Sunday, July 25, 2010
Jaque Fourie and Quade Cooper both suspended for dangerous tackles
Jaque Fourie and Quade Cooper have both been suspended following dangerous tackles they made during the Wallabies successful start to the Tri Nations campaign in Brisbane yesterday.
It was a repeat of the previous two matches for the Springboks as they once again had a player sent from the field within the first few minutes of a Test match. This time it was center Fourie for his lifting tackle on Richard Brown.
Upon recommendation from the touch judge, referee George Clancy yellow carded him. In staying consistent, Clancy carded Wallaby flyhalf Cooper for a similar offence in the second half.
While both spent their ten minutes in the bin, that apparently wasnt enough as they were both cited, and have subsequently been suspended. Cooper received two weeks for his tackle, while Fourie was given four for his.
Both tackles weren't malicious and yellow cards seemed sufficient. Last week Jean De Villiers was handed a two week suspension for a tackle that was similar in nature to both of these. He wasnt yellow carded during the match though.
The disparity in the sentencing is most likely to be because of the upcoming fixtures. So to look at it differently, Cooper got a two match ban, while Fourie got a three match ban.
Both players were found guilty of breaching Law 10.4 (j), but the tackles were considered at the lower end of severity. An entry point for a low grade lifting tackle is three matches.
Coopers clean record played in his favour, while Fourie was suspended last year for a similar offence on Maa Nonu, for which he was suspended.
What do you think of the rulings?
Posted at 1:50 pm | 78 comments
|
Related Posts
The Wallabies bash the Boks in Brisbane
Jaque Fourie suspended for dangerous tackle on Ma'a Nonu
The Wallabies come right against the Springboks in Brisbane
Posted in Big Hits & Dirty Play
|
|
Viewing 78 comments
Anonymous July 25, 2010 2:54 pm
Absolutely unnecessary, the yellow card was enough
BigBucks July 25, 2010 2:55 pm
Suspensions for those ?? they were bad tackles alright, but the Yellow sorted it out. And Quade Coopers one looked accidental as Steyns leg went up in the air as Cooper was trying to put Steyn on the ground, and as a result of the leg in the air he ended up getting speared accidentally.
Mike July 25, 2010 2:55 pm
I think Fourie was a little unlucky, you can't see much there but it didn't look like he was going to hurt the guy - maybe a harsh call by the assistant. Cooper's was much worse, he drove the guy into the ground.
silence784 July 25, 2010 2:56 pm
i think the yellow card was enough for both, the suspension was to harsh after such a tackle... personally i think even the yellow card was to much but i'm not the referee
Anonymous July 25, 2010 3:08 pm
Terrible decision, Fourie's tackle cost him more than enough as it was and Cooper's was no more than a yellow!
Chris M July 25, 2010 3:11 pm
Agree with the above comments, suspensions were completely unnecessary. Neither of the tackles were malicious and neither of the tackled players were injured in any form.
Think the citing commission is just a bit bored at this time of year.
Think the citing commission is just a bit bored at this time of year.
Anonymous July 25, 2010 3:13 pm
I can see the point of the bans in as much as they want to stamp this out of the game...either wait for a serious injury or try to stamp it out this way, I think the two individuals may feel it's harsh (and I sympathise) but I think in many ways necessary...they are professionals and we need this out of the game
Anonymous July 25, 2010 3:27 pm
typical, With a New Zealander as the Citing Commissioner "Steve Hinds"
The Kiwis are turning this into a game of touch. If those were dangerous than why wasn't their any citing's on The NZ wing (forgot his name) dangerous tackle. I find the inconstancy at the breakdown a bigger problem in the game than a few over aggressive tackles. Why is it in one game do you have to let the offense play the ball at a tackle and the next you don't. No wonder the Boks are confused.
The Kiwis are turning this into a game of touch. If those were dangerous than why wasn't their any citing's on The NZ wing (forgot his name) dangerous tackle. I find the inconstancy at the breakdown a bigger problem in the game than a few over aggressive tackles. Why is it in one game do you have to let the offense play the ball at a tackle and the next you don't. No wonder the Boks are confused.
cp85 July 25, 2010 3:31 pm
What about Schalk Burger's eye gouge? Oh that's fine I suppose
Mike July 25, 2010 3:38 pm
I don't understand how 'inconsistency' at the breakdown is only affecting the Boks...I agree that it is a real problem, but the Boks need to beware of blaming everyone but themselves for losing.
