Stephen Ferris tackle- Was it a yellow card or even a penalty

by Rugby_Girl Sun Feb 05, 2012 6:25 pm

First topic message reminder :

Wales won the match after Leigh Halfpenny kicked a penalty with under 1 min to go. Stephen Ferris was given a yellow card for a 'dangerous' tackle, everyone seems to agree yellow was harsh but was it even a penalty or was it just a good tackle?

**EDIT UPDATE from Adam**

The International Rugby Board and Six Nations have backed Referee Wayne Barnes over the penalty decision that led to Ireland's Stephen Ferris being yellow carded during the RBS 6 Nations match at the Aviva Stadium on February 5.

While an Independent Six Nations Disciplinary Panel did not ultimately uphold the citing, the IRB’s match officials performance review endorsed Barnes' decision to award a penalty. On first viewing the panel could understand exactly how the match referee came to his decision. In dismissing the citing no criticism of the referee’s on field decision should be taken or inferred. It was only after careful and prolonged analysis of the dynamics of the contact, including slow motion and step by step viewing, that the committee was able to see the strength of the submissions made in favour of Stephen Ferris.

All match officials are selected for International competition on merit. Performances are reviewed on an ongoing basis and taken into consideration when appointments are made for future international competitions.

Neither organisation will make any further comment on this matter.

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 2:06 pm

Yes, I agree they said it, but they are an internal disciplinary panel not the European Court of Justice! The problems with rugby laws are:
1 too many of them
2 refs are encouraged to apply interpretations or chose one of a number of conflicting laws.

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 2:49 pm

I have no problem with the fact that Wayne Barnes called the tackle as he saw it in real time or even that Ireland lost the match. I also agree that there may indeed be too many laws and that refs have to apply them.

I just don't think that tackle broke any of them.

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 3:03 pm

Fair enough. I think it did thumbsup

by Rava Sat Feb 18, 2012 3:31 pm

Glas a du wrote:Fair enough. I think it did

You would

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 4:10 pm

Rava wrote:
Glas a du wrote:Fair enough. I think it did

You would

And you wouldn't! raspberry

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 4:22 pm

Glas,

What did you think of the citings against Matthew Rees and was it Jones around Christmas time?

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:28 pm

Fine.

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:31 pm

Did you think the "clear-out" was dangerous?

by BigTrevsbigmac Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:31 pm

No & no

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:32 pm

We needed you on day one BigTrev!

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:46 pm

Just watched it again on that clip - first impressions last, Phillip Mathews is a disgrace Very Happy

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:50 pm

Stephen Ferris looks like Bop off Abney and Teale.

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:56 pm

Glas a du wrote:Stephen Ferris looks like Bop off Abney and Teale.

It's good to see you starting to develop a bit of clarity in your ideas Glas. That post has more logic than all your previous ones combined!

Very Happy

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:03 pm

Seriously though, it's the nose.

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:05 pm

see what I mean?

Ferris

Bop

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:07 pm

Glas a du wrote:

Seriously though, it's the nose.

Really?

And there was me thinking it was the fact that Bop never executes dangerous tackles either even though you insist on seeing them as such despite the evidence and in contradiction of the Disciplinary Panel.

Wink

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:31 pm

Mrs P, eat a Snickers...

Very Happy

by irfon17 Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:56 pm

People seem to think that this decision (which I believe was no way a yellow card but to then letter of the law a penally as both feet came off the floor (look closely) and the player was taken beyond the horizontal) decided the outcome of the match.

What people ignore is that Wales were on an excellent drive up the field and may well have scored a drop goal, forced Ireland to concede a different penaly or even scored a try had the referee's whistle not brought their attack to a premature end.

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:01 pm

(which I believe was no way a yellow card but to then letter of the law a penally as both feet came off the floor (look closely) and the player was taken beyond the horizontal)

Irfon, don't you see? You can't think that because the commitee's decision is final.

warning

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:10 pm

No Glas, he can think what he likes but the committee and I disagree.

And to use the "...both feet came off the floor..." criteria to determine if a tackle is dangerous is both outside the Law's of the game and also outside common sense as a huge proportion of tackles end that way.

The important difference is that the player has to be lifted off the ground, not just that his feet came off the ground.

Read the judgment.

