[2018 Super Rugby] Round 2: Crusaders vs. Chiefs (24/02/2018)

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Does anyone think DMac will evolve into a top class 10? I personally am not optmistic. Is there any suggestion he is happy to experiment like this?

 

[dasNdanger]

In terms of the Laws of the Game, it was absolutely the correct decision, An act of foul play that prevents a probable try being scored = penalty try against the team and a yellow card issued to the offender.

As to whether the Laws should be like that, well that is a discussion that is above my pay grade, but I will say this. If you don't have a penalty try in that situation, then you open the door for players to deliberately commit foul play to prevent a try being scored. This is something you see in RL quite often and I would not like to see it in our game

Yeah, I guess you're right. I think the problem (I have) is that the defender had little option because the player was diving for the line. It did look to me as if he hit his shoulder, not neck, first...but because of the downward momentum his arm ended up around the neck. I get that a yellow card = penalty try at that point, but I question whether it was initially a bad tackle, or rather one that evolved into a bad tackle due to circumstances out of the defender's control.

das

 

[Gena_ZA]

Does anyone think DMac will evolve into a top class 10? I personally am not optmistic. Is there any suggestion he is happy to experiment like this?

He could but he is worth so much more in space, NZ have plenty of class no 10's.
DMac is a match winner at 15

 

[smartcooky]

Yeah, I guess you're right. I think the problem (I have) is that the defender had little option because the player was diving for the line. It did look to me as if he hit his shoulder, not neck, first...but because of the downward momentum his arm ended up around the neck. I get that a yellow card = penalty try at that point, but I question whether it was initially a bad tackle, or rather one that evolved into a bad tackle due to circumstances out of the defender's control.

das

The new protocol means that the head is protected. In the course of making a tackle or cleaning out a player, the tackler makes:

1. any contact with the head = penalty
2. direct contact with the head = penalty + yellow card
3. direct contact with the head, with with force = penalty + red card

Mitigation is then applied in circumstances where the player slips or is ducking into the tackle.

In this case if you listen to the conversation between the referee and Sam Cane, he made it quite clear that the high tackle was a penalty only offence (#1 above) but it was committing foul play on the ball carrier who was in the act of scoring the try (resulting in a penalty try) that made it a yellow card. That tackle anywhere else on the field or not in the act of scoring would have been a penalty only. On that count, earlier in the match, Alaalatoa swung his arm and made direct contact with a player's head with some force but was only yellow carded. IMO, he was damned lucky it wasn't red.

As to the argument "what else could he do?" or "the defender had no option", well sorry, I don't buy it. Why should a defender get a free pass in committing foul play just because he is trying to stop a try. I think the defender in this scenario was out of position, or rather, there should have been another defender on the blind side who could have come forward and tackled Crotty before he started to dive for the line. We should not give defenders a free pass just because their team allowed themselves to get into position to concede a try. Let me put this scenario to you....

The same scenario but 5m further from the try line and there is a defender on the ground just past the last foot (so he's onside). Crotty runs left and has an open run to the try line with no other defenders in sight. The player on the ground sticks out a foot and trips Crotty.

What would you rule?

Would you still think "what else could he do?" or "the defender had no option" are valid defenses for the actions of the player on the ground?

 

[Zero]

Does anyone think DMac will evolve into a top class 10? I personally am not optmistic. Is there any suggestion he is happy to experiment like this?

I'd put money on it being a probable failed "experiment". Would rather him at FB with Ben Smith hitting the twilight of his career, Gatlin and Mo'Unga seem like really good prospects too.

 

[Hound]

I'd have him at fullback, but I don't think it hurts giving him the odd Super Rugby game at 10. Trend at International level tends to be to have two playmaker "halves" out there and the second tends to play at either 12 or 15. With New Zealand's depth of hard ball-running, offloading 12s and using the 13 as a Conrad Smith/Slade lines off the big 12 looking to offload it makes sense for that second playmaker to come in the form of a fullback slipping into the line in that role for the odd phase.

Give him the odd game at 10 it lets him focus on that aspect... but yeah, he's invaluable when given space to cut teams apart.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Agree on what people are saying on DMac; had a bit of a nightmare this game and he failed there for the Maoris vs the Lions as well. I don't really see the point on transforming a world class fullback into a mediocre 10.

