"the lights went out on rugby". Eddie Butler

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:04 am

"if a tackle like that deserves a red card, then there is something wrong with the rules!" Eddie butler on Scrum V tonight.

He's right.

We want to see more consistency, but we also want to see fairer interpretations. We want to see foul play and nastiness eradicated but we wish that some foul play was treated with leniency.

Some people want to see players rucked out with the boot, but we are happy to have successfully erradicated stamping.

What do we want and what do we need for rugby to be the sport we want?

Everyone has a different opinion, everyone likes different aspects of the game. I personally love great ball in hand play, but one of my best mates stopped watching altogether when the scrum became a joke as he lost what he loved in the sport.

Rugby is a sport that is very organic, it evolves, new ideas, new ways and means of tactically advancing the game happen every season.

The rules always adapt and the IRB try to keep up.

But what do we the spectators, fans, players and former players want.

by Standulstermen Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:08 am

I disagree entirely with Eddie.

I know nothing serious resulted as regards injuries but he was a few inches away from landing on his neck. Did Warburton have control over those inches? Of course not, how could he.

I have a feeling if Clerc were in a neck brace this morning Eddie wouldnt be bristling about it. Myself and Osprey were discussing rewording the law and adressing the consistency of its application on the other thread. Those need worked at. Tolerating these tackles isnt an option imo

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:15 am

I agree with you.

Consistency is the most important aspect of the rules that needs to be addressed. This is a prime example where a black and white law makes a referees decision easier.

Interpretation is what has bred inconsistency in rugby.

Less interpretation and a greater simplification of the rules.

by Standulstermen Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:19 am

Certainly on the big calls maestag.

I will say again by removing the height reference and "showing no regard" reference from the rules there can be no debate.

Im actually disappointed in the like of Eddie Butler coming out with that. brent Pope was the same on RTE. They can wax lyrical all they want but they arent the ones going out there and facing those tackles. I want my son to grow up playing rugby but if anything happened to him as a result of something like that i would never forgive myself. It needs removed from the game. Not to change the game but to make it as safe as it possibly can be when 15-20st men run into each other

I can understand fans wanting to vent but these guys are paid to have a knowledge of the game above what we see on here. I have seen more evidence of said knowledge on this messageboard

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:23 am

We seem to have found massive progress in the scrums.

That is through interpretation which goes against my last post. But if the IRB could stiffen their recent scrum directives then maybe interpretation could be swapped for something more concrete. More consistent.

by **Notch** Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:26 am

Interestingly different perspective from Paddy O'Brien;

“Alain Rolland’s decision to issue a red card was absolutely correct in Law and in keeping with the clear instructions that match officials have received in recent years regarding dangerous tackling,” said O’Brien.

“Alain is a highly experienced referee and had a clear view of the incident, which enabled him to make an accurate and instant decision.

“Player welfare is paramount and unions, teams and match officials are all aware of the responsibility to eradicate dangerous play. This message was reiterated as recently as the week before Rugby World Cup 2011 kicked off when we hosted briefings at a workshop with match officials and coaches.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/wales/8830580/Rugby-World-Cup-2011-Wales-captain-Sam-Warburton-tells-his-team-to-move-on-after-he-is-banned-for-three-weeks.html

But the key message in that, from Warburton himself? Time to move on.

I agree with you when you say we want to eradicate foul play. So why should it be treated with leniency if it is dangerous play? We've got to strip the emotion out of this conversation and look at it rationally and objectively.

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:27 am

Standulstermen wrote:

Im actually disappointed in the like of Eddie Butler coming out with that. brent Pope was the same on RTE. They can wax lyrical all they want but they arent the ones going out there and facing those tackles. I want my son to grow up playing rugby but if anything happened to him as a result of something like that i would never forgive myself. It needs removed from the game. Not to change the game but to make it as safe as it possibly can be when 15-20st men run into each other

I presume that Butler as well as most people agree that the particular tackle was accidental rather than pre meditated?

But yes I agree. That type of tackle could be outlawed easily and for the good of the game.

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:30 am

Actually mate, I would rather this debate was on improvements to the laws rather thanre-hashing "The Tackle"...!

There are plenty of other threads all regurgitating the same lines in different ways.

Notch wrote:Interestingly different perspective from Paddy O'Brien;

“Alain Rolland’s decision to issue a red card was absolutely correct in Law and in keeping with the clear instructions that match officials have received in recent years regarding dangerous tackling,” said O’Brien.

“Alain is a highly experienced referee and had a clear view of the incident, which enabled him to make an accurate and instant decision.

