The gilroy one is a yellow as attempt to wrap and Gilroy is going down hence mitigation.  could be yellow could be red – the ref has to make a subjective assessment.  there is a framework to work in but it still subjective

the clip of the Botham one is too poor to really see. but looks like it should have been at least Yellow.  Looks like an attempt to wrap ie not leading with the shoulder but hard to tell

commentators on the Elliot Dee one are absurd – not understanding the laws.  Thats a bang to rights red as no attempt to wrap

No attempt to wrap then its foul play and you cannot give any mitigation.  If its an attempt with a legal challenge ie a wrap of the arms and hits the head then mitigation can be applied so if other circumstance mean the tackled player is going down its a yellow not red.  so with Gilroy he is going down already due to the actions of the player behind him and an attempt to wrap so yellow

. the clip of the Botham one is too poor to really see. but looks like it should have been at least Yellow. Looks like an attempt to wrap ie not leading with the shoulder but hard to tell

Not really, he runs in and head butts him, I was flabbergasted the video ref didn’t even get the red to look at, especially as they had 15mibs doing nothing whilst Botham was swept up. What you do with your arms is irrelevant if you headbutt someone

Gilroy is going down hence mitigati

That’s what happens when people are being tackled, the mitigation is if the player dips or unexpectedly drops, he was being tackled by someone else so it is not unexpected

commentators on the Elliot Dee one are absurd –

Didn’t listen tbh. It’s a spot on red, even Dee said so, but then so was the cherry one.

but then so was the cherry one, doesn’t matter if you try and wrap if you headbutt someone, what you arms are doing is irrelevant.

correct but I cannot see from the clip

That’s what happens when people are being tackled, the mitigation is if the player dips or unexpectedly drops, he was being tackled by someone else so it is not unexpected

Mitigation can also be applied in that situation – heard it done many times.  Its an unexpected dip in height – doesn’t matter why.  Thats the framework and i would bet thts what the ref team worked thru.  they all use the same framework

Was there head contact yes / no. Was it with force yes / no Was it an attempt at a legal tackle yes /no Is there mitigation yes/ no

Head contact means its looked at, with force means a red card is the starting point.  If its not an attempt at a legal tackle then no mitigation so it remains red card  If its an attempt at a legal tackle then is there mitigation yes / no  Was the tackler tackling at an appropriate height yes / no, did the tackled player dip at the last moment yes / no

that the framework for decision making and every incident where they look head contact they work thru it to reach a decision

The Gilroy one could easily have been given as red.  to me right on the margin

I think the answer is to reduce the tackle height so its below the armpits or mid chest.  Under that doctrine the gilroy one would be red card,  IIRC this has been trialed this removes the doubt in the tackle that “slips up” and stops the upright tackles completely.

I think the answer is to reduce the tackle height so its below the armpits or mid chest. Under that doctrine the gilroy one would be red card, IIRC this has been trialed this removes the doubt in the tackle that “slips up” and stops the upright tackles completely.

Non of which applies to the Gilroy one, he hit a player plum in the head as that player was being tackled, he didn’t slip up and Rogers didn’t dip unexpectedly. It was a clear reckless tackle, no doubt accidental but still reckless, with force, direct to head. Mitigation does not apply to highly reckless acts.

Dee’s tweet

Sorry to the @BenettonRugby player who’s head I made contact with at the end, was not my intention, I was just looking to clear out, glad your okay!, I owe you a beer 🍺 Spot on call from the ref, I take full responsibility and should of been more accurate!

I think red card for Cherry as well. Yes the player is dipping but there is no arm wrap, Cherry is doing what he has been coached to do,aim for the jackals arms if he is lifting it to prevent the steal. Catches him while he is still dipping and clunk!

Welsh one was just so dumb, is there only limited hot water in the Rodney Parade showers or something? Initial home commentary was comedy gold as well!

AA – thats not how the process / framework works.  The question is was it an attempt at  a legal tackle?  If no its red if yes is there mitigation.  It does not matter why the player is going downwards

I tend to agree with Duckman tho that it was never a legal tackle but if the ref saw an attempt to wrap then mitigation applies.  Yo may not agree with the framework but thats what it is

good tweet from Dee and he is right – thats a bang to rights red as no attempt at a legal tackle.

