The danger of jumping

by clivemcl Sun Apr 06, 2014 12:27 am

Lets leave the match thread and talk about this particular scenario by itself.

Here's my take on it.

In days gone by, everybody stayed on the ground to catch balls.

Then one day somebody decided to jump to make catches - here's the benefits.

- You get the ball before the opposition player who is still on the ground
- (and this came later) IF they tackle you, they are penalised.

So, the tackle in the air rule was created because obviously it can lead to very serious injury.

But, why didn't they just outlaw jumping instead? Does that sound boring? Maybe, but its safe. We still aren't allowed to jump tackles as far as I know - for similar reasons.

The chasing team - will want to run as fast as they can to challange for the kicked ball. Whilst running fast, they need to both watch the ball, and keep an eye on who they will be challenging for the ball.
The defending team - doesn't have to run too fast, more time, and the protection of the rules if they are in the air.

What's the problem?

If the defending team player does not jump, and the attacking player does - we get boots, hip, knees in the face.
If the attacking player does not jump, but the defender does - the defender gets taken out by the other players upper body.

In this particular case, I simply cannot see why Jared Payne who is running full tilt in order to get underneath the ball can be expected to be responsible for a player who left the ground when he was only meters away.

a) he does not HAVE TO jump
b) he did not have enough time to react
c) he didn't see Goode had jumped anyway
d) he was completely focused on catching a ball
e) a player MUST accept the risk involved if they jump into the air in a contact sport

Ultimately, what's the message? What does the IRB want to say to players in these situations?

a) don't try to get under a ball?
b) ALWAYS jump, the other guy probably will
c) don't run so fast when you are chasing kicks

A few other ponderings -
a) if Payne had got injured, would he still have seen red
b) If Goode hadn't been injured would he have seen red

Discuss

by VinceWLB Sun Apr 06, 2014 12:43 am

I think a player take a risk when jumping to get the ball and it should be assumed, and the injury if there is shouldn't have a bearing on the sanction which sadly has today.
Payne mis read the landing of the ball, that was his only fault.

Nobody would have complained has it been a yellow, not even Saracens fans.

by **BigGee** Sun Apr 06, 2014 12:54 am

The IRB just needs to say what it already does. Don't take people out when they are in the air! It is very dangerous, I wonder how this debate would be going now if Goode had broken his neck when he fell. Do you think that so many people would be seeing Payne as the victim then?

I don't think Payne meant to do that but the onus to compete for the ball or to pull out of the challenge was always going to be on him, just to say that he was running flat out and could not help it does not wash.

I was watching the game as a neutral and knew as soon as he did it that he was in trouble, as did he and everyone else in the ground judging by their faces when the camera panned at them. It was always going to be a card and a red was no surprise, they have been given for a lot less.

My wife who was watching with me and is not really a rugby fan, thought a life ban would have been appropriate. She was horrified!

by **profitius** Sun Apr 06, 2014 12:54 am

Good post, Clive. I was thinking of starting a similar thread because its a real grey area in rugby.

Not jumping would be my preferred choice but thinking more about it, would it be realistic. What if a player leaves the ground by an inch?
Also if no jumping was brought in, would that be a disadvantage for smaller players? If thats the case we might see even more bigger players.

Theres another area that needs serious reviewing. Thats jumping and leading with the knee or boot. Folau does this often and I've seen him clobber players including his own team mates.

Maybe make a rule where only the chaser can jump?? That would mean both teams at least know what to expect. It could lead to more kicking however...

by Rory_Gallagher Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:14 am

BigGee wrote:The IRB just needs to say what it already does. Don't take people out when they are in the air! It is very dangerous, I wonder how this debate would be going now if Goode had broken his neck when he fell. Do you think that so many people would be seeing Payne as the victim then?

I don't think Payne meant to do that but the onus to compete for the ball or to pull out of the challenge was always going to be on him, just to say that he was running flat out and could not help it does not wash.

I was watching the game as a neutral and knew as soon as he did it that he was in trouble, as did he and everyone else in the ground judging by their faces when the camera panned at them. It was always going to be a card and a red was no surprise, they have been given for a lot less.

My wife who was watching with me and is not really a rugby fan, thought a life ban would have been appropriate. She was horrified!

So by the same argument, if a player is completely legally tackled, and breaks his neck, the player deserves a life time ban? Or if a player is trampled and badly injured in a maul if he falls, the players should all be banned despite playing to the rules of the game?