“Player welfare is paramount and unions, teams and match officials are all aware of the responsibility to eradicate dangerous play. This message was reiterated as recently as the week before Rugby World Cup 2011 kicked off when we hosted briefings at a workshop with match officials and coaches.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/wales/8830580/Rugby-World-Cup-2011-Wales-captain-Sam-Warburton-tells-his-team-to-move-on-after-he-is-banned-for-three-weeks.html

But the key message in that, from Warburton himself? Time to move on.

I agree with you when you say we want to eradicate foul play. So why should it be treated with leniency if it is dangerous play? We've got to strip the emotion out of this conversation and look at it rationally and objectively.

by PJHolybloke Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:37 am

I'm with Eddie Maesteg,

I'm sick of it - Warburton's a reckless idiot and Clerc nearly died.. blah blah, he's so lucky he didn't end up in a wheelchair blah blah, feck me it's a wonder I ever made my twenties alive, let alone my forties with nothing more than dodgy knees and a bad back, what with me playing when flying wedges and REAL rucking were par for the feckin rugby course.

We're breeding a bunch of cissy-arsed limp-wristed ponces who have already started throwing themselves to the ground the minute there's a whiff of "foul-play" at hand, and "refs" and the health & safety brigade are buying into it hook, line and sinker. England are breeding a bunch of self-obsessed up-their-own-arses celebrity wannabees who couldn't give a flying toss for the real Corinthians that made this game what it is today through endless sacrifice and dedication for nothing more but the pure love of the game, and that's just for starters.

Do the world a favour IRB and give Clerc a BAFTA, chuck a few more about while you're at it, he ain't the first and the road we're going down he'll be not even the tip of the iceberg.

Now Clerc has to face New Zealand whilst being a member of the worst team to ever reach the World Cup final, I wouldn't be surprised if a wheelchair holds a certain attraction for Clerc come 8.55 next Sunday.

I'm sick of the bullshine to be honest, it wont be long before we're left with a cross between roundball and a game of 15 man non-contact rugby league, my only hope is that I'll be dead and buried by then, because I wouldn't watch a Test Match of that shoite if they played it in my garden.

by Standulstermen Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:48 am

Sorry PJ. I would rather they were labelled sissies than this

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2009/05/28/castillo-guilty.html

Perhaps we should be more lenient on gouging as well seeing as that was rife in the good ole days

I appreciate the game is going away from its roots and it is sad to some extent but the players were never the size or condition they are in now.

by PJHolybloke Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:04 am

Standulstermen wrote:Sorry PJ. I would rather they were labelled sissies than this

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2009/05/28/castillo-guilty.html

Perhaps we should be more lenient on gouging as well seeing as that was rife in the good ole days

I appreciate the game is going away from its roots and it is sad to some extent but the players were never the size or condition they are in now.

There are three parts of a rugby player that are sacrosanct, his eyes, his ballsack and his a£$ehole, mess with any of those and the perpetrator should be banned for a year, minimum. If you are suggesting for a single second that I have advocated gouging or promoted leniency for any act of that kind, you're bang out of order mate, that kind of assault is for cheap-shotting cowards and has NEVER had any place in the sport. If you want to rip the pish out of my age and era at least show me some deference and try a little harder.

We're talking about tackling here and it wont be long before the powers that be kill this game off as a collision sport, as long as I'm dead by then, those that support "player safety" above the game itself, can worship the cissies that ponce around the park as much as they like.

It's a tough game and the more that toughness is leeched away the less the game will be, if player safety were an absolute concern the game would be banned tomorrow as being intrinsically unsafe.

by Standulstermen Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:06 am

You are suggesting dropping a player on his neck is perfectly fine then you belong to a game from 40 years ago PJ. End of story.

by PJHolybloke Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:24 am

Standulstermen wrote:You are suggesting dropping a player on his neck is perfectly fine then you belong to a game from 40 years ago PJ. End of story.

Yeah, of course I am, and it's so obvious you'll be able to point out exactly where I said that wont you?

The game is going to the health and safety dogs mate, it's just a matter of time, the next time a players hips travel above his head a red card will be a matter of course wont it? I wonder what the reaction will be if a red card isn't issued...?

If you can't see that this is just the "tip" of the iceberg, there's nothing I can say to help you out.

The chinese have an old proverb that goes "When the wise man points at the moon, the fool looks at his finger".

by Standulstermen Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:35 am

PJHolybloke wrote:
Standulstermen wrote:You are suggesting dropping a player on his neck is perfectly fine then you belong to a game from 40 years ago PJ. End of story.

Yeah, of course I am, and it's so obvious you'll be able to point out exactly where I said that wont you?

