Are England the kings of legal cheap shots?

First topic message reminder :

Courtney Lawes tackle on Jules Plisson was a disgrace in my opinion because Lawes' sole intention was to blindside France's outhalf and injure him.

I cannot believe that you can take a guy out in the air completely by accident and get a red card ala Payne v Sarries and yet smashing a guy with such unnecessary force that he gets whiplash and lands on his head is deemed ok.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-3013551/If-Courtney-Lawes-tackle-Jules-Plisson-legal-explains-parents-discouraging-children-play-rugby.html

Hard tackles are fine but what Lawes did to Plisson was a cheap shot and I see no reason to blindside a player like that.

Similarly I believe that Cole intentionally headbutted Healy when Healy put in a poor tackle on him in the Ireland game.

Are legal cheapshots ok?

Are England the reigning cheap shot champions?

It's nice to acknowledge the prejudice. It's the 1st step to get over it.

The Saint wrote:

fa0019 wrote:How many bans has Lawes had? How many cards? From a quick net search I have only ever found 1 instance which was a 2 game ban during the RWC. I don't think he's ever been sent off.

In comparison I see Sam Warburton has been banned for 3 weeks and sent off in his career.

Why has courtney lawes got a naughty reputation?

You sure it was 3 weeks?

Simple web search would suffice Saint.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's nice to acknowledge the prejudice. It's the 1st step to get over it.

I think prejudice is a little strong, don't you think ? It has nothing to do with his nationality, colour, religion, so could we please try using a different word ?

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It's nice to acknowledge the prejudice. It's the 1st step to get over it.

I think prejudice is a little strong, don't you think ? It has nothing to do with his nationality, colour, religion, so could we please try using a different word ?

No. As you said you're now prejudiced against him due to what's gone before.

'If it were anybody else making that tackle we would not be having this debate on here, it's just that Lawes has given himself a bit of a naughty reputation, being the cynic I am, I am going to say that Lawes wanted to hurt him/shake him up, in slow motion it looks bad, but you can understand why nothing has come of it, because when I replace Lawes in my imagination with another player you think ah well, it's a mans game, as soon as you see Lawes doing it, you immediately think it's dirty. He only has himself to blame for people taking that mind set though.'

You admit it yourself. I'm not bringing nationality, colour religion into it; but you are prejudiced against him.

LD, did you ever reply to my query as to why you described Dan Cole as a total tool?

No 7&1/2 wrote:You admit it yourself. I'm not bringing nationality, colour religion into it; but you are prejudiced against him..

I think you might want to go and check what the word means. I am cynical towards him, suspicous towards him even, but not prejudiced. I SUSPECT, that he wanted to hurt Plisson to live up to the tag of being an enforcer, that he has been given by the fans and media alike.

LondonTiger wrote:LD, did you ever reply to my query as to why you described Dan Cole as a total tool?

Was thinking of the wrong player sorry, for some reason I was picturing Dylan Hartley in my head.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:You admit it yourself. I'm not bringing nationality, colour religion into it; but you are prejudiced against him..

I think you might want to go and check what the word means. I am cynical towards him, suspicous towards him even, but not prejudiced. I SUSPECT, that he wanted to hurt Plisson to live up to the tag of being an enforcer, that he has been given by the fans and media alike.

I apologise then, as long as you don't have a preconceived opinion of him which you are using to judge this situation you're clearly not prejudiced.

I can not believe this thread is still going.

I only hope the fools arguing against Lawes and that tackle haven't actually read the article, as I can't believe that they'd want to be anywere near such a sh*t piece of journalism.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I apologise then, as long as you don't have a preconceived opinion of him which you are using to judge this situation you're clearly not prejudiced

No Probs.

What is his reputation by the way? Big hits?

No 7&1/2 wrote:What is his reputation by the way? Big hits?

Yes, that is how I see it.

fa0019 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So what you're saying is the tackle is fine but you're prejudiced against Lawes.

Yes, because I think he looks to hurt people, he has got previous for it.

If he looked to hurt people he would have had more than a sole ban given he's been a pro rugby player for 8 years.

Maybe you dislike him but his record is near as clean as anyone's.

For 8 years, close to 200 games for club and country and only 2 weeks being banned given he's a lock is vying on "Saint" territory.

You mean he hates everybody equally?

Fair enough, there are a few players who go for them. A few in and around the Welsh team as well. I always try to judge the situation though. As you say the tackle is fine but when we start to err against players and not others it leads to an imbalance.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Fair enough, there are a few players who go for them. A few in and around the Welsh team as well. I always try to judge the situation though. As you say the tackle is fine but when we start to err against players and not others it leads to an imbalance.

Richard Hibbard does it, although I have never seen anyone call him an enforcer, but I do think he tries to rough people up or hurt them.

LordDowlais wrote:Richard Hibbard does it, although I have never seen anyone call him an enforcer, but I do think he tries to rough people up or hurt them.

Was it Hibbard who clashed with George Smith on the Lions tour?

Yup. Don't see anything wrong with making yourself known to the opposition. I said earlier in the thread players will take the chance to put in the hit. Ben Youngs did a fantastic one on Roberts this 6Ns, nothing said then.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yup. Don't see anything wrong with making yourself known to the opposition. I said earlier in the thread players will take the chance to put in the hit. Ben Youngs did a fantastic one on Roberts this 6Ns, nothing said then.

