Allan Colm Pierre Rolland set to ref Wales v BaaBaas

This June.
I hope the locals behave themselves and don't take it down the road of football mentality by giving him a hard time.
Lets take a leaf out of our Captain Sam's book and treat the matter with dignity and respect.
In the long term i guess this is the best game for him to come back and ref us on.

My biggest worry is he turns the free flowing ethos of BaaBaas and Welsh rugby into a petulant bore fest,put your whistle in your pocket Allan then your brain might engage before you blow it.

The only tickets available on the WRU site is upper tier North Stand

Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Why do you say that ? I for one have not given it a second thought.

If only the welsh could move on from their victim mentality.

Cymroglan wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Why do you say that ? I for one have not given it a second thought.

You may not have but there are those that haven't.

Just like those that wont accept the Ferris penalty but that's life,

Double jeopardy Cymro?

No just being realistic.

Really?

I don't care how bitter it looks but that french-irish ruined that semi-final AND the IRB have to sort out the tip tackle interpretation/rule. Put it this way:

1. Bradley Davies - worth a RED card.
2. Sam Warburton - worth a YELLOW card
3. Stephen Ferris - worth a PENALTY if that!

None of the decisions were balanced or merited. Instead you get egotistical refs who want to have an impact on the game (Rolland) or weak minded refs (whoever it was) who will not interpret the rules with a feel for the game and the players but follow stupid edicts and ruin games for the fans.

Rant over and I don't care if that made me seem bitter

Actually it did Scarlet. But who cares at this time of the night.

Water under the bridge as far as most are concnered, you've brought some unwated attention to it with this though View.

The tip tackle/dangerous tackle rule does need a review. I'm sure I am not alone here, I like to see big hits go in where the player is put hard on the floor with the wind knocked out of him. We are going to lose that spectacle if the IRB doesn't sort it out. Anyone who's watched Rabo and Super15 would have seen some examples. Even players are milking the situations now which I don't like to see.

Rava wrote: Actually it did Scarlet. But who cares at this time of the night.

Morgannwg wrote:Water under the bridge as far as most are concnered, you've brought some unwated attention to it with this though View.

The tip tackle/dangerous tackle rule does need a review. I'm sure I am not alone here, I like to see big hits go in where the player is put hard on the floor with the wind knocked out of him. We are going to lose that spectacle if the IRB doesn't sort it out. Anyone who's watched Rabo and Super15 would have seen some examples. Even players are milking the situations now which I don't like to see.

I am in total agreement here. There were a couple of decisions this weekend that were debatable. I agree something must be done to regulate this.

Iaone's yellow last weekend and Tipuric's yellow last night spring to mind. Refs seem to be under real pressure in these situations and are likely to give in to the crowd.

Tupurics was a particularly poor decision. I think the refs are too easily influenced by the relevant topic.

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

What does it matter in all honesty, it is in the past, it is time to move on and try, try, not to repeat it again.

By the way Sam Warbutton's was a red card. end of.

viewtothegym.

Are you by any chance saying that Allan Rolland, will not ref the game fairly?

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

I'm well over the French irish man robbing wales of a world cup final game with his petulant style of reffing, I'm just hoping he keeps this game free flowing and the fans just keep it real.
Also why can't the Irish stop booing the kicker when they are losing?

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

Absolute rubbish it was definitely a red under the laws of the game. Rolland was 100% right on his decision. Warburton didn't have to say anything yet he chose to admit he was at fault and it was a red and you still can't accept it?

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

Absolute rubbish it was definitely a red under the laws of the game. Rolland was 100% right on his decision. Warburton didn't have to say anything yet he chose to admit he was at fault and it was a red and you still can't accept it?

In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:
In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

That's not your decision to make.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:
In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

That's not your decision to make.

Well whoopdie ding!

Like I care mate. I'm entitled to an opinion and that opinion is that Alain Rolland is a who got it wrong off the back of his own inflated ego.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Well whoopdie ding!

Like I care mate. I'm entitled to an opinion and that opinion is that Alain Rolland is a who got it wrong off the back of his own inflated ego.

That's fine you're entitled to your opinion but then you can't get mad when people disagree and cite the fact that Rolland is still an elite ref and was backed up in his decision by both the IRB and Sam Warburton.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

Absolute rubbish it was definitely a red under the laws of the game. Rolland was 100% right on his decision. Warburton didn't have to say anything yet he chose to admit he was at fault and it was a red and you still can't accept it?