The game is going to the health and safety dogs mate, it's just a matter of time, the next time a players hips travel above his head a red card will be a matter of course wont it? I wonder what the reaction will be if a red card isn't issued...?

If you can't see that this is just the "tip" of the iceberg, there's nothing I can say to help you out.

The chinese have an old proverb that goes "When the wise man points at the moon, the fool looks at his finger".

Your entire post says it! For a start you say Clerc needs Bafta despite being dumped on his neck/shoulders! I have no idea whether Clerc was hurt or not, if he milked it or not but your condemnation of him rather than Warburton says it all.

I have already said i understand that the game is moving away from its roots. The use of Muppet is an example im sure we can all agree on but the simple fact remains that these guys are massively bigger and more powerful than those in the old amateur era and as such issues like health and safety must be taken into account. The neck is such a fragile area of the human body that any responsible organisation (like the IRB) has to think long and hard about tackles like the one yesterday and they do need eradicated from the game (much like rucking did)

Formula 1 is another example of a sport that has had to move with the times. Now the cars and drivers are safer than ever. The spectacle probably isnt what it was in the past (almost definately) but the safety of the participants is paramount. Same logic applies to rugby. we have bigger collisions than ever before, we are seeing bigger, more dynamic players than ever before. we need to make sure that the safety of those playing is paramount.

by Guest Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:48 am

While I have the utmost respect for Rolland and his CORRECT decision, I have to agree with Eddie's sentiment.

It is the rules and/or their implementation that needs to be looked at.

No one could question the reasoning for the rules as they stand and of course player safety has to be paramount. But Rugby is an inherently dangerous sport. Most professional players accept this, and thankfully even with it's inherent dangers serious life changing/ending injuries are rare in the game. When assessing foul play of any seriousness, intent has to be considered.

IMO refs have been put in the impossible position of trying to assess objectively a very subjective occurance and consequence of an action. It's difficult for Rugby/sport laws to co-exist with the laws of physics.

I doubt that any single person who has ever made a contraversial decision/mistake in their day to day job should have to put up with the abuse /critisicism/penalty that Rolland has been subjected to. The same ethos should be applied to players in a game where phyisicality plays such a big part.

I won't say that red cards should be reserved for Cynical play, but to ignore mitigating circumstances in the incident of accidental play is wrong, yet they can carry the same penalty during the game itself, i.e losing a player for the duration of the game.

I'm not suggesting for one moment that Sam Warburtons tackle has any mitigating circumstance, but to dismiss it as a possibilty (which Rolland correctly determined, under the directives issued) is unfair to the game.

by Standulstermen Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:52 am

Eddies point is that the tackle was fine though, is it not?

The need for consistency and better wording is a very fair call. If you are asking for refs to look and determine whether something is accidental (which i thought you implied; correct me if im wrong) then you are making the refs job difficult again and consistency would be harder to be acheive

by PJHolybloke Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:53 am

Hey, if you want to read things I haven't written then there's nothing I can do, my "entire post" says that health and safety issues are ruining our game, and if this is allowed to continue without anyone putting in some checks and balances, it's only a matter of time before we wont even recognise the game as Rugby Union.

I wouldn't have a clue about Formula 1 as I don't watch it, mainly because it's boring - the state of things to come for RU I reckon.

by Standulstermen Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:56 am

So you didnt say that the three part of a rugby player that were sacrosanct were his eyes, balls and ass? No mention of neck there am i wrong?

You didnt also say that Clerc deserved a bafta, after he was dumped on his neck/shoulders????

I must be misty eyed because i could swear you did. I think we should avoid eachother on here for a while PJ. We arent going to reach common ground on this issue

"those that support "player safety" above the game itself, can worship the cissies that ponce around the park as much as they like."

Thats all from me

by PJHolybloke Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:16 am

Crack on then, I'm seriously not bothered.

What's with the neck/shoulders????

Clerc was dropped from a nothing height onto his shoulders/back and pussied about on the floor until it was clear Warburton was offed.

As for the three parts? Seriously? Why would you tackle a players eyes, ballsack or a£$ehole? You know I was talking about cowardly foul play in that context and it was you who brought up gouging in the first place whilst suggesting I was cool with it.

Sheesh, if you want to avoid me that's your call, I'm totally not stressed by debating.

You'll be misty-eyed when the game's reduced to a comic-book resemblence of what it should be.

by Guest Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:19 am

Time to call an end to this guys, agree to disagree, there'll be no winner here.

by **LondonTiger** Mon Oct 17, 2011 8:12 am

PJHolybloke wrote:I'm with Eddie Maesteg,

I'm sick of it - Warburton's a reckless idiot and Clerc nearly died.. blah blah, he's so lucky he didn't end up in a wheelchair blah blah, feck me it's a wonder I ever made my twenties alive, let alone my forties with nothing more than dodgy knees and a bad back, what with me playing when flying wedges and REAL rucking were par for the feckin rugby course.