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:22 pm

Ferris cwtches down, takes hold of him, drives upwards and flicks his arm up in a tipping motion. It was a clear penalty notwithstanding the judgement.

Things to bear in mind when reading the judgement:
1 Ireland lost, and this decision was a crucial (if not deciding) factor
2 Bradley Davies had committed a much worse offence
3 They didn't want to clobber Davies too much but needed to differentiate between the two incidents

It was a fudge, their decisions are always a fudge. They are called 'laws' but that is like calling homeopathy 'conventional medicine'.

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:30 pm

Glas a du wrote:Ferris cwtches down, takes hold of him, drives upwards and flicks his arm up in a tipping motion. It was a clear penalty notwithstanding the judgement.

Things to bear in mind when reading the judgement:
1 Ireland lost, and this decision was a crucial (if not deciding) factor
2 Bradley Davies had committed a much worse offence
3 They didn't want to clobber Davies too much but needed to differentiate between the two incidents

It was a fudge, their decisions are always a fudge. They are called 'laws' but that is like calling homeopathy 'conventional medicine'.

I really struggle to see how you can think the Disciplinary Panel could have wanted to do anything other than endorse the ref's decision. That is their position in the vast majority of citings and it would have been so much easier for them to do that again here. There were so many ways to differentiate between those offences that they didn't need to do anything to ensure there was clear water between them.

You didn't answer if you felt what Rees and (?) Jones did at Christmas time was dangerous too?

It is starting to look like the only thing that makes some folks see anything wrong with this tackle, is the colour of the shirts worn by the 2 men.

by Glas a du Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:32 pm

I've promised Notch I won't post on this thre... Doh

by irfon17 Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:34 pm

MrsP wrote:No Glas, he can think what he likes but the committee and I disagree.

And to use the "...both feet came off the floor..." criteria to determine if a tackle is dangerous is both outside the Law's of the game and also outside common sense as a huge proportion of tackles end that way.

The important difference is that the player has to be lifted off the ground, not just that his feet came off the ground.

Read the judgment.

You are right, many tackles involve both feet coming off the ground, most do not end up with the playing going beyond the horizontal. Are you suggesting that the player jumped rather than was lifted as if he wasn't lift how else would he end up airborne?

Anyhow, I was wanting to avoid getting drawn into the was it or wasn't argument (the judgement solves nothing- at least the way I read it). Any chance of calling it a borderline decision (the penalty that is, the card was just plain silly) and being done with it Hug

?

My main point was that Wales might still have won without the penalty call as the way they were driving up the field meant they were looking good for getting themselves into drop goal position (or forcing another unrelated penalty from the Irish defence).

by Guest Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:36 pm

MrsP wrote:It is starting to look like the only thing that makes some folks see anything wrong with this tackle, is the colour of the shirts worn by the 2 men.

Lock the thread, we have a winner! Very Happy

by MrsP Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:44 pm

"My main point was that Wales might still have won without the penalty call as the way they were driving up the field meant they were looking good for getting themselves into drop goal position (or forcing another unrelated penalty from the Irish defence). "

They may well have done indeed but that has absolutely no bearing on the legality or otherwise of the tackle.

And of course I'm not saying he jumped. There is a difference between being knocked off your feet and being lifted off your feet. Watch any match and count how many times a player lands with both feet off the ground after he is tackled.

You cannot satisfactorily leave it as a borderline decision in Law after you have looked at the evidence and declared the tackle to not have been dangerous. If it wasn't a dangerous tackle it wasn't a penalty.

The Ireland v Wales game is over and done with but players especially need to know whether or not they will be penalised for the simple act of lifting one leg of a player.

That is why this is important.

by doctor_grey Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:24 pm

MrsP wrote:"players especially need to know whether or not they will be penalised for the simple act of lifting one leg of a player.

That is why this is important.

MrsP., I quite agree. But here's the rub. Each referee sees each tackle differently. And things move so fast in a match a referee might not even have a clear view, even if it is close. So I prefer to give the referees some slack.

