Tai Tuifua's dangerous flying tackle on Nicky Robinson

Yellow card. Late and high. Citing, 1 week suspension.

Nonsense! If that's not a red card offense then what is? The tackler drove his head into the face of the defender and made no attempt to make a proper tackle. I'm all for hard rugby, but that was reckless, shows no respect for the opposition, or the laws of the game. A "tackle" or rather hit like that can easily end a players' career or worse. Tuifua deserves a lengthy ban as a result.

Regarding Johndoe's comments on Wayne Barnes - whilst I agree he does miss a lot of big calls he can't shoulder all the blame. His AR's also have to be held responsible. In this case, the AR's were absolutely useless and made no tangible contribution.

Don't forget he left his feet and dived at the player!

I'm all for taking the referee's side where possible and understanding that they have to make quick decisions under pressure, but Barnes misses so many big decisions. Ireland vs. Wales, no red card for Davies, an undeserved yellow card for Ferris for not even a penalty offense, Clermont vs. Leinster, Leo Cullen punch on prop, Cudmore charge on Isaac Boss, Clermont player flying headbutt and face / eye grabbing on Cullen and more. And now he's missed a massive tackle like that.

It does seem to be a theme with him now. I used to consider him the best until 2 years ago or so.

What are the specifics of tackling rules, I need a little clarification before I decide. Because there isn't any doubt that's a messy tackle, but I'm wondering if rugby has anything similar to League rules which would explain the lack of action against Tuifua, whether written or not. I know that in league what matters is the point of contact, therefore if you make a textbook tackle and belt someone in their shoulder, and for some reason you happen to go higher, so long as it's deemed to be accidental and the result of the initial contact then you're usually excused.

As far as I'm aware there is no such common sense in rugby, so really he's very lucky to get away with this, even though initial contact was shoulder to shoulder.

As an aside, Vunipola did nothing wrong. He ran in and gave Tuifua a nothing-push after the tackle, which is what the majority of players are coached to do these days, so that the incident is brought to the referees attention and ruled on(so to stop the attacking play too.) Then a phase or two later Vunipola is out of the ruck and Tuifua comes from nowhere and basically dives on the man. He was well entitled to give him a punch or two. Soft commentators are soft.

The other English commentator gives a great insight into why the game has gotten as pathetically soft as it is though. Bunch of oxbridge-types trying to pander to "soccer moms"

NH rugby is seriously weak. There really ought to be a breakaway with the professional, tough SH players taking the game forward professionally under a new name. And the eton types up north playing their glorified mud-wrestling like girls until their hearts content. The NH holds back rugby so, so much.

Buzz I believe that it USED to be where the tackle started that counted, for instance your arm makes initial contact at shoulder level, then rises up to the neck its not classed as a high tackle... However I believe that NOW it is where it ends up... so again, if your arm ends up at the neck even though you started at the ankles (don't ask me how) it could be deemed as a high tackle...(or dangerous)...

Not sure where your oxbridge comment comes from, below I made a comment in reference to the pathetic "my little boy might get hurt" scenario, but as far as oxford or cambridge goes, I have played against cambridge, and I wouldn't let the "posh" atmosphere that floats around cambridge fool you... I'd imagine it is much the same for oxford...

In fact, you seem to have a trend of bashing the upper class... Some not-so-well hidden issues there? Most of the guys I play with were from fee paying schools and they are no less tough than those that came from the bottom of the barrel schools...

It's reverse snobbery mate. A shame really, as Buzz makes some cracking points otherwise.

*Takes cover*

It's legitimate 'snobbery'. Rugby is too posh, and it holds the game back. Which is why every second professional team in the world has a Rugby League defensive coach, because it's a tough working class game where in-your-face, defence-with-intent is the standard, a game where malice and athleticism is rewarded and coached.

It's not a problem with the game I've invented, it's a documented problem that people are in denial about. Why else are rugby league coaches working at every level of the game showing the posh sort how to tackle properly?

Glad your saying that mate, absolutely right, anyone in the UK who denies that elite rugby is NOT full private school players is probably just blind to reality or simply hasn't seen it for themselves.

Deffo a NH trait to be fair which is a shame really, lots of good players simply cant get to the top echelons - just trust me on this one. Surrey Rugby is particularly bad for that, remember going there and being organised by which school you attended! WTF thats totally mad! Since when has school rugby somehow signified whether or not ur any good?

Last point, get some more council estate players on the pitch - they are just what your looking for - tough and bring new elements to what is currently a very 1 Dimensional style of English rugby

Just my thoughts though ...

Because rugby tackles have changed, and rugby teams are generally intelligent enough to learn from other sports.
The All-Blacks use crossfit for fitness, Irish Gaelic Football coaches have been used by a number of South African teams to help with fielding skills and kicking on the run. Class has nothing to do with it.
By the way, the SH rugby history is as steeped in private schools as anywhere else, I went to Newbridge College in Ireland, we had a number of rugby exchange students from Aukland.