We're breeding a bunch of cissy-arsed limp-wristed ponces who have already started throwing themselves to the ground the minute there's a whiff of "foul-play" at hand, and "refs" and the health & safety brigade are buying into it hook, line and sinker. England are breeding a bunch of self-obsessed up-their-own-arses celebrity wannabees who couldn't give a flying toss for the real Corinthians that made this game what it is today through endless sacrifice and dedication for nothing more but the pure love of the game, and that's just for starters.

Do the world a favour IRB and give Clerc a BAFTA, chuck a few more about while you're at it, he ain't the first and the road we're going down he'll be not even the tip of the iceberg.

Now Clerc has to face New Zealand whilst being a member of the worst team to ever reach the World Cup final, I wouldn't be surprised if a wheelchair holds a certain attraction for Clerc come 8.55 next Sunday.

I'm sick of the bullshine to be honest, it wont be long before we're left with a cross between roundball and a game of 15 man non-contact rugby league, my only hope is that I'll be dead and buried by then, because I wouldn't watch a Test Match of that shoite if they played it in my garden.

Due to a tackle that constituted foul play, I broke 5 of the vertebrae in my neck while at university. Thankfully my spinal column was only bruised - and I recovered to eventually play professional rugby. The lad who tackled me never played again as he was unable to cope with the thought that his recklessness (I am sure there was no malice) almost paralysed someone. Rugby is a tough physical game, which is why we need some level of protection from dangerous play. The only place intent should be relevant is when deciding the sentence, otherwise it matters not a jot whether it is malicious or just bad technique - dangerous play should not be tolerated.

So dear MrPJHolyThingy STFU.

by Davie Mon Oct 17, 2011 8:19 am

Eddie Butler? 'Nuff said

by english warrior Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:00 am

Eddie Butler is so one eyed he makes cyclops seem well sighted, but the man is a total clown. I still feel that the tackle was poor, but with no malice and intent and therefore as Pieenar said on TV it all comes down to that old devil called 'Interpretation'.

But also and this is a party political point 'Even handed' Eddie can't tolerate the White of England on the Rugby pitch and i wonder how fair and dismissive he would have been were it an England player doing the same to 'wee' Shane.

Yes it was a foul and a yellow, but never a red, but the bottom line is the tackle was illegal.

by Luckless Pedestrian Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:30 am

maestegmafia wrote:I presume that Butler as well as most people agree that the particular tackle was accidental rather than pre meditated?

That makes it no less dangerous.

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:41 am

PJHolybloke wrote:I'm with Eddie Maesteg,

I'm sick of it - Warburton's a reckless idiot and Clerc nearly died.. blah blah, he's so lucky he didn't end up in a wheelchair blah blah, feck me it's a wonder I ever made my twenties alive, let alone my forties with nothing more than dodgy knees and a bad back, what with me playing when flying wedges and REAL rucking were par for the feckin rugby course.

We're breeding a bunch of cissy-arsed limp-wristed ponces who have already started throwing themselves to the ground the minute there's a whiff of "foul-play" at hand, and "refs" and the health & safety brigade are buying into it hook, line and sinker. England are breeding a bunch of self-obsessed up-their-own-arses celebrity wannabees who couldn't give a flying toss for the real Corinthians that made this game what it is today through endless sacrifice and dedication for nothing more but the pure love of the game, and that's just for starters.

Do the world a favour IRB and give Clerc a BAFTA, chuck a few more about while you're at it, he ain't the first and the road we're going down he'll be not even the tip of the iceberg.

Now Clerc has to face New Zealand whilst being a member of the worst team to ever reach the World Cup final, I wouldn't be surprised if a wheelchair holds a certain attraction for Clerc come 8.55 next Sunday.

I'm sick of the bullshine to be honest, it wont be long before we're left with a cross between roundball and a game of 15 man non-contact rugby league, my only hope is that I'll be dead and buried by then, because I wouldn't watch a Test Match of that shoite if they played it in my garden.

I am mid way mate, trust me growing up playing rugby in the Neath Valley was never an easy ride. Dai Morris is a local, one of the toughest men ever to play the game and many people wanted to emulate his hardness, at fly half or scum half I took the brunt of a hell of a lot of those impersonators.

