Monday, May 30, 2011
Siale Piutau lets fly on Michael Rhodes after dangerous headlock

A handful of citings took place this weekend in Super Rugby, with one of the most talked about being this incident from the Lions' great 26-22 away win at the Highlanders on Saturday. Both players are in the dock.
As you can see in the clip, flanker Michael Rhodes appeared to get Highlanders winger Siale Piutau in some kind of headlock, then attempted to clear him out like that, flipping him dangerously. Piutau retaliated, as to be expected, landing two blows to the head of Rhodes.
In the chaos that followed, he threw another punch. As expected, both players have since been cited, and will face a SANZAR judicial panel tomorrow. They are both cited for 'acts contrary to good sportsmanship', while Rhodes' is for dangerous tackling without the ball, and Piutau's will be for punching and opponent and retaliation.
Both will no doubt face a few weeks off if (when?) found guilty.
Elsewhere, Sharks forward Jean Deyself was cited for a similar offence in their 26-21 win over the Waratahs in Durban. Unlike in the other incident, Deyself was seen by the officials, and yellow carded for his dangerous headlock.
UPDATE 31/05/2011: Rhodes has been suspended for 6 weeks, while Piutau escaped suspension, due to 'exceptional circumstances'.
"Whilst the player admitted to foul play he had been seriously compromised in the incident involving Rhodes," said judicial officer Nick Davidson, who added that the winger was placed 'at serious risk of injury'.
"Piutau's reaction was that of someone who had been seriously endangered and to impose a sanction in these circumstances would not reflect the effect on Piutau of the incident and a reaction that was the product of shock rather than retaliatory intent."
Rhodes has the right to appeal the sanction.
Time: 02:37
Posted at 1:25 pm | 91 comments
Posted in Big Hits & Dirty Play
|
|
Viewing 91 comments
Anonymous May 30, 2011 1:55 pm

katman May 30, 2011 2:00 pm

Anonymous May 30, 2011 2:08 pm

New Centre Pairing May 30, 2011 2:10 pm

Anonymous May 30, 2011 2:12 pm

Ealabhan May 30, 2011 2:14 pm

CitingboardsRlame May 30, 2011 2:14 pm

15 weeks? The only time a guy deserves 15 weeks is if they gouge an eye, come in from the sideline to fight, or punch a ref. Sometimes weird things happen in rugby, almost always, like this, they sort themselves out.
Anonymous May 30, 2011 2:25 pm

Both acts are wrong, but both individuals I don't think did anything they can be slandered for. Just an unfortunate incident all round.
Anonymous May 30, 2011 2:27 pm

Von May 30, 2011 2:31 pm

Tom May 30, 2011 2:48 pm

My opinion is that it was unfortunate incident which doesn't happen very often (retaliation excluded but not ignored) which doesn't need strict punishment but just to be dealt with firmly and in the correct manner. It's rugby after all, dangerous game.
Laz May 30, 2011 2:57 pm

Fair play to Justin Marshall for sticking up for him too. Clearly seeing it was a players point of view, even if he was a number nine :P
Nice punch too, that first one. Rhodes looked about as shocked any anyone though. Definitely not 'trying to break his neck' as someone has suggested
Anonymous May 30, 2011 3:01 pm

Mike May 30, 2011 3:05 pm

I hate to see players taking risks with other players' spines.
Anonymous May 30, 2011 3:07 pm

Wolfman May 30, 2011 3:18 pm

His eyes are closed, as can been seen from the video, and I guess in the heat of the moment, on his try line, he didn't realise he had the guy's neck.
Should still be a suspension though.
Jannie du Plessis did a similar thing to Pocock earlier this season, at the ruck in which Pocock damaged his knee. Apparently told Pocock he would break his neck the next time. Pleasant guy.
Deysel should, however, receive a very long ban. He grabbed Carter's neck in a similar technique, and squeezed, and squeezed, and squeezed. He held on for probably 5-10 seconds, long after the ruck had broken up, and long after Carter was on his back. Plenty of intent in choking Carter. He should have received a red card, and he should receive a long suspension.
Tony Hart May 30, 2011 3:21 pm

Luke G May 30, 2011 3:22 pm

Not sure about the "its a technique of the game, just poorly executed idea"...Tackling is a technique, but when poorly executed there's no defense.
Definitely deserves a ban. He knew his arm was around the players neck...
Anonymous May 30, 2011 3:58 pm

His technique is appalling. He's latched on around his neck and seriously had he had some leverage on his chin his neck would have snapped. It's only cos he didn't have the face wrapped up that it didn't break. lucky guy.
I just don't get rugby sometimes. There is simply no justifiable reason why any player needs to make contact with another players head except during the scrum. any other incident of the head being struck or manhandled simply HAS to be dealt with stricter.
Sander May 30, 2011 4:01 pm