In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

The difference between Ferris and Tupuric tackles and Warburtons is that Warburtons was dangerous. For the Ferris and Tupuric tackles it could be debated that there was nothing wrong with them. Was the player even off the ground?

Absolute BS about Rolland, he 100% made the correct decisions as even Warburton acknowledged. Im the one that needs to grow up yet your the one moaning about the ref making a correct decision just cause it hindered your team? How its his fault that Warburton made a stupid decision and the Welsh team bottled it against a disinterested French ill never know.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Well whoopdie ding!

Like I care mate. I'm entitled to an opinion and that opinion is that Alain Rolland is a who got it wrong off the back of his own inflated ego.

That's fine you're entitled to your opinion but then you can't get mad when people disagree and cite the fact that Rolland is still an elite ref and was backed up in his decision by both the IRB and Sam Warburton.

Yes I can.

And what would you do if you were in Warburton's shoes? Protest your innocence and get a longer ban or play the diplomatic card and get the shortest ban you can. He was never going to complain was he? Gatland had a lot to say about it though didn't he?

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Yes I can.

And what would you do if you were in Warburton's shoes? Protest your innocence and get a longer ban or play the diplomatic card and get the shortest ban you can. He was never going to complain was he? Gatland had a lot to say about it though didn't he?

I'd do what Stephen Ferris did,if I believed I was right I'd fight it all the way.

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

Absolute rubbish it was definitely a red under the laws of the game. Rolland was 100% right on his decision. Warburton didn't have to say anything yet he chose to admit he was at fault and it was a red and you still can't accept it?

In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

The difference between Ferris and Tupuric tackles and Warburtons is that Warburtons was dangerous. For the Ferris and Tupuric tackles it could be debated that there was nothing wrong with them. Was the player even off the ground?

Absolute BS about Rolland, he 100% made the correct decisions as even Warburton acknowledged. Im the one that needs to grow up yet your the one moaning about the ref making a correct decision just cause it hindered your team? How its his fault that Warburton made a stupid decision and the Welsh team bottled it against a disinterested French ill never know.

Nah, your BS mate.

Never a red. Definately a yellow. When he made the tackle I thought "ah that's a yellow" then Rolland gave a red. I dont care what you think the laws are. Those decisions have been left to refs to apply according to what happens on the pitch. Warbs was clumsy not dirty. If you can't see how Rollands bad decision ruined the game then perhaps wendyball is the one for you and you can watch the actresses whinning every time someone "tackles" them.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

Absolute rubbish it was definitely a red under the laws of the game. Rolland was 100% right on his decision. Warburton didn't have to say anything yet he chose to admit he was at fault and it was a red and you still can't accept it?

In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

The difference between Ferris and Tupuric tackles and Warburtons is that Warburtons was dangerous. For the Ferris and Tupuric tackles it could be debated that there was nothing wrong with them. Was the player even off the ground?

Absolute BS about Rolland, he 100% made the correct decisions as even Warburton acknowledged. Im the one that needs to grow up yet your the one moaning about the ref making a correct decision just cause it hindered your team? How its his fault that Warburton made a stupid decision and the Welsh team bottled it against a disinterested French ill never know.

Nah, your BS mate.

Never a red. Definately a yellow. When he made the tackle I thought "ah that's a yellow" then Rolland gave a red. I dont care what you think the laws are. Those decisions have been left to refs to apply according to what happens on the pitch. Warbs was clumsy not dirty. If you can't see how Rollands bad decision ruined the game then perhaps wendyball is the one for you and you can watch the actresses whinning every time someone "tackles" them.

What does that have to do with it? I dont think Warburton intended to injure Clerc but either way he put him down on his head/neck/ shoulders from 4 or 5 feet of the ground. Its dangerous play which merited a red.

Morgannwg wrote:Iaone's yellow last weekend and Tipuric's yellow last night spring to mind. Refs seem to be under real pressure in these situations and are likely to give in to the crowd.

That was a really poor decision. It was a fantastic tackle.

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

Absolute rubbish it was definitely a red under the laws of the game. Rolland was 100% right on his decision. Warburton didn't have to say anything yet he chose to admit he was at fault and it was a red and you still can't accept it?

In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

The difference between Ferris and Tupuric tackles and Warburtons is that Warburtons was dangerous. For the Ferris and Tupuric tackles it could be debated that there was nothing wrong with them. Was the player even off the ground?

