[June Tests 2018: 1st Test] South Africa vs. England (09/06/2018)

[TRF_Olyy]

We were definitely targeting Faf on box kicks. Don't believe we were out to injure him, But to put him off his game - hard to concentrate on your kick if you know you're gonna have a 110kg forward smashing you any second

 

[ratsapprentice]

He's allowed to hold his line but not allowed to hit a kicker late with a shoulder to the face. It was a pretty obvious yellow...

Shoulder touching the face =/= shoulder-charge to the face.

Mako is literally walking by the time contact is made.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Shoulder touching the face =/= shoulder-charge to the face.

Mako is literally walking by the time contact is made.

It's a late shoulder to the face, he turns into it and it would have been easier to avoid.

 

[Triple Exe]

Just watched the game again and have to say I was really baffled by the "not rolling way" penalties. The third one against Jamie George he moved about as fast as humanly possible and interfered with nobody getting to the ruck.

 

[ratsapprentice]

It's a late shoulder to the face, he turns into it and it would have been easier to avoid.

Again, shoulder touching the face =/= a shoulder with force.

You see more violent events every day on the tube during rush hour.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Again, shoulder touching the face =/= a shoulder with force.

You see more violent events every day on the tube during rush hour.

He turned into it though, it may not have been a lot of force but there was force. It was a petulant late hit, it's a yellow all day long, any good scrum half is going to react like Faf too.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Can't agree on that.

About as much force as Hugh Hefner's pecker could produce without cialis.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Can't agree on that.

About as much force as Hugh Hefner's pecker could produce without cialis.

Fair enough, my interpretation is that virtually any shoulder to head contact should see at least a yellow card, probably only popular among half backs!

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Just watched the game again and have to say I was really baffled by the "not rolling way" penalties. The third one against Jamie George he moved about as fast as humanly possible and interfered with nobody getting to the ruck.

Especially considering how many times SA players didn't roll away yet never got penalised for it.

 

[Immenso]

Shoulder touching the face =/= shoulder-charge to the face.

Mako is literally walking by the time contact is made.

The silly thing about rugby refereeing is that they're so anal about the no arms / shoulder charge. It's almost like its a point of pride that differentiates them from rugby league (although RL has now also banned shoulder charges, but for decades that was a big difference between the sports). They've doubled down on this in the last few years by getting paranoid about any head contact.

So through referee goggles; Mako's act becomes a late shoulder charge to the head (albeit without much force).

In reality it's just a cheeky bump to the kicker.

If you're going to bump someone late and get away with it, you're obviously not going to use your arms. A late tackle gets seen, a late little 'subtle' shoulder to shoulder (viewed from the corner of your eyes) just looks like an accidental coming together. But if it does get seen then the punishement is often far out of context of the crime.

Rugby refereeing is currently silly because WR head office are removing the ref's room to use their common sense.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I imagine they're covering their backs for when the CTE lawsuits start coming in, like in the NFL.
"We did everything we could to stop contact to the head, and penalised harshly whenever it did occur" kinda thing.

 

[Pom in Exile]

He's allowed to hold his line but not allowed to hit a kicker late with a shoulder to the face. It was a pretty obvious yellow...

He didn't dip his shoulder, he just braced himself, whilst Faf deliberately milked it by running into him and collapsing like a sack of ****.
Joel Stransky the SA commentator having seen the replay a few times said that it was very harsh on Mako, nuff said.

 

[TRF_heineken]

The yellow might have been harsh. But don't look at that incident without context. That was the third/fourth/fifth high/late hit on Faf in the game, Itoje hit him twice before that happened and got penalised for both of them and George also had a late hit on him, but the ref played advantage for that incident and we scored a try, so he didn't go back for the penalty.

Mako got the yellow because his teammates infringed before him, and perhaps him feeling the effects of altitude so late in the game, caused him to have delayed reactions.

It doesn't matter what Faf did, he had the ball, he didn't infringe, he's tiny. The big guys should have known better.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

He didn't dip his shoulder, he just braced himself, whilst Faf deliberately milked it by running into him and collapsing like a sack of ****.
Joel Stransky the SA commentator having seen the replay a few times said that it was very harsh on Mako, nuff said.

First of all lets address the off balanced 80kg scrum half's dive when hit by a 121kg prop, it's not a dive it's physics.

Secondly, why in the world would Mako brace himself for something that would have been easier to avoid? The direction he was running was away from Faf and he turned his shoulder back into him.

Thirdly, One SA commentator said it was harsh is a weaker than weak argument.