Toughness comes from experience, if you don't have that life experience then generally speaking you're going to lack the toughness. This is why in all full on professional sports (and I don't count northern rugby as a legitimate professional sport) the sports are filled with poor people, raised in humble conditions. Look at sports that are professionalised, how many great upper class boxers, football(American) players are there? Toughness and upper class upbringings are at odds with one another. There are few exceptions.

Whenever there is an even playing field the posh sorts from their posh backgrounds fall behind, primarily because they're mentally weak and haven't dealt with any sort of hardship. The only time this isn't the case is when a sport is institutionally elitist, such as Rugby in the Northern Hemisphere and Australia.

These people are absolutely less tough. They're too nice. They're yellow-bellied. In a brawl Cambridge would get eaten by any working class equivalent.

I love to picture sat in some palatial mansion, nursing an ice-cold gin and tonic and a bowl of olives as you type...

Anyway, some good points well made mate. Got to pick you up on this though: "The only time this isn't the case is when a sport is institutionally elitist, such as Rugby in the Northern Hemisphere and Australia." - how can Australian rugby be elitist when they're all basically crims?

Anyway, I'd still maintain there are already far too many ill-mannered yobbos in the game.

But, trolling aside(!), I played a few years in south-west London and there were quite a few posh gits there; most of the rugby people I play with and against now (in the south of England) don't resemble the caricature you paint at all.

I'm starting to doubt that Buzz ever played himself to be honest. If nothing else Rugby will toughen you up pretty quickly.
It took the Navy 20yrs to notch up their first win against Oxford...I suppose they're just not poor enough to be tough either?
Anyway, it's a pity, some valid points getting lost in a bitter rant based on stereotypes.

Sounds like Eric Cartman ideas on Nascar, only the poor and stupid can drive in Nascar...

My comments aimed at nobody in particular seem to have sent you into a frenzy, whereby you - for reasons beyond my understanding - think I care about your individual upbringing or life experiences? I appreciate that you seem concerned about my own upbringing, but not everybody shares your enthusiasm in others.

The only thing you're right about is my contempt for the upper classes - and damn proud of it. A trait I happen to share with every other well-read, oppressed human. Though I'm sure you'd have it known that there is no institutional oppression against working class people, in sports such as rugby union, or

I don't really understand how I can offer any evidence buzz... Numerous occasions did our club hand it to the peasant locals on a night out... But of course this didn't happen because you can't comprehend it...

As for NH rugby, have you ever been to the NH? Do you realise that lower class citizens opt for football over ANYTHING else, (including getting a job!).. Ever consider that? Then you head up north and the lower classes either opt for football or for rugby league, and have no knowledge of union. I believe even Chris Ashton said himself that he didn't even know about union until he was quite a bit older... Now let me guess you'll say that is because no one in union let them in, or maybe it is because of people like you that would rather turn your back on the upper classes than stand along side them?

At our rugby club there are quite a few types like you, the first team is packed full of the best players which admittedly are predominantly from fee paying schools, why you might ask? Because the fee paying schools had the top coaches, our school had a coach who apparently played international U20's? U21's?... So when our teams faced up against any guys that would rather be playing football from a non fee school it was a try fest in our favour, they did not want to play, they would rather be playing football.. England isn't even my home country but having lived here for a few years now I can tell that EVERYTHING is sadly about football.. If the School of hard knocks bunch got themselves off the street and joined a rugby club then they might actually progress, but what you're suggesting is that they should be somehow playing for England when they spend their junior life getting into trouble?

I'm sorry but if I sit here with my computer bitching about how I'm not playing professional rugby do you think it will further my chances?

I'll give you a further reason why upper class players may do better in the NH and that is because of school structure, I experienced a year in a non fee school, do you know what I learnt in my entire time there? Nothing... I genuinely did not learn a thing, other than contempt for almost 90% of my class mates, no one actually went there to learn, they all had complete disrespect for the teachers, they all set upon people attempting to learn.. There were very few of the names from that school that I have heard since in a positive manner... VERY FEW dug themselves out of that hole... and they did so through brains and not through athleticism.. What I understand is that is quite a common trend in non fee paying schools in the UK.. They DON'T want to learn... So is it "the elite's" fault that these people do not try? They also leave school right after GCSE's (5th form/year 11) and go on with their lives there... Very few enter into A levels (6th form/year 12-13).. unlike fee paying schools which all appear to offer a 6th form, in which a huge amount of rugby playing and training occurs... Then there is university, ANOTHER way to get yourself seen playing rugby... Perhaps the scouts should be looking at football fans instead of watching rugby matches?

Oh and for the record, in a huge amount of our matches against either fee paying or non fee paying schools there were county scouts.. so non fee paying students were open to county selection... you excel in those and you get more recognised...

I can recognise that the NH has a huge amount of rugby players from fee paying schools because:
1. Rugby along with cricket are the primary sports in a fee paying school, our school did not have a football team!
2. Rugby was played all through school, 6th form, university.. more chances to get noticed.