This is why I think the way forward is to lower the tackle height to below armpits

I’m looking forward to Edinburgh stuffing the Ospreys this afternoon and cementing their rightful place at the top of the table 🙂

Actually its a weakened Edinburgh team stripped of most of the internationals especially forwards.  Dunno what the Ospreys team is like

AA – thats not how the process / framework works. The question is was it an attempt at a legal tackle? If no its red if yes is there mitigation. It does not matter why the player is going downwards

That’s not what it says here, also

No mitigation for highly reckless acts

https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/guidelines/17

The Head Contact Process is a Law Application Guideline. Under 9.11, the referee is always entitled to issue a red or yellow card for anything deemed to be reckless or dangerous. However, this process is intended to aid consistency in the application of sanctions by providing guidance on how contact with the head should be approached by match officials and disciplinary personnel.

LAW 9: Foul play

11. Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others including leading with the elbow or forearm.

13. A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.

20. Dangerous play in a ruck or maul.

a. A player must not charge into a ruck or maul. Charging includes any contact made without binding onto another player in the ruck or maul.

b. A player must not make contact with an opponent above the line of the shoulders.

This includes head-on-head

Process questions and considerations
1. Has head contact occurred?
Head contact includes neck and throat area

2. Was there foul play?
Considerations:

Intentional
Reckless
Avoidable
3. What was the degree of danger?
Considerations include:

Direct vs indirect contact
High force vs low force
4. Is there any mitigation?
Considerations include:

Line of sight
Sudden and significant drop or movement
Clear attempt to change height
Level of control
Upright – passive vs dynamic

Mitigation
Sudden / significant drop in height or change in direction from ball carrier
A late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact
An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust

Yes AA – that is correct.  Reckless is a subjective judgement.  In the refs eyes it was an attempt at a legal tackle ie id did not start high and there was an attempt to wrap

Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.

Note this

A late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact

So on the mitigation your earlier statement was wrong

So the yellow card is correct if the judgement is as I assume in this case that it was an attempt at  a legal tackle which IMO it was and the refs in which case mitigation is applied

Process followed and correct outcome

Its not a shoulder charge or a tackle that starts high.  Head contact occurred with force, as it was an attempt at a legal tackle them mitigation applies

Now that is a subjective judgement – watch the clip again and see how much the player dips in the last few feet.  If he hadn’t dipped then the tackle would not have been high

Why do you think it a reckless tackle?  He does not start high and he attempts a wrap?

A t-rex would have attempted a better wrap than that TJ.😄

AA was saying it was always high –   the arm was not tucked  so attempted wrap- IMo could be given either way yellow or red with no complaints

Are you watching the glasgow game – a head on head given as an accident ply on when the clearing out player comes in upright and hits him straight on  should have been red – or am I being as one eyed as AA?  🙂

Unless the Glasgow game is in council telly, I can’t see it. I just think Cherry’s is a clear red as well. He hasn’t for me tried to wrap and has also hit his head. Only mitigation is the height of the player he dings but it was never at any time a legal clear out from Cherry which trumps the dropping player. I wonder if he will be cited for it? Seems a lottery. About to watch the mighty glazzer go marching on, yarp!

I have a vipbox to all the games 😉  a bit of a pirate

The cherry one I can’t see well enough to have an opinion

Why do you think it a reckless tackle?

Because he smacks him firesquare in the face with his shoulder. The fact he is coming down is obvious as that’s what happens to players being tackled. If you can’t see its reckless then there really is no hope. The only question is was it reckless, mitigation allowed or highly reckless, no mitigation.

Note this

A late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact

It’s not a late change, it’s an inevitable consequence of the tackle that is in action before Gilroy attempts the tackle

Any question of acwrap is also inconsequential as we are not talking a no arms tackle, its a high tackle which given the player was dropping was highly reckless imo, just reckless in the opinion of the ref. The laws are there to protect players in this case as with the Cherry case the refs have failed them imo. Got it bang on with Dee though. The red also got it wrong with Cuthbert recently as the ref gave yellow but he was cited and rightly banned, the conclusion to that is that the ref got it wrong, they need to be stronger or it’s not too far to suggest the game will collapse.