He could've easily broken his neck and I was absolutely cringing during the slow-mo replay.
Perhaps accidental (I don't think anyone would wring someonelse's neck that way on purpose) but it fully justified a good smack in the face.
A slap on the wrist for Piutau and I'd say Rhodes has had his punishment.
ellie May 30, 2011 4:10 pm

King May 30, 2011 4:19 pm

citing commissioner should give 2 weeks for retaliation and 6-8 for the headlock.
Tim May 30, 2011 4:29 pm

Ugly, really ugly. You can't argue poor technique for that any more than you can for a spear.
Possibly not intentional but bloody reckless and dangerous. A bit rough if Piutau cops a ban for that but I'm guessing he probably will.
Ian M May 30, 2011 4:37 pm

I don't know the relative players' records, but it'll probably be something like 4 weeks for the clearout and 5 for the punches, based on Tuilagi's recent exploits.
SmellyNerfherder May 30, 2011 4:47 pm

Conman May 30, 2011 4:56 pm

I agree it's badly executed though (grabbing the head rather than torso) and could have resulted in injury to the player. I think a mid-range ban of about 4-6 weeks is in order, more to send a message to other players not to do that than for the offense itself.
The punches probably get a low end ban, 2-3 weeks, due to the mitigation of him feeling the guy had tried to do him.
Nice break up the middle! Ducking through two tacklers!
Hoizokimaru May 30, 2011 5:02 pm

3 weeks for the punches
8 weeks for that crocodile roll - could have been so much worse.
themull May 30, 2011 5:10 pm

themull May 30, 2011 5:13 pm

Anonymous May 30, 2011 5:37 pm

Headlock, very danger, he knew what he was doing... red card!
pommie May 30, 2011 5:41 pm

lightning May 30, 2011 6:46 pm

his wrestling action was dangerous and horrible, i'm sure he'll get a 15-25 weeks suspension for that. piutau's reaction could get a 2 weeks ban.
M May 30, 2011 6:53 pm

Don't want to see this. 8 week ban for Rhodes methinks. Can't condone violence but most people would react to that. Piutau 3/4 weeks
Controversial Rugby May 30, 2011 6:53 pm

Still disgraceful for that plank who thinks he's Rick Rude! 14 week ban and for Piatau, 1 week; as he was right to retaliate.
katman May 30, 2011 7:32 pm

What are you having a go at me for? I simply commented that plenty of Highlanders seemed to fly in with punches after the incident. It's there for all to see. How does this constitute me having my head up my arse?
I hate ppl who write May 30, 2011 7:39 pm

chappie May 30, 2011 7:58 pm

Rhodes should get a ban for this. Not too long though, about 2 weeks as he has a clean previous record, and IMO no malicious intent.
The kiwis always seem to through punches especially those damn maoris...
Adam Keni May 30, 2011 8:11 pm

I think both will get a small ban, mostly because of the fact this sorted itself out on the pitch. But Rhodes surely deserves a longer suspension.
It does bring up another question though that has been asked before. It's often said that in the professional era of rugby, you must take care of your own body, but certainly that doesn't give the opposing player free license to do what he wants to you in regards to clearing out...
Look at the Brian O'Driscoll incident. Now, before I start, I don't want to bring up old arguments, I'm simply using this example as case in point because surely everyone knows about it.
One side of the argument that I've heard so much about is that the spear tackle on O'Driscoll was a legal technique of clearing out, and that the two New Zealand players had simply executed it wrong, or as also suggested, O'Driscoll didn't control his body in the right way. (not something I agree to, but again, don't want to bring up that argument, but simply using this example to make my next point)
At what point does it stop? Can the defence of a player be put down to 'poorly executed technique'? Or blaming the opposite player on not controlling his body? There's a level of on-the-pitch cynicism that seems to be left out in these judicial hearings.
The funny part is I say 'at what point does it stop?' and you'd think the most extreme point at where it would stop is when two players clear a player out from a ruck and fail to control him, turn him legs up and drive him head first into the ground. But seemingly it doesn't.
Or, seemingly smaller games and smaller teams are treated harder than the big ones. Look at that incident in England. During a game, an attacking player with ball tried to hand-off a defender. The defender said he felt searing pain in his eye, dropped to the ground. Hours later he was in hospital, as his eyeball had burst. The matter was passed onto the police, and then onto the RFU. The RFU deemed the attacking player had 'tried to repulse the defending player with a extended arm and/or finger(s)'. The attacking player always maintained that he had used his palm, and the defending player, now without one eye, did admit that he probably didn't intend on hurting him.
If you think about it further, to be running at full pace, whilst trying to keep a defender off you, holding a ball, and in the heat of battle try and stab someone in the eye with your finger with enough accuracy to burst his eyeball, it'd be some mean feat. Likely, it was all an accident. Yet, the RFU deemed that the attacking player had not controlled his body in a responsible manner, and as such, the player in question has been banned from rugby, and is still banned (something like 70 odd weeks so far I believe?)
So, where's the line drawn between bad technique and being irresponsible? And why should the consequences differ so greatly between international test/club rugby and smaller club rugby when outside of the lime-light?
Flipje May 30, 2011 8:14 pm