See the logic in that? You can get severely hurt even through legal play. Payne had his eyes on the ball, mistimed it, and even got whiplash himself in the collision. He led with the head, it is clear to everyone he was not trying to take the man out. It was clumsy, and totally misjudged, and dangerous and deserved a penalty. But it was not enough to warrant a red card. If it is, give up on rugby. We are going to see much more frequent red cards for accidents and collisions. Yay, can't wait for that. Rolling Eyes

by Jhamer25 Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:56 am

Personally it don;t think it was a red. Payne has a good record and isn't that type of player. It was a yellow because it was a bit reckless but was not intentional.

by The Great Aukster Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:02 am

BigGee wrote:The IRB just needs to say what it already does. Don't take people out when they are in the air! It is very dangerous, I wonder how this debate would be going now if Goode had broken his neck when he fell. Do you think that so many people would be seeing Payne as the victim then

...and if Payne broke his neck in the collision?

The only logical conclusion from a health and Safety point of view is for the IRB to ban all aerial activity - including lineouts.

by Pot Hale Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:50 am

Interesting article for discussion. Have been thinking about the incident and reading responses from elsewhere about it. Some see the red card as being totally deserved, others saying that yellow would have been more appropriate.

It does look like Payne was totally focussed on the ball and catching it - after all his own player had kicked it up in the air for that very purpose.

Some commenters say that it was reckless by Payne and he should have known what he was doing.

Would it be fair to say that Goode should have been doing the same thing?

Let's suppose for a moment, that Goode had not been hurt, but was able to get up afterwards and dust himself down. Would the card have still been warranted? Or let's say that it was Payne who had been injured instead?

As someone pointed out already, his head whiplashed back when he and Goode cannoned into each other. The replays make it look like Payne ran into Goode, but in actuality they ran into each other in going for the ball, and because Goode jumped, it left him in more danger from the collision. But not absolutely so. Payne could just as easily have been injured or received a neck injury from the collision.

If that had been the case, would Goode have been at fault? Would it be seen as him not having taken due care in jumping for the ball and being aware of another player competing for it? Or do the rules say that it is only the player jumping in the air who needs to be protected, and not the player who is on the ground?

by **Rugby Fan** Sun Apr 06, 2014 3:51 am

Definitely a subject worth discussing, although the idea of not jumping to catch a ball seems like a non starter. It's hardly a new part of the game. Players have always jumped to try and contest a kick-off or short drop-out. Leaving the ground to take an up-and-under is no recent innovation.

I have a problem with the claim Payne had no idea any opposition player was there. If he thought he had a clean catch, you would have seen him try and take the ball, but he didn't. Regardless of when he did actually become aware he was not the first on the scene, it was a high kick to the opposition, so he ought to have been expecting someone to be challenging him for it.

by joe.reeves.33 Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:16 am

a) he does not HAVE TO jump
b) he did not have enough time to react
c) he didn't see Goode had jumped anyway
d) he was completely focused on catching a ball
e) a player MUST accept the risk involved if they jump into the air in a contact sport

a - d - all true but a player also has to be responsible and aware not to get in situations where his actions results in dangerous play, intended or not, tough as that is.
e - players do accept the risk, but they can also except if they are taken out the opposition will be penalised.

Ultimately, what's the message? What does the IRB want to say to players in these situations?

a) don't try to get under a ball? - be aware of your actions in trying to get under the ball
b) ALWAYS jump, the other guy probably will - make sure you don’t take a player out in the air if he’s jumping
c) don't run so fast when you are chasing kicks - again, be aware

A few other ponderings -
a) if Payne had got injured, would he still have seen red
b) If Goode hadn't been injured would he have seen red

a - b, it shouldn’t change the result of the card, if the ref thought it was dangerous play it doesn’t shouldn’t matter if it resulted in an injury.

Is the solution really to ban jumping?

by Guest Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:33 am

Agree Joe, the chasing player needs to be more 'aware' of what's happening rather than act like heat seeking missiles. If they get it wrong they deserve harsh penalties IMO, no sympathy if they 'just get it wrong'.

by toml Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:36 am

Pot Hale wrote:Interesting article for discussion. Have been thinking about the incident and reading responses from elsewhere about it. Some see the red card as being totally deserved, others saying that yellow would have been more appropriate.

It does look like Payne was totally focussed on the ball and catching it - after all his own player had kicked it up in the air for that very purpose.

