Injury/Suspensions List
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Rugby is a contact sport and over the years the authorities have done a lot to clean up the game to prevent injuries. Contact with the head has its consequences and is rightly addressed with protocols including sanctions and HIAs etc.
There have been some incidents in recent weeks (Banahan, Van Wyk, Thorley) where the contact has been head on head and all the players have been red carded and subsequently banned...
In my opinion, these were all rugby accidents and did not warrant a Red card.
There was no intent, no forearm or shoulder aiming for the players head. The tackle was made below shoulder height and heads subsequently clashed, tackling player not leading with his head to make contact. Soon we are going to have an instruction that all tackles must be 6" above the waste........may seem ridiculous but there are going to be accidents and this needs to be recognised. The refs are very much in a tunnel where they cannot deviate from the outcome of a red card being awarded.
Am all for players safety, but there are going to be accidental collisions............it is a contact sport.
Red cards should used for foul play where the contact has been made with a forearm, shoulder etc........
There have been some incidents in recent weeks (Banahan, Van Wyk, Thorley) where the contact has been head on head and all the players have been red carded and subsequently banned...
In my opinion, these were all rugby accidents and did not warrant a Red card.
There was no intent, no forearm or shoulder aiming for the players head. The tackle was made below shoulder height and heads subsequently clashed, tackling player not leading with his head to make contact. Soon we are going to have an instruction that all tackles must be 6" above the waste........may seem ridiculous but there are going to be accidents and this needs to be recognised. The refs are very much in a tunnel where they cannot deviate from the outcome of a red card being awarded.
Am all for players safety, but there are going to be accidental collisions............it is a contact sport.
Red cards should used for foul play where the contact has been made with a forearm, shoulder etc........
SUPPORT THE MATT HAMPSON TRUST
www.matthampson.co.uk
www.matthampson.co.uk
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
I was talking about the other player. Someone just posted that because he was injured more than Hepetemas victim Van Wyk it meant that his ban was longer. Unless I misread.
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7532
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 6:23 am
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
https://twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status ... 79811?s=19
It was me who posted about the injury, I was just quoting off the tweet from the RFU where it has a tick in the player injured column, what would be the real kick in the teeth is if it does mean himself, that means potentially not only is his ban longer because he injured himself (daft I know) but remember the ban doesn't start until he is deemed fit to play again, that means his injury counts double against him...
Used to run around with an 11, 14 or 15 on my back.
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Thanks TS. In a bit of a tantrum about this whole situation as you’ve probably guessedTigerFeetSteve wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 4:04 pmhttps://twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status ... 79811?s=19
It was me who posted about the injury, I was just quoting off the tweet from the RFU where it has a tick in the player injured column, what would be the real kick in the teeth is if it does mean himself, that means potentially not only is his ban longer because he injured himself (daft I know) but remember the ban doesn't start until he is deemed fit to play again, that means his injury counts double against him...
Needs ripping up and starting again for me,common sense needed!
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7532
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 6:23 am
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Well I will seriously lose it if the Carreras gouging incident isn't harshly punished, that was a REAL shocker, but after seeing the French guy only got 2 weeks I'm a little nervous that he may get away without the big ban that deserves...Scott1 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 4:07 pmThanks TS. In a bit of a tantrum about this whole situation as you’ve probably guessedTigerFeetSteve wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 4:04 pmhttps://twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status ... 79811?s=19
It was me who posted about the injury, I was just quoting off the tweet from the RFU where it has a tick in the player injured column, what would be the real kick in the teeth is if it does mean himself, that means potentially not only is his ban longer because he injured himself (daft I know) but remember the ban doesn't start until he is deemed fit to play again, that means his injury counts double against him...
Needs ripping up and starting again for me,common sense needed!
Used to run around with an 11, 14 or 15 on my back.
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
We have to remember what the authorities are trying to achieve here. They aren't trying to get rid of intentional head contact, they're trying to get rid of all avoidable head contact.
The message to Van Wyk is that you need to tackle lower. If you go in completely upright you risk head contact. In fact it's pretty likely you're going to make head contact if you run in upright at another upright person.
Just. Tackle. Lower.
The message to Van Wyk is that you need to tackle lower. If you go in completely upright you risk head contact. In fact it's pretty likely you're going to make head contact if you run in upright at another upright person.