Seriously are some of you joking. I understand rugby is a physical game, but common who are joking here!
Only one punch as retaliation? Should deserve more.... Credit to Piutau
Anonymous May 30, 2011 8:18 pm

Rhodes should be banned for a while, could've broken Piitau's neck!
cheyanqui May 30, 2011 8:34 pm

The issue is that this probably happens fairly regularly.
Where Rhodes got "unlucky" was that he fell over with the Otagan.
That aside, if this is happening in ruck/maul, this needs to be punished.
Putting a player in this type of headlock can cause severe injury.
Even if the player isn't thrown down by the headlock, it it probably already in the realm of a "sleeper hold", cutting off or limiting blood flow to the player's brain.
This isn't tiddly-winks, I know, but it's also no olympic wrestling, where you expect head-locks, or MMA, where you can tap out
Guy May 30, 2011 8:39 pm

Seriously, I don't understand some of the comments on this site.
Is flying in with a stretched arm to the head of your opponent bad tackling technique?
Is putting your boot to someones head poor kicking technique?
Is gougeing someone's eyes poor 'mosqito-sting-scratching-technique'?
This is the most dangerous thing I've seen on RD this year. The guy was lucky his legs were not stuck in the maul so he was able to roll with it.
Lengthy, lengthy ban IMHO. And a few weeks for retaliating.
Charlie May 30, 2011 9:14 pm

Saying its bad technique - does this mean that spear tackles, (when some are intentional, admittedly,) the majority of them are dump tackles just out of control, you think they deserve just a slap on the wrist for potentially paralysing another player? I think not!
The retaliation will get something, but there should be a heftier ban for the killer judo move....if it has potential for serious harm, then it should be eradicated before actual incidences occur and making a marker of it now will help that.
Robbie May 30, 2011 10:12 pm

Highlanders player: nothing
Fucking disgraceful. end of story.
Ian M May 30, 2011 10:50 pm

Bill May 30, 2011 11:18 pm

I was watching a show in Australia with former Wallabies hooker Adam Frier, and he was explaining that the technique Michael Rhodes used was actually textbook if he had been doing it to Piutau's body, isntead of his head.
That's basically one of the taught ways that you clear a guy out of a ruck at the top level.
Obviously not around the neck (it was basically what they call a gator roll in MMA), and so deserves punsihment.
But let's not flip out. It's actually not as dangerous as people make out. It's a standard grappling technique, used in MMA or graeco-roman wrestling.
People should reaslise that rugby has been using wrestling and grappling techniques like this for many years now, occaisonally things like this might happen.
So a short ban and we move on.
Alexander May 30, 2011 11:55 pm

Alexander May 31, 2011 12:06 am

Anonymous May 31, 2011 12:41 am

However, they carry very high danger levels and need to be stopped. I can't condone the punches thrown but I do understand why they were thrown. The citings should fall heavy on the Lions player
There are comments here talking about technique. I Can't buy any of that, as poor tackle technique results in tip tackles that SOMETIMES merit a red card.
Cut this out of the game before it reaches any level of acceptance.
BobMacActual May 31, 2011 12:50 am

Absolutely the wrong approach to discipline, at any time.
That's the standard in the National Hockey League, which is high water mark for stupid in management of professional sports. It's a useful rule of thumb that whatever the NHL does, by definition, is wrong.
If I'm the discipline officer in this case, Piutau gets the going rate for punches (4 weeks?)
And if Rhodes's next job does not involve the phrase, "Do you want fries with that?" then he's a very lucky boy.
Darren May 31, 2011 12:51 am

Bill May 31, 2011 1:38 am

Don't tar all south africans with the same brush cuz of one douchebag on the internet.
Obviously he is an idiot, or he would know that there are hundreds of thousands of people of Samoan, Tongan, Fijian and other islander descent living in Nz who were born and raised there.
The fact that he is too thick to understand the concept of an immigrant nation like NZ indicates that no one should take his views at all seriously, so let's just ignore him.
In regards to this incident, people are getting very worked up over something that's not too bad.
It is illegal what he did, he attacked the neck and head. It should result in a ban of some weeks, and will.
But you can't stampt his kind of thing out of the game altogether, it's a full contact sport, occaisonally people overstep the mark, they get punished and we move on.
As has been pointed out by people who have actually trained in or coached rucking, this technique is textbook if used lower on the body, under the armpits (called using underhooks in grappling). Round the neck is of course illegal (a gator roll in grappling) and should be penalised.
But it is a matter of making a mistake and using poor technique, I doubt it was malicious.
By the way inw restling this kind of move is done frequently and I've never heard of it breaking anyone's neck. It's not as dangerous as it looks.
Anonymous May 31, 2011 3:06 am

