Manu Tuilagi hit with citing

First topic message reminder :

Here's the link: http://www.espnscrum.com/england-tour-2012/rugby/story/164738.html

In my opinion I didn't think it was that bad but if he is cited and misses the tests against South Africa then it gives Jonathan Joseph a chance. I hope he's not cited though.

Just seen all the mentioned tip tackles for reference. Ferris is the lightest tip tackle I have ever seen... if thats illegal then I think we should make contact illegal.

Manu's a little worse but I can't see it as a citing. He could have drilled him into the ground but tried to guide him safely down.... you can see him twist Care back to the floor safely.

How anyone can compare this to Warburton's is compeltely beyond me. I don't doubt for a second that it was unintentional.... but he still dumped him straight on his head... it could have been very serious.

With tip tackles you only have a few seconds to react. I don't think anyone goes into a tackle looking to tip tackle him. It often occurs to big men hitting little guys... as in Clerc, Care etc.
Manu did bring him down safely which shows there was no intent. The fact Care got up immediately shows it was as good an execution out of a tip tackle as you could get.

Your right, I wouldn't have penalised Manu at all, just making comparisons.

Coaching these days is playing the odds. Taking contact the best way you can, and the most consistent way possible. Losing a yard 10 times out of 10 is far better than gaining a yard 9 times out of 10 and missing the 10th!

With the way players look for the offload so often the general consensus (that Ive seen) is either hit at the knee drop the player and push through to the wrong side, or wrap up and keep on his feet and wait for support. Anything else is wild, wreckless and risky!

The fact Care got up immediately shows it was as good an execution out of a tip tackle as you could get.

Oh dear!

And Warburton didn't put anybody anywhere, he lifted panic'd and pulled out, Clerc didn't react like Care did, who is a tough little SOB.

Right in this case Manu was attempting a tackle he gets right and executes quite legally several times in most games. He screwed up slightly and ended up tipping Care slightly past horizontal whilst static rather than driving through as he normally would.
The way the rules are he may suffer the consequences of that.

Bare in mind, Tuilagi also put in a high tackle in this match and a hit with no use of the arms - 3 illegal tackles - amazing he didn't get a yellow card especially baring in mind what Barnes give Ferris a yellow card for. Think that decision to card Ferris might be haunting Barnes and he doesnt want to give a yellow now.

I'm not sure I agree that Ferris was totally innocent. It was a marginal clumsy tackle but after the directives , and the contraversy of the WC it had to be penalised!

Bare in mind, Tuilagi also put in a high tackle in this match and a hit with no use of the arms - 3 illegal tackles

Where was the one with no arms? I missed that one.

The high tackle wasn't much of one to be honest. Had the Quins not screamed for it immeadiately I'm not sure it would have been given. That was a covering tackle where Manu wrapped up Lowe and his right arm went across Lowe's shoulder close in to the head and around the top of the chest.

What I don't understand is why the IRB are looking to outlaw tip tackling but at the same time introduce laws at the scrum which are pretty much gauranteeing any front rower who players at a high level with end up with serious neck injuries for the rest of their lives.

not saying some tip tackling is not dangerous... but its rare and hardly ever results in injury, especially long term.

Scrum initial hits introduced over the last few years are putting immense pressure on the necks of front rowers, nearly all front rowers retire due to neck injuries which could be very serious if they continue. Double standards?

One is quite obvious but unlikely to cause serious injury... the other may not seem obvious but almost always leads to injury, nearly all of it serious... which is worse?

thebluesmancometh wrote:I'm not sure I agree that Ferris was totally innocent. It was a marginal clumsy tackle but after the directives , and the contraversy of the WC it had to be penalised!

It wasn't an illegal tackle in any sense as both of the Welsh players legs didn't even leave the ground, hence the citing panel apologizing to Ferris, deciding not to give him a ban and Wayne Barnes subsequently being demoted from the IRB elite panel.

Artful_Dodger wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:I'm not sure I agree that Ferris was totally innocent. It was a marginal clumsy tackle but after the directives , and the contraversy of the WC it had to be penalised!

It wasn't an illegal tackle in any sense as both of the Welsh players legs didn't even leave the ground, hence the citing panel apologizing to Ferris, deciding not to give him a ban and Wayne Barnes subsequently being demoted from the IRB elite panel.

And the referees assessment board upholding the award of a penalty

You have to feel for poor Barnes, whatever he does theres someone to tell him its wrong. Hayman clip was him too.

Peter what is the referees assessment board?

