Guy Porter red card - Update - 3 week ban

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

Post Reply
Yorkshire man
Top Cat
Top Cat
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:02 am

Guy Porter red card - Update - 3 week ban

Post by Yorkshire man »

I appreciate that player safety should be paramount in all we do in this game, but I really struggle to understand why Guy Porter got a red card today. Watching on TV, two players who seemed to be unaware of the presence of each other clashed heads, and Porter came off the best from the collision. There was no malice or bad intent from either player, and it seemed to be an accident. I listened with disbelief to the referee discussing the incident with his fellow officials and struggled to comprehend what they were saying. It seemed that they started from red card and never veered from that decision. Surely for it to be a red card issue there must be some intent, and there was clearly none from either player. How was Porter judged to be the offender. He wasn't making a tackle as neither player was particularly near the ball. Was he judged to be the aggressor simply because the Clermont player was bloodied and suffered more from the incident.

I sincerely hope for his sake that when he appears before the disciplinary panel common sense prevails and it is judged that the sending off was sufficient punishment.
Scott1
Super User
Super User
Posts: 16783
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Scott1 »

It was a shocker,one of the worse decisions I’ve ever seen! Completely unavoidable,hopefully it gets rescinded but I doubt it. I’m gonna sound like a broken record but I don’t care,the law needs revisiting end of season and putting right. It’s ridiculous that officials have been instructed to hand out red cards for any head contact (ok I’m simplifying it a bit) but let’s just bring back some common sense for goodness sakes. That’s not even a penalty let alone a red card!
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Old Hob
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4111
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:15 pm

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Old Hob »

There does not need to be intent as that is impossible to prove. Porter, in the eyes of the officials, ran in at speed which was deemed reckless.
Omnia dicta fortiora si dicta Latina
TigerFeetSteve
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7419
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 6:23 am

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by TigerFeetSteve »

It's one of those like the Liebenberg one vs Wasps last year where it was completely accidental, but I can completely understand why it was given if that makes sense.

Doubt it'll be recinded. Hopefully he passed his HIA otherwise ban is delayed till he's back fit to play which may extend the period
Used to run around with an 11, 14 or 15 on my back.
Rugbygramps
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7263
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:29 pm

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Rugbygramps »

Already being discussed ad nauseum on the match thread.
Duty of care is one of the things discussed as well as being completely off the ball.
There is a still photo showing the clash that given the 2 players height difference shows direct contact head to temple with Porter upright and Lee bending slightly.
Of course completely accidental, imo the right decision but also hope the red is deemed sufficient
Scott1
Super User
Super User
Posts: 16783
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Scott1 »

A still or a video replay slowed down or speeded up can do whatever your mind wants it to do
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Rugbygramps
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7263
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:29 pm

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Rugbygramps »

Scott1 wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 8:44 pm A still or a video replay slowed down or speeded up can do whatever your mind wants it to do
Scott it’s a still photo showing a snapshot in time, it shows what it shows
Scott1
Super User
Super User
Posts: 16783
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Scott1 »

Rugbygramps wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 8:45 pm
Scott1 wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 8:44 pm A still or a video replay slowed down or speeded up can do whatever your mind wants it to do
Scott it’s a still photo showing a snapshot in time, it shows what it shows
I’ve explained it on the match thread and covered it
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Ian Cant
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1909
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Ian Cant »

By the letter of today’s laws Potter had to be given red: it might be like Kalamafoni the other week so the sending off will suffice: I doubt it though.
The discussion should be more about consistency. As covered by BT and I was amazed at the time, Gibson Park’s was far worse yet only yellow.
Like some others I thought the tackle on Steward was no arms: had it been Weise or Tuilagi I think it would certainly have been looked at.
Last season there was more consistency but this season in all competitions there has been plenty of inconsistency!
However, we won and with 14 played as well as we have done.
OakhamTiger32
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4642
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:01 pm

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by OakhamTiger32 »

One view on Porter’s red card:

https://rugbyonslaught.com/leicester-ti ... er-player/

And another:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... oric-away/
Oakham lad born and bred, Tigers season ticket holder who is enjoying steady progression back towards the good old days!
Jimmy Skitz
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4954
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:19 pm
Location: Thurnby Lodge

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Jimmy Skitz »

Rugbygramps wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 8:42 pm Already being discussed ad nauseum on the match thread.
Duty of care is one of the things discussed as well as being completely off the ball.
There is a still photo showing the clash that given the 2 players height difference shows direct contact head to temple with Porter upright and Lee bending slightly.
Of course completely accidental, imo the right decision but also hope the red is deemed sufficient
duty of care refers to a tackle or a clear out, Porter was going for an interception attempt as their 10 dummied a pass there was no foul play and he shouldn't have been red carded
Big Dai
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 6:04 pm
Location: Abergavenny

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Big Dai »

I've had about enough of this!

How about contact with the Head = yellow card. Player not allowed back on. Disciplinary sits to determine ban.

The oficiating team diissecting the event live doesn't seem to be working. Get the offending player off. Then work out the penalty or rehabilitation.
Exile Wigstonite living in Wales.
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Pellsey
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2163
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Luxembourg

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Pellsey »

Old Hob wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 8:38 pm There does not need to be intent as that is impossible to prove. Porter, in the eyes of the officials, ran in at speed which was deemed reckless.
Haha, never run at speed in defence then, otherwise you might get a red card :smt046

IMO intent is normally obvious, and this had absolutely zero intent.

Such reds make a farce of the game. The law needs changing. Or at least, sirs should have the right to make common sense decisions based on circumstances such as accidents and not being able to see the opposition, with whom you are just about to make contact.

At least it didn't affect the result.
Pellsey
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2163
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Luxembourg

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Pellsey »

TigerFeetSteve wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 8:38 pm It's one of those like the Liebenberg one vs Wasps last year where it was completely accidental, but I can completely understand why it was given if that makes sense.
Nope ;) Poor naive referees / poor laws would be the only thing I would understand in both situations ;)
Downsouth
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:47 pm
Location: Haywards Heath

Re: Guy Porter red card

Post by Downsouth »

There are a few things wrong for me
A) if it's red then surely that's not the kind of offence that section was designed for
B) I would have thought many refs would have given yellow and it sounded like the TMO thought yellow
C) We had quite a few replays and different angles for that challenge but strangely not the hit on steward. The joys of French TV!

The performance with 14 was absolutely outstanding. Hopefully just a short ban.
Post Reply