On the other hand, and this goes straight to your point, I don't give any slack to the enforcing bodies, the judiciary bodies, and the IRB. It seems to me, without conducting a doctoral thesis on the subject, that most serious infractions such as tip tackles and gouging are not adjudicated consistently by the disciplinary boards. Some suspensions are short and some are long for infractions which seem similar, and I think that is unacceptable. I also don't believe a player should get a reduced sentence for copping a plea, apologising, or for never having been caught doing something before. All these in account and a player should perhaps get the minimum sentence, not less than the minimum (linguistically impossible, but it can happen only in Rugby) as long as the foul is not too severe. Otherwise, simple to understand, graduated punishments based upon severity.

by Glas a du Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:19 am

The Ireland v Wales game is over and done with but players especially need to know whether or not they will be penalised for the simple act of lifting one leg of a player.

That is straight out of the Peter Mandelson book of spin. You make it sound like a Morcambe and Wise sketch.

Our heroes dressed in doggy outfits

"oh, I'm dog tired, I couldn't even man sausage a leg

Here, shall I lift it for ya!

Would you that would be ever so kind"

Etc.

by **Notch** Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:37 am

Uh, guys- pack it in! With all this chat here, you've yet to cover the frozen french pitch controversy; we better see this thread sink onto the second page by the weekend or we risk being two full rounds behind on pointless 6N related finger pointing.

by PJHolybloke Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:31 am

Well if anyone tried lifting my leg I'd knock 'em the feck out - send me off for that. Very Happy

Sorry Notch.

by Glas a du Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:13 am

You'd have to watch your positioning though, you know to avoid the "angle of the dangle"

Sorry Notch kiss

by MrsP Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:10 am

Notch wrote:Uh, guys- pack it in! With all this chat here, you've yet to cover the frozen french pitch controversy; we better see this thread sink onto the second page by the weekend or we risk being two full rounds behind on pointless 6N related finger pointing.

The irony of posting on a thread to ask other people to stop....posting on the thread.

Doh

Reading and/or posting on this thread is not compulsory. If you are not interested feel free to pass on by.

by Glas a du Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:29 pm

Ok...

by BlueNote Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:19 pm

Crikey, hasn't this died yet?

I would read "the IRB’s match officials performance review endorsed Barnes' decision to award a penalty. On first viewing the panel could understand exactly how the match referee came to his decision. In dismissing the citing no criticism of the referee’s on field decision should be taken or inferred. It was only after careful and prolonged analysis of the dynamics of the contact, including slow motion and step by step viewing, that the committee was able to see the strength of the submissions made in favour of Stephen Ferris" as saying that they thought it probably wasn't a penalty offence, but they could understand how the ref gave it.

by MrsP Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:56 pm

As do I Bluenote.

by Glas a du Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:23 pm

Sounds like Ferris' legal team have done a job on the panel.

"Now Sir, we are sure you, as expert arbitrators, would appreciate a mechanical evaluation of the tackle in every detail with the benefit of the latest slow motion technology and frame by frame capability. We are sure you've heard of the BaffleBS system and it's application in these matters. May I invite you Sir, Gentlemen to take advantage of the interactive functionality...etc."

by MrsP Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:32 pm

Legal team use evidence to prove their case!!!!

Shock! Horror!!!!

I think Glas is running out of straws.

by Glas a du Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:36 pm

That's my point Mrs P, they used the old legal maxim: "baffle them with BS"

Works every time Very Happy

by MrsP Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:07 pm

Here you go Glas,

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=haystacks&hl=en&sa=X&rlz=1T4ACPW_enGB310GB312&biw=1318&bih=658&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=jQofXL7FXIpxGM:&imgrefurl=http://www.posters.co.uk/Haystacks-(Monet)/Custom-Prints/95208/70&docid=CrkJ0cnA7AUnrM&imgurl=http://imagecache6.allposters.com/LRG/22/2212/ZVJAD00Z.jpg&w=400&h=300&ei=sA9BT7P2IsLG0QXgudSPDw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=194&vpy=74&dur=1773&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=136&ty=124&sig=107278131425761695751&page=5&tbnh=144&tbnw=192&start=78&ndsp=20&ved=0CNcDEK0DMF0

That should keep you going for a while.

Very Happy

by Feckless Rogue Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:09 pm

Glas a du wrote:That's my point Mrs P, they used the old legal maxim: "baffle them with BS"

Works every time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1QI4P0YqtM

by Glas a du Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:29 pm

FR

Mrs P, your faith in the disciplinary panel is touching yet misplaced, now you have the final word...

by Sponsored content