The difference between those days and now is that Dai was at biggest probably 15 and a half stone and 5 foot 10, and considered a big flanker. Today an average flanker is six foot 4, 18 stone and in peak physical shape. The Damage you can do these days is far greater than it was before professionalism.

by aucklandlaurie Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:42 am

Meanwhile in the other semi Final Australia and New Zealand threw everything at each other for 80 minutes, people getting absolutely smashed everywhere, blood flying all over the place,no one got sent off, none got hurt.
Both teams got to play with 15 players..
I cant believe that it was any less dangerous ,than a little Frenchman,going flying,then rolling round on the ground like he'd been tasered until he had sucker punched not only a sending off but also a penalty.
And no one got hurt.

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:53 am

Davie wrote:Eddie Butler? 'Nuff said

What does your post mean ? it doesnt make any sense? Do you mean to Pose the name Eddie Butler as a question and then imply that he is talked about too much ?

Think before your post a bit more, you are not gaining any respect as a mod by posting like a stroppy child.

english warrior wrote:Eddie Butler is so one eyed he makes cyclops seem well sighted, but the man is a total clown. I still feel that the tackle was poor, but with no malice and intent and therefore as Pieenar said on TV it all comes down to that old devil called 'Interpretation'.

But also and this is a party political point 'Even handed' Eddie can't tolerate the White of England on the Rugby pitch and i wonder how fair and dismissive he would have been were it an England player doing the same to 'wee' Shane.

Yes it was a foul and a yellow, but never a red, but the bottom line is the tackle was illegal.

If you took the time to read the post you would see that it is not about eddie butler it is about whether we think that the laws reflect the game we want to play, watch, support and enjoy.

by Metal Tiger Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:53 am

Interpretation is always the issue, not just for this incident, but for many throughout the game it has come down to interpretation.

One of the wonderful things about the English language, and one of it's greatest failings when it comes to the application of rules & laws, is that it is such a versatile dialect that even the simplest passage written in plain text can be interpreted different ways because it's a language that relies upon context to make meaning.

As for the tackle.... so many threads already going on this one but IMHO my version is.... Tip tackle (waist above shoulders) is a Yellow card. Had Clerc landed on his back I think this is all he would have gotten.

Whether or not Warburton meant it, even if it was accidental, Clerc came down on his neck. It cannot be excused, lightened or let off. It's a red.

Sorry chaps. Not being one eyed on this as I really thought Wales deserved better on Saturday.

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:55 am

aucklandlaurie wrote: Meanwhile in the other semi Final Australia and New Zealand threw everything at each other for 80 minutes, people getting absolutely smashed everywhere, blood flying all over the place,no one got sent off, none got hurt.
Both teams got to play with 15 players..
I cant believe that it was any less dangerous ,than a little Frenchman,going flying,then rolling round on the ground like he'd been tasered until he had sucker punched not only a sending off but also a penalty.
And no one got hurt.

Well how do you think the IRB should address the LAWS to improve the consistency, eradicating the un necessary violence and keeping the ok stuff across the board?

by **rodders** Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:55 am

LondonTiger wrote:
Due to a tackle that constituted foul play, I broke 5 of the vertebrae in my neck while at university. Thankfully my spinal column was only bruised - and I recovered to eventually play professional rugby. The lad who tackled me never played again as he was unable to cope with the thought that his recklessness (I am sure there was no malice) almost paralysed someone. Rugby is a tough physical game, which is why we need some level of protection from dangerous play. The only place intent should be relevant is when deciding the sentence, otherwise it matters not a jot whether it is malicious or just bad technique - dangerous play should not be tolerated.

So dear MrPJHolyThingy STFU.

well said.

by PJHolybloke Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:56 am

LondonTiger wrote:
PJHolybloke wrote:I'm with Eddie Maesteg,

I'm sick of it - Warburton's a reckless idiot and Clerc nearly died.. blah blah, he's so lucky he didn't end up in a wheelchair blah blah, feck me it's a wonder I ever made my twenties alive, let alone my forties with nothing more than dodgy knees and a bad back, what with me playing when flying wedges and REAL rucking were par for the feckin rugby course.

We're breeding a bunch of cissy-arsed limp-wristed ponces who have already started throwing themselves to the ground the minute there's a whiff of "foul-play" at hand, and "refs" and the health & safety brigade are buying into it hook, line and sinker. England are breeding a bunch of self-obsessed up-their-own-arses celebrity wannabees who couldn't give a flying toss for the real Corinthians that made this game what it is today through endless sacrifice and dedication for nothing more but the pure love of the game, and that's just for starters.

Do the world a favour IRB and give Clerc a BAFTA, chuck a few more about while you're at it, he ain't the first and the road we're going down he'll be not even the tip of the iceberg.

