Contact in the air - the sequel

Did anyone else see this? Wuss-Bath affected by IRB directive

I didn't see the game, but this sounds like a step too far:

Grauniad wrote:...a midweek email from the international board's referee manager, Joël Jutge, demanding at least a yellow card for any player who did not get out of the way when another players is airborne

I know I was one of the most vehement defenders of the Payne red card (and it seems from this that the IRB wholeheartedly agreed with it), but without having seen either the email or its application, this is a worrying development for the game. There is an important difference (as we debated to death) between charging into an area where there is likely to be a man in the air and being in the path of someone who jumps. This directive would appear to remove that difference.

Does anyone know how to track down what the email said, and has anyone got any comments on the cards themselves? I've not read of any other game this weekend being affected by Jutge's directive.

All they doing now is forcing everyone to jump.

So now you will have players rushing in to jump, others who are stationary will jump, and to ensure all of them land safely you would need a trampoline.

Biltong wrote:All they doing now is forcing everyone to jump.

So now you will have players rushing in to jump, others who are stationary will jump, and to ensure all of them land safely you would need a trampoline.

You also have to make sure you jump at the same time as the other guy. Its getting really silly now. Common sense would have been to give a penalty or a yellow and it would have been forgotten about already. They have backed themselves into a corner now and have to issue red cards for accidents.

I would like to see the whole email and it's context. And to whom it was sent, and in what official capacity.

During the Oyonnax vs Toulouse game at the weekend a player ran into a jumping player and took him out, yet the result was just a penalty no yellow or red card.

The commentators said it was because the player wasn't injuried.

Scrumpy wrote:During the Oyonnax vs Toulouse game at the weekend a player ran into a jumping player and took him out, yet the result was just a penalty no yellow or red card.

The commentators said it was because the player wasn't injuried.

How did the player who jumped land? that is the criteria by which the severity is judged and the sanction is decided

If the above is true then Jutge is an idiot. Sack him! ...... and Garces  

The Payne red card really has opened a can of worms, and how it is being dealt with by the IRB is descending into farce.

Might be funny watching players jumping around the field any time the ball comes close though. Although the novelty would wear thin quickly I would think.

TJ wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:During the Oyonnax vs Toulouse game at the weekend a player ran into a jumping player and took him out, yet the result was just a penalty no yellow or red card.

The commentators said it was because the player wasn't injuried.

How did the player who jumped land?  that is the criteria by which the severity is judged and the sanction is decided

On his back and shoulder I think, but no injury.

Scrumpy wrote:

TJ wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:During the Oyonnax vs Toulouse game at the weekend a player ran into a jumping player and took him out, yet the result was just a penalty no yellow or red card.

The commentators said it was because the player wasn't injuried.

How did the player who jumped land?  that is the criteria by which the severity is judged and the sanction is decided

On his back and shoulder I think, but no injury.

should have been a card then and maybe red. on the current guidelines

Yep, but it wasn't.

Scrumpy wrote:Yep, but it wasn't.

Bad and inconsistent decision then

Yes it was, by todays standards.

Biltong wrote:All they doing now is forcing everyone to jump.

So now you will have players rushing in to jump, others who are stationary will jump, and to ensure all of them land safely you would need a trampoline.

Or worse, allowing players to jump into players on the ground trying to get them sin binned

marty2086 wrote:

Biltong wrote:All they doing now is forcing everyone to jump.

So now you will have players rushing in to jump, others who are stationary will jump, and to ensure all of them land safely you would need a trampoline.

Or worse, allowing players to jump into players on the ground trying to get them sin binned

Yep, you cannot discount the cynical play aspect.

So if a player is stationary and another player jumps into him, he can be penalised now?

If that is correct, I think it's just getting nuts.

Notch wrote:So if a player is stationary and another player jumps into him, he can be penalised now?

If that is correct, I think it's just getting nuts.

I was just wondering that. It would be nice if the e-mail was leaked.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Notch wrote:So if a player is stationary and another player jumps into him, he can be penalised now?

If that is correct, I think it's just getting nuts.