Marts May 31, 2011 3:09 am

Piatau has been found guilty of punching but escaped being banned because of exceptional circumstances.
Anonymous May 31, 2011 3:44 am

admax May 31, 2011 7:28 am

katman May 31, 2011 7:41 am

Tim May 31, 2011 8:03 am

I guess people just see what they want to see.
Anonymous May 31, 2011 9:09 am

Anonymous May 31, 2011 12:37 pm

Anonymous May 31, 2011 2:02 pm

Anonymous May 31, 2011 2:15 pm

I mean we see BIG bans for spear tackles, and to me this had a HUGE amount more potential to injure the guys neck than a spear.
Anonymous May 31, 2011 2:36 pm

Anonymous May 31, 2011 11:33 pm

Agree clean out was unacceptable and deserved to be punished but now there is a ruling that to retaliate is OK.
High tackles are often more dangerous, so now after a high tackle (well the precedence set so far is that you may well need to be a Kiwi) you can jump up take 2 cheap shot punches and then follow up with a third and claim it was exceptional circumstances.
I would have though QCs thought through the consequences of their decisions - as a Kiwi maybe he has.
Anonymous June 01, 2011 12:48 am

Typical dirty saffa goes for cheap shot then gets belted up (along with other members of his team).
The guy gets 6 weeks and now all the yarpie muppets will start complaining that South Africans are targeted...
The reason you idiots are targeted is becasue you are filthy cheats who can't win by playing within the rules!
cheyanqui June 01, 2011 2:43 am

Isn't this an attack on a player in a "defenseless position"?
Not saying Rhodes don't deserve some biffo.. But for Piutau to get NOTHING for hitting a player on the ground simply begs the calls for the double standards Kiwis get accused of.
If that had of been Schalk Burger retaliating on Richie McCaw, McCaw would have gotten nothing, and Burger would have gotten 12 weeks for attacking a defenseless opponent on the ground.
No.7 June 01, 2011 1:27 pm

Fucking hell. Why don't you guys go and ay a SINGLE game of rugby. Rather than living off a rugby video game and then come back to the site!
rememberthemer June 01, 2011 1:35 pm

Back in the day Rhodes would have spent the remainder of the game removing Otago sprigs from his butt after every ruck.
JustaThought June 01, 2011 1:36 pm

I recognise it could have been worse though, naturally.
rememberthemer June 01, 2011 1:41 pm

Of course the point you fail to mention is that Richie McCaw wouldn't have tried to wrench anyone's head off to start with.
Not sure you could say the same thing about Burger though.
Anonymous June 01, 2011 6:19 pm

Whining Keeeeweeeees typically claiming Saffa's are dirty. Precious much? You're quick to point fingers but let's not forget about "Umugger" and St. Kev nearly killing O'driscoll, typical dirty Keeeeweeeees, no BMT and choke on the big stage as a bonus.
P.S. Rhodes hardly felt those "punches" so I'd hardly call it a belting.
Anonymous June 01, 2011 7:17 pm

rememberthemer June 01, 2011 9:29 pm

25 June 2005 - 2 June 2011
or 6 years
or 2168 days
or 3,121,920 minutes
Did you know in that time you could have impregnated the missus and the result would already have started school?
Mind you who can forget when it is only 16,819,200 minutes since John Ashworth studded JPR.
Bill June 01, 2011 11:06 pm

It would virtually impossible to break a man's neck with a gator roll.
It's a standard grappling technique. In college (and olympic wrestling) it's a relativley common move.
It's seriously not even fractionaly as dangerous as you are making out.
No.7 June 02, 2011 12:01 am

Care to comment again Einstein?
Bill June 02, 2011 1:31 am

I'll stay civil, since I don't want to engage in some petulent internet argument.
I was simply commentating on your assertion that it was incredibly dangerous.
I don't agree. It's not very dangerous, though it looks terrible and is of course illegal. It should be punished and I think 5 or 6 weeks is a good punishment.
I have no problem with the punches, I'd do the same thing.
But the gator roll, flip or not, isn't gonna break anyone's neck.
Just calm down.
Alexander Ioannou June 02, 2011 12:05 pm

Rhodes could be looking at a lengthy ban, If that happened to me in a game I would have reacted the same was as Piutau and would accept the 6 week ban I'd probably get.
Anonymous June 04, 2011 2:45 pm
















Commenting as Guest | Register or Login