As I said, I think Fourie is unlucky to be cited and banned here, but Cooper's tackle could have seriously hurt the Bok player when he drove his head/shoulder into the ground, and probably deserves a ban.
As I said, I think Fourie is unlucky to be cited and banned here, but Cooper's tackle could have seriously hurt the Bok player when he drove his head/shoulder into the ground, and probably deserves a ban.
Old7 July 25, 2010 3:40 pm
After Fourie's "tip tackle" (the new buzzword), the ref should have warned both captains.
Then Cooper's yellow would have been fully justified. Seems like Copper accepted it anyway.
The officials are just digging themselves a big hole with these suspensions. Getting way too complex.
Then Cooper's yellow would have been fully justified. Seems like Copper accepted it anyway.
The officials are just digging themselves a big hole with these suspensions. Getting way too complex.
Redron July 25, 2010 3:58 pm
These tackles seem almost accidental in nature, Fourie's had the guy falling at the same time as he tackled him, and on Coopers the guy had just jumped in order to tap-pass, totally off balance. Definitely no need for suspensions, and if anything, no need for yellow cards either, a warning would have easily sufficed.
Anonymous July 25, 2010 4:29 pm
totally unnecessary, the yellow card was enough. i think that the ref should have warned both caps, after jaques tackle
Anonymous July 25, 2010 4:39 pm
All this suspension is getting overboard and ridiculous.. Maybe they shld change it to a game of touch instead.. It is now almost impossible to lift tackle someone with getting a yellow card..
oh dear July 25, 2010 4:51 pm
the suspensions are unnecessary but at least they are consistent now, right?
Anonymous July 25, 2010 4:51 pm
The general opinion seems to be that the suspensions were harsh and uncalled for! The sighting comity and officials in charge need to be listening to the rugby public.
Anonymous July 25, 2010 5:04 pm
Schalk burger gouged again. That is FAR more serious. And he has previous because of the lions tour. He should have a minimum 8 week ban. The commentators didn't help... 'there's nothing in that' ....it was disgusting and people are beginning to see what Burger is.... A mindless thug with no respect for the game or his opponents. Leaves a bad taste in the mouth. What a shame...
Kearney for tests July 25, 2010 5:05 pm
I love the commentator. For Fourie's he says 'Ah that's a bit harsh, Brown was already going down. Looked worse than it was.' Then for Cooper's almost identical tackle 'It was a worse tackle than Cooper's. He's got to go. Completely justified.'
The cards are all right, but the suspensions are a bit much though in my opinion.
The cards are all right, but the suspensions are a bit much though in my opinion.
Pedro Fleury July 25, 2010 5:22 pm
Fourie was a bit sloppy there, didn't even try to go to ground with the aussie so obviously the australian was going to end up with his shoulder/head on the ground first... Cooper wen't simply to high on the guy so when driving forwards he ended tackling him like that.
Both yelloes were a fair call... suspension?! not really...
Soon enough rugby players will nedd a law degree the way things are going
Both yelloes were a fair call... suspension?! not really...
Soon enough rugby players will nedd a law degree the way things are going
Anonymous July 25, 2010 5:29 pm
I said it for an earlier video when 'tip tackles' were being discussed. If they're going to be so harsh on minor offences they may aswell BAN LIFTING ALL TOGETHER.
In league tackles like these are let go all the time, and if anything they're less common!
The reason people go for the big lift and slam is because of the stupid wrapping laws. If they were allowed to shoulder charge they wouldn't need to lift a guy into a dangerous position in order to pull off a big hit.
In league tackles like these are let go all the time, and if anything they're less common!
The reason people go for the big lift and slam is because of the stupid wrapping laws. If they were allowed to shoulder charge they wouldn't need to lift a guy into a dangerous position in order to pull off a big hit.
lapotiche July 25, 2010 5:47 pm
Personally what I like the most in this: the all player looks very athletic, the shirts fit well, also nice tan, rounded up by well chosen ad. Ruling? Well, money rules the world, is n't it? More Liberty to rule!
Now as I shared my thoughts I b al ready feel much more comfortable.
Now as I shared my thoughts I b al ready feel much more comfortable.
fromaladiespointofvi July 25, 2010 5:50 pm
And yes I almost forgot: sorry two of these athletic guys carded and had to leave, but all the rest are also attractive sportsmen to fight in harmony.
