Weekend citings

During the Treviso-Leicester game, Alain Rolland, the ref I have frequently criticised of a showboater who makes important, controversial decisions to puff up his inflated ego, awarded a penalty try from twelve metres out.

Quite rightly too. Salvi's cynical entry was one of the most blatant pieces of cheating you could witness on a rugby pitch
However as well as a PT, Rolland should have issued Salvi a yellow card.

And in my opinion, such acts of gross cynicism should merit a ban from the citing commissioners under (in this case law 11 http://www.irblaws.com/downloads/EN/Law_11_EN.pdf)

The big castres guy who stamped on Low (I think) could miss a good few weeks

Plus SOB, hell be attentive his mobile. And lucky imo to see any game time before the New Year.

What didnhe do grey. Missed 90% of the Leinster game

Standulstermen wrote:What didnhe do grey. Missed 90% of the Leinster game

O'Brien's early and dangerous tackle on Sivivatu earned him a yellow card. Leinster's day darkened further as Parra nailed the penalty for 22-9.

http://www.espnscrum.com/heineken-cup-2012-13/rugby/story/174612.html

The Salvi infringement should not have been a penalty a try but a yellow card. A penalty try cannot be given from 12 metres out as it is too far away for the ref to have a definitive view that it impeded a score. Unless you are going to use a penalty try to stop blatant foul play (which I wouldnt agree with) you cannot vindicate that decision. He should have got a yellow instead.

So what you are implying MBC is that so long as cynical play (contrary to Law 10) should be condoned without further sanction.

Some teams appear to use specific tactics to gain cynical advantage routinely.

Maybe the citings committee would be better armed if routine acts of cynicism were noted and sides' coaches and referees were notified in advance for pre-match reference. (e.g. Mujati's suspect bind or Ulster's retreating defenders impeding opposition runners with outstretched arms)

That way the next game might automatically start with an implicit warning and not a clean sheet once again.

So what you are implying MBC is that so long as cynical play (contrary to Law 10) should be condoned without further sanction.

A yellow card is punishment. A second indiscretion would equal a red and an automatic citing. Ashton was also pulled before the citing committee and banned for receiving three yellow cards for the same offence.

If you're going to ban players for pulling down mauls then the citing committees will be seeing and extra dozern or two players a week.

Should have been a yellow as it was what we've come to call a professional foul, much like a deliberate knock on in the 22 instead of an intercept.

Penalty try was an odd call, I suppose he can justify it but he'd better be ready to make the same call a lot more often now or else his bosses should be asking why he thought it was correct this time.

The amount of times we see a 5m lineout turn in to a maul and then a penalty with no other sanction makes the call even more...odd.

If it was a couple of metres out then I could see it Yappy but this was over 10m out and just smacked of Rolland making a scene. I very much doubt he'll make a similar decision anytime soon.

I've thought for some time that egregious and cynical in the extreme acts of foul play should result in extreme and exemplary consequences.

As it happens I was sitting on my hands waiting for an example from my own team to commit one lest I get accused of bias. Salvi's case just fits my profile.

Honestly iof he thought it was worthy of a penalty try whow couldnt he have deemed it worthy of a yellow card? Its just odd.

Re citings when do ERC publish the actual citings.

I havn't seen the incident but was one player the problem or was it the whole front row?

I mean, was there an identifiable culprit at whom a card could be waved?

Would like to see a reply of the Treviso penalty try again, cause it looked an awful lot closer than 12m out to me.

Standulstermen wrote:The big castres guy who stamped on Low (I think) could miss a good few weeks

That was SERIOUSLY nasty stuff.

It's a rolling maul from a lineout that had effectively splintered away at the 22 surged forward unopposed for about 5m when Salvi came in the side and pulled it down.

Thanks Sam.

I had got the impression it was from a scrum.

And last week the ERC announced the citings on the Monday evening but it was reesonably late on if I remember right.

Was it Diame or something that Castre guy was called? That was awful, thuggery. It was strange he gave a penalty try to Leicester with it so far away from the line should have been a yellow card though.

The try was for Treviso.Leicester penalty try came after repeated infringements at the scrum 5m out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFla9XDoae0

Salvi fouls at around 33:15, penalty try is incredibly harsh, i would have given a penalty + yellow instead.

I'm hoping Diarra's stamping will be severely punished and that it will be in months not weeks.

oh ok i guess I wasn't paying enough attention at the time and cant find it now to see how I have got it wrong. I apologise.

I can understand why the penalty try. the maul was trotting forward and the opposing forwards were scattered with little chance to get back. I would have been almost impossible to stop the maul legally.

