Red Cards & HIA
-
@brodean said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@booboo said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
Beirne wasn't set up to tackle. He was set up to brace for impact from a dummy runner.
So again, upright and driving up? Ball or no ball he put himself into that position.
He wasn't driving up at all.
I thought that initially but on some angles it looks like he's driving up and into it.
Look at about 9s here on the second angle.
https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/1olyafz/tadhg_beirne_yellow_upgraded_to_red_card/
In the second angle his leading leg goes from bent to fully extended upwards on contact which is not a good look because his full bodyweight is leading into it when he connects.
To me, he's just taken a step, which I guess means his trajectory is marginally upwards? The 2nd angle is from below which makes it look worse, just as the first angle is from above and it doesn't look like that at all.
I don't think you can watch it at full speed and tell me that he's deliberately driving up - he's genuinely surprised by the ball being thrown forward to BB in a ridiculous position. -
@nonpartizan said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Richie8-7 said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Richie8-7 said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Richie8-7 said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@No-Quarter said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate I am TRYING to be positive here!!
To try to counter that point, I think the impact of their forwards tiring is less in the modern game given you can replace so much of your pack in the 2nd 40. If we'd built a lead during that period you could say that it had a big impact, but as it stands it was them that went ahead, so I don't think the impact of that card was as bad as it could have been for Ireland.
Yeah sorry to bring you down bro.
It's less impactful, but I think it's still a pretty big deal: 20 minutes with 14 you may do well to limit the damage, but still have the fatigue from that effort affect you late in the game.
Think I'm right in saying that Beirne is one of their 80 minute guys too? (and he's certainly a workhorse).We had 20 minutes with 14 in 2023 against a much better Irish side and still won.
Not sure that's a great example. We started really well, and had to make a mountain of tackles and hang on for grim death late in the game to scrape the win because of those cards. Sam Whitelock with the turnover after 30+ phases, and I think Jordie also held someone up over the line? Replay that game 100 x and I think most times we lose it because of the cards.
So an example of a match where a team won is not a good example of a team winning with 14 players for 20 minutes? Good lord. Ireland didn't just lose on Sunday, they got hammered 4 tries to 1 and the final score flattered them.
Ireland also should have had a yellow card in 2023 for a high tackle that was never reviewed after we kicked a 50-22. And in that last play there were 2 forward passes, neck roll on Ioane and a clear penalty won by Ardie. So not only did we win with 14 players for 20 mins, we won against the tide of terrible decisions.
It can be done, and obviously happens sometimes - but, "good lord", that doesn't mean the card doesn't matter.
We took the lead in about the 60th minute. They were poor, sure. But if we aren't in front for 3/4 of the game, I don't really think it's a hammering.The card does matter of course, which is why you shouldn't make a no arms tackle with a shoulder to the head. I was saying it is still possible to win.
And yes, it is a hammering. It's an 80 minute game, not 60. 33-13 would have been a fair reflection. If the score at 60 minutes had any relevance there wouldn't be so much angst about the Springboks match in Wellington.
Fair point.
The Boks didn't take a lead this year v ABs until after 2 entire hours of rugby yet it's the last 20 minutes in Wellington that is afforded all the attention.
If we hyper focus on that the same thing has to apply in reverse. Otherwise we are unfairly critiquing the ABs.
For me the Irish played 60 mins with even numbers and didn't create a lot of try scoring opportunities so I don't feel like anyone should be overly generous to them. They can feel hard done by but I don't think it's why they lost.
I'm certainly not saying that is why they lost, they were poor: error-prone and couldn't even control their own set-piece.
What I am saying is that we were pretty bloody mediocre too for most of that game - and our win should be taken with their poor performance and the card as context. -
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@nonpartizan said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Richie8-7 said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Richie8-7 said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Richie8-7 said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@No-Quarter said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate I am TRYING to be positive here!!
To try to counter that point, I think the impact of their forwards tiring is less in the modern game given you can replace so much of your pack in the 2nd 40. If we'd built a lead during that period you could say that it had a big impact, but as it stands it was them that went ahead, so I don't think the impact of that card was as bad as it could have been for Ireland.
Yeah sorry to bring you down bro.
It's less impactful, but I think it's still a pretty big deal: 20 minutes with 14 you may do well to limit the damage, but still have the fatigue from that effort affect you late in the game.