I'm amazed a late and high tackle with no arms is actually being disputed as a card, have people been living under rocks since 2016?

 

[Pom in Exile]

The yellow might have been harsh. But don't look at that incident without context. That was the third/fourth/fifth high/late hit on Faf in the game, Itoje hit him twice before that happened and got penalised for both of them and George also had a late hit on him, but the ref played advantage for that incident and we scored a try, so he didn't go back for the penalty.

Mako got the yellow because his teammates infringed before him, and perhaps him feeling the effects of altitude so late in the game, caused him to have delayed reactions.

It doesn't matter what Faf did, he had the ball, he didn't infringe, he's tiny. The big guys should have known better.

It does matter what Faf did, he sold that penalty/YC and the ref was buying it. Pretty sure we don't want that stuff in rugby.
'The big guys should have known better' true in so many ways.

 

[Pom in Exile]

First of all lets address the off balanced 80kg scrum half's dive when hit by a 121kg prop, it's not a dive it's physics.

Secondly, why in the world would Mako brace himself for something that would have been easier to avoid? The direction he was running was away from Faf and he turned his shoulder back into him.

Thirdly, One SA commentator said it was harsh is a weaker than weak argument.

I'm amazed a late and high tackle with no arms is actually being disputed as a card, have people been living under rocks since 2016?

Never said he dived.
Mako didn't change his line...easier for Faf to avoid it given that he was the one who ran into him...deliberately.
Not sure why stating that a SA commentator disagreed with the decision is a weaker than weak argument, having an advocate from the other side is generally pretty helpful I would have thought.
It wasn't high or a no arms tackle, it simply wasn't a tackle.
'Clever' play from Faf if you like that sort of thing but please don't pretend it was something completely different to what it was.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Never said he dived.
Mako didn't change his line...easier for Faf to avoid it given that he was the one who ran into him...deliberately.
Not sure why stating that a SA commentator disagreed with the decision is a weaker than weak argument, having an advocate from the other side is generally pretty helpful I would have thought.
It wasn't high or a no arms tackle, it simply wasn't a tackle.
'Clever' play from Faf if you like that sort of thing but please don't pretend it was something completely different to what it was.

That commentator was Joel Stransky, the guy who kicked the winning drop goal in the 1995 RWC final. But he's a bit iffy on his interpretations when commentating, so I wouldn't take it to heart.

I think the fact that there is no remarks about this by any retired referee, such as Jonathan Kaplan and others, makes me think that most in the business agrees with O'keefe.

We can dispute this issue ad infinitum and drag out this thread as long as you are willing to debate this. But I know as soon as the next match is done and dusted, this will just be a distant memory...

 

[unrated]

I think what's happening here (With regards to the Yellow card) has to do with a theory by Kenneth Burke called Dramatism. He basically says that the human process of relieving guilt follows a predictable pattern, one of these patterns is called victimage. One type of victimage is scapegoating, this is if you do not blame yourselves but instead turn to someone or something else to blame. So, you will need a sacrificial scapegoat to blame and once you sacrifice that scapegoat then you will be purged of sin. The person you are trying to purge of sin is Vunipola, and by saying Faf dived you are using him as a scapegoat as a sacrificial lamb in a way to relieve Vunipola of guilt.

Now the ref saw it the way he did and hence why a yellow card was given, but your attempts to lay the blame on Faf is merely just a result of a process England supporters will engage in to relieve Vunipola from blame.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

https://www.planetrugby.com/news/453303/

Apologies if this has already been posted in this thread. But thought it was quite a good analysis posted up by Sam Larner at Planet Rugby.

 

[Pom in Exile]

I think what's happening here (With regards to the Yellow card) has to do with a theory by Kenneth Burke called Dramatism. He basically says that the human process of relieving guilt follows a predictable pattern, one of these patterns is called victimage. One type of victimage is scapegoating, this is if you do not blame yourselves but instead turn to someone or something else to blame. So, you will need a sacrificial scapegoat to blame and once you sacrifice that scapegoat then you will be purged of sin. The person you are trying to purge of sin is Vunipola, and by saying Faf dived you are using him as a scapegoat as a sacrificial lamb in a way to relieve Vunipola of guilt.

Now the ref saw it the way he did and hence why a yellow card was given, but your attempts to lay the blame on Faf is merely just a result of a process England supporters will engage in to relieve Vunipola from blame.

Just to clarify, I didn't say that he dived and my issue isn't really with Faf, it's O'Keefe, but to be frank the YC didn't cost England the game but it was part of a cumulative effect of some pretty iffy reffing.
Anyhoo, we've got Poite on the weekend so...