I don't really feel for Barnes at all and he deserved to be demoted from the elite panel as he makes a lot of very poor decisions.

Artful_Dodger wrote:Peter what is the referees assessment board?

I don't really feel for Barnes at all and he deserved to be demoted from the elite panel as he makes a lot of very poor decisions.

The citing commission didnt uphold the citing, at no time did they say it never should have been a penalty or a yellow (which isnt within their remit), it was only the Ireland team manager that claimed this, although you'd be hard pressed to find it clearly reported that way in the mainstream press who love a simple headline.
This is what the IRB said in response to the BS that came from Ireland :

“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,” this afternoon’s statement said.

Wayne Barnes doesnt make citings. He wasnt at fault in that case (at least according to the IRB, although we can infer from that they were suggesting the yellow was wrong). It was Pearson who made the howler in that game telling Barnes that the Davies dump was a yellow and generally being born.

Barnes has had plenty of other man sausage ups though yes, its just strange he gets hung out to dry on the one thing the IRB backed him on. With the Davies decsion and the infamous quick lineout both times he got screwed by his touch judge. If those are the reason he lost his job thats a pretty poor show from the IRB. the poll on the rugby refs forum had him as one of the top performing refs of the world cup.
Failing to give a straight red to Hayman was ridiculous, especially after screwing up on Davies.

I guess what this really shows is that no-one has a clue what the rules are and where the line is when it comes to tips, including Barnes so he just guesses like the rest of us. getting confronted with that about 5 minutes into a major final, you can see why its no one wants to referee the game...and who can blame him for erring ion the side of caution? Imagine the gnashing and wailing there would be had he carded Tuilagi. EFSP would probably be all over his twitter calling him gay and saying he should be beheaded.
Honestly I have no idea what the citing commission will have to say on this one.

Apparently this example of a "TipTackle" is perfectly acceptable and will result in no action taken!

The legal tackle is executed at about 2:17 in the vid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTVhckB3juk

I know we've all seen it but just contrast and compare with Manu's

cant really see that one

Artful_Dodger wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:I'm not sure I agree that Ferris was totally innocent. It was a marginal clumsy tackle but after the directives , and the contraversy of the WC it had to be penalised!

It wasn't an illegal tackle in any sense as both of the Welsh players legs didn't even leave the ground, hence the citing panel apologizing to Ferris, deciding not to give him a ban and Wayne Barnes subsequently being demoted from the IRB elite panel.

Your just making it up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RGVswInv3k 5.24 Both Evans feet leave the floor one is above his head, penalty possible yellow. The refs decsion was upheld the citing was not because the refs decision was deemed appropriate.

Any body know what the latest news is about Manu?

well there is abig shock to come on sky sports news for our rugby players!

what is it?? is it manu

oh no its a huge injury blow- who is it

TycroesOsprey wrote:

Artful_Dodger wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:I'm not sure I agree that Ferris was totally innocent. It was a marginal clumsy tackle but after the directives , and the contraversy of the WC it had to be penalised!

It wasn't an illegal tackle in any sense as both of the Welsh players legs didn't even leave the ground, hence the citing panel apologizing to Ferris, deciding not to give him a ban and Wayne Barnes subsequently being demoted from the IRB elite panel.

Your just making it up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RGVswInv3k 5.24 Both Evans feet leave the floor one is above his head, penalty possible yellow. The refs decsion was upheld the citing was not because the refs decision was deemed appropriate.

He has one foot on the ground up until the point that his body hits the ground, so its not a tip tackle as part of him is touching the ground at all times - besides the fact that Barnes gives a yellow for that but not for Tuilagi shows one of two things - either he is a poor and inconsistent ref for yellow carding Ferris but not Tuilagi - or it is accepted that Ferris's wasn't worth a yellow and thats why Tuilagi didn't get a yellow for the same offence. If its not the wrong call then why didn't Barnes yellow Tuilagi and why was he demoted from the elite panel?

The reason why were debating this is down to law/rule/guidance fiddling.

For what it's worth what Manu did was fine in my view, ok so cares body "tipped" but the momentum was sideways. He wasn't drilled.etc

No ban at all, not even a pen.

This is spoiling rugby. Making controversy when there's none

tuilagi's been cleared to tour SA, good news, a bit sus maybe from the disciplinary panel?

he did lift him but not all the way thrpugh the horizontal, there was no driving towards the ground and he didnt let go of him either, correct decision in my eyes.

cheers for the news- good stuff i suppose

HQ matt wrote:tuilagi's been cleared to tour SA, good news, a bit sus maybe from the disciplinary panel?

he did lift him but not all the way thrpugh the horizontal, there was no driving towards the ground and he didnt let go of him either, correct decision in my eyes.