Some commenters say that it was reckless by Payne and he should have known what he was doing.

Would it be fair to say that Goode should have been doing the same thing?

Let's suppose for a moment, that Goode had not been hurt, but was able to get up afterwards and dust himself down. Would the card have still been warranted? Or let's say that it was Payne who had been injured instead?

As someone pointed out already, his head whiplashed back when he and Goode cannoned into each other. The replays make it look like Payne ran into Goode, but in actuality they ran into each other in going for the ball, and because Goode jumped, it left him in more danger from the collision. But not absolutely so. Payne could just as easily have been injured or received a neck injury from the collision.

If that had been the case, would Goode have been at fault? Would it be seen as him not having taken due care in jumping for the ball and being aware of another player competing for it? Or do the rules say that it is only the player jumping in the air who needs to be protected, and not the player who is on the ground?

Thats an excellent balanced post.

Interesting you point out that they came to occupy the same space at the same time, rather than Goode having occupied the space and payne encroaching upon it.

by toml Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:39 am

toml wrote:
Pot Hale wrote:Interesting article for discussion. Have been thinking about the incident and reading responses from elsewhere about it. Some see the red card as being totally deserved, others saying that yellow would have been more appropriate.

It does look like Payne was totally focussed on the ball and catching it - after all his own player had kicked it up in the air for that very purpose.

Some commenters say that it was reckless by Payne and he should have known what he was doing.

Would it be fair to say that Goode should have been doing the same thing?

Let's suppose for a moment, that Goode had not been hurt, but was able to get up afterwards and dust himself down. Would the card have still been warranted? Or let's say that it was Payne who had been injured instead?

As someone pointed out already, his head whiplashed back when he and Goode cannoned into each other. The replays make it look like Payne ran into Goode, but in actuality they ran into each other in going for the ball, and because Goode jumped, it left him in more danger from the collision. But not absolutely so. Payne could just as easily have been injured or received a neck injury from the collision.

If that had been the case, would Goode have been at fault? Would it be seen as him not having taken due care in jumping for the ball and being aware of another player competing for it? Or do the rules say that it is only the player jumping in the air who needs to be protected, and not the player who is on the ground?

Thats an excellent post.

Interesting you point out that they came to occupy the same space at the same time, rather than Goode having occupied the space and payne encroaching upon it.

by bedfordwelsh Sun Apr 06, 2014 5:31 am

I remember reading JPRs autobiography many mooms ago and he talks about jumping for the ball.

In it he says that that whenever he took a high ball he had two scenarios basically:

1 If he had decided not to jump he would try and turn his back towards his try line that way if he dropped it the ball would go backwards.

2 Which is relevant here is that if he decided to jump for the ball he would lead with either his foot or knee high up, that way it often made on rushing players wary of trying to take him out as they would run into his knee or studs.

by aucklandlaurie Sun Apr 06, 2014 7:00 am

Every player is entitled to compete for the ball,when possession is at large.

Sometimes innocent collisions do actually happen in Rugby (sometimes between members of the same team), and for referees to start penalising players involved in those collisions makes them (referees) look very stupid.

by **Notch** Sun Apr 06, 2014 7:19 am

Yeah, it was an innocent collision. Goode came from a long, long way back and the first Payne knew about him being there is when he (Payne) was knocked to the ground. Payne is watching the ball the entire way and preparing to jump.

It's a penalty against Payne for me, I thought a yellow card would have been pretty harsh in the circumstances. Because accidental collisions happen in rugby. I'm very relieved that Goode is okay but red cards should be reserved for players who commit acts of dangerous play- not an unfortunate collision where no-one is at fault. Later in the game there were a few incidents where players were actually tackled in the air. As in, not looking at the ball- looking at the man. And no penalty given because the landing was better. Which just makes the call seem bizarre.

If Payne knew Goode was there I can see it being justified. And he should have known but really, you can see he didn't. It reminds me of the Paul O'Connell-Dave Kearney incident. O'Connell goes to kick the ball and kicks Kearneys head accidentally. Should that have been a penalty? No, it was an accident.

You can't take all the risk out of the game. If a player goes to deliberately take out a jumpers legs that should be a straight red card every time and a hefty ban. But no way was that what happened. With the TMO to help there was really no excuse for that call. I imagine Garces will pay heavily for it.

by **Biltong** Sun Apr 06, 2014 7:49 am

Does anyone have a link?

by HongKongCherry Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:16 am

Here it is
http://balls.ie/rugby/gif-jared-payne-red-carded-ulster-4-minutes/

by **Biltong** Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:22 am

Thanks HongkongCherry, the problem with that angle is it doesn't really show a front on view of Payne.

