johnthegriff wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:54 am
If any player should be cited it should be Wade for his forearm charge into Jonny May which in no way could be construed as a hand-off.
I don't think Wade is a dirty player, but my thought at the time was he delberately swung his elbow up into May's face.
Just saw a picture on the unoffy...
Not sure if the link will work...
johnthegriff wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:54 am
If any player should be cited it should be Wade for his forearm charge into Jonny May which in no way could be construed as a hand-off.
I don't think Wade is a dirty player, but my thought at the time was he delberately swung his elbow up into May's face.
Just saw a picture on the unoffy...
Not sure if the link will work...
Come on folks, look how low May is!
Wade is a midget and yet his arm is at May's head height, that tells the story.
A low tackle is not always the right tackle, and especially against pacey players who possess the ability to change the angles after the tackler has gone down into position.
If May stays high to adjust last moment then that incident is avoided, but he is forced to go low by silly modern rules that penalise the slightest contact with the head, even brushing the head can get a player in trouble, it's crazy!
Not May's fault and not Wade's fault, the rules are just stupid!
Wade certainly lead with his shoulder/arm and lifted up into the tackle. I can't read his mind, but it looked a lot like he was attempting contact with May's head/neck. May did not dip.
Totally accidental,its the nature of the sport. Easy to pick out a still that looks unforgiving,you could do that with every single collision, like I said nothing to see here.
If Dayglo's got anything to do with it, he'll be lucky to get away with a ban for ball tampering and expulsion as an undeclared Aussie intelligence* officer!
[Apologies for using the words 'Aussie' and 'intelligence' in the same sentence!]
Happy days clearing straw from the pitch before the Baa-Baas games! KBO
Wear a Mask>Protect The NHS>Save Lives
Rugbyflanker wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:56 pm
Totally accidental,its the nature of the sport. Easy to pick out a still that looks unforgiving,you could do that with every single collision, like I said nothing to see here.
Nowt as blind as those that refuse to see!
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity
Rugbyflanker wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 4:00 pm
I try to look at things objectively,if it was vice versa and our player was cited everyone would be crying!
I don’t think anyone who has played the game at any level will say Wades actions were deliberate, the point being made is that if Malouf can be cited for a high reckless challenge as the tackler, should the same standards be applied to Wade as the ball carrier, if they are looking to rid head shots from the game.
After all Wade was fine after Maloufs challenge, May was knocked out by Wades forearm
No, you can't tell much from a still. However, I saw it live and there was movement upwards by Wade so that he lead into the tackle with his arm and shoulder to Mays head. So much seems to be judged on outcome in the sport these days (e.g. Castre 15 taking May out in the air, not being penalised because May got straight back up), that it should have been looked at more thoroughly at the time.
Rugbyflanker wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 4:00 pm
I try to look at things objectively,if it was vice versa and our player was cited everyone would be crying!
Everyone? I saw the incident clearly from behind the incident in the Holland and Barrett and Wade lead with his elbow that made contact with May's head All the images i have seen of the incident are viewed from the front, seeing is believing!
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity
Rugbyflanker wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:56 pm
Totally accidental,its the nature of the sport. Easy to pick out a still that looks unforgiving,you could do that with every single collision, like I said nothing to see here.
As are most incidents of taking players out in the air, whether it's intentional or not has very little to do with it. Intention is very difficult to judge therefore it makes a extremely subjective criterion in these matters.
An objective criterion is one which helps reach the same conclusion irrespective of who applies it.
Just in case it needs pointing out, an objective criterion does not necessarily reach a good and fair conclusion. But I think most folk despair more against the inconsistency than the unfairness.
The still, as shown, suggests to me I wasn't completely imagining what I thought I saw, and but agreed it needs to be seen in context. As the citing team biscuits have already been ordered, why not review the context then.