Now Clerc has to face New Zealand whilst being a member of the worst team to ever reach the World Cup final, I wouldn't be surprised if a wheelchair holds a certain attraction for Clerc come 8.55 next Sunday.

I'm sick of the bullshine to be honest, it wont be long before we're left with a cross between roundball and a game of 15 man non-contact rugby league, my only hope is that I'll be dead and buried by then, because I wouldn't watch a Test Match of that shoite if they played it in my garden.

Due to a tackle that constituted foul play, I broke 5 of the vertebrae in my neck while at university. Thankfully my spinal column was only bruised - and I recovered to eventually play professional rugby. The lad who tackled me never played again as he was unable to cope with the thought that his recklessness (I am sure there was no malice) almost paralysed someone. Rugby is a tough physical game, which is why we need some level of protection from dangerous play. The only place intent should be relevant is when deciding the sentence, otherwise it matters not a jot whether it is malicious or just bad technique - dangerous play should not be tolerated.

So dear MrPJHolyThingy STFU.

STFU? Oh, OK then.

On the other hand, if you're not keen on debate KMA.

If you think what I've written is a slight on anyone who's ever been injured playing the game, in the first instance I'm sorry you feel that way and in the second instance get over yourself.

Spear tackles are really bad, what Warburton did was not so,but referees apparently don't have a choice in the matter now and it will be something else next.

If we want to reduce injuries in the game overnight, ban body armour, the worst development in boxing safety was to introduce heavily padded gloves.

by Davie Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:03 am

maestegmafia wrote:
Davie wrote:Eddie Butler? 'Nuff said

What does your post mean ? it doesnt make any sense? Do you mean to Pose the name Eddie Butler as a question and then imply that he is talked about too much ?

Think before your post a bit more, you are not gaining any respect as a mod by posting like a stroppy child.

As someone else here said, Butler is more one-eyed than a cyclops when it comes to matters Welsh

And I've said it many times but I'll say it again, especially for your benefit - I am not a moderator for the rugby section. Stroppy child? Look in the mirror

by Guest Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:08 am

In Eddie's defence, that video clip he made was quite clearly right after the game. The man had tears in his eyes and was obviously very emotional, just like we all were on Saturday. Give him time to look over it and read up on the rules I'm sure he would change his mind about the tackle though.

For me though I agree with others that the laws need to be amended or at least re-phrased.

I would hope though that tip-tackles might well be on their way to being eradicated for good now due to how much press this situation has got. They are horrible to see, and can result in some horrific injuries.

by aucklandlaurie Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:14 am

rugbydreamer
Nothing is going to improve in the areas of the legislation,or the role of the referees until the IRB get rid of Paddy O.

by RubyGuby Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:18 am

PJHolybloke wrote:I'm with Eddie Maesteg,

I'm sick of it - Warburton's a reckless idiot and Clerc nearly died.. blah blah, he's so lucky he didn't end up in a wheelchair blah blah, feck me it's a wonder I ever made my twenties alive, let alone my forties with nothing more than dodgy knees and a bad back, what with me playing when flying wedges and REAL rucking were par for the feckin rugby course.

We're breeding a bunch of cissy-arsed limp-wristed ponces who have already started throwing themselves to the ground the minute there's a whiff of "foul-play" at hand, and "refs" and the health & safety brigade are buying into it hook, line and sinker. England are breeding a bunch of self-obsessed up-their-own-arses celebrity wannabees who couldn't give a flying toss for the real Corinthians that made this game what it is today through endless sacrifice and dedication for nothing more but the pure love of the game, and that's just for starters.

Do the world a favour IRB and give Clerc a BAFTA, chuck a few more about while you're at it, he ain't the first and the road we're going down he'll be not even the tip of the iceberg.

Now Clerc has to face New Zealand whilst being a member of the worst team to ever reach the World Cup final, I wouldn't be surprised if a wheelchair holds a certain attraction for Clerc come 8.55 next Sunday.

I'm sick of the bullshine to be honest, it wont be long before we're left with a cross between roundball and a game of 15 man non-contact rugby league, my only hope is that I'll be dead and buried by then, because I wouldn't watch a Test Match of that shoite if they played it in my garden.

by maestegmafia Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:36 am

Davie wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:
Davie wrote:Eddie Butler? 'Nuff said

What does your post mean ? it doesnt make any sense? Do you mean to Pose the name Eddie Butler as a question and then imply that he is talked about too much ?

Think before your post a bit more, you are not gaining any respect as a mod by posting like a stroppy child.

