Return fixture - Clermont (H) - 16th April 2022

[Scott1]

I'm watching Chessums tackle and I'm desperately trying to give a red for it! Be very surprised if this wasn't rescinded,I've got no doubt Chessum won't accept it.

[northerntiger]

His shoulder hit his head. That’s it. Red

[Scott1]

Mitigation is it was shoulder first. Thats been enough in games before to downgrade to yellow from red so I'm sure that will be the case they will use. Never a red for me just a yellow

[DeadlyDunc]

I'm watching Chessums tackle and I'm desperately trying to give a red for it! Be very surprised if this wasn't rescinded,I've got no doubt Chessum won't accept it.

Can’t see the panel being seen to undermine the argument of the TMO, very rarely happens.

Whatever the minimum ban is available will be the more likely outcome.

I felt, as is understandable, we missed some ball carrying threat around the park in the form of Montoya, Nemzy and Wiese.

It was a bit of a funny game really with CA looking to rescue some pride and us trying (and achieving) a win under any circumstances.

Not sure what you can read into it other than if you make hundreds of tackles against massive opposition you are going to pick up knocks.

Kelly is looking like being a while out (maybe the rest of the season), Montoya doesn’t sound good and i imagine Chessum would have been out for a couple of weeks with that bang to the knee.

Time for the likes of Nadolo, Jasper, Henderson, Martin, Dolly and Moroni to step back up when fit/selected and make those losses as bearable as possible

[Darc Tiger]

Potter's run was beautiful, but it was merely the icing on a top performance. Glad Austin spotlighted him.

[WhitecapTiger]

Mitigation is it was shoulder first. Thats been enough in games before to downgrade to yellow from red so I'm sure that will be the case they will use. Never a red for me just a yellow

+1 but on the basis of this being a 'common sense' view, he'll be tarred and feathered.

[Jimmy Skitz]

His shoulder hit his head. That’s it. Red

they are supposed to take into account the initial contact point so it wasn't "direct to the head" as they stated

[TigerFeetSteve]

His shoulder hit his head. That’s it. Red

they are supposed to take into account the initial contact point so it wasn't "direct to the head" as they stated

This is all on the TMO for me, she clearly states to the ref it is shoulder direct to head. He is miles away from the screen and has to take her word on initial impact. Given what she says he has to give Chessum a red.

[DeadlyDunc]

His shoulder hit his head. That’s it. Red

they are supposed to take into account the initial contact point so it wasn't "direct to the head" as they stated

This is all on the TMO for me, she clearly states to the ref it is shoulder direct to head. He is miles away from the screen and has to take her word on initial impact. Given what she says he has to give Chessum a red.

And it won’t be rescinded to save face and not undermine the poor officials (hope I’m wrong)

[DeadlyDunc]

Potter's run was beautiful, but it was merely the icing on a top performance. Glad Austin spotlighted him.

Some of his hits on Fritz Lee were incredible

[WhitecapTiger]

Potter's run was beautiful, but it was merely the icing on a top performance. Glad Austin spotlighted him.

Some of his hits on Fritz Lee were incredible

Probably get cited <more sarcasm>

[Offside]

Sadly players are hitting higher than in the past and not changing behaviour. Been coached the dominant hit idea. Why not tackle round the waist there? Probably knock him into touch if not next week. Instead target the ball and ride up to hit the head. Coaching point - tackle lower.
We can say it should be a yellow and complain about inconsistency - which I have sympathy with, but most of these tackles do have an element of the tackler rising towards the head, moving the shoulder towards the player and not a wrapping arm or targeting a ball that is carried high on the chest. Taking a risk and since ref changes the risk is higher.

[westwinds31]

Who was the TMO ? Could not wait to chip in and desperate to give a red. Fed up with not just this and last weeks red for Porter, just the ridiculous inconsistency of it all. There’s player welfare and then there’s what we’re witnessing every game pretty much now. Mitigation isn’t even a consideration. The way forward is go low every time as the tackler. How you’re supposed to make that decision in a millisecond I have no idea. Show me a player that will pull out of a tackle because he knows he’s going in high ? So the aim is to cut out any head contact….no sign of it happening.

[kpj tiger]

Sadly players are hitting higher than in the past and not changing behaviour. Been coached the dominant hit idea. Why not tackle round the waist there? Probably knock him into touch if not next week. Instead target the ball and ride up to hit the head. Coaching point - tackle lower.
We can say it should be a yellow and complain about inconsistency - which I have sympathy with, but most of these tackles do have an element of the tackler rising towards the head, moving the shoulder towards the player and not a wrapping arm or targeting a ball that is carried high on the chest. Taking a risk and since ref changes the risk is higher.

Nobody wants to tackle at waist height because of the offload threat, teams would rather risk the odd red in the current climate than allow teams to have free reign with offloads

[Scott1]

TPTB either sort this law out or go ANY head contact equals an automatic red card regardless! They can't be trusted to get it right or use common sense and the inconsistencies are shocking.