So it makes it difficult to judge. All I can read from that is it doesn't look like he saw Goode until the last second.

by HongKongCherry Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:23 am

I'm not sure why there is this thought Payne did not see or expect Goode. He would have been clearly visible to Payne and furthermore with any garryowen you expect the full back to be the lead defender.

By the letter of the law he deserved a red card, the issue is more with the inconsistent interpretation of these laws by officials, as in most instances that would have been a yellow.

by HongKongCherry Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:26 am

Sorry biltong, I didn't see your response otherwise I'd have addressed it to you. If you look at the 2nd clip from a wider angle it does show that Payne should have had ample time to see Goode.

by Guest Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:38 am

Thanks for the link HKC. It actually looked as if Jared Payne didn't see Goode as he got clattered himself. Reckon that was just an accident and not a tackle in the air. If Payne had looked up and braced himself for the tackle then naughty boy. But it didn't look like that in the vids. Just my opinion.

by **Biltong** Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:38 am

The angle on the link you provided is unclear, but it doesn't look like they were running front on toward each other, it looks like Goode came from the left side of the field at an angle, whereas Payne was running straight forward.

If you are watching the ball then sure your peripheral vision should pick up a player, but the you have to concede Goode jumped at the last second, by which time it will be hard to react from the approaching player.

If I read law 10.4 correctly, the minimum sanction for tackling a player in the air is a penalty. There after the referee can decide upon how dangerous the tackle or collision was and decide whether it is a red or yellow card.

In this case you have to admit the collision was not a tackle, but a collision and there seems to be no intent from Payne to tackle Goode.

However again, this is about interpretation, and that means it is up to the sole discretion of the referee in how dangerous or reckless he deemed the collision to be.

If he gave Payne a yellow card some would argue he was too lemient, by giving Payne a red card others will say it was too harsh.

My personal opinion is there was no intent, hence a yellow card would have sufficed.

by **Ozzy3213** Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:47 am

Missed the game, but have seen the arguments on here and twitter about this one since last night. Have only just seen the clip.

I have to agree with Brian Moore's very succinct summary on this one...

Brian Moore ‏@brianmoore666 13h
Ulster red card- 1. Ref can't consider effect on game 2. Can't penalise on outcome 3. Intent is not in the law. Arguable red but no travesty.

I do not claim to be unbiased as my heritage is Ulster, but I would say that this is a dispassionate view in the cold light of day. My view is that a yellow card would have sufficed. It is dangerous play, and as such has to be penalised. Anybody arguing that it is not is seriously blinkered. Was it the worst piece of dangerous play I have ever seen? Not by a long stretch. It was reckless, and players have to take responsibility for their actions out on the field, and if they do not there has to be a sanction.

The referee in my opinion has over reacted, but this is always a danger where there is room for subjectivity within the laws of the game.

by Pete330v2 Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:48 am

"Let's suppose for a moment, that Goode had not been hurt, but was able to get up afterwards and dust himself down. Would the card have still been warranted? Or let's say that it was Payne who had been injured instead? "

This is the thing, the red was only produced because Goode had been injured. However, how the officials could possibly have thought that was Payne's intent just boggles the mind. Had Payne stayed down perhaps he'd have seen the game out.
The fact is Jared Payne is not nor has he ever been a dirty player that added to the fact that it is blatantly obvious that the incident was an accidental collision and never an intentional tackle should have been taken into consideration.
Yellow perhaps, penalty definately but red? Disgusting and those who are agreeing with the red decision need to think for a while as to how they'd feel if Goode and Payne's roles were reversed.

by **Rugby Fan** Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:55 am

Notch wrote:... the first Payne knew about him being there is when he (Payne) was knocked to the ground...

Again, if he didn't know there was someone there before he hit him, why didn't he jump for the ball? Not only must he have known he had been beaten to the spot, it ought to have been no surprise at all that others were going to be competing for the ball.

by Nachos Jones Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:58 am

Just my thoughts on this.

Payne appeared very much to have his eyes on the ball but at the same time, the distance he ran to get there and having to go through quite a bit of traffic to get there means that he has to be very aware of who is around him and where they are. He must also expect that 90% of the time, a defender will jump to catch a high ball so that should be in the back of his head. Paynes decision making and timing are what caused this, not Goode doing what every good 15 does in jumping to take a high ball.