I was just wondering that. It would be nice if the e-mail was leaked.

Well you could argue that is what happened to Hartley with Faletau

But Hartley deliberately tackled him, he just (probably) wasn't expecting him to jump. Notch is talking about someone waiting for the ball, feet on ground, watching it and then gets jumped into.

But it seems to do want all players jumping for the ball. I'd say two players, upright, colliding the air is less likely to tip someone than if one is on the floor. Maybe that's what they're going for. I think it would have been better saying you can't jump for the ball outside the lineout.

It happened in the Ulster-Glasgow game. A player went up and basically 'tripped' over a prop who had his back to play and was jogging back onside. So he was moving away from the player in the air and had his back to him.

Anyway, it wasn't a penalty and I don't think anyone batted an eye about it.

Incidentally I do think there should be some responsibility for safety on the shoulders of the jumper also. I was never that impressed with Lee byrne's flying kick on Evans.

I agree lost - "Foot up" should be a penalty but how do you decide if there are two offenses - tackling the layer in the air and "foot up"

Notch wrote:So if a player is stationary and another player jumps into him, he can be penalised now?

If that is correct, I think it's just getting nuts.

No - unless he makes a deliberate tackle. If he is standing still I don't think so

That's isn't what Jutge is reported to have emailed though, is it?

"a yellow card for any player who did not get out of the way when another players is airborne"

Bit of a difference becoming airborne to retrieve the ball ie having to jump to reach it and just jumping into players in an attempt to win a penalty.

HammerofThunor wrote:But Hartley deliberately tackled him, he just (probably) wasn't expecting him to jump. Notch is talking about someone waiting for the ball, feet on ground, watching it and then gets jumped into.

But it seems to do want all players jumping for the ball. I'd say two players, upright, colliding the air is less likely to tip someone than if one is on the floor. Maybe that's what they're going for. I think it would have been better saying you can't jump for the ball outside the lineout.

Can't jump outside the lineout would be unenforceable in practical terms, I think. Would we really want to penalise Faletau for jumping to catch a bad pass?

I considered raising the Hartley incident in the OP, but held back. The logical end point, though, would be for coaches to get players to pass high so that the receiver can jump into the catch, and then one of three things happens: i) YC for the tackler, ii) instant line break (if the tackler gets out of the way) or iii) (as defences get smarter) defences stand back - defensive line speed becomes a liability.

I really hope the ref was just over-applying a gentle reminder and that this is not a directive as reported. I believe that the safety line needs to be drawn so that the man on the ground must not make things more dangerous for the jumper, but...

Actually, that's where it gets difficult. It's very hard to work out where the line lies, except with common sense. The only alternative is Jutge's "get out of the way" dictat.

There is of course a solution to this whole debacle.

If you leave the ground you get penalised. No more swan dives, no more jumping in the line out, no more jumping to catch the ball, no tip tackles etc.

I still think the Payne red card was the correct call.

Scrumpy wrote:I still think the Payne red card was the correct call.

No one else does  

marty2086 wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:I still think the Payne red card was the correct call.

No one else does  

Lots of folk do. Harsh but not unreasonable.

TJ wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:I still think the Payne red card was the correct call.

No one else does  

Lots of folk do.  Harsh but not unreasonable.

From all that I have read, I just don't believe that's true. Very few actually agree with the red card. Most, like me, would say it was very harsh, and most, like me, wouldn't have had an issue had it have been yellow.

Anyway, two week ban for Williams- couldn't have been any less really. It's a common sense ban and good to see that its confirmed what he did was a red card offence, not yellow card.

Does it matter if you jump but don't get anywhere near the ball? Thats even harder to argue. I mean, you could argue you really misjudged it. I mean, if you see a chasing player going after a ball, just jump in the air in front of him, with the 'basket' presented. Doesn't matter where the ball is, you just want the opposition to lose a player...

bobs your uncle.

clivemcl wrote:Does it matter if you jump but don't get anywhere near the ball? Thats even harder to argue. I mean, you could argue you really misjudged it. I mean, if you see a chasing player going after a ball, just jump in the air in front of him, with the 'basket' presented. Doesn't matter where the ball is, you just want the opposition to lose a player...

bobs your uncle.