I think it is probably the correct decision but the IRB have once again completely lost the plot with referee's and the rules - some players tip tackles apparently worth 7 weeks whilst others aren't worth anything. This all happened with gouging as well, some players like Attoub getting months out others like Burger getting nothing. How hard can it be to set clear criteria and enforce the rules?

I agree as well that it is very suspect from the disciplinary panel which was presumably English officiating on an English qualified player.

oh gawwd here we go. the conspiracies.. get your tin foil out lads

I think its great, every time a player gets exonerated from a "tip tackle" charge, As more people will realise its an unnecesary law, with ridiculously over the top sanctions, and has very little to do with player safety.

I am in two minds about it to be honest. I am trying to take the fact i am english out of the equation. I just dont know what is worthy of a ban or not, due to the fact he still held him and put him down- therefore he did what he could. But the original tackle still ripped him into the air- so is that enough!!

White card and leave up to the citers to cite and hoping that they evaluate on about how is dangerous or not and remember always that we not playing the tiddle-winkies.

AWOP
yes you are a thousand % correct. these 'tip tackles' are far better dealt with by a white card, it avoids the ridiculous situation where a stupid rugby law can affect a perfectly good game of rugby.If there really is an offence, it can be picked up later.

I make this mind after I considering Wayne Barnes predictament. He make a mess of a few decision. But is not his fault because sometime the tackle look spectacular and so hard to tell "is it legal?" so unless you seeing and make the decision easy (like Warburton predicament) then is best to the citing later. It's too impossible situation to be consistency.

My rule for referee is "nobody hurt, play on, white card" and not make a guess and look like a stupid later.

Why the white card?

Why not go to video ref!

mystiroakey wrote:Why the white card?

Why not go to video ref!

Video ref make enough mistake already! and I get bored of watch the game stop every 30 second in case someone make a tip tackle off the view. Was tired enough when Nigle Owen start always ask the TMO every time there is a kick at goal.

Yeah i know- but i think foul play should be punished, white cards could provide a sinister angle and we could see alot of bad tackles going in with no yellow or red cards, the team on the day wont be affected, squads may be utilised abit more but is that fair

Then is new type of foul - professional one and not about the tackle but about the tacticals. Referee already can give yellow just for tacticals foul so is make his decision by different pathway.

A white card? nooooooo...... Easy option. If the ref thinks its a sending off offence DO it. Surely they have a feel for the intent?

Look, most of these "tip" tackles are due to ref's being paranoid - and now crowds screaming foul play hoping to get a player carded.

None of this was a problem until the world cup

It's funny how a one on one situation Can get you a yellow but trying to snap someone's head off who's trapped in a maul is ignored.

Hopefully this judgement is the start of common sense

mystiroakey wrote:Why the white card?

Why not go to video ref!

my main reluctance to use the video ref in these situations, is because not all footage is available to the Vid/ref duting the course of the game, but would be available later to a citing commissioner. and its often those unbroadcast cameras that hold the trump card footage.

I think the set up is pretty good now. If the ref is sure he can penalise, yellow or red someone if he is not sure he can white card him or the player can be cited by the authorities anyway.

To me (and I have not seen the tackle) the fact that Manu was not further sanctioned means that he has served the correct punishment already.
Move on...

[quote="Artful_Dodger"]

TycroesOsprey wrote:

Artful_Dodger wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:I'm not sure I agree that Ferris was totally innocent. It was a marginal clumsy tackle but after the directives , and the contraversy of the WC it had to be penalised!

It wasn't an illegal tackle in any sense as both of the Welsh players legs didn't even leave the ground, hence the citing panel apologizing to Ferris, deciding not to give him a ban and Wayne Barnes subsequently being demoted from the IRB elite panel.

Your just making it up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RGVswInv3k 5.24 Both Evans feet leave the floor one is above his head, penalty possible yellow. The refs decsion was upheld the citing was not because the refs decision was deemed appropriate.