Anonymous July 25, 2010 5:56 pm
this whole suspension thing is really starting to get out of hand its completely rediculous, give em a yellow card and be done with it, now were without two great players to watch
irked July 25, 2010 6:27 pm
The judiciary committees can go fuck themselves. Needless suspensions for both players; needless suspension for JdV last game; needless suspensions time and time again. Shitty tackles happen sometimes - penalty or yellow card, speak to the player, and that should be the end of it.
Of course suspensions are called for sometimes, but these are examples of a good idea gone wrong (citing/suspensions).
I think it casts a poor light on the game of rugby when the higher ups in the bureaucracy get too involved (and for the wrong reasons).
Whatever...not like they'll be reading these comments anyways.
Of course suspensions are called for sometimes, but these are examples of a good idea gone wrong (citing/suspensions).
I think it casts a poor light on the game of rugby when the higher ups in the bureaucracy get too involved (and for the wrong reasons).
Whatever...not like they'll be reading these comments anyways.
still irked July 25, 2010 7:00 pm
I've also got to say that even though I think Quade Cooper is a little shithead, I'm pissed that he's going to miss out on the OZ-NZ game for such a ridiculous reason.
While part of me was just looking forward to seeing the AB's shut him down, he's part of what makes this current OZ side the best it can be, so not having him in there ensures next week to be less exciting than it could've been.
While part of me was just looking forward to seeing the AB's shut him down, he's part of what makes this current OZ side the best it can be, so not having him in there ensures next week to be less exciting than it could've been.
TB July 25, 2010 7:11 pm
Question: has spear or dump tackling always been illegal? I seem to remember getting dumped a few times and having a coach tell me "that's what you get for running straight up".
Anonymous July 25, 2010 8:23 pm
This is absolute rubbish, it was dealt with on the pitch, no more action required.
dutchrugbyplayer July 25, 2010 8:26 pm
looking at the footage i have the feeling that cooper half-way tackle realises it is going to be dangerous and tries to break it of. Fourie's tackle got a more 'intentional' apprearance. Like he's checking if he really does land on his head. But that's just my perception, I have no issues with either player or team. I have no problem with the bans handed out: these kind of tackles are dangerous and should be gotten rid of. A player in my team broke a joint in his neck this way (no permanent damage fortunately)
falafel July 25, 2010 8:29 pm
Bruce Squire and Steve Hinds - two more names that I'll know as morons from now on (along with Jeff Blackett).
I wish there were a way to contact these idiots - nothing malicious, maybe just some flowers and a simple "thanks for doing your best to ruin this beloved game".
I wish there were a way to contact these idiots - nothing malicious, maybe just some flowers and a simple "thanks for doing your best to ruin this beloved game".
Anonymous July 25, 2010 8:30 pm
i think the touch judge should have no say in on field issues only for touch line incedents and tries, having one sir is what makes rugby so great to play and watch.
falafel July 25, 2010 8:32 pm
"these kind of tackles are dangerous and should be gotten rid of"
That will never happen; these are just bad tackles, or tackles gone wrong. They will always be part of the game and most of the time, they will be accidental. The bans do nothing but take good players out of the game.
That will never happen; these are just bad tackles, or tackles gone wrong. They will always be part of the game and most of the time, they will be accidental. The bans do nothing but take good players out of the game.
Anonymous July 25, 2010 8:40 pm
tackler = responsible... they know what they where doing.... suspension, harsh but that wil be the modern game...
p-unit
p-unit
Dan July 25, 2010 9:30 pm
As a rugby player, tackles like these scare the crap out of me. unfortunatly, they're apart of the game, and if you want to tackle with proper technique then you will do this at least once in your career. people arguing for rugby league rules you should go back and watch your no-skill brand of rugby. Might as well play some american footy if all you want is to fly into someone with a shoulder.
Anonymous July 25, 2010 9:36 pm
The yellow card was more than sufficiant for those
Anonymous July 25, 2010 9:36 pm
The suspensions were not needed. They both got yellow cards fair enough. Why take two good players out of competition?
Mike July 25, 2010 9:57 pm
I guess that Burger isn't going to be cited for the fingers in the eye area of Pollock?
In which case I withdraw my criticism of Burger in this case, as clearly the citing officers will have had a lot better look at it than I did.