Personally I thought a yellow card would have sufficed (referee discretion) but precedent has been made when a player is taken out in the air and a red card is expected. Dangerous play is dangerous play whether intentional or not.

by **Notch** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:06 am

Rugby Fan wrote:
Notch wrote:... the first Payne knew about him being there is when he (Payne) was knocked to the ground...
Again, if he didn't know there was someone there before he hit him, why didn't he jump for the ball? Not only must he have known he had been beaten to the spot, it ought to have been no surprise at all that others were going to be competing for the ball.

He was in the process of jumping for it if you watch they clip. Goode came up very fast and from an angle. Payne doesn't see him- in fact if he had seen him then he would jump sooner. The reason he doesn't jump as soon as he should is he has a brainfart and doesn't realise the catch will be contested.

It's not great play from Payne as he should jump earlier. But a player coming off badly from a collision does not make bad play into foul play. Technically, the only thing Payne is guilty of is poor fullback play in that he mistimed his jump.

by **Notch** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:11 am

Also, people are saying he should have been aware a player might jump- and he should have been, aye. He should have and he wasn't. But what should he do apart from jump himself? Move out of the way?

When you go into a tackle, you take a risk you'll hurt yourself. When you jump for a ball, you take a risk you'll hurt yourself. The game is not without risk. Unfortunately Goode went up for a ball, collided with a player and landed badly.

But I don't see how anyone is to blame for that. It's no-ones fault. And for the referee to scapegoat a player means the game was ruined for everyone.

by clivemcl Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:11 am

Folks - read what I have to say with an open mind, and watch the animated gif on balls.ie to verify it.

http://balls.ie/rugby/gif-jared-payne-red-carded-ulster-4-minutes/

- Goode leaves the ground when Payne is 2 meters away from him
- Payne is running very fast
- It is not a given that Goode will jump
- Payne does not have to jump
- THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO REACT
- If a player is running right down your neck, and you choose to jump, do you not accept the danger that may result????

If anyone disagrees with that, they have a screw loose.

If the law says Payne could have done something different, then the law is pile of nonsense.

If you disagree, please tell me in detail what Payne could have done differently, two metres out at that speed without certainty that Goode would leave the ground.

by **Ozzy3213** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:13 am

Notch, are you saying Payne was in the process of jumping for it? I don't see that. The only time his feet leave the ground is when the top half of his body is forced backwards by the collision.

by Nachos Jones Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:20 am

Notch wrote:Also, people are saying he should have been aware a player might jump- and he should have been, aye. He should have and he wasn't. But what should he do apart from jump himself? Move out of the way?

When you go into a tackle, you take a risk you'll hurt yourself. When you jump for a ball, you take a risk you'll hurt yourself. The game is not without risk. Unfortunately Goode went up for a ball, collided with a player and landed badly.

But I don't see how anyone is to blame for that. It's no-ones fault. And for the referee to scapegoat a player means the game was ruined for everyone.

Therein is the clue. Under high balls you have to expect that a defending player will jump, the fact that he didn't has put himself into this position. It was simply mistimed and bad play from Payne, nothing more. No intention but he has put himself in that position by not having the expected awareness that he perhaps should of had. I disagree with the red card myself as it was an accident and the red card should be reserved for intentional dangerous play. I can understand the ref awarding the red but in doing so, he has implied that Payne intentionally took Goode out in the air and that is what annoyed me.

by **Notch** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:21 am

That gif is a poor representation of what happened

a) Because the camera is following Goodes run, it seems Goode is stationary and Payne runs into him at full tilt
b) It's very much slowed down from real life.

What actually happens is the ball lands between Payne and Goode and both players are running at full tilt and have to make the decision to jump or stay on the ground in a split second. We watch replay after replay and we think that gives us a more accurate view... I'm not sure.

Payne should have got off the ground, but that error did not deserve a red card.

by **Notch** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:23 am

Ozzy3213 wrote:Notch, are you saying Payne was in the process of jumping for it? I don't see that. The only time his feet leave the ground is when the top half of his body is forced backwards by the collision.