He has one foot on the ground up until the point that his body hits the ground, so its not a tip tackle as part of him is touching the ground at all times - besides the fact that Barnes gives a yellow for that but not for Tuilagi shows one of two things - either he is a poor and inconsistent ref for yellow carding Ferris but not Tuilagi - or it is accepted that Ferris's wasn't worth a yellow and thats why Tuilagi didn't get a yellow for the same offence. If its not the wrong call then why didn't Barnes yellow Tuilagi and why was he demoted from the elite panel?[/quote

I dont know why Barnes got demoted, but it wasnt because of the Ferris incident which he was backed on. It wouldve been because of the million and one other things he flipped up.
Again hes been partially vindicated in this case, the citing commission believes its not worthy of punishment with a ban which means it was a yellow at worst. Hardly and earth shattering mistake, had they deemed it a red worthy tackle and issued a ban then ( like with the Hayman one Barnes only gave a yellow on) and Barnes had only given a penalty then yeah that would be a stinging criticism.

Barnes was publicly backed by the IRB on the Ferris incident. He was not demoted because of that. having a massive chip on your shoulder about the English wont change that. The conspiracy theory nonsense says it all.


Yes the rules are very grey and yes it does appear they are often applied inconsistently. Thats why I have some sympathy for Barnes that he keeps getting these high profile tips to deal with. "Make a call ref" thats the underlying principle, the ref has to do something. Would a white card have made any difference in this context/ No just a pointless piece of gimmickry. The call was made and explained, and picked up by the citing panel who looked in detail and made their decision.

What more do we want?

Firstly I have to say I do not think it deserved a ban - a yellow card would have been fair.

However it does make a joke of the whole process when Afoa got 4 weeks for doing the same thing.
The cynic in me days if this had been the end of September he would have been banned (no International tours in October )

With respect to the tip tackle the discipline process seems to be toss a coin - Heads he is guilty, Tails he is innocent. If guilty roll a dice to determine the number of weeks for a ban.

The whole system deserves open ridicule and is a total farce

Spoiling the game imv

i dont like inconsitancies at all. sad rugby is a game that has to be judged all the time and clear defined rules dont realy work.

But i dont understand why club bans affect country and vice versa??

does anyone else think it should be seperate?

With respect to the tip tackle the discipline process seems to be toss a coin - Heads he is guilty, Tails he is innocent. If guilty roll a dice to determine the number of weeks for a ban.

It's not just the tip tackle discipline process Geoff.

I agree with that.

Well thats the other problem, a tip tackle can be deemed worthy of anything from a penalty to a year long ban. Theres a huge range of possibilities which gives rise to these accusations, yet in the Warburton case wasnt it stated that referees should have more discretion?
the more discretion and greater the range the more apparent inconsistency where minor variations in action and interpretation by the judges lead to wildly differing sanctions.

You cant win on this.

I'd be happier with either an independent international judicial system or tighter guidence. My experience watching the NRL doesn't fill me with a lot of hope for the other option.

Did Manu tip Danny a tiny bit because his service was so poor?

Portnoy wrote:Did Manu tip Danny a tiny bit because his service was so poor?

No encores then?

I'll leave the stage :shuffles off:

Tip tackles aren't the problem - just a symptom of a wider malaise.

The IRB are under pressure. As players get bigger and more powerful even more injuries are coming in and forcing players out of the game. The same scenario happened in American football leading to the introduction of crash helmets. So the IRB is faced with trying to prevent injuries or allow more body armour protection. Rugby has always been a contact sport so the latter isn't an option as it would cost the game it's unique brand definition.

Tip tackles are hard to fake and are being used as a brand leader by the IRB to get across the message it's not ok to put your opponent in danger. Therein lies the inconsistency. Some panels judge an individual tip tackle on it's subjective merits and generally both players walk away without any injury. Another panel may pay more heed to the objective IRB directive that it is unacceptable in the game and therefore examples have to be made irrespective of the specific misdemeanor.

The IRB will always back their referees over any individual incident - what else can they do? However they often will demote referees to ensure they don't have to repeatedly back the same one!

What's to be done? The white card is a nonsense as referees generally need fewer options rather than more. The ref should decide penalty/yellow/red on the pitch just as he has to do for trips or taking a player out in the air etc. It's off the pitch that the changes should come. Footage from games should be analysed for all incidents of foul play and players collect points until they reach a disciplinary threshold. This will only apply to televised games but then that is the shop window that the IRB want to clean up.

Aukster, thats another good point in all this. id be interested to see the figures on citings/bans normalised against the importance of game and profile of that player. Its an impression we get that incidents in big games with high profile players are far more likely to get cited. I dont know if thats really the case or just a perception

Auckster

Very interesting post. I'd also be interested in seeing how often citings are given for incidents that the commentators didn't pick up on. Seems that it's often just a publicity thing as much as any.

Glad there was no ban, but a little part of me is gutted that we won't see Joseph start...

I'm just a miserable sod really!

No pleasing me sometimes