Think I'm right in saying that Beirne is one of their 80 minute guys too? (and he's certainly a workhorse).We had 20 minutes with 14 in 2023 against a much better Irish side and still won.
Not sure that's a great example. We started really well, and had to make a mountain of tackles and hang on for grim death late in the game to scrape the win because of those cards. Sam Whitelock with the turnover after 30+ phases, and I think Jordie also held someone up over the line? Replay that game 100 x and I think most times we lose it because of the cards.
So an example of a match where a team won is not a good example of a team winning with 14 players for 20 minutes? Good lord. Ireland didn't just lose on Sunday, they got hammered 4 tries to 1 and the final score flattered them.
Ireland also should have had a yellow card in 2023 for a high tackle that was never reviewed after we kicked a 50-22. And in that last play there were 2 forward passes, neck roll on Ioane and a clear penalty won by Ardie. So not only did we win with 14 players for 20 mins, we won against the tide of terrible decisions.
It can be done, and obviously happens sometimes - but, "good lord", that doesn't mean the card doesn't matter.
We took the lead in about the 60th minute. They were poor, sure. But if we aren't in front for 3/4 of the game, I don't really think it's a hammering.The card does matter of course, which is why you shouldn't make a no arms tackle with a shoulder to the head. I was saying it is still possible to win.
And yes, it is a hammering. It's an 80 minute game, not 60. 33-13 would have been a fair reflection. If the score at 60 minutes had any relevance there wouldn't be so much angst about the Springboks match in Wellington.
Fair point.
The Boks didn't take a lead this year v ABs until after 2 entire hours of rugby yet it's the last 20 minutes in Wellington that is afforded all the attention.
If we hyper focus on that the same thing has to apply in reverse. Otherwise we are unfairly critiquing the ABs.
For me the Irish played 60 mins with even numbers and didn't create a lot of try scoring opportunities so I don't feel like anyone should be overly generous to them. They can feel hard done by but I don't think it's why they lost.
I'm certainly not saying that is why they lost, they were poor: error-prone and couldn't even control their own set-piece.
What I am saying is that we were pretty bloody mediocre too for most of that game - and our win should be taken with their poor performance and the card as context.Fair enough, can't disagree with you there.
I will admit my opinion is slightly coloured by listening to a few of the Irish journalists/podcasters whinging about the card when they had been talking up their chances in the week leading to the test. Came across as poor losers because for me, card or not they didn't do enough to feel they should have won that match.
But yeah I agree with you - context is important. The first half was appalling and it wasnt untill the hour mark that they hit their stride.
-
@brodean said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@booboo said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
Beirne wasn't set up to tackle. He was set up to brace for impact from a dummy runner.
So again, upright and driving up? Ball or no ball he put himself into that position.
He wasn't driving up at all.
I thought that initially but on some angles it looks like he's driving up and into it.
Look at about 9s here on the second angle.
https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/1olyafz/tadhg_beirne_yellow_upgraded_to_red_card/
In the second angle his leading leg goes from bent to fully extended upwards on contact which is not a good look because his full bodyweight is leading into it when he connects.
He's certainly moving forwards and in anticipation of having to make a tackle doesn't look to be preparing to grasp. Quite the opposite.
I don't understand the argument that he didn't expect to have to make one either. Being in the defensive line must have confused him.
Outside of acts of filth, this is as clear as a red card gets. And while Beaudy is being the bigger man - a stoic, magnanimous Kiwi - the demented are trotting that out as proof it shouldn't have been a card.
-
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@brodean said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@booboo said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
Beirne wasn't set up to tackle. He was set up to brace for impact from a dummy runner.
So again, upright and driving up? Ball or no ball he put himself into that position.
He wasn't driving up at all.
I thought that initially but on some angles it looks like he's driving up and into it.
Look at about 9s here on the second angle.
https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/1olyafz/tadhg_beirne_yellow_upgraded_to_red_card/
In the second angle his leading leg goes from bent to fully extended upwards on contact which is not a good look because his full bodyweight is leading into it when he connects.
To me, he's just taken a step, which I guess means his trajectory is marginally upwards? The 2nd angle is from below which makes it look worse, just as the first angle is from above and it doesn't look like that at all.
I don't think you can watch it at full speed and tell me that he's deliberately driving up - he's genuinely surprised by the ball being thrown forward to BB in a ridiculous position.Angus Ta'avao was probably genuinely surprised too when he got smashed in the face and knocked out followed by a red card.