Just as long as Jeromes not your referee you may be ok

Thats why referees have to be given leave to use their common sense clive. Which I'm sure they can do. It's pretty easy to figure out what is happening in the example you give. I don't think that would be an issue for referees.

Notch wrote:Thats why referees have to be given leave to use their common sense clive. Which I'm sure they can do. It's pretty easy to figure out what is happening in the example you give. I don't think that would be an issue for referees.

Notch, isn’t the whole argument based on the fact the refs are supposedly following black and white letter of the law rather than making judgements of anyone’s intent? Pretty sure many have argued that intent is irrelevant.

Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

marty2086 wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:I still think the Payne red card was the correct call.

No one else does  

Hmm!

I think they do.

clivemcl wrote:

Notch wrote:Thats why referees have to be given leave to use their common sense clive. Which I'm sure they can do. It's pretty easy to figure out what is happening in the example you give. I don't think that would be an issue for referees.

Notch, isn’t the whole argument based on the fact the refs are supposedly following black and white letter of the law rather than making judgements of anyone’s intent? Pretty sure many have argued that intent is irrelevant.

Yeah, you can argue that. You can even put it in a refereeing directive and publish it officially and make it the official IRB position.

But in reality, a good referee will always use his discretion and common sense when a loophole arises. There are many loopholes which make total black and white implementation of the laws of rugby pretty much completely impossible and this is no different.

If we start seeing penalties against players for 'not getting out of the way' of jumping players, then I think we'll have completely lost the run of ourselves. I don't agree with those who are saying ban jumping, but we need to appreciate that running full speed towards a gaggle of players and then jumping in the air to catch a ball carries with it a large element of risk. Sometimes it will result in accidents and if competing in the air is part of the game so is the risk it entails. Not every accident needs to result in a penalty or card.

I totally agree that if you move into the jumper in any way when he is in the air trying to catch a ball it should always be at least a penalty, with yellow cards for dangerous situations and red cards for the top end of that offence, but if you collide with someone who is standing still or moving away because you are trying to catch the ball that should not be a penalty no matter what happens next.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

You honestly believe that Payne deliberately collided with Goode? Payne didn't jump. I wish he had....

As far as intent being irrelevant; you have just judged Payne according to intent.....

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

You honestly believe that Payne deliberately collided with Goode? Payne didn't jump. I wish he had....

As far as intent being irrelevant; you have just judged Payne according to intent.....

 
No I don't think it was deliberate. I think it was reckless it was always going to be a pen, most of the time a yellow and sometimes a red. Sorry the jumping part was in response to having someone jump into a player deliberately not really going for the ball in the example clive gave.

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

You honestly believe that Payne deliberately collided with Goode? Payne didn't jump. I wish he had....

As far as intent being irrelevant; you have just judged Payne according to intent.....

He was reckless and endangered another player, nothing more nothing less.

He had to go, but lets not rake up old graves on the eve of the Euro semi finals.   

Notch wrote:Anyway, two week ban for Williams- couldn't have been any less really. It's a common sense ban and good to see that its confirmed what he did was a red card offence, not yellow card.

for clarity did he get the ban for the red for the two yellows ( he did get two yellows didn't he?) or for the single incident? I am not sure hence I ask

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

You honestly believe that Payne deliberately collided with Goode? Payne didn't jump. I wish he had....

As far as intent being irrelevant; you have just judged Payne according to intent.....

No I don't think it was deliberate. I think it was reckless it was always going to be a pen, most of the time a yellow and sometimes a red.

Sorry if I misunderstood your comment. I thought the bit in bold was in reference to Payne's actions.

Edit: What other times have you seen a red card given for that offence?

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

You honestly believe that Payne deliberately collided with Goode? Payne didn't jump. I wish he had....

As far as intent being irrelevant; you have just judged Payne according to intent.....