In which case I withdraw my criticism of Burger in this case, as clearly the citing officers will have had a lot better look at it than I did.
come on connacht July 25, 2010 10:30 pm
First of all, Mike, it's Pocock.
Second, there was nothing in that incident, so it makes sense that the citing commissioners had no reason to call him up.
Second, there was nothing in that incident, so it makes sense that the citing commissioners had no reason to call him up.
Bob July 25, 2010 11:38 pm
"Might as well play some american footy if all you want is to fly into someone with a shoulder."
Most people want to fly into someone with their shoulder. You should speak to a few pros. The vast majority I've encountered don't like the wrapping laws.
Most people want to fly into someone with their shoulder. You should speak to a few pros. The vast majority I've encountered don't like the wrapping laws.
Put a sock in it Smi July 25, 2010 11:40 pm
hahaha I love the Bok,
Every time one of their dirty players gets carded, John Smit pleads with the Ref to reverse his decision.
Fourie is just another dirty player, he did the same thing to Nonu (but without the ball) last year too! hes also shithouse.... Iv seen him touch the ball maybe 4 times in 3 games. Perhaps a new midfield combo will help them get a win in this years tri-nations.
Every time one of their dirty players gets carded, John Smit pleads with the Ref to reverse his decision.
Fourie is just another dirty player, he did the same thing to Nonu (but without the ball) last year too! hes also shithouse.... Iv seen him touch the ball maybe 4 times in 3 games. Perhaps a new midfield combo will help them get a win in this years tri-nations.
Mike July 26, 2010 12:32 am
OMG, yeah, Pocock, not Pollock - not sure where I got that from, but I have had most of a bottle of wine. My RD credibilty just went through the floor ^^
Mike July 26, 2010 12:36 am
Fourie is a fine player - if he's not getting ball, it's the fault of the guys inside him and the Bok's gameplan. He doesn't seem 'dirty' to me, and check out his try in the second test against the Lions, then tell me he's 'shithouse'...
(u-p)rick July 26, 2010 1:08 am
Not suspension worthy in my eyes....
coopers appeared worse but to me it looked ike he stumbled causing him to drive the saffa player into the ground... (rather than malicious..)
yellow cards id say 80% agree, suspensions 100% disagree!!! (for both)
coopers appeared worse but to me it looked ike he stumbled causing him to drive the saffa player into the ground... (rather than malicious..)
yellow cards id say 80% agree, suspensions 100% disagree!!! (for both)
Tommy July 26, 2010 1:10 am
Fourie is a very good player, typical South african centre, limited in his passing but big and strong, very hard tos top, especially close to the line.
He's not particularly dirty either, so people shouldn't say that about him, he's not Botha.
I think the suspensions are a little harsh, the yellow cards were both justified and probably enough.
But suspensions for dangerous tackles are a part oft he game these days, so what can you do?
one game each would probably be fine, after all, both tackles were clearly accidental.
And you'll never erradicate the occaisonal spear tackle, you can punish it and discourage players, but 99% of the time players do a spear accidentally, it's really not that hard to do. Play long enough and you'll probably end up doing one or two by accident at some point.
He's not particularly dirty either, so people shouldn't say that about him, he's not Botha.
I think the suspensions are a little harsh, the yellow cards were both justified and probably enough.
But suspensions for dangerous tackles are a part oft he game these days, so what can you do?
one game each would probably be fine, after all, both tackles were clearly accidental.
And you'll never erradicate the occaisonal spear tackle, you can punish it and discourage players, but 99% of the time players do a spear accidentally, it's really not that hard to do. Play long enough and you'll probably end up doing one or two by accident at some point.
Ned2or3 July 26, 2010 3:31 am
I am a little dissapointed in both players for getting themselves in this type of situation. Surely they both would have seen/heard about JdV???
Anyhew, yellows and suspensions are about right. I actually think if you get yellowed for foul play (not professional fouls like killing the ball) are automatic suspensions.
Do we know if Burger was looked at for contatc to the eyes of Pocock? It looked bad at full speed and a replay didn't convince me either way
Anyhew, yellows and suspensions are about right. I actually think if you get yellowed for foul play (not professional fouls like killing the ball) are automatic suspensions.
Do we know if Burger was looked at for contatc to the eyes of Pocock? It looked bad at full speed and a replay didn't convince me either way
good grief July 26, 2010 4:02 am
Ned2or3, drop the Burger case. He hasn't been cited, and for good reason - there was nothing in it.