-
@brodean said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@brodean said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@booboo said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
Beirne wasn't set up to tackle. He was set up to brace for impact from a dummy runner.
So again, upright and driving up? Ball or no ball he put himself into that position.
He wasn't driving up at all.
I thought that initially but on some angles it looks like he's driving up and into it.
Look at about 9s here on the second angle.
https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/1olyafz/tadhg_beirne_yellow_upgraded_to_red_card/
In the second angle his leading leg goes from bent to fully extended upwards on contact which is not a good look because his full bodyweight is leading into it when he connects.
To me, he's just taken a step, which I guess means his trajectory is marginally upwards? The 2nd angle is from below which makes it look worse, just as the first angle is from above and it doesn't look like that at all.
I don't think you can watch it at full speed and tell me that he's deliberately driving up - he's genuinely surprised by the ball being thrown forward to BB in a ridiculous position.Angus Ta'avao was probably genuinely surprised too when he got smashed in the face and knocked out followed by a red card.
Absolutely, and again in that instance I think the game is worse for that being a red card.
-
@booboo said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
Ball or no ball he put himself into that position.
This! I go against the grain on the "accidental so ok" bollocks.
As Joey Swoll says, you need to do better.
9 times out of 10, foul play is simply players putting themselves in a poor position and/or trying to do something they shouldn't, being reckless and sometimes wilfully ignorant. This is the same argument that gives players a free pass to wipe out players in the air with "but sir, he was only watching the ball the whole time". Yeah numpty, that's the fucking issue.
Be aware, act consciously, take responsibility. These are well paid professional players and coaches.
-
@Bones said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@booboo said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
Ball or no ball he put himself into that position.
This! I go against the grain on the "accidental so ok" bollocks.
As Joey Swoll says, you need to do better.
9 times out of 10, foul play is simply players putting themselves in a poor position and/or trying to do something they shouldn't, being reckless and sometimes wilfully ignorant. This is the same argument that gives players a free pass to wipe out players in the air with "but sir, he was only watching the ball the whole time". Yeah numpty, that's the fucking issue.
Be aware, act consciously, take responsibility. These are well paid professional players and coaches.
I agree with this sentiment most of the time when a tackler doesn't get low (and all the time when the tackler has time to get low), but in this instance he had no time and wasn't even looking to tackle - I get you don't think that makes a difference, but to me it kinda does. It's not realistic for the game to be played by 15 blokes crouching, and he's being penalised for a dangerous tackle when he hasn't actually even attempted a tackle. Yes I see the argument that he's part of the defensive line so of course he's there to make a tackle - but in practical terms I think he's just taking the space to prevent anyone trying to go through there - which is why neither he or BB expected the pass.
That's why the argument from the Irish about the pass being forward - because at that point BB wasn't a realistic recipient, so the tackler wasn't prepared. It's a shit argument of course, because it's immaterial to the current interpretations, but personally I do see it as mitigating and I'd expect it to get him off any further sanctions -
@reprobate you can't see the fault in that argument I take it?
Right, so he's lined up in defence, advanced then had time to note the pass would be forward so adjusted in that very short amount of time to not attempt a tackle, but brace himself to a shoulder charge with decent force and a tucked elbow.
So he was either prepared to make a tackle and readjusted in the time we're saying people can't make decisions, or he was reckless and wasn't prepared to make a legal tackle.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Tim said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
The mitigation was it was a forward pass
That is a unique excuse. No one else saw it, nor did would it have impacted the tackle situation.
Come on ...
Kelleher asked the ref to look at the pass. Ref didn't.
Beirne wasn't set up to tackle. He was set up to brace for impact from a dummy runner.
Then it changed in an instant and he made head contact in the collision.
It certainly wasn't a tackle.
It also certainly wasnt a forward pass. Was Beirne offside?
-
@DaGrubster said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Tim said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
The mitigation was it was a forward pass
That is a unique excuse. No one else saw it, nor did would it have impacted the tackle situation.
Come on ...
Kelleher asked the ref to look at the pass. Ref didn't.
Beirne wasn't set up to tackle. He was set up to brace for impact from a dummy runner.
Then it changed in an instant and he made head contact in the collision.
It certainly wasn't a tackle.
It also certainly wasnt a forward pass. Was Beirne offside?
I'm not sure on the logic there?
-
didn't see it live, don't have a dog in this fight, but for me re the red card, it certainly was a few years ago, ref teams much quicker to apply mitigation these days. I'm not as familiar with how things are reffed under the 20 min red card.