In the refs eyes it was an attempt at a legal tackle

It’s written up there.
Q1 was head contact made?
Q2 was there foul play?
Q3 extent of danger?
Q4 mitigatio, if not excessively reckless

No talk of did he try a fair tackle or wrap

Cherry which trumps the dropping player. I wonder if he will be cited for it?

Time has been and gone, no citing. Disgrace imo, the game needs to do better. I don’t think the hieght should mitigate either as Botham did not move, he was in place well before Cherry arrived. He should have coped a ban imo.
Marker should have been at least yellow carded for the snack in the chops on the Cardiff hooker too that week. Even Marker looked surprised he wasn’t after apologising to the player and everyone else.

Anybody want a ticket for the Calcutta Cup?

I have one but can’t make it.

Drop me a PM.

Bloody hell, Ospreys beat Edinburgh 😄😄😄😄

No talk of did he try a fair tackle or wrap

Thats how you judge if its an attempt at a tackle

From the framework!

An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust

jeepers AA – its a process that has been followed for years

you can argue it was not an attempt at a fair tackle but you cannot argue any head contact is foul play  Otherwise every time somones head is touched its an automatic red card

You apply mitigation if its an attempt at a fair tackle.

I don’t think the hieght should mitigate either as Botham did not move,

Correct – again its in the framework.  Its a dip or drop that mitigate not how low you are to start with

You have already contradicted yourself on this  You said

That’s what happens when people are being tackled, the mitigation is if the player dips or unexpectedly drops, he was being tackled by someone else so it is not unexpected

the framework says

Mitigation
Sudden / significant drop in height or change in direction from ball carrier
A late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact

Good win for the ospreys.  I hate playing league games during the international window – Edinburgh lost their entire first team pack and more.  Just about held parity up front until the subs came on but when your forward subs are 3rd and 4th choices its always going to be hard

how badly effected was the Ospreys team – I just do not know but that was a barely recognisable Edinburgh team

Still – Edinburgh playing much better this year than last

jeepers AA – its a process that has been followed for years

The process is below, you can download it from the link above. You are conflating high tackle with shoulder charges which are illegal whether high or not.

Process questions and considerations
1. Has head contact occurred?
Head contact includes neck and throat area

2. Was there foul play?
Considerations:

Intentional
Reckless
Avoidable
3. What was the degree of danger?
Considerations include:

Direct vs indirect contact
High force vs low force
4. Is there any mitigation?
Considerations include:

Line of sight
Sudden and significant drop or movement
Clear attempt to change height
Level of control
Upright – passive vs dynamic

Wrapping is not mentioned

You have already contradicted yourself on this You said

That’s what happens when people are being tackled, the mitigation is if the player dips or unexpectedly drops, he was being tackled by someone else so it is not unexpected

the framework says

Mitigation
Sudden / significant drop in height or change in direction from ball carrier
A late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact

It wasn’t late or unexpected the other tackle was in action well before Gilroy set for the tackle.

An effort to wrap / bind and having no time to adjust

From your list of the fremework

jeepers AA its in black and white as is the late change in dynamics

i am not surprised you think this all unfair when you simply cannot read whats written

Every ref had better be retrained in the AA interpretation

Here have a look, head contact shoulder charge

https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/guidelines/19

Here head contact high tackle

https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/guidelines/18

You can’t mitigate a high tackle by saying they attempted to wrap you can only mitigate a shoulder charge through an attempt to wrap surely you can see that?

Thats not what I said AA

I give in

all the refs have it wrong, your constantly changing idea of what constitutes foul play is right and all refs need retraining in this new interpretion

I give in

Good, with your spare time you can read the links, an attempted wrap does not mitigate a high tackle it mitgates a shoulder charge, it’s not hard.

Wrap or not is the difference between a shoulder charge and an attempted tackle  Really dude – do you think the refs get it wrong all the time and that you are right or is it just possible you are confused and the refs get it right?

In other news Cardiff beat leinster.  A good night for the Welsh clubs and that does Edinburgh a big favour!

Really dude – do you think the refs get it wrong all the time and that you are right or is it just possible you are confused and the refs get it right?

No I think you get it wrong Pyper and the to never mentioned the wrap in that incident as it wasn’t relevant. Commentators do all the time, bacause they get it wrong.

I still think VDM is faster 🤪🤪🤪