No I don't think it was deliberate. I think it was reckless it was always going to be a pen, most of the time a yellow and sometimes a red.

Sorry if I misunderstood your comment. I thought the bit in bold was in reference to Payne's actions.

Edit: What other times have you seen a red card given for that offence?

Sorry mine wasn't exactly crystal clear. Don't remember seeing an incident exactly like it to be fair. Don't think as a player at this sort of level you should be ploughing on through without a thought going through you mind that someone could be competing for the ball and that you're likely to be able to gather it by not jumping. What he did was clearly dangerous. My initial thought was it's a yellow, red is harsh but just about justifiable.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

You honestly believe that Payne deliberately collided with Goode? Payne didn't jump. I wish he had....

As far as intent being irrelevant; you have just judged Payne according to intent.....

No I don't think it was deliberate. I think it was reckless it was always going to be a pen, most of the time a yellow and sometimes a red.

Sorry if I misunderstood your comment. I thought the bit in bold was in reference to Payne's actions.

Edit: What other times have you seen a red card given for that offence?

Sorry mine wasn't exactly crystal clear. Don't remember seeing an incident exactly like it to be fair. Don't think as a player at this sort of level you should be ploughing on through without a thought going through you mind that someone could be competing for the ball and that you're likely to be able to gather it by not jumping. What he did was clearly dangerous. My initial thought was it's a yellow, red is harsh but just about justifiable.

I would think most players focus solely on the ball when chasing, and the field of vision is much more limited when looking up, rather than straight ahead. What would have made it much more difficult for Payne is the fact that Goode came in from an angle, turning sharply as he jumped.

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

You honestly believe that Payne deliberately collided with Goode? Payne didn't jump. I wish he had....

As far as intent being irrelevant; you have just judged Payne according to intent.....

No I don't think it was deliberate. I think it was reckless it was always going to be a pen, most of the time a yellow and sometimes a red.

Sorry if I misunderstood your comment. I thought the bit in bold was in reference to Payne's actions.

Edit: What other times have you seen a red card given for that offence?

Sorry mine wasn't exactly crystal clear. Don't remember seeing an incident exactly like it to be fair. Don't think as a player at this sort of level you should be ploughing on through without a thought going through you mind that someone could be competing for the ball and that you're likely to be able to gather it by not jumping. What he did was clearly dangerous. My initial thought was it's a yellow, red is harsh but just about justifiable.

I would think most players focus solely on the ball when chasing, and the field of vision is much more limited when looking up, rather than straight ahead. What would have made it much more difficult for Payne is the fact that Goode came in from an angle, turning sharply as he jumped.

Yup, and we now know players have to take their surroundings into account.

How did Goode turn sharply in mid air?

Scrumpy wrote:How did Goode turn sharply in mid air?

Scrumpy, 'as he jumped'. Hope that answers your question.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Intent in the case of Payne was irrelevant as he was reckless. Having someone deliberately jump into you while not going for the ball is a little different to me.

You honestly believe that Payne deliberately collided with Goode? Payne didn't jump. I wish he had....

As far as intent being irrelevant; you have just judged Payne according to intent.....

No I don't think it was deliberate. I think it was reckless it was always going to be a pen, most of the time a yellow and sometimes a red.

Sorry if I misunderstood your comment. I thought the bit in bold was in reference to Payne's actions.

Edit: What other times have you seen a red card given for that offence?

Sorry mine wasn't exactly crystal clear. Don't remember seeing an incident exactly like it to be fair. Don't think as a player at this sort of level you should be ploughing on through without a thought going through you mind that someone could be competing for the ball and that you're likely to be able to gather it by not jumping. What he did was clearly dangerous. My initial thought was it's a yellow, red is harsh but just about justifiable.

I would think most players focus solely on the ball when chasing, and the field of vision is much more limited when looking up, rather than straight ahead. What would have made it much more difficult for Payne is the fact that Goode came in from an angle, turning sharply as he jumped.

Yup, and we now know players have to take their surroundings into account.

As much as they're able I suppose, and that should also apply to those who jump.