IMO he braced for impact rather than tucked and drove a shoulder, to that end i'm a bit surprised in the current game that he wasn't seen as passive in the contact as he absorbed the impact and went backwards as much as JB did. I've no real issue with it given recent years but am surprised at the vigor with which are some are claiming its the clearest red you'll see, think could easily have stayed yellow.
I blame world rugby for this lack of clarity, before the last world cup, and in some games in it (particularly in the early rounds) the interpretations were way stricter and mitigations far less regularly applied than we saw in later stages and since.
-
@Dodge you made me watch it again, as we apparently have different versions of backwards. Can't say it looks the same to me.
What is most apparent though is how laughable it is to suggest the guy one out from the ruck isn't expecting to make a tackle when the halfback picks and drifts to his side.
-
genuine question - are you saying that in the first shot in that clip you don't see Beirne bounce backwards after the contact? The clip you posted shows pretty clearly from the first angle that Beirne takes three steps back immediately after the contact takes place, it actually also shows that BB actually keeps travelling forwards and spins slightly to the side line. I would argue that's passive in contact, which these days usually provides enough mitigation.
I understand it was upgraded to a 20 min red because of the level of danger, which with a shoulder to the head I can follow the logic, it just seems to fly slightly in the face of what I've seen more recently. Just my twopenneth
-
@Bones thank you for the Joey Swoll reference. Being implored to do better by a muscle bound gym bro is what the world needs more of.
-
@Dodge said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
I blame world rugby for this lack of clarity, before the last world cup, and in some games in it (particularly in the early rounds) the interpretations were way stricter and mitigations far less regularly applied than we saw in later stages and since.
the fact that people on here are passionate fans who have watched alot of rugby at all levels, and we have differing interpretations of these kinds of incidents kinda sums up the hole that World Rugby have created and seem incapable of getting out of.
-
@Dodge that's an interesting perspective, thanks. I don't have time to watch a lot of NH rugby, so my impression from the last RWC is that the push for cards for these types of incidents came strongly from the north. And further to that, Ireland themselves have a history of calling for cards for the opposition whenever there is some form of accidental head contact. So to that end, they made their bed, they can lie in it now. If that is changing then that's a good thing, but as we are all saying, the directive from WR has to be crystal clear on this, but right now it's as clear as mud.
-
@Mauss said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@reprobate said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Mauss re the loose forward comparison vs Ireland - the red card has to make a big difference there. The Irish were buggered late in the game, they had to make a lot of tackles as you point out. Also the fact that it was Beirne, who is an extra loose forward for them, and one of their best.
Sititi came on and dominated late - looks like if you take out his carry metres, the Irish had more? So are we really doing the right thing with our starting loosies?That, to me, just comes across as letting the Irish loose forwards off the hook rather easily. Aren’t Jack Conan and Josh Van der Flier both 50-cappers while also being British and Irish Lions? They should be able to lift for 20 minutes with Beirne off the field, after which he could be replaced. That’s not even mentioning another 50-capper on the bench in Caelan Doris.
Again, my intention wasn't to claim that the AB back row is particularly settled: blindside remains an issue while Savea’s eclectic positioning makes any loose forward combination a complex exercise. But, for now at least, there are a few things which are working, and that’s including Sititi’s performances off the bench. After a difficult start it would’ve been easy for a player like Sititi to spiral so the fact that he’s once again putting in performances – even in shorter bursts – is good to see.
It's far from perfect but it's also not quite a disaster either.
I think they did lift for 20 minutes: we certainly weren't able to take advantage. My point is that this extra effort tells late in the game, and I think it means any comparison of loose forward stats has to come with a little caveat. Was it better? Yes in some ways, but...
-
@DaGrubster said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@Tim said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
@MiketheSnow said in Ireland v All Blacks - Chicago2:
The mitigation was it was a forward pass
That is a unique excuse. No one else saw it, nor did would it have impacted the tackle situation.
Come on ...
Kelleher asked the ref to look at the pass. Ref didn't.
Beirne wasn't set up to tackle. He was set up to brace for impact from a dummy runner.
Then it changed in an instant and he made head contact in the collision.
It certainly wasn't a tackle.
It also certainly wasnt a forward pass. Was Beirne offside?
Ya what?
No he wasn't offside. It was a forward pass. The two are not related.