I'd look to give him the odd bit of game time at 10 so that he's able to cover there from the 22 shirt for the ABs if necessary but for the most part he'll cover the back three. Realistically there's no reason to move Beauden away from 10 so unless he's injured then cover from the bench shouldn't be needed. And if it is, then DMac's able to briefly fill in.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

The new protocol means that the head is protected. In the course of making a tackle or cleaning out a player, the tackler makes:

1. any contact with the head = penalty
2. direct contact with the head = penalty + yellow card
3. direct contact with the head, with with force = penalty + red card

Mitigation is then applied in circumstances where the player slips or is ducking into the tackle.

In this case if you listen to the conversation between the referee and Sam Cane, he made it quite clear that the high tackle was a penalty only offence (#1 above) but it was committing foul play on the ball carrier who was in the act of scoring the try (resulting in a penalty try) that made it a yellow card. That tackle anywhere else on the field or not in the act of scoring would have been a penalty only. On that count, earlier in the match, Alaalatoa swung his arm and made direct contact with a player's head with some force but was only yellow carded. IMO, he was damned lucky it wasn't red.

As to the argument "what else could he do?" or "the defender had no option", well sorry, I don't buy it. Why should a defender get a free pass in committing foul play just because he is trying to stop a try. I think the defender in this scenario was out of position, or rather, there should have been another defender on the blind side who could have come forward and tackled Crotty before he started to dive for the line. We should not give defenders a free pass just because their team allowed themselves to get into position to concede a try. Let me put this scenario to you....

The same scenario but 5m further from the try line and there is a defender on the ground just past the last foot (so he's onside). Crotty runs left and has an open run to the try line with no other defenders in sight. The player on the ground sticks out a foot and trips Crotty.

What would you rule?

Would you still think "what else could he do?" or "the defender had no option" are valid defenses for the actions of the player on the ground?

While I completely agree with your point that foul play can't be excused just because you have no other option (except for not doing anything), I question how a player is able to legally defend a player diving over the try line. It is almost inevitable that contact with the head is going to occur, because diving players naturally lead with their head. I think a penalty try/yellow card was exceptionally harsh in the circumstances, and if ducking is a reason for reducing a red card to yellow then I don't see why diving is isn't a reason for reducing a penalty to nothing - that's my major issue with last night's display of refereeing - complete lack of consistency. Also Crotty's first try should have absolutely been taken back for a knock on, the ball clearly hits his arm first before touching his head.

The Chiefs should have had a penalty back in the Crusaders 22 (right after Mo'unga got carded), instead of the penalty going to the Crusaders. Todd clearly never released the tackled player before trying to steal the ball. A few minutes later the Chiefs are penalised for exactly the same thing and the Crusaders subsequently score a try. Just bloody frustrating to watch when the ref is making inconsistent calls regularly.

 

[mania]

Does anyone think DMac will evolve into a top class 10? I personally am not optmistic. Is there any suggestion he is happy to experiment like this?

not this season. has a lot to learn yet. havent seen any good game management from him. a 10 has to be able to preserve his forwards gas tank and utilise his backline. atm dMac tries too hard to do everything himself.

 

[Larksea]

I thought DMac was very good at 10, he setup trys and looked dangerous but also looked like he was being a bit more conservative and responsible. He will be great anywhere, FB, wing, 10 even midfield. He is just one of those rare players with all the skills, vision and that added x factor, much like Ben Smith.
I dont like Faauli at 12, I think he will hamper Dmac and the chiefs there. Faauli worked hard and looked good on defense but his attacking game and vision looks very limited to me. The chiefs backline would be so much better with Ngatai at 12. Put Ngatai at 12 and the chiefs backline is one of the the best in the comp, but with Faauli at 12 it just wont be anywhere near that level.
Faauli has a lot of potential. He looks like Nonu and its a good comparison to Nonu's early career. Nonu had more xfactor back then than Faauli does. But like Faauli, Nonu lacked vision and distribution skills early in his career and was best suited out on the wing.

I would like to see Faauli model his career on Nonu. Nonu was great because despite being naturally very strong, instead of using power to beat defenders he relied on footwork and over time he developed an excellent passing game.