Yes because you can see he's opening the bread basket and preparing to take the ball. Then Goode ran into him. He didn't get off the ground quickly enough was the problem- clumsy, but never malicious.

by **Ozzy3213** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:26 am

Clive, you appear to be using a very short clip to make your points, which does not show the play in its entirety. This gives a clearer picture...

http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/rugby-union/9251679/ulster-v-saracens-highlights

clivemcl wrote:
- Goode leaves the ground when Payne is 2 meters away from him - Yes, but Payne has run from his own 22 and into the Sarries half. He is looking at the ball and then as he crosses his own 10 metre line he glances forward and has a clear view that Goode is coming.
- Payne is running very fast - not sure what relevance this has to anything
- It is not a given that Goode will jump - Come on, really? It's not a given that the defending full back will jump to collect the high ball? That is nonsense. I know it, you know it and most importantly, as an experienced professional rugby player, Jared Payne knows it.
- Payne does not have to jump - You are correct, but what he does have to do it he chooses not to jump and compete for the ball, is ensure that he does not, either deliberately or recklessly take the man out in the air.
- THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO REACT - Nonsense. He runs roughly 40 metres and has plenty of time to make a choice as to what he does
- If a player is running right down your neck, and you choose to jump, do you not accept the danger that may result???? - No. The law is designed to protect players who are off the ground legally contesting for the ball. No portion of blame can be attributed to Alex Goode here, and to actually attempt to blame him is a pretty poor in all honesty.

If anyone disagrees with that, they have a screw loose.

If the law says Payne could have done something different, then the law is pile of nonsense.

Of course he could have done something different. He has two options, he either competes for the ball in the air, or allows the jumping man to take it and nails him as his feet hit the ground. This is standard, and using the excuse of he was running fast so couldn't make that decision is rubbish. I accept that it's the start of a massive game and the adrenaline is pumping, but part of being a top athlete is controlling that. He has made a poor decision, and has been punished for it. The punishment in my view is harsh, but certainly not incorrect in terms of the laws of the game.

If you disagree, please tell me in detail what Payne could have done differently, two metres out at that speed without certainty that Goode would leave the ground.

by **Ozzy3213** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:27 am

Notch wrote:
Ozzy3213 wrote:Notch, are you saying Payne was in the process of jumping for it? I don't see that. The only time his feet leave the ground is when the top half of his body is forced backwards by the collision.

Yes because you can see he's opening the bread basket and preparing to take the ball. Then Goode ran into him. He didn't get off the ground quickly enough was the problem- clumsy, but never malicious.

I agree not malicious, but he never looks like he's about to jump for it from what I have seen.

by clivemcl Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:29 am

Nachos Jones wrote:
Notch wrote:Also, people are saying he should have been aware a player might jump- and he should have been, aye. He should have and he wasn't. But what should he do apart from jump himself? Move out of the way?

When you go into a tackle, you take a risk you'll hurt yourself. When you jump for a ball, you take a risk you'll hurt yourself. The game is not without risk. Unfortunately Goode went up for a ball, collided with a player and landed badly.

But I don't see how anyone is to blame for that. It's no-ones fault. And for the referee to scapegoat a player means the game was ruined for everyone.

Therein is the clue. Under high balls you have to expect that a defending player will jump, the fact that he didn't has put himself into this position. It was simply mistimed and bad play from Payne, nothing more. No intention but he has put himself in that position by not having the expected awareness that he perhaps should of had. I disagree with the red card myself as it was an accident and the red card should be reserved for intentional dangerous play. I can understand the ref awarding the red but in doing so, he has implied that Payne intentionally took Goode out in the air and that is what annoyed me.

Nonsense.

Are we to play a game of rugby based on 'don't do this just in case the other player might do that'. Catch a grip. Nobody has to expect anything. Its not a game of chess, they put there bodies on the line to compete for the ball. Payne has every right to get himself under the ball as fast as he can. Just because 'most times' players jump, does not mean he has to. If he feels he can make a clean catch on the ground, he is within the law to attempt so.

Goode on the other hand surely must accept that putting himself in the air when a full speed player is charging in is a risk.

What next - Don't compete for the ball in a line-out, because you might grab the opponents arm instead of the ball and cause him to fall badly???
No tackles above the waist, in case the opponent ducks and you catch his neck?

by **George Carlin** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:30 am

I agree that the fact Payne clearly didn't adopt any brace position or use the usual instinctive methods one uses to protect oneself from an imminent collision means that he almost certainly didn't see Goode at all.