However your opinion of oppression is bull shit..

I'm English, you don't have to tell me about the UK education system or the class system - and I wouldn't listen to you either way, as you're apparently indoctrinated.

And to answer one of your questions: Yes, it is the elites fault. Who else can you blame for this Plutocratic system with restrictive upward mobility. Are the British poor born thick?

For an educated man - of paid education, no less - I would expect you to understand the principles of circumstance.

Why do you think poor people don't try. I would love to know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

Replace America with Britain, just as apt. Hopefully that answers your question.

Ok Buzz, I watched your link... but who EXACTLY are they?

I mean somewhere along the line you have to draw a line... This is about business vanishing pensions etc etc etc.. so what has that got to do with upper classes playing rugby? I went to a fee paying school, am I "upper class"?.. Am I running the poor?

I think the idea of the super rich and everybody else is around, but you have to realise that 99.9999% of these "toffs, rich, spoilt, posh and every other insult you can think of" people that you are haranguing about NH rugby are in the everybody else category along with you...

How is it elitist? That is what I do not understand. I went to a good school I worked hard and I achieved good grades, I went to an average university, graduated and now have a decent job... My grades were good at school but not top of the range... I had friends who went to crappy schools and ended up in Oxford University because their grades were BRILLIANT.. What is bad about anything I just wrote?

I also had friends who didn't go to university and have again landed brilliant jobs...

I apologise to you for my lack of understanding because quite frankly I don't see HOW or WHY that system could ever need to be changed?

You know about GSCE's I take it (or O levels if you're older)... They are set and are the same across the board... So as long as you apply yourself and work you have just as much chance of passing as the next person.

I do not think "poor people don't try" I think morons don't try, and sadly because there is no discipline system the morons get away with murder and drag down their classmates who would like to learn...

On the flipside in a fee paying school, you cannot get away with murder, if I did half the shit I saw in a WEEK at a non fee school, over an entire year at a fee paying school I'd be booted out faster than you can say buzzkillington.. So then what, I'd have an expulsion on my record, I'd have numerous bad reports, I'd have parents raining hell down upon me, and I'd have a real shit DECK let alone hand...

The British poor are no more thick than the British rich, in my school we had huge ranges of "class" rich-poor, everyone got on fine, the only difference between the people were that the rich paid the fees and the poor got scholarships..

As for restricted upward mobility, are you employed? I only ask because I have bumped into numerous past friends who have not had the qualifications to take the next step in the company they work, so the company PAID for the education for that next step. so how is anybody restricted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo

BuzzKillington May 13, 2012 1:04 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo

Classic! That is you Buzz.

As is this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMKsR_wUSfA

Buzz are you kidding me? I generally agree with a lot of what you say but you're losing your credibility quickly... Honestly the way you are talking sounds like your dad was some lackey to a rich land owner who paid your dad a dollar a week to work, when your poor old dad reached an old age of 40 and his terrible arthritis set in from living in damp squalor he could no longer work, he tried to get you to work but you were only a babe in life and although your spirit said yes your young undeveloped frame couldn't stand the hardships of the manual labour. This being the case his great lordship landowner turfed you and your family out into the cold, no home, no money, no future... You spent a few years on the streets trying to beg for money so you could nurse your ailing father, until final he passed away, your mother so stricken with grief at the loss of what was once a strong man followed very shortly after, leaving a poor defenceless buzz to fend for himself... He worked hard in the factories, until eventually he got an education, he climbed the social ladder knowing that one day he would have the position and the power to strike at the heart of the elitist Lord land owner and have his sweet sweet revenge....

Am I on the mark?

I enjoyed writing that, but you are seriously a bitter sounding bloke. Your argument whilst having some valid points is purely speculation and honestly nonsensical.. I went to a fee paying school, I enjoyed my upbringing.. However I must be losing my marbles because although I may be from "posh sorts" (by some standards) I don't recall being brought up with dom perignon fresh salmon and caviar... I do recall playing a good old game of "rugger with the chaps then making my way into town with them for a jolly good pint of beer, I do recall numerous occasions when the local ruffians were taken down a peg after they attempted to challenge us to a bout of fisty cuffs"....

It's interesting Pretzel that you don't offer any evidence to the contrary. You don't even attempt to offer argument against my own, apart from some anecdotal rubbish, which I would doubt to be true in the first place. A group of posh sorts winning a square-dance with working class people? Only in the dreams of the insecure rich.

Face facts, at elite levels of all sport there is little to no participation from people of privileged backgrounds - they don't have the heart or the hunger for it, in many cases they don't even have the innate athleticism for it. But this runs in stark contrast with NH Rugby Union, where this is little if any elite participation from ordinary citizens. A thinking person would question why that is? Why is it the game is chock full of toff types?

The reason for this is because Rugby Union is still an elite sport that's institutionally supportive of only well-off kids. This cultural hegemony (right down to restrictive beliefs and values) within Rugby, to borrow from Antonio Gramsci, is indisputable