European Club Rugby
-
Times this morning was raving it up re Johnno & Matt Dawson tossed his name out on BBC radio.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/johnson-can-bring-steely-edge-back-to-welford-road-g8xql0pn5
-
Ah, cheers. Hadn't seen that. Can't see it at all, as the guy hasn't had a job in rugby for more than 5 years now.
It could be viable if they just need a hands off motivational director & let Mauger decide the tactics & coach
The issue with Cockerill v Mauger is both were hands on tracksuit managers telling the players what they wanted every day. And they each wanted different things. And Cockerill was VERY vocal & "my way of the highway" with players - hence them all leaving.
But yeah, if they want an actual hands on coach, a guy who has done nothing in rugby for 5 years does not exactly look like what they need.
-
@Pot-Hale said in NH club rugby:
@Crucial said in NH club rugby:
Nuci has a track record of upsetting apple carts. He's on his third country of doing it now.
I'm ok with his grand plan if it keeps resulting in development of new Irish players being capped as occurred in the last 12 months.
Lam said a few weeks ago that he'd relinquished control of recruitment of new players into the squad given his departure in a few months. That is now being managed by other coaching staff with Nucifora's continuing oversight. His son, Mitch, is playing with Connacht Eagles currently. But he may leave for U.K. with his family so the hard decision may be that those committed long-term to the club continue to be used or get a step up.
That is all understandable, however rules are made to be bent when need be and the current injury situation probably warrants a little bending of the rules, especially when other teams have had concessions.
I suspect that it is a case of no favours going Lam's way after he decide to leave. Nuci possibly takes it as a personal slight. Also don't forget that Nuci was pushed/left his job at the Blues in favour of Lam so there is a fair bit of untold history in this soap opera.
@Crucial said in NH club rugby:
@Pot-Hale said in NH club rugby:
@Crucial said in NH club rugby:
Nuci has a track record of upsetting apple carts. He's on his third country of doing it now.
I'm ok with his grand plan if it keeps resulting in development of new Irish players being capped as occurred in the last 12 months.
Lam said a few weeks ago that he'd relinquished control of recruitment of new players into the squad given his departure in a few months. That is now being managed by other coaching staff with Nucifora's continuing oversight. His son, Mitch, is playing with Connacht Eagles currently. But he may leave for U.K. with his family so the hard decision may be that those committed long-term to the club continue to be used or get a step up.
That is all understandable, however rules are made to be bent when need be and the current injury situation probably warrants a little bending of the rules, especially when other teams have had concessions.
I suspect that it is a case of no favours going Lam's way after he decide to leave. Nuci possibly takes it as a personal slight. Also don't forget that Nuci was pushed/left his job at the Blues in favour of Lam so there is a fair bit of untold history in this soap opera.
True that. I don't think Ulster or Leinster figure they've had any favours given so far. Pienaar's required departure at season end and van der Merwe going from Ulster. Nuci's refusal on a foreign Leinster 10 resulting in Carberry's promotion was a good move. Nacewa and Kirchener's contracts are also up at season end but early noises about Dagg being a replacement don't seem realistic.
-
That's the first time I've even heard Johnson's name mentioned in relation to it and even then, the author was just reeling off ex Leicester players with coaching experience. Who's every man and his dog in this case?
In other news, Manu Tuilagi gone for the season with knee ligament damage picked up at the weekend. Unrelated to his previous injuries.
@Margin_Walker said in NH club rugby:
In other news, Manu Tuilagi gone for the season with knee ligament damage picked up at the weekend. Unrelated to his previous injuries.
He just can't get a break.
-
looks like he jumped, realised he had no show and readied for the contact.
Is this one where the guys landing was a factor in the colour of the card? If he had flipped a bit more, landed on his feet, run away and scored would they still have carded Pisi?
-
[Brit Journo Mode] Clear red card, made no attempt at all to do anything to avoid the collision, things like this must be taken out of the game. No doubt if the player was dressed in Black though, would have gotten away with a warning [/Brit Journo Mode]
Honestly, the fact that is a red, and the fact that most people agree that it should be a red, leaves me in fear for the game.
-
[Brit Journo Mode] Clear red card, made no attempt at all to do anything to avoid the collision, things like this must be taken out of the game. No doubt if the player was dressed in Black though, would have gotten away with a warning [/Brit Journo Mode]
Honestly, the fact that is a red, and the fact that most people agree that it should be a red, leaves me in fear for the game.
-
Because punching is a red card. Kicking is a red card. Trying on purpose to inflict physical injury on your opponent is a red card.
Not jumping as high as another bloke to catch a ball should not be a sending off offense.
To counter - why should it be a red card?
-
@Bones
Pisi was clearly going for the ball.He was on a running line that saw him arrive under the ball.
As MR notes the other guy jumped higher and not jumping as high shouldn't be a red card offence.
Furthermore Pisi braced for the impact of a guy leading with his legs.
-
They need to change the laws, like make jumping illegal or something, because at the moment you've got two guys legitimately going for the ball with a random chance of a game changing red being dished out.
Either that or accept there are risks with jumping for the ball and stop carding players.
-
The Tusi Pisi red-card:
@Tim The fact he was also suspended shows World Rugby has lost the plot.
-
@Bones
Pisi was clearly going for the ball.He was on a running line that saw him arrive under the ball.
As MR notes the other guy jumped higher and not jumping as high shouldn't be a red card offence.
Furthermore Pisi braced for the impact of a guy leading with his legs.