Did the ref go to the TMO about this? Did anyone hear what was said?

by Nachos Jones Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:35 am

clivemcl wrote:
Nachos Jones wrote:
Notch wrote:Also, people are saying he should have been aware a player might jump- and he should have been, aye. He should have and he wasn't. But what should he do apart from jump himself? Move out of the way?

When you go into a tackle, you take a risk you'll hurt yourself. When you jump for a ball, you take a risk you'll hurt yourself. The game is not without risk. Unfortunately Goode went up for a ball, collided with a player and landed badly.

But I don't see how anyone is to blame for that. It's no-ones fault. And for the referee to scapegoat a player means the game was ruined for everyone.

Therein is the clue. Under high balls you have to expect that a defending player will jump, the fact that he didn't has put himself into this position. It was simply mistimed and bad play from Payne, nothing more. No intention but he has put himself in that position by not having the expected awareness that he perhaps should of had. I disagree with the red card myself as it was an accident and the red card should be reserved for intentional dangerous play. I can understand the ref awarding the red but in doing so, he has implied that Payne intentionally took Goode out in the air and that is what annoyed me.

Nonsense.

Are we to play a game of rugby based on 'don't do this just in case the other player might do that'. Catch a grip. Nobody has to expect anything. Its not a game of chess, they put there bodies on the line to compete for the ball. Payne has every right to get himself under the ball as fast as he can. Just because 'most times' players jump, does not mean he has to. If he feels he can make a clean catch on the ground, he is within the law to attempt so.

Goode on the other hand surely must accept that putting himself in the air when a full speed player is charging in is a risk.

What next - Don't compete for the ball in a line-out, because you might grab the opponents arm instead of the ball and cause him to fall badly???
No tackles above the waist, in case the opponent ducks and you catch his neck?

Sorry Clive but the laws of the game are quite clear in regards to this. Protection of players in the air. All 15's worth their salt WILL jump to take a high ball when under pressure. Experienced players like Payne will be well aware of this, he is not new to the game. As I said, not intentional and without malice but ended up as dangerous play.

Thanks for calling my opinion ' nonsense' and informing me to 'catch a grip'. Very respectful of you there. I don't think that I have said anything that bad myself.

by Nachos Jones Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:37 am

I would like to add Clive, that apportioning some blame to Goode in this instance when all he did was to do exactly everything expected of him as a fullback is a bit rich.

by clivemcl Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:42 am

Ozzy3213 wrote:Clive, you appear to be using a very short clip to make your points, which does not show the play in its entirety. This gives a clearer picture...

http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/rugby-union/9251679/ulster-v-saracens-highlights

clivemcl wrote:
- Goode leaves the ground when Payne is 2 meters away from him - Yes, but Payne has run from his own 22 and into the Sarries half. He is looking at the ball and then as he crosses his own 10 metre line he glances forward and has a clear view that Goode is coming. He still has no knowledge Goode will jump until he is 2m away
- Payne is running very fast - not sure what relevance this has to anything In a competitive sport it is right to run as fast as you can
- It is not a given that Goode will jump - Come on, really? It's not a given that the defending full back will jump to collect the high ball? That is nonsense. I know it, you know it and most importantly, as an experienced professional rugby player, Jared Payne knows it. Are you saying Payne knew Goode would jump and decided to act dangerously by staying on the ground?
- Payne does not have to jump - You are correct, but what he does have to do it he chooses not to jump and compete for the ball, is ensure that he does not, either deliberately or recklessly take the man out in the air. My previous points were made to show he could not reasonably be expected to react quickly enough
- THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO REACT - Nonsense. He runs roughly 40 metres and has plenty of time to make a choice as to what he does 2metres away, Goode jumps
- If a player is running right down your neck, and you choose to jump, do you not accept the danger that may result???? - No. The law is designed to protect players who are off the ground legally contesting for the ball. No portion of blame can be attributed to Alex Goode here, and to actually attempt to blame him is a pretty poor in all honesty. All players accept risk in all aspects of the game. In this case, the protection of the law has encouraged players to act more recklessly themselves. Goode is making a decision to put himself in danger despite a very fast approaching players potentially harming him. (the risk is still there even when both players jump, but not to the same degree).

If anyone disagrees with that, they have a screw loose.

If the law says Payne could have done something different, then the law is pile of nonsense.