Absolute BS about Rolland, he 100% made the correct decisions as even Warburton acknowledged. Im the one that needs to grow up yet your the one moaning about the ref making a correct decision just cause it hindered your team? How its his fault that Warburton made a stupid decision and the Welsh team bottled it against a disinterested French ill never know.

Nah, your BS mate.

Never a red. Definately a yellow. When he made the tackle I thought "ah that's a yellow" then Rolland gave a red. I dont care what you think the laws are. Those decisions have been left to refs to apply according to what happens on the pitch. Warbs was clumsy not dirty. If you can't see how Rollands bad decision ruined the game then perhaps wendyball is the one for you and you can watch the actresses whinning every time someone "tackles" them.

What does that have to do with it? I dont think Warburton intended to injure Clerc but either way he put him down on his head/neck/ shoulders from 4 or 5 feet of the ground. Its dangerous play which merited a red.

Everything,because that's what the man in the middle is supposed to judge. They've been doing just that for donkeys. How many times has a player been warned re. a clumsy challenge and the words "no intent" have been used when explaining the decision? Its a regular thing. Why this should be any different is ridiculous! It was a poor, clumsy tackle. he got himself in the wrong position and tried to bail out when Clerc started going the wrong way. Never in a month of sundays did that merit a red .... and nobody will convince me otherwise.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:
Everything,because that's what the man in the middle is supposed to judge. They've been doing just that for donkeys. How many times has a player been warned re. a clumsy challenge and the words "no intent" have been used when explaining the decision? Its a regular thing. Why this should be any different is ridiculous! It was a poor, clumsy tackle. he got himself in the wrong position and tried to bail out when Clerc started going the wrong way. Never in a month of sundays did that merit a red .... and nobody will convince me otherwise.

Here's a quote 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.

O'Brien also said the concern was less the intent of the player who makes a tip tackle and more about the potential consequences of a ball-carrier being dumped or dropped on his head or shoulders.

In this type of case intent is used to determine the lenth of the ban the offendin player receives,it's a red card no matter what.

asoreleftshoulder
That's the problem more often than not it's just a yellow that's produced.
The law is clear but ref's are not consistent.

Cymroglan wrote:asoreleftshoulder
That's the problem more often than not it's just a yellow that's produced.
The law is clear but ref's are not consistent.

Bang on and unfortunately i find Mr Rolland to be one of the most inconsistent.

Cymroglan wrote:asoreleftshoulder
That's the problem more often than not it's just a yellow that's produced.
The law is clear but ref's are not consistent.

Yep agree with you here,although Rolland has previous history of red carding a player for a tackle like this.It was a French player in a Heineken Cup match as far as I can remember.

There were a number of similar tackles in the WC which only resulted in yellow cards however I don't think it's right to say that because those refs made bad decisions that Rolland should make a bad decision too.

Bang on. That law was brought in because of Umanga's spear tackle on O'Driscoll. Warbs didn't spear tackle Clerc - he a normal tackle up by accident. If the IRB want to red card those incidents so be it but then Bradley Davies and Stephen Ferris in the Wales Ireland match should have been carded (Davies should have been either way - dirty play!) and Tipuric recently also.

Or we can have a game where ref use their brains to apply laws sympathetically according to the purpose for which they were designed.

Perhaps we could enjoy the matches then!

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:Bang on. That law was brought in because of Umanga's spear tackle on O'Driscoll. Warbs didn't spear tackle Clerc - he a normal tackle up by accident. If the IRB want to red card those incidents so be it but then Bradley Davies and Stephen Ferris in the Wales Ireland match should have been carded (Davies should have been either way - dirty play!) and Tipuric recently also.

Or we can have a game where ref use their brains to apply laws sympathetically according to the purpose for which they were designed.

Perhaps we could enjoy the matches then!

If you want to look at it that way that's fine but you can't blame Rolland for enforcing the laws the way he has been instructed is correct.

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

Absolute rubbish it was definitely a red under the laws of the game. Rolland was 100% right on his decision. Warburton didn't have to say anything yet he chose to admit he was at fault and it was a red and you still can't accept it?

In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

The difference between Ferris and Tupuric tackles and Warburtons is that Warburtons was dangerous. For the Ferris and Tupuric tackles it could be debated that there was nothing wrong with them. Was the player even off the ground?

Absolute BS about Rolland, he 100% made the correct decisions as even Warburton acknowledged. Im the one that needs to grow up yet your the one moaning about the ref making a correct decision just cause it hindered your team? How its his fault that Warburton made a stupid decision and the Welsh team bottled it against a disinterested French ill never know.