As someone else here said, Butler is more one-eyed than a cyclops when it comes to matters Welsh

And I've said it many times but I'll say it again, especially for your benefit - I am not a moderator for the rugby section. Stroppy child? Look in the mirror

Welshman Eddie Butlers quote was taken from his piece on Scrum V a Welsh TV show.

by english warrior Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:37 am

Now Maesteg, you are just being pedantic, because when someone wrote

'Eddie Butler, enough said'

you know exactly what they mean, namely that if Eddie said something, then its nearly always flawed, either by his incompetance, arrogance or more likely his one eyed bias. The mans a clown and to quote someone else 'If he said it, then i'm agin it' Thats how much of a tanker he is and whats more deep down you know it too.

by JDandfries Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:45 am

LondonTiger wrote:
PJHolybloke wrote:I'm with Eddie Maesteg,

I'm sick of it - Warburton's a reckless idiot and Clerc nearly died.. blah blah, he's so lucky he didn't end up in a wheelchair blah blah, feck me it's a wonder I ever made my twenties alive, let alone my forties with nothing more than dodgy knees and a bad back, what with me playing when flying wedges and REAL rucking were par for the feckin rugby course.

We're breeding a bunch of cissy-arsed limp-wristed ponces who have already started throwing themselves to the ground the minute there's a whiff of "foul-play" at hand, and "refs" and the health & safety brigade are buying into it hook, line and sinker. England are breeding a bunch of self-obsessed up-their-own-arses celebrity wannabees who couldn't give a flying toss for the real Corinthians that made this game what it is today through endless sacrifice and dedication for nothing more but the pure love of the game, and that's just for starters.

Do the world a favour IRB and give Clerc a BAFTA, chuck a few more about while you're at it, he ain't the first and the road we're going down he'll be not even the tip of the iceberg.

Now Clerc has to face New Zealand whilst being a member of the worst team to ever reach the World Cup final, I wouldn't be surprised if a wheelchair holds a certain attraction for Clerc come 8.55 next Sunday.

I'm sick of the bullshine to be honest, it wont be long before we're left with a cross between roundball and a game of 15 man non-contact rugby league, my only hope is that I'll be dead and buried by then, because I wouldn't watch a Test Match of that shoite if they played it in my garden.

Due to a tackle that constituted foul play, I broke 5 of the vertebrae in my neck while at university. Thankfully my spinal column was only bruised - and I recovered to eventually play professional rugby. The lad who tackled me never played again as he was unable to cope with the thought that his recklessness (I am sure there was no malice) almost paralysed someone. Rugby is a tough physical game, which is why we need some level of protection from dangerous play. The only place intent should be relevant is when deciding the sentence, otherwise it matters not a jot whether it is malicious or just bad technique - dangerous play should not be tolerated.

So dear MrPJHolyThingy STFU.

Excellent post Tiger, this fool PJ Holy has been moaning for three days now, and despite at least 50 people explaining to him how he is so wrong, he will not let it go.

He fails to see that the ref was spot on, and that no one is saying that Warburton tried to hurt anyone, but that when you drop someone accidently, after you have picked them up you have no control over where or how they land, and that is extremely dangerous, as you well know!

Clerc came away unscathed, but that shouldn't dtermine the level of punishment, because on another day he could have been paralysed or worse!

PJ should vent his misguided anger perhaps at the ineptitude of his own team, rather than a highler professional referee, who had IMO an excellent game!

by Davie Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:46 am

maestegmafia wrote:
Welshman Eddie Butlers quote was taken from his piece on Scrum V a Welsh TV show.

He also made similar remarks in the Guardian newspaper - which isn't Welsh

by munkian Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:57 am

I feel Sam was made an example of. If it was at start of tournament - fair enough but in a semi final ? A little late I think.

There has been much much worse - a Fijian player ACTUALLY speared Lamb off the ball and nothing was given.

by JDandfries Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:58 am

munkian wrote:I feel Sam was made an example of. If it was at start of tournament - fair enough but in a semi final ? A little late I think.

There has been much much worse - a Fijian player ACTUALLY speared Lamb off the ball and nothing was given.

Totally irrelevent!

by munkian Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:01 am

JDandfries wrote:
munkian wrote:I feel Sam was made an example of. If it was at start of tournament - fair enough but in a semi final ? A little late I think.

There has been much much worse - a Fijian player ACTUALLY speared Lamb off the ball and nothing was given.

Totally irrelevent!

Apologies, God forgive me and send me to deepest hells alongside primadonna refs for expressing my opinion on a rugby board Erm

by JDandfries Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:12 am

munkian wrote:
JDandfries wrote:
munkian wrote:I feel Sam was made an example of. If it was at start of tournament - fair enough but in a semi final ? A little late I think.

There has been much much worse - a Fijian player ACTUALLY speared Lamb off the ball and nothing was given.