As for these two players "getting themselves into this situation", as it has been said, sometimes tackles go wrong. Sometimes, a guy steps to your side after you've already committed to tackling him so you twist instead of driving back. Or maybe you only get a hold of one leg. It happens. The fact that JdV did it last week doesn't mean these could've been prevented as they were surely accidental.
As for these two players "getting themselves into this situation", as it has been said, sometimes tackles go wrong. Sometimes, a guy steps to your side after you've already committed to tackling him so you twist instead of driving back. Or maybe you only get a hold of one leg. It happens. The fact that JdV did it last week doesn't mean these could've been prevented as they were surely accidental.
Tommy July 26, 2010 4:42 am
Ned2or3, they didn't do it on purpose, it would take a very sick player to intentionally spear a player, potentially breaking their neck.
In fact I doubt anyone ever gets intentionally speared at the highest level (and no of course BOD wasn't intentionally speared - which Irish people will be probably disagree with, but anyone else would have to agree with if they think about it logically for five seconds).
Spears will happen from time to time, just like head highs. Penalise them yes, even card or suspend players, particularly if they keep doing it (repeat offenders would be doing it due to recklessness not intention).
But don't think that you can somehow officiate it out of the game. That will never happen, and anyone who's played would know that.
In fact I doubt anyone ever gets intentionally speared at the highest level (and no of course BOD wasn't intentionally speared - which Irish people will be probably disagree with, but anyone else would have to agree with if they think about it logically for five seconds).
Spears will happen from time to time, just like head highs. Penalise them yes, even card or suspend players, particularly if they keep doing it (repeat offenders would be doing it due to recklessness not intention).
But don't think that you can somehow officiate it out of the game. That will never happen, and anyone who's played would know that.
miguel July 26, 2010 5:14 am
both suspensions are b.s. and quite honestly its hard to look at them and not call conspiracy.
two of the opposition's best backs are involved in incidents which are rightly(if harshly) yellow carded and they get suspensions keeping them out of critical tri nations game.
it reeks. if the abs get away with anything in the upcoming games it just confirms it in my eyes.
two of the opposition's best backs are involved in incidents which are rightly(if harshly) yellow carded and they get suspensions keeping them out of critical tri nations game.
it reeks. if the abs get away with anything in the upcoming games it just confirms it in my eyes.
miguel July 26, 2010 5:20 am
not that there is an actual conspiracy.
still hard to look at new zealand citing officials in this game. theres got to be plenty of officials from the NH who can serve
still hard to look at new zealand citing officials in this game. theres got to be plenty of officials from the NH who can serve
Tommy July 26, 2010 5:21 am
There's no conspiracy, and I say that as a passionite Australian supporter.
Both guys were guilty of spear tackles, and they both know that citing commisions are harsh on that offence these days.
I agree the suspensions are harsh and over the top probably, but it has nothing to do with NZ and I expect that any NZer guilty of such an offence would receive a similar punsihment, it's just that no kiwis have done it so far this tri-nations.
And before anyone starts, Ranger wasn't suspended because he committed a shoulder charge according to the ref (I think it was a perfectly good tackle, excellent in fact and should have been applauded not carded), and shoulder charges have never been treated as the same level of offence as a spear tackle for very good reason, they aren't any more dangerous than a normal bloody tackle, and probably shouldn't be illegal at all in the first place.
Both guys were guilty of spear tackles, and they both know that citing commisions are harsh on that offence these days.
I agree the suspensions are harsh and over the top probably, but it has nothing to do with NZ and I expect that any NZer guilty of such an offence would receive a similar punsihment, it's just that no kiwis have done it so far this tri-nations.
And before anyone starts, Ranger wasn't suspended because he committed a shoulder charge according to the ref (I think it was a perfectly good tackle, excellent in fact and should have been applauded not carded), and shoulder charges have never been treated as the same level of offence as a spear tackle for very good reason, they aren't any more dangerous than a normal bloody tackle, and probably shouldn't be illegal at all in the first place.
secondfive July 26, 2010 6:00 am
miguel said...
quite honestly its hard to look at them and not call conspiracy. it reeks. if the abs get away with anything in the upcoming games it just confirms it in my eyes
miguel said...
not that there is an actual conspiracy.