Just. Tackle. Lower.
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Just checked the video to the game and it seems the quins player that Banahan tackled got straght up and didn't look injured to me!!
2:01.07 into the video below:
https://www.premiershiprugby.com/watch/ ... y-round-14
2:01.07 into the video below:
https://www.premiershiprugby.com/watch/ ... y-round-14
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Has Carreras been cited?
SUPPORT THE MATT HAMPSON TRUST
www.matthampson.co.uk
www.matthampson.co.uk
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4828
- Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:01 pm
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
https://www.ruck.co.uk/premiership-star ... -the-eyes/
An RFU statement reads: "Mateo Carreras of Newcastle Falcons will appear before an online independent disciplinary panel on Wednesday evening (24 March 2021)”
Last edited by OakhamTiger32 on Wed Mar 24, 2021 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Oakham lad born and bred, Tigers season ticket holder who is enjoying steady progression back towards the good old days!
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Great...but at the moment, if you tackle at a level where head on head contact is likely but it doesn't happen there is no penalty. Have a clash of heads and it's a red card.Tiglon wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 4:22 pm We have to remember what the authorities are trying to achieve here. They aren't trying to get rid of intentional head contact, they're trying to get rid of all avoidable head contact.
The message to Van Wyk is that you need to tackle lower. If you go in completely upright you risk head contact. In fact it's pretty likely you're going to make head contact if you run in upright at another upright person.
Just. Tackle. Lower.
Doesn't seem quite right. IMHO
Exile Wigstonite living in Wales.
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Willemse got 2 weeks?! What?????!!!
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7532
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 6:23 am
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Stated it was only "contact with the eye area" not either "intentional contact with the eye" or "reckless contact with the eye" and insufficient evidence to the contrary meant it only went in as a low end breach at that. So 4 weeks, down to 2 due to no previous...
https://twitter.com/RugbyInsideLine/sta ... 01479?s=19
I hope the RFU citing committee don't take that sort of line with the Carreras...
Used to run around with an 11, 14 or 15 on my back.
-
- Gold Member
- Posts: 1782
- Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:55 pm
- Location: Birmingham / Bangor Uni
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
I'm really surprised it wasn't deemed reckless contact with the eye - can only assume that Willemse's fingers were on the cheekbone & brow.TigerFeetSteve wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 6:21 pmStated it was only "contact with the eye area" not either "intentional contact with the eye" or "reckless contact with the eye" and insufficient evidence to the contrary meant it only went in as a low end breach at that. So 4 weeks, down to 2 due to no previous...
https://twitter.com/RugbyInsideLine/sta ... 01479?s=19
I hope the RFU citing committee don't take that sort of line with the Carreras...
Also assume it was longer & reduced for good record & behaviour etc.
Re: Injury/Suspensions List
Your post is contradictory:Tigerbeat wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 3:35 pm Rugby is a contact sport and over the years the authorities have done a lot to clean up the game to prevent injuries. Contact with the head has its consequences and is rightly addressed with protocols including sanctions and HIAs etc.
There have been some incidents in recent weeks (Banahan, Van Wyk, Thorley) where the contact has been head on head and all the players have been red carded and subsequently banned...
In my opinion, these were all rugby accidents and did not warrant a Red card.
There was no intent, no forearm or shoulder aiming for the players head. The tackle was made below shoulder height and heads subsequently clashed, tackling player not leading with his head to make contact. Soon we are going to have an instruction that all tackles must be 6" above the waste........may seem ridiculous but there are going to be accidents and this needs to be recognised. The refs are very much in a tunnel where they cannot deviate from the outcome of a red card being awarded.
Am all for players safety, but there are going to be accidental collisions............it is a contact sport.
Red cards should used for foul play where the contact has been made with a forearm, shoulder etc........
If "Contact with the head has its consequences and is rightly addressed with protocols including sanctions and HIAs etc." how can you then say "In my opinion, these were all rugby accidents and did not warrant a Red card."? How you would rightly address contact with head with little (sin bin) or no sanction?
You say they tackle's were made "below shoulder height" so how can there be direct contact to the head?
You say it's "accidental" but it's not accidental that they are making upright tackes is it?
Players should ideally be tackling waist or below. Chest height is OK but potentially leads to rising to the neck which becomes foul play. Players agree and accept this, why can't fans?