Of course he could have done something different. He has two options, he either competes for the ball in the air, or allows the jumping man to take it and nails him as his feet hit the ground. This is standard, and using the excuse of he was running fast so couldn't make that decision is rubbish. I accept that it's the start of a massive game and the adrenaline is pumping, but part of being a top athlete is controlling that. He has made a poor decision, and has been punished for it. The punishment in my view is harsh, but certainly not incorrect in terms of the laws of the game.

If you disagree, please tell me in detail what Payne could have done differently, two metres out at that speed without certainty that Goode would leave the ground.

I'll say it again because its true. Payne does not have to jump just because Goode does. Payne is within the law to run fast. Goode must accept some responsibility for endangering himself when a player is running full tilt at him. The protection of the law has encouraged recklessness.

by Guest Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:47 am

I don't think Payne should be accused of poor play because he 'didn't' jump as if every single player jumps for the ball when running at full speed! This is not true.

by **Ozzy3213** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:47 am

Clive, I completely understand you want to defend your man, but trying to put any blame for this on Goode is quite frankly ridiculous. You are correct, and I have already said, Payne does not have to jump, but equally he does then have to ensure that he does not take the man out in the air, and he has not done this. He has been reckless and it is dangerous, therefore it's an offence which has to be punished with a penalty and can be given a yellow or red card.

by MrsP Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:50 am

If Payne had jumped a millisecond before the players collided what would have changed?

by Sgt_Pooly Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:54 am

Ultimately Payne has to take responsibility for his actions. There certainly seemed to be no malicious intent for him but that doesn't take away the fact it was an extremely dangerous act that could have seriously injured Goode.

The act warrants something around the yellow/red level, on a different day Payne May have got a sin bin but you can't be surprised it was red.

by Nachos Jones Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:56 am

MrsP wrote:If Payne had jumped a millisecond before the players collided what would have changed?

Quite simply MrsP, the referee (RA's and TMO) may have seen that Payne was making more of an attempt to contest the ball. The outcome (to the players) may have been the same but it would have highlighted more that Payne was competing for the ball. I see nothing other than Payne competing for the ball and see it only as a mistimed attempt and lack of awareness. As stated earlier, what I didn't like about the red card was the fact that it has been implied that Payne acted in a dangerous way intentionally and I cannot see that myself.

by **LondonTiger** Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:57 am

George Carlin wrote:I agree that the fact Payne clearly didn't adopt any brace position or use the usual instinctive methods one uses to protect oneself from an imminent collision means that he almost certainly didn't see Goode at all.

Did the ref go to the TMO about this? Did anyone hear what was said?

Yes he went to the TMO. There was a long discussion in French that could only be partially heard on the mics, while they waited for the neck braces etc to be applied to Goode. My french is decent, but not fluent and I struggled a little to keep up with what the TMO was saying. My brother who is fluent stated that they were seriously considering a sending off (which of course once Goode was removed from play was what happened).

by beshocked Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:58 am

Goode got there first and caught the ball. Payne took Goode out. Reckless and dangerous.

As for not seeing Goode, he should be aware he would likely have to compete with someone for the ball, certainly the full back.

What should Goode have done? Allowed Payne to get the ball? Should he expect someone to recklessly run into him?

Payne does not jump. He is beaten to the ball by Goode. When that happens he should allow the player who caught the ball to return to the ground.

Rush of blood to the head by Payne.

by IanBru Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:02 am

A related incident happened last week in the Treviso v Edinburgh match.

https://youtu.be/OSMmlu83MAw

As you can see, Jack Cuthbert was standing still under the high ball, waiting to receive it. He didn't jump (he's pretty tall so he rarely has to). Botes, the Treviso stand off, jumped for the ball from behind Cuthbert and collided with him.

1. Botes jumped, Cuthbert didn't.
2. Cuthbert was effectively motionless under the high ball.
3. Botes encroached on Cuthbert from behind, so there was nothing Cuthbert could have done.

Result: penalty against Edinburgh.

Obviously safety is paramount in these situations, but I have a problem with referees (even ones as skilled as Nigel Owens) who blindly follow the letter of the law, regardless of circumstances.

Now I ask you, in light of the Payne-Goode incident, could it not be argued that the jumping player is being reckless by putting themselves in a dangerous position, regardless of whether they are attacking or defending?

by MrsP Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:03 am

So this was a Red Card purely because Payne decided to try to catch the ball with his feet on the ground? If he had decided to jump it immediately changes from an act of dangerous foul play to "play on"?

by Sponsored content

What should the punishment have been?