If you believe your own second comment then what is the first comment about? Just a reflex reaction I suppose.
The tackling offenses are there for all to see. Do the NZ officials get together and put some kind of juju on opposing players to make them tackle illegally? Just how does this conspiracy (that you both believe in and don't believe in) actually work?
As an AB supporter I would much prefer Cooper to be playing. He's great to watch and so far this season no other back has presented NZ with the same sort of challenge and I want to see how they deal with it. We'll all have to wait.
quite honestly its hard to look at them and not call conspiracy. it reeks. if the abs get away with anything in the upcoming games it just confirms it in my eyes
miguel said...
not that there is an actual conspiracy.
If you believe your own second comment then what is the first comment about? Just a reflex reaction I suppose.
The tackling offenses are there for all to see. Do the NZ officials get together and put some kind of juju on opposing players to make them tackle illegally? Just how does this conspiracy (that you both believe in and don't believe in) actually work?
As an AB supporter I would much prefer Cooper to be playing. He's great to watch and so far this season no other back has presented NZ with the same sort of challenge and I want to see how they deal with it. We'll all have to wait.
miguel July 26, 2010 6:45 am
@secondfive
because anytime you do say "conspiracy" you think youre right and that its not as crazy as it sounds. but when you step back you see it does look quite crazy.
its not that i believe it, its just that it becomes understandable why someone would believe such allegations as evidence comes together.
still i wouldnt call fourie's tackle a spear as it seems that he "throws" brown rather than drives him.(dangerous but not a spear) coopers is much closer to a spear but i still dont beleive he deserves to be suspended.
because anytime you do say "conspiracy" you think youre right and that its not as crazy as it sounds. but when you step back you see it does look quite crazy.
its not that i believe it, its just that it becomes understandable why someone would believe such allegations as evidence comes together.
still i wouldnt call fourie's tackle a spear as it seems that he "throws" brown rather than drives him.(dangerous but not a spear) coopers is much closer to a spear but i still dont beleive he deserves to be suspended.
katman July 26, 2010 6:54 am
All the yellow cards and suspensions in the Tri-Nations this year have been totally over the top. The only incident that deserved a citing was the Botha head butt. Jean De Villiers, Danie Rossouw, Jaque Fourie and Quade Cooper were all victims of this move to apologetic rugby: "Sorry for tackling you, pardon me for being rough, excuse me, I didn't mean to jump in the air at the same time as you, oops, did you land okay there?"
Anonymous July 26, 2010 7:00 am
Yeah the suspensions are a bit much. Surely a penalty and a yellow card is enough for a dangerous but accidental tackle.
Jot July 26, 2010 7:14 am
These suspensions are beginning to spoil the competition. We all want to see the best players from each country compete and nobody is benefitting from players being side lined.
Why not simply penalise players by keeping their match fees or even giving them an additional fine but still allow them to play.
Ridiculous!
Why not simply penalise players by keeping their match fees or even giving them an additional fine but still allow them to play.
Ridiculous!
Anonymous July 26, 2010 8:00 am
Agreed that we're not seeing the best 15 players on the field representing their countries no thanks to all the suspensions.. Yes by all means suspend players when there is a clear intention to injure like head butting, eye gouging stomping etc etc.. But what the IRB is doing now is they are stepping in after every game and nitpick and find fault in every tackle which just spoils it.
From the way things are going, soon there will not be any big hits or lift tackles.
From the way things are going, soon there will not be any big hits or lift tackles.
NiWiTa July 26, 2010 8:51 am
Both tackles were "spear tackles" within the letter of the law so deserved a yellow card. Not sure on the citing/banning thereafter. Quade Cooper's was the worst though...but as someone said earlier these tackles were NOT particularly malicious compared to gouging, stamping etc...
IRB are setting referee's up with more an more confusing views/bans and whilst foul play needs to be punished it's all getting a little silly now.
IRB are setting referee's up with more an more confusing views/bans and whilst foul play needs to be punished it's all getting a little silly now.
Anonymous July 26, 2010 9:26 am
Australia are appealing the ban for Cooper, surely it won't get quashed, it was the worst of the tackles and most lienient.
themull July 26, 2010 10:52 am
I'm not reading throgh all of these comments, but the ssuuspensions were completely unneccesary IMO....Both bad tackles and deserved yellows but defo nothing more....
They were reckless tackles not malicous ones....
