Sam Warburton Red Card

First topic message reminder :

Good call from the ref a definite spear tackle. Has there been a more stupid piece of play this world cup?

Fair red, stupid tackle. Not really a debate form a neutral's point of view but I can understand the Welsh being upset and having to blame something for the defeat.

So if momentum results in a player being tipped (which is VERY possible) and the tackler lets go, that is a red? That doesn't seem right to me at all. If the player still commits to the tackle then he is driving the player into the ground

Then the rule is clearly flawed. It's like carding a player for gouging when somebody's fingers accidentally scrape across somebody else's face.

brennomac wrote:If Dusautoir was the tackler and Shane Williams was the one tackled in the same situation, Welsh fans would legitimately be screaming for a red card for Dusautoir. And the rules and the interpretations of those rules imposed on refs by the IRB mean that Warburton's dump tackle was a red card. OK, he didn't drive Clerc into the ground as St Kevin and the Blessed Tana did to BOD but he did drop him.

Not saying I necessarily agree with the rule, but Rolland was left with little choice - the fact that it was a RWC semi-final is neither here nor there.

i wouldnt, i would have said yellow probably at most and if we would have got a penalty from it then i would have been ok, which is what warburtons should have been at most

For months after the last World Cup final I was convinced that Cueto scored a try. I think it took until about January until I accepted he had a foot in touch.

Yep it's the rules that are wrong and Wales shoul be in the final.......

Knowsit17 wrote:Then the rule is clearly flawed. It's like carding a player for gouging when somebody's fingers accidentally scrape across somebody else's face.

Strange how it's only flawed when your own player is committing the offence. I think some people need to sit back, take a breather and look at it logically.

If you're annoyed you should be annoyed with Warburton for letting you down

Sam W: 'I'm devastated. I thought it was a normal tackle. As soon as I hit him I felt like his body weight took control of what happened'

This just adds to my argument. If Warburton is being honest here then he is saying that momentum is what took control here. How can that be a red card offence? That is seriously flawed.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:Then the rule is clearly flawed. It's like carding a player for gouging when somebody's fingers accidentally scrape across somebody else's face.

Strange how it's only flawed when your own player is committing the offence. I think some people need to sit back, take a breather and look at it logically.

If you're annoyed you should be annoyed with Warburton for letting you down

I'm not a Welsh fan, he isn't my player. It was a terrible decision.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:So if momentum results in a player being tipped (which is VERY possible) and the tackler lets go, that is a red? That doesn't seem right to me at all. If the player still commits to the tackle then he is driving the player into the ground

If you pick someone up you are responsible for bringing him to ground safely. If you tip him past the horizontal you must "untip" him. Failing that you are in trouble. Drop or drive = RC. I have no qualms with the laws, you have to consider that in this case the whole of Clerc's body weight landed on his head, neck and upper shoulders and could have caused serious damage.

ITV showed a few highlights of similar tackles in this tournament, one by fiji against sa which looked worse, and by what has been ruled so far, it was a yellow for me. unfortunately, he showed red. we had enough chances to kick points, we couldnt take them, and for that, we cant blame anyone. after that, my emotions are mixed. sadness, that we had a chance of making the final, but pride in the way wales played, the way they kept till the end.

There was a directive for the 7s this year that dropping a player on their head/upper back would be a straight red every time. Wouldn't be surprised if it was the same for the 15s

Rory_Gallagher wrote:So if momentum results in a player being tipped (which is VERY possible) and the tackler lets go, that is a red? That doesn't seem right to me at all. If the player still commits to the tackle then he is driving the player into the ground

I know rory, it is very easy to tip the player and drop them. However the rules are clear that once you lift a player you have to get them down safely and cannot drop them. The rule probably is flawed but it is there for player safety and it is better to have someone sent off for an unintentional dangerous offence than have someone break their neck.

I feel sorry for Warburton, I really do but under the rules it is 100% a red card.

How can you"untip" someone who weighs 13/14 stone plus? You can't. Not at that speed. No malicious intent, no red card.

It would have been right for Warburton to come out and say I dumped the fella and deserved red, inexperience coming through a little there I think.

Rory he clearly lifted him and turned him. He might have left go but at that height the player was upside down and in danger. He actually did the same to O'Gara in the qf but got lucky because Charteris landed the tackled player .

The law is fairly clear .

It's as if Heath and Safety had fined Jesus for walking on water.

Hope he is not banned for the 3rd place play off

jay_welsh wrote:ITV showed a few highlights of similar tackles in this tournament, one by fiji against sa which looked worse, and by what has been ruled so far, it was a yellow for me. unfortunately, he showed red. we had enough chances to kick points, we couldnt take them, and for that, we cant blame anyone. after that, my emotions are mixed. sadness, that we had a chance of making the final, but pride in the way wales played, the way they kept till the end.

Roman Poite refereed that game and he hasn't been given the whistle in any of the knock-out matches yet.

Poite was wrong with that tackle and his sanction. Rolland was right with this one.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:It was a terrible decision.