If Rolland made the right decision over Warburton, did Joubert make the wrong decision when identical tackles in the final didn't even warrant a penalty?

maestegmafia wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:

Rava wrote:Pity the Welsh can't put the past behind them Especially since Warburton actually accepted he was in the wrong.

Typical generalisation again. It ws a red card, Rolland done nothing wrong.

Nonsense, if Warbs had complained he'd have been banned for longer. Rolland him, Wales and the match. It never merited a red card. it was clumsy not dirty. Refs need to get that through their skulls. Rolland was quoted from a refs meeting that those tackles were reds regardless. Stupid interpretation. We were jus unlucky he was reffing in that match. I think a less egotistical official would have given a yellow.

Absolute rubbish it was definitely a red under the laws of the game. Rolland was 100% right on his decision. Warburton didn't have to say anything yet he chose to admit he was at fault and it was a red and you still can't accept it?

In that case Tipuric should have been red carded in the Leinster game recently, Davies should have been red carded vs Ireland as should Ferris in the same game. Grow up. There is such a thing as interpretation. Rolland ruined that semi final, we all know it. I've never seen such a premeditated and deliberately harsh decision on a rugby pitch in my life. Clumsy tackles do not merit red cards, they merit penalties or if particularly bad yellows. Dirty play is what merits a red.

I don't care if you disagree or think the rules say otherwise. The law, as they say, is an ass. I posted earlier which tackles deserve what. If the likes of Rolland are going to take it on themselves to interpret the rules so narrowly then the IRB need to get involved. Showing them the three tackles I mentioned and educating the refs on sensible outcomes would not be a bad start.

The difference between Ferris and Tupuric tackles and Warburtons is that Warburtons was dangerous. For the Ferris and Tupuric tackles it could be debated that there was nothing wrong with them. Was the player even off the ground?

Absolute BS about Rolland, he 100% made the correct decisions as even Warburton acknowledged. Im the one that needs to grow up yet your the one moaning about the ref making a correct decision just cause it hindered your team? How its his fault that Warburton made a stupid decision and the Welsh team bottled it against a disinterested French ill never know.

If Rolland made the right decision over Warburton, did Joubert make the wrong decision when identical tackles in the final didn't even warrant a penalty?

Dont know what tackles your referring to but if they were identical as you say then yes they should have been red cards.

As asoreleftshoulder posted

"Here's a quote 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.

O'Brien also said the concern was less the intent of the player who makes a tip tackle and more about the potential consequences of a ball-carrier being dumped or dropped on his head or shoulders."

Under the laws of the game they would have been red cards

Bulloney. The law is there to stop spear tackles ala Umaga vs O'Driscoll, not to red card accidental technical offences. Refs have ben interpreting laws since the inception of the game. Hide behind the rule book if you will, but Rollands red card on Warbs was wrong ....

I will not be changing my mind on this one.

"No, the world IS flat I tell you! Nobody will ever convince me otherwise, nope put the globe away I don't care!"

Arrogance is a funny thing

It is Rory, thats why you always make me chuckle.

Boys, both sides of the argument are correct, but you'r arguing for the sake of it. The main points all being correct but flawed.

Anything Sam, and POB said all hade reasoning behind them, either to take the pressure off Rolland or themselves, on the other hand he did go by the letter of the law...

My problem is, the rulebook is a little like the bible, and quran. They have the best intentions in mind but... well you know!

Well initially I was on the side that thought Warburton did not deserve a red and a yellow would suffice, at the time of the world cup. I admit to being wrong now though, and even Warburton admits that he deserved the red. I don't see what else there is to debate on that really.

Warburton like most street wise players is not going to publicly say he did not deserve a red card.
He is a international captain who wants to keep on the right side of the officials.
It would have been extremely foolish of him to go against Rolland or any other official if it comes to that.
Warburton privately may not agree with the decision but as a captain he is saying all the right things.

Do you think it didn't warrant a red card? Also, Ferris was pretty clear that he didn't believe he was in the wrong..

Rory_Gallagher wrote:"No, the world IS flat I tell you! Nobody will ever convince me otherwise, nope put the globe away I don't care!"

Arrogance is a funny thing

W H A T E V E R - Tell it to the hand. And as for Warbs accepting the call Been there, done it.

My grud, we are living in times where everyone wants to follow the letter of the law. Fine - you live like that. I for one prefer to THINK for myself.

The red card was given and so was a penalty against Ferris both decisions were correct within the letter of the law.
The problem we have is consistency with the ref's.