They were reckless tackles not malicous ones....
Anonymous July 26, 2010 11:18 am
if this over protective anti contact crap players are goin to be afraid to tackle at all for fear of yellow cards its not on
Anonymous July 26, 2010 12:22 pm
It's obvious that the judiciary have gotten together and decided to try and stamp spear tackling out. To the person that said they should be harsher on ruck infringements, ruck infringements arnt going to kill anyone.
Anonymous July 26, 2010 12:22 pm
I think the Fourie challenge was harmless in terms of the result but it could have been different. He certainly makes the spear as he appears to deliberately flip him over.
Definite yellow but a ban I'm not so sure.....
Definite yellow but a ban I'm not so sure.....
edbok July 26, 2010 12:33 pm
I'll give them points for consistency, and on this occasion, I agree in principle with the suits for the harsh line they are taking.
Definitely neither tackle here - nor De Villiers' last week - was at the extreme end of the scale, but you can understand a zero tolerance approach. Seems that the Aussies however are going to test the suits again by appealing Cooper's ban, we'll see then how committed they are in this area.
Definitely neither tackle here - nor De Villiers' last week - was at the extreme end of the scale, but you can understand a zero tolerance approach. Seems that the Aussies however are going to test the suits again by appealing Cooper's ban, we'll see then how committed they are in this area.
Anonymous July 26, 2010 12:54 pm
really don't think a suspension is needed for this.... repeat offenders in multiple games yes... but i think both these boys are good about keeping a clean game and would not need to be hit with a suspension...
Anonymous July 26, 2010 1:48 pm
Burger's swipe on Pocock's eyes has been ignored completely. Cards handed out during play were ample sanction for both tackles. Lets use suspensions when necessary. Burger I'm looking at you
itsahighstandardtrop July 26, 2010 2:05 pm
Rugby is a non criminal sport! Illegal tecniques are not an option!
And always the same, provocate anger, accident happened and was punished. None of the best player in the world makes the same mistake twice.
I think the team should think about ongoing strategy, it's crucial. Yes also difficult but best player in the world means best when it's difficult.
And always the same, provocate anger, accident happened and was punished. None of the best player in the world makes the same mistake twice.
I think the team should think about ongoing strategy, it's crucial. Yes also difficult but best player in the world means best when it's difficult.
Anonymous July 26, 2010 7:13 pm
unless the intention is to make this a greco-roman wrestling contest, there must be some modification of the laws or interpretations. Tackling the legs with even lateral force, if the tackler is lower (as is commonly taught), will result in accidental lifting, and the tackled player will naturally topple over some. As upper body collisions without using the arms is also now much more closely watched along with high tackles, apparently the only sure way to tackle with minimal risk for suspension is to grab up top around the waist or shoulders - assuming you can match body heights up, as too low or too high will likely end in a penalty. It is way too restrictive, and as a player I am all for safety too...but I HAVE to have a reasonable way to tackle short of PERFECT form every time - because that doesn't happen wityh high-caliber folks running at you...
Jamie July 27, 2010 1:11 am
@Mike
A good rugby player goes looking for work in General play, so Fourie going missing in the last few games because of the guys inside of him... isn't really an excuse.... would you agree?
Just like Spies, Most talented and imposing athlete running around....But doesn't leave his mark on a game like Burger.
The word "shithouse" was strong as he played very well in 2009.... But he did dump Nonu on his head without the ball in last year so I stand by my comment as him being suspiciously dirty.
A good rugby player goes looking for work in General play, so Fourie going missing in the last few games because of the guys inside of him... isn't really an excuse.... would you agree?
Just like Spies, Most talented and imposing athlete running around....But doesn't leave his mark on a game like Burger.
The word "shithouse" was strong as he played very well in 2009.... But he did dump Nonu on his head without the ball in last year so I stand by my comment as him being suspiciously dirty.
Anonymous July 27, 2010 2:44 am
WHY ARE PEOPLE STILL COMPLAINING ABOUT SCHALK BURGER?? HE WAS BANNED FOR 8 WEEKS WHICH IS FAIR ENOUGH AS HE WASNT EVEN LOOKING AT THE PLAYER WHEN HE DID IT. IT WAS A OVER A YEAR AGO!!!!!!