Why? People have pointed out that the decision was completely consistent with the current laws and directives. You could say "they are terrible laws and directives" but you can't blame the ref or the decision.

HammerofThunor wrote:There was a directive for the 7s this year that dropping a player on their head/upper back would be a straight red every time. Wouldn't be surprised if it was the same for the 15s

Actually was the exact same Thunor. Can't blame Rolland for applying the laws as he's been directly instructed to do so.

Well, as much as I disagree about the rule, it has happened and Warburton was given a red, and if that is the law then players will have to be more careful. Doesn't mean I agree but the law is the law. It is just a shame for Warburton, Wales, and their fans.

If a French player had done that to Williams never in my wildest dreams would I have thought he would have had a red card.
We all know what a spear tackle is and we also know what a accidental tackle is and I would have classed that as being accidental.

If all the neutrals were honest with themselves you would also feel you were hard done by.

In 2009 and earlier this year coincidentally, Byrne got taken out in the air against Scotland. I don't see how that's any less dangerous than "dropping" a player, in fact it could be more dangerous as it's from possibly a greater height and the fouled player can equally end up in any awkward position.

On neither of those occasions did the offender recieve a red card by my recollection.

JDizzle wrote:How can you"untip" someone who weighs 13/14 stone plus? You can't. Not at that speed.

If you can't untip someone (I agree it is near impossible) then don't tip them!

JDizzle wrote: No malicious intent, no red card.

See the directive. Referees are advised NOT to consider intent.

Cymroglan wrote:If a French player had done that to Williams never in my wildest dreams would I have thought he would have had a red card.
We all know what a spear tackle is and we also know what a accidental tackle is and I would have classed that as being accidental.

If all the neutrals were honest with themselves you would also feel you were hard done by.

I would feel hard done by, but I would be wrong.

All week I have said this was the worst ref we could have got.

He always referees Wales with one eye open. I hope I never see him reffing us again and the WRU should refuse to have him.

The sending off was a disgraceful decision. And for all the keyboard warriors, when Pienaar, Dayglo and M Williams, all former international captains, 2 of them World Cup winners say it was a disgraceful decision then I think they know a bit more about it than the people on this board.

All this world cup there have been tackles like that that have at most got a yellow card, and most of them were worse than this. If this was ared card then referees in this tournament have missed about 20 of them.


Having said that we still could have won the game even with 14 against 16.

For some reason we played the tactics we were playing last year when we weren't winning anything.

I can understand why Welsh fans are frustrated but you need to vent it at the IRB not Rolland. When you read and understand the rules Rolland has no option.

If he had of shown yellow then it would have been a citing.

It's instructive to see the reaction of players from neutral countries (eg see the BBC website).

btw it is not correct to say Roland didn't have an option, it would be correct (if the rule was breached) that he DID have the option. He had a judgment to exercise. That's why all the (neutral) players that have commented are saying it's wrong.

doctornickolas wrote:The sending off was a disgraceful decision. And for all the keyboard warriors, when Pienaar, Dayglo and M Williams, all former international captains, 2 of them World Cup winners say it was a disgraceful decision then I think they know a bit more about it than the people on this board.

None of them are referees. Clearly none of them have read the IRB directive from 2009.

One thing I will add, if the actual players are saying that they believe it was not a red card offence and a ridiculous decision, maybe they actually know the game better than any of us spectators, as well as the risks that come with it.

As spectators we can debate and say it was a fair/harsh decision, but if the players think it is ridiculous then maybe they don't actually believe there would have been any injury from such a tackle, and they maybe have been on the receiving end of such tackles themselves. I would listen to them as they actually play the game.

Dry your eyes.

Bitter Beer wrote:Dry your eyes.

Original

Rory_Gallagher wrote:One thing I will add, if the actual players are saying that they believe it was not a red card offence and a ridiculous decision, maybe they actually know the game better than any of us spectators, as well as the risks that come with it.

As spectators we can debate and say it was a fair/harsh decision, but if the players think it is ridiculous then maybe they don't actually believe there would have been any injury from such a tackle, and they maybe have been on the receiving end of such tackles themselves. I would listen to them as they actually play the game.

I play the game. Maybe not at International level, but to suggest I don't know the rules because I am an average player is very insulting to me.

I'll also wager I've played more games this season than Dallaglio, Pienaar and Williams put together.

You can listen to them regarding future changes but it doesn't change the current guidelines.

Also I have no doubt that if it was the other way round and the card wasn't given they would have saying the decision was wrong and Wales would have won if it had been given. I really don't care what their pundits say. Remember these are the same ones talking about England all the time

But they are used to the rules being applied to them week in, week out and know also what it is like from the position of those involved.

I think it's becoming clear that Rolland made the correct decision according to the directives about how he should apply the laws.

But it's dreadful when the first time this particular law is properly applied is in the semifinal when as far as I can recall no other side has been sanctioned like this up to now. Don't just start applying laws half way through the competition!

