Guy Porter red card - Update - 3 week ban
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
-
- Top Cat
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:02 am
Guy Porter red card - Update - 3 week ban
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.
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.
Re: Guy Porter red card
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 Completely unavoidable,hopefully it gets rescinded but I doubt it.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
Re: Guy Porter red card
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
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7419
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 6:23 am
Re: Guy Porter red card
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
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.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7263
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:29 pm
Re: Guy Porter red card
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 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
Re: Guy Porter red card
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
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7263
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:29 pm
Re: Guy Porter red card
I’ve explained it on the match thread and covered itRugbygramps wrote: ↑Sun Apr 10, 2022 8:45 pmScott it’s a still photo showing a snapshot in time, it shows what it shows
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Re: Guy Porter red card
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.
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.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4642
- Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:01 pm
Re: Guy Porter red card
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/
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!
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4954
- Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:19 pm
- Location: Thurnby Lodge
Re: Guy Porter red card
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 cardedRugbygramps 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
Re: Guy Porter red card
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.
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"
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Re: Guy Porter red card
Haha, never run at speed in defence then, otherwise you might get a red card
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.
Re: Guy Porter red card
Nope ;) Poor naive referees / poor laws would be the only thing I would understand in both situations ;)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.
Re: Guy Porter red card
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.
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.