Why wasn't this a red card?

First topic message reminder :






If not - why on EARTH was it not cited and the thug Irish scumbag banned?

It is a flying headbutt to the neck and head.

Discrageful.

Pete330v2 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Notch wrote: No arm clear out at the breakdown- maybe 1 or 2 weeks max. It was a physical game, these things happen. Slap on the wrist territory.

No.

It's a flying headbutt to the face.

It's a 10 weeker given his previous for dangerous play.

Where exactly is it you have your face? On the top of your rather vacuous head? That's where the 'flying headbutt' lands.
Perhaps you should join the citing panels and arrange hearings for such things as 'caused a nasty bruise' or 'made a man fall over'. Perhaps you should just remain the keyboard warrior that you are.

Kind Regards

Another Irish thug

Scottie, do you really want me to answer that with reference to Chunk-heid?!

TJ wrote:Why does anyone answer this nasty piece of work chunky norwich?  Best ignored

 

Odd post.

GloriousEmpire wrote:If referees correctly policed ruck entry and participation (as I've been banging on about for weeks now) this would be impossible.

Players need to (a) be on their feet. (B) bind to a team mate on entry (c) keep their heads above their hips.

Both players should've been penalised long before the offence.

This, this I agree with 100%.

For me, i was screaming because I thought that Cian may have cost Ireland the game. I have no explanation as to what he was doing but in the red zone he can consider himself very lucky not to have at least received a yellow card.

He doesn't get many cards or ban's but he is definitely getting a bit of a bad reputation for foul play and its only a matter of time before ref's start watching him a little more closely.

The Irish guy was lucky. 9 out of 10 times that's a red, no questions asked, but then again, once in a while, the ref overlooks it.

I sometimes worry about the future of rugby, and if I said that I saw all this coming when the game went professional back in '95, I'd probably be dismissed as an old f**t and you'd probably be right, but I make no apologies for being of the rugby old school.  

I notice that there is a lot of this "give him a red card" mentality creeping in amongst commentators.  In the match between Gloucester and Bath last week, when the referee issued one red card and several (ie: more than three but I lost count) yellow cards, the BT Sport team who covered the match... including one Austin Healey (never a sensible source of objective analysis) said that the referee ruined the match, and yet, during the game he (Healey) played at least four playbacks of incidents where he said the referee should have issued red cards.

Honestly, Austin.... four red cards in a game...?  Are you serious..?   Thirteen a side... that's rugby league and who wants to see that..?

Now.. this is rugby we're talking about here, right..?   A sport where there is never any fighting in the crowd because all the hooligans are on the pitch playing the game.

Now, I would be the first to agree that there are some acts of gratuitous violence taking place in rugby matches these days.  So, tell me what's new..??

A player throws a punch.... puts a shoulder in..... drops the nut on an opponent..... hands up anybody who has actually played this game who has never been on the giving or receiving end of this sort of thing..?   Of course (politically correct statement time)... I do not condone eye gouging or stamping on heads or any other such "beyond the pale" behaviour.

But rugby is hard.  It's visceral and at the risk of sounding like a dinosaur from a bygone age... it should be.   For 80 minutes we thump the holy bejasus out of each other and then we shake hands, clap each other off the pitch and then head for the bar.  That's the true spirit of rugby and I feel it is being slowly but surely lost.

I once played in an inter unit game where two players squared up to each other.  Nobody stepped in to part them and I heard the referee say  "I'll let them fight it out.  Whoever wins, I'll send him off and the loser will probably be carried off.  Then we can get on with the game."  Actually, that's how it turned out.  But in the bar after the match, the two protagonists were the best of mates.  That's rugby.  Or at least, that's how it used to be.

I don't like to hear people trying to get opponents sent off.   Is that the only way you can win the game, fellas..?   By getting the opposition reduced in numbers..?  Is that all you've got..?   How about fronting up instead and beating them regardless of what they do..?  Surely that is more in the noble traditions of the game.

OK... I know I'm going to be called a dinosaur for my opinions, but that's the rugby I grew up with and played for all those years.   I lost teeth, had my nose broken, had dislocations, broken fingers, had more stitches and retired from the game Hors de Combat more times than I can count but I wouldn't trade it for the world, and I wouldn't have wanted to see anybody sent off on my account.  

Whenever an opponent hit me, my response was to look him in the eye and say  "I'll see you at the next ruck, mate."

And I have not one solitary regret about that.

Getting opponents sent off is for the wimps and the faint hearted who think that is the only way they can win the game.

Pathetic.

Chunky Norwich wrote:




If not - why on EARTH was it not cited and the thug Irish scumbag banned?

It is a flying headbutt to the neck and head.

Discrageful.

This is 5 weeks worse than that thug Healy (apparently)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6SnmESy2t4

Maybe if the word IRISH was omitted from the opening sentence of the thread, and had not tarred an entire peoples with the behaviour of Cian Healy, the discussion might have been more technical about the aspects of his play and not polarised by nationhood.

It's summertime, let's leave that stuff for later. The sun is out, the girls on the beach (all legal age, mind) in quite the beach mode, a bit of beer and life is good.