Anyway neither of these deserve suspensions. coopers was quite dangerous though as steyn landed on his head/shoulder
Anyway neither of these deserve suspensions. coopers was quite dangerous though as steyn landed on his head/shoulder
Anonymous July 27, 2010 2:54 am
put a sock in it smit-
maybe youre thinking of a different jaque fourie because hes probably the best centre in the world. (im from NZ by the way not SA) i guess you didnt watch the super 14 either, he scored 8 tries and was the form 13 for the whole competition. yes the boks do need a new centre combination: 12-de jongh or de villiers 13-fourie
maybe youre thinking of a different jaque fourie because hes probably the best centre in the world. (im from NZ by the way not SA) i guess you didnt watch the super 14 either, he scored 8 tries and was the form 13 for the whole competition. yes the boks do need a new centre combination: 12-de jongh or de villiers 13-fourie
Anonymous July 27, 2010 10:50 am
Both were hard done. Even a yellow was ifysh. A spear is when U lift with an upward motion first then drive the player into the ground head first and the tackling player adding his weight by getting off his feet in the drive.
Just to through a cat in the bag though. I know this person in particular is not the most likable player in rugby today but I`ll still ask for consistency sake> dose everyone remember the lions tour last yr with Botha, the justice bands etc. How many players have U seen to-date fly into a ruck unbound and dose not get banned.
Just to through a cat in the bag though. I know this person in particular is not the most likable player in rugby today but I`ll still ask for consistency sake> dose everyone remember the lions tour last yr with Botha, the justice bands etc. How many players have U seen to-date fly into a ruck unbound and dose not get banned.
Anonymous July 27, 2010 11:57 am
I think public forums are easily misinterpreted, for instance for comments that are not dedicated to talk about a lady but about a non standard french section comment cited. Same point for public blogs that are read and interpreted by people who are not in the comments and should not be offended intentionally.
Anonymous July 27, 2010 5:53 pm
At some point the ball carrier must share in the responsibility of protecting himself. If you get
"dumped" that quickly you gotta get your shoulders down right????
"dumped" that quickly you gotta get your shoulders down right????
(u-p)rick July 27, 2010 10:58 pm
'I think public forums are easily misinterpreted, for instance for comments that are not dedicated to talk about a lady but about a non standard french section comment cited. Same point for public blogs that are read and interpreted by people who are not in the comments and should not be offended intentionally.'
Anyone else wondering WTF this guy just said?
'At some point the ball carrier must share in the responsibility of protecting himself. If you get
"dumped" that quickly you gotta get your shoulders down right????'
Sort of agree, but there perhaps its a case that it should never be up to the ball carrier to protect himself in a situation like that?!? I do agree though, as a second row if you are 'tipped' in a lineout the best bet is to tuck your head in and take the brunt of the impact on your back or shoulders rather than stick an arm out or land on your head/neck...
ofcourse taking the brunt of the impact on your cheek by landing on the bald head of a prop is another way....although you tend to end up with what looks like a golf ball stuffed under your skin...
Anyone else wondering WTF this guy just said?
'At some point the ball carrier must share in the responsibility of protecting himself. If you get
"dumped" that quickly you gotta get your shoulders down right????'
Sort of agree, but there perhaps its a case that it should never be up to the ball carrier to protect himself in a situation like that?!? I do agree though, as a second row if you are 'tipped' in a lineout the best bet is to tuck your head in and take the brunt of the impact on your back or shoulders rather than stick an arm out or land on your head/neck...
ofcourse taking the brunt of the impact on your cheek by landing on the bald head of a prop is another way....although you tend to end up with what looks like a golf ball stuffed under your skin...
Anonymous July 28, 2010 1:03 am
If anyone thinks players intentionally risk their spines by trying to make spear tackles look worse, they are completely off their trees.
Do realise how quickly these tackles happen? Do you honeslty think the player getting speared isn't trying everything in their power to avoid landing on their head or neck?
What kind of self-hating person would allow themselves to be dropped on their heads if they could avoid it?
Do realise how quickly these tackles happen? Do you honeslty think the player getting speared isn't trying everything in their power to avoid landing on their head or neck?
What kind of self-hating person would allow themselves to be dropped on their heads if they could avoid it?
Anonymous July 28, 2010 9:20 am
Coopers was a citable offence as he drove Steyn's head into the ground! Fourie's was nothing as Brown leant into the attack to try and offload... pathetic that he gets 4 weeks
Commenting as Guest | Register or Login