@Nepia said in NH club rugby:
@Bones
Pisi was clearly going for the ball.He was on a running line that saw him arrive under the ball.
As MR notes the other guy jumped higher and not jumping as high shouldn't be a red card offence.
Furthermore Pisi braced for the impact of a guy leading with his legs.
Eh no. Pisi ran underneath him and took him out. Is a high tackle ok if it's a tall guy on a short guy? It's not the tall guys fault the other fella is short. If the short guy was taller there'd be no issue eh. Or if the tall guy was shorter.
Pisi should have been aware of the danger, the bullshit about going for the ball screams reckless to me. What kind of a player thinks he's the only guy on the field going to catch a ball? Do players all of a sudden lose all ability to scan and/or use peripheral vision in these circumstances?
I like how people scream the game is becoming soft and then it's proposed we remove jumping. How about we just drill it into players to take responsibility for their actions?
-
That's pathetic
@mariner4life said in NH club rugby:
That's pathetic
You may have a point there but at least it is becoming (repeat, becoming) more consistent in sanctioning.
That's a positive step.
Of sorts.
-
Because punching is a red card. Kicking is a red card. Trying on purpose to inflict physical injury on your opponent is a red card.
Not jumping as high as another bloke to catch a ball should not be a sending off offense.
To counter - why should it be a red card?
@MajorRage said in NH club rugby:
Because punching is a red card. Kicking is a red card. Trying on purpose to inflict physical injury on your opponent is a red card.
Not jumping as high as another bloke to catch a ball should not be a sending off offense.
To counter - why should it be a red card?
The rules on reds have moved from "being a dick" - ie punching someone, to "potentially breaking someones neck, shoulder, arm etc" so causing them to flip over & land on their head, spear tackling, neck rolls. All the new directions to refs are to do with preventing serious injury.
Its not a red because he didn't jump as high, its a red because its carelessly causing a situation where another player lands on his neck from 5 feet up. He knew about 3 metres out he had lost that contest & he carried on straight through & the only thing he did was duck his head a bit to limit his own injury potential. There was zero attempt to mitigate the injury to the other player. He could have easily avoided that collision but the oppo player would have steamed off with the ball, so instead he just just a little half jump & tucked his head in.
The point of impact is his back & shoulder going into the player, he wasn't trying to get the ball, the ones where 2 players hit face on & one is a bit higher, those are valid attempts, if you impact a jumper with your shoulder & back you were never trying to get the ball.
I'd argue it was cynical as well as careless
-
They both jump at the same time, and both end up in a position to catch the ball. But the yellow player jumps twice as high. So basically if you are going for the ball, make sure you outjump the opposition or risk being carded.
I personally think the most reckless act there is the bloke jumping as high as he can to catch the ball. And I think anyone doing that should accept the risk that they won't always land safely.
I'm not advocating taking a guys feet out when he jumps, but if it's a fair contest then bad luck.
-
@Nepia said in NH club rugby:
@Bones
Pisi was clearly going for the ball.He was on a running line that saw him arrive under the ball.
As MR notes the other guy jumped higher and not jumping as high shouldn't be a red card offence.
Furthermore Pisi braced for the impact of a guy leading with his legs.
Eh no. Pisi ran underneath him and took him out. Is a high tackle ok if it's a tall guy on a short guy? It's not the tall guys fault the other fella is short. If the short guy was taller there'd be no issue eh. Or if the tall guy was shorter.
Pisi should have been aware of the danger, the bullshit about going for the ball screams reckless to me. What kind of a player thinks he's the only guy on the field going to catch a ball? Do players all of a sudden lose all ability to scan and/or use peripheral vision in these circumstances?
I like how people scream the game is becoming soft and then it's proposed we remove jumping. How about we just drill it into players to take responsibility for their actions?
@Bones said in NH club rugby:
@Nepia said in NH club rugby:
@Bones
Pisi was clearly going for the ball.He was on a running line that saw him arrive under the ball.
As MR notes the other guy jumped higher and not jumping as high shouldn't be a red card offence.
Furthermore Pisi braced for the impact of a guy leading with his legs.
Eh no. Pisi ran underneath him and took him out. Is a high tackle ok if it's a tall guy on a short guy? It's not the tall guys fault the other fella is short. If the short guy was taller there'd be no issue eh. Or if the tall guy was shorter.
Pisi should have been aware of the danger, the bullshit about going for the ball screams reckless to me. What kind of a player thinks he's the only guy on the field going to catch a ball? Do players all of a sudden lose all ability to scan and/or use peripheral vision in these circumstances?
I like how people scream the game is becoming soft and then it's proposed we remove jumping. How about we just drill it into players to take responsibility for their actions?
I kind off agree with you however there is also the aspect that Rugby is a game played best on instinct. Instinct does not often involve a full assessment of a potential situation.
Eliminating jumping is not the answer but I also don't think that whacking out red cards whenever instinctive errors occur is the answer either. At the moment the outcome is that players are actually encouraged to place themselves at high risk in order to make the opposition back off.Take the jumping element out and extend the argument and we could see players diving toward a kicker's boot to block a kick with the kicker being expected to see the risk and stop swinging his leg or risk a red card for contact with the head.
in this particular case I think Pisi simply wasn't aware he was creating danger, he has a WTF? look on his face as it happened.
Should he have been more aware? Quite possibly, and that is obviously the conclusion the ref came to as well.Can someone more knowledgeable with AFL let us know how this is dealt with in that game. I understand that the dynamics are different but surely there are times when a jumping players gets his legs knocked from under him.