Totally irrelevent!

Apologies, God forgive me and send me to deepest hells alongside primadonna refs for expressing my opinion on a rugby board

Ditto

by eirebilly Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:13 am

I have no doubt in my mind that Clerc was hurt, it was a crunching tackle and really bent him half as well as falling on his kneck and shoulders. No BAFTA needed as most of us would have felt that as well.

What i saw in it was a great tackle, loved it dearly and it was slightly too good and left Clerc in a dangerous position. The letter of law says its red so it was red. It was unfortunate but a really good hit at the same time so i agree that the laws have to be looked as removing these kind of hits sets a pretty bad precedent in regards to players being scared to go in hard for fear of being sent off.

In regards to the point that players are bigger and stronger now than before so run the risk of a greater chance of injury.... Dont buy that sorry. Players now are more physically bigger and stronger but with that comes stronger bodies and the risk of serious injury is reduced in my eyes.

I agree with PJ (not with the extreme posting) that we run the risk of ruining the game with OTT health and safety regulations. I am all for health and safety but this is rugby, the game itself is dangerous and you know that the very first time you start playing.

by JDandfries Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:21 am

eirebilly wrote:I have no doubt in my mind that Clerc was hurt, it was a crunching tackle and really bent him half as well as falling on his kneck and shoulders. No BAFTA needed as most of us would have felt that as well.

What i saw in it was a great tackle, loved it dearly and it was slightly too good and left Clerc in a dangerous position. The letter of law says its red so it was red. It was unfortunate but a really good hit at the same time so i agree that the laws have to be looked as removing these kind of hits sets a pretty bad precedent in regards to players being scared to go in hard for fear of being sent off.

In regards to the point that players are bigger and stronger now than before so run the risk of a greater chance of injury.... Dont buy that sorry. Players now are more physically bigger and stronger but with that comes stronger bodies and the risk of serious injury is reduced in my eyes.

I agree with PJ (not with the extreme posting) that we run the risk of ruining the game with OTT health and safety regulations. I am all for health and safety but this is rugby, the game itself is dangerous and you know that the very first time you start playing.

Not sure the HSE brigade are trying anything, I think it is more an effort to save players from injury, maybe it will actually put the empasis on players to tackle properly, when I played, we were always taught to tackle and wrpa the man up, nowadays you see people basically shouldering players rather than actually tackling with the arms

by Luckless Pedestrian Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:24 am

eirebilly wrote:I have no doubt in my mind that Clerc was hurt, it was a crunching tackle and really bent him half as well as falling on his kneck and shoulders. No BAFTA needed as most of us would have felt that as well.

What i saw in it was a great tackle, loved it dearly and it was slightly too good and left Clerc in a dangerous position. The letter of law says its red so it was red. It was unfortunate but a really good hit at the same time

I agree with you, Billy. I have to assume that anyone who thinks Vincent Clerc was play-acting have never been tipped and dropped onto their shoulders. I agree, too, that it was a great tackle - all Warburton had to do was bring Clerc back down safely and there would have been nothing for the referee to penalise.

by eirebilly Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:29 am

Jdandfries;
Its fairly obvious to me from Paddy's comments that the refs are under some pressure from the HSE to make changes but it should be kept real.

Luckless;

It really annoys me that people say that Clerc was faking to try and con the ref into sending Warburton off. It was some hit and having been on the end of a few of them. They hurt, a few minutes recovery is needed after a hit like that. I dont think he was hurt in the drop but certainly from the hit.

by JDandfries Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:30 am

[quote="eirebilly"]Jdandfries;
Its fairly obvious to me from Paddy's comments that the refs are under some pressure from the HSE to make changes but it should be kept real.

I realise that, but i was trying to say because of the way tackling has changed this is a necessary change (IMO) not the HSE being petty or anything, not completing the tackling, is dangerous

by Guest Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:33 am

Eddie Butler writes misty-eyed, over-emotional, sanctimonious, one-eyed drivel.

In fact I think he's been posting on here with several accounts since the Wales game. It's the only way to explain the volume of posts along those lines.

Strange too how certain laws need 'fixing' (for the good of the game, for the good of humanity vomit

) as a knee-jerk reaction in the anguish of defeat.

by eirebilly Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:34 am

Agreed, the shoulder charge tackles are terrible and very dangerous.
I just think that there should be a few amandments made in the wording of the rules and the interprettion from the refs.

Those tackles should'nt be looked at as it was a beauty but Warburton was guilty of allowing Clerc to fall. Wording like 'No regard to safety' labels players as thugs and dangerous when Warburton is neither, it was unfortunate but still a cracking hit.

by Sponsored content