I know if it had happened to England I'd feel gutted. But in the end Wales had their chance to go ahead with a drop goal 8mins out, and who knows what might have been?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:One thing I will add, if the actual players are saying that they believe it was not a red card offence and a ridiculous decision, maybe they actually know the game better than any of us spectators, as well as the risks that come with it.

As spectators we can debate and say it was a fair/harsh decision, but if the players think it is ridiculous then maybe they don't actually believe there would have been any injury from such a tackle, and they maybe have been on the receiving end of such tackles themselves. I would listen to them as they actually play the game.

Actually the current players have not queried it, only ex-players. The rules are 100% clear.

Don't the rules say "start at a red card and work backwards"? No idea what this means.

The player is lifted and then forced or “speared” into the ground. A red card
should be issued for this type of tackle.

The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the
player’s safety. A red card should be issued for this type of tackle.

For all other types of dangerous lifting tackles, it may be considered a penalty
or yellow card is sufficient.
Referees and Citing Commissioners should not make their decisions based on what
they consider was the intention of the offending player. Their decision should be based
on an objective assessment (as per Law 10.4 (e)) of the circumstances of the tackle.

These are the laws per the latest directive and they are self-contradicting as they say red card for dropping from a height with no regard for a players safety. But Sam let go clearly WITH a regard for the players safety....so yellow or just a penalty. Even though the directive then mentions objectivity.....but to gauge an intention will always be SUBJECTIVE on the part of the Ref.

"Actually the current players have not queried it, only ex-players."

I hadn't realised the likes of Foden had retired. Shame, he was a super player.

roddersm Let's have the same rules for everybody then.

robbo277 wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:One thing I will add, if the actual players are saying that they believe it was not a red card offence and a ridiculous decision, maybe they actually know the game better than any of us spectators, as well as the risks that come with it.

As spectators we can debate and say it was a fair/harsh decision, but if the players think it is ridiculous then maybe they don't actually believe there would have been any injury from such a tackle, and they maybe have been on the receiving end of such tackles themselves. I would listen to them as they actually play the game.

I play the game. Maybe not at International level, but to suggest I don't know the rules because I am an average player is very insulting to me.

I'll also wager I've played more games this season than Dallaglio, Pienaar and Williams put together.

And where did I suggest such a thing robbo? I didn't. And rodders Sam has spoken about the tackle.

Yup Warburton showed so much regard for Clerc's safety that he dropped him on his head. Sorry guys, by law it was a RC.

lauriehow wrote:The player is lifted and then forced or “speared” into the ground. A red card
should be issued for this type of tackle.

The lifted player is dropped to the ground from a height with no regard to the
player’s safety. A red card should be issued for this type of tackle.

For all other types of dangerous lifting tackles, it may be considered a penalty
or yellow card is sufficient.
Referees and Citing Commissioners should not make their decisions based on what
they consider was the intention of the offending player. Their decision should be based
on an objective assessment (as per Law 10.4 (e)) of the circumstances of the tackle.

These are the laws per the latest directive and they are self-contradicting as they say red card for dropping from a height with no regard for a players safety. But Sam let go clearly WITH a regard for the players safety....so yellow or just a penalty. Even though the directive then mentions objectivity.....but to gauge an intention will always be SUBJECTIVE on the part of the Ref.

Have you got a link? Wouldn't mind reading the whole thing and can't find it online

Cymroglan wrote:roddersm Let's have the same rules for everybody then.

I agree. However I think I'm right in saying that the other tackles that led to yellow cards ended up in citings and bans. There is no way that Warburton deserved anything other than red under the current directives.

To Hammer:

See here for a link:
http://www.deepsouthrugbyunion.com/images/IRB_Memorandum_re_Dangerous_Tackles.pdf

Did he cost Wales the game?

Or did Wales actualy colapse when Warbaton was sent off?

Just seen the news and alot of Welsh fans have been saying that Wales was playing 16 against 14.

So do you think that Rowland was more on the French side than the Welsh side?.

Or is this simply sour grapes from very upset welsh fans?

You've got to question Gatland's choice of words post match, implying that the ref should not have penalised Warburton because for some reason, because it was a SF, Rolland wasn't supposed to spoil the spectacle by applying the laws of the game...

And would somebody like to explain to me what the difference is between a spear tackle and an accidental spear tackle?

One thing I will add, if the actual players are saying that they believe it was not a red card offence and a ridiculous decision, maybe they actually know the game better than any of us spectators, as well as the risks that come with it.

I play the game, I've got a fixture later this afternoon. And if anyone picks me up, tips me up and lets me drop to the ground I'll expect them to be sent off.

Dallaglio's arguments seemed to centre around the idea that "it's a World Cup semi-final" and if a yellow card was given he could be cited later (which is ridiculous). Pienaar at least spoke some sense, but he hasn't played the game in over 10 years. The rules have changed.

What can he do once Clerc's legs got over his head?! You can't stop then. From that situation it is always going to look bad, but he didn't drive him into the ground and that is all he could do after he had got him up there. (note: obviously he should never have got Clerc up in the first place)