And that proves what I said earlier, it is all down to the person doing the hitting.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yup. Don't see anything wrong with making yourself known to the opposition. I said earlier in the thread players will take the chance to put in the hit. Ben Youngs did a fantastic one on Roberts this 6Ns, nothing said then.

Ansthat proves what I said earlier, it is all down to the person doing the hitting.

That sounds like prejudice to me

So will Ben Youngs now be tarnished along with Lawes and Hibbard LD? And also why do you think big hits are dirty?

I think it was a deliberate cheap shot and attempt to injure. Lawes intended to do damage adn could have done real nasty damage. However it was not an illegal tackle under the laws of the game. Maybe the laws should be changed. Untill they are then its no foul

I think he saw the opportunity to hit him hard, chance at a turnover and rattle him. Not sure how you would change the laws to ensure that you're only tackling players to bring them down and not putting too much 'power' for want of a better word into it.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So will Ben Youngs now be tarnished along with Lawes and Hibbard LD? And also why do you think big hits are dirty?

I do not think big hits are dirty, I have never said that, I like a big hit as much as the next person, as long as it is not me being hit. I just think, that unfortunately, because the fans and the media like to make an image of Lawes being an enforcer, he feels he needs to live up to that mantle, I also think that the tackle in the clip provided was ok, it's just that because it was Lawes it has been blown up out of proportion, like you said earlier, nothing was said about Ben Youngs, that was not brought up, why, because he is not Courtney Lawes that's why, Ben Youngs has not forged a reputation for big hits.

Look, it's the same when Samoa and Tonga and Fiji come to town, everybody is waiting for their physicality, why, because we build them up for it, it does not mean they are not nice, or dirty players, you just feel every time you see a player from Samoa go for a tackle you expect to feel it yourself. I know, it's unfair, but that's the reputation they have got, and when they are late, even a fraction, everybody is up in arms about it, its their game, that's how they play, they will miss as many tackles as they make, but if that is the way they want to play, then they should except this type of debate about it as well.

So Lawes, and the samoans, Hibbard etc look dirty because they like the big hit and go for it when presented with it. Youngs if he started doing it regularly would move to the looking dirty category?

No 7&1/2 wrote:So Lawes, and the samoans, Hibbard etc look dirty because they like the big hit and go for it when presented with it. Youngs if he started doing it regularly would move to the looking dirty category?

You live and die by the sword, if that is how you want to play, thats fine, but you had better make sure that you are right with your tackles, because you will be up for scrutiny if you don't, a few miss timed tackles could see you targeted by the refs for future games, and I would not say they look dirty, I would not say they are dirty either, but they have a reputation for big hits so they need to do it right, as everybody is waiting for them with open eyes, just waiting for the SMASH. I do not think Ben Youngs comes under that catagory just yet.

Ha. It's coming down to the size of the guy doing it and who he's doing it to? You did say that if you see Lawes do it you immediately think it's dirty. You can't have a different set of rules for the size of the player though.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ha. It's coming down to the size of the guy doing it and who he's doing it to? You did say that if you see Lawes do it you immediately think it's dirty. You can't have  a different set of rules for the size of the player though.

I do not automaticaly think it is dirty, if I have come across as saying that I apologise, size does not matter either, but lets be honest when have we seen a Shane Williams type player forge a reputation as a big hitter ? I do not think I have said anything about a players size though either so I do not know what angle you are trying to come from, what I am saying is, BECAUSE it is Lawes, it is being blown out of proportion, because some of the English fans and certain parts of the media have giving him the mantle of being an enforcer.

Ah that was my bug bear LD, fair enough, I've got the wrong end of the stick in what you were saying.

' because when I replace Lawes in my imagination with another player you think ah well, it's a mans game, as soon as you see Lawes doing it, you immediately think it's dirty.'

The size issue is brought up in the original article. Kind of fits with people ignoring the big hit by Youngs on Roberts which is more comical then Lawes on Plisson. To me though you accpet one you should accept both.

No 7&1/2 wrote:To me though you accpet one you should accept both..

I agree, it's just the ones who are known for it will be more in the spotlight than others.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think he saw the opportunity to hit him hard, chance at a turnover and rattle him. Not sure how you would change the laws to ensure that you're only tackling players to bring them down and not putting too much 'power' for want of a better word into it.

Indeed. I can see no way of making the laws work like that unless you bring "unnecessary roughness" like in NFL - and then its a judgement call by the ref

TJ wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think he saw the opportunity to hit him hard, chance at a turnover and rattle him. Not sure how you would change the laws to ensure that you're only tackling players to bring them down and not putting too much 'power' for want of a better word into it.

Indeed.  I can see no way of making the laws work like that unless you bring "unnecessary roughness" like in NFL - and then its a judgement call by the ref

And we have to many judgment calls for the red to make as it is.

nathan wrote:

TJ wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think he saw the opportunity to hit him hard, chance at a turnover and rattle him. Not sure how you would change the laws to ensure that you're only tackling players to bring them down and not putting too much 'power' for want of a better word into it.

Indeed.  I can see no way of making the laws work like that unless you bring "unnecessary roughness" like in NFL - and then its a judgement call by the ref

And we have to many judgment calls for the red to make as it is.

indeed