Did the foul stop a certain try? certainly stopped an almost certain one adn I think justice was done

Salvi fouls at around 33:15, penalty try is incredibly harsh, i would have given a penalty + yellow instead.

I was expecting a YC and a penalty at the time. In fact I like to see yellow cards in those situations as cynically dragging down mauls is annoying. Can't see how it was going to be a definite try, especially given the conditions so penalty try is a bit bemusing. I'll be expecting the same for Tigers when we next have a rolling maul pulled down in the opposition 22.

I realise now there was that much area behind the try I got confused bless me lol

Just looked at that youtube clip - its almost down to the 5 m line whan he collapses it , its trotting forward almost at a run, almost no players in a position to stop the maul. maul well organised. Harsh but not outrageous and justice done.

I hater to see cynical fouls stopping scoring

Certainly a lot of momentum but saying it's almost to the 5m line isn't quite true- more than the distance away from it again so at least 10m from the try line. Probably fair call for pen try

I think greytiger should be cited for being such a whinger...

formerly known as Sam wrote:It's a rolling maul from a lineout that had effectively splintered away at the 22 surged forward unopposed for about 5m when Salvi came in the side and pulled it down.

Look at the vid again - it makes it nearly to the 5 m line when its hauled down - certainly well more than 5 m forward

I just looked at the clip and they are about 10m out when the offside occurs, no?

Plus, was there not a Treviso player who joined from an offside position too just before?

No citing for this. A deliberate high shot to the head from behind. Rugby is so corrupt these days it's untrue

Spoiler:

I'd not seen the O'Brien incident before.

Nasty cheap shot.

MrsP wrote:I just looked at the clip and they are about 10m out when the offside occurs, no?

yes - and anther couple of m forward when the maul is collapsed, Under 10 m from the line maybe? depends where you measure from I guess

From where the penalty was given, 12m out, would be the obvious place to measure from

However depth perception is difficult when looking from one eye

Well, unless you are watching in 3D we are all looking at it one eyed on TV, no?

Has to be said that the 12m attribution comes from the ESPN report. I think that 10m is about right. I still thing that the level of cynicism is totally unacceptable though and merits a more than a standard penalty.

And in my case in poor quality as well - it looks on thsat youtube clip to be only 2 0r 3 m from the 5 m line to me - but very hard to be sure

Well, there you go.

http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/news/20037.php

The incident against Lowe has been cited. Hearing tomorrow.

Expect them to go in at the Low end on that one

Chunky Norwich wrote:No citing for this. A deliberate high shot to the head from behind. Rugby is so corrupt these days it's untrue

Spoiler:

Jog on dear boy the shoulder isn't high.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:No citing for this. A deliberate high shot to the head from behind. Rugby is so corrupt these days it's untrue

Spoiler:

Jog on dear boy the shoulder isn't high.

Actually does look like hes trying to hook him back there.

That high hit should have been a penalty, maybe a yellow. Not a red so no citing.

It's a swinging arm way before the ball and it's in the face, not shoulder.

I think O'Brien is a lucky guy there.

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:It's a swinging arm way before the ball and it's in the face, not shoulder.

I think O'Brien is a lucky guy there.

Is it a red card offense tho? otherwise it cannot be cited

MrsP wrote:Well, unless you are watching in 3D we are all looking at it one eyed on TV, no?

Well heres a much m ore balanced statement from a neutral eye witness

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/amazed-Treviso-penalty-try-ndash-Leicester-Tigers/story-17602387-detail/story.html



Strikes me as a bullshine crusade by the Irish to drive Tigers out of the Heniken Cup

TJ wrote:

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:It's a swinging arm way before the ball and it's in the face, not shoulder.

I think O'Brien is a lucky guy there.

Is it a red card offense tho? otherwise it cannot be cited

It's borderline, but there's certainly intent there to hit him before the ball gets there so technically it's not a tackle but foul/dangerous play (off the ball). Given how close Barnes was to the incident it shouldn't need the citing team to look at it. Red during the game or not.

Do you think the press will ever stop describing the decision to give a red card for a red card offence as "controversial"?

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:It's a swinging arm way before the ball and it's in the face, not shoulder.

I think O'Brien is a lucky guy there.

You're completely and utterly wrong
Post 2162 in this thread shows it clearly is a shoulder high tackle and never touches his face,early tackle and dealt with correctly by the ref at the time.


http://www.munsterfans.com/threads/31627-Leinster-2012-2013/page73?p=1154353#post1154353

That's the same clip. It's not the shoulder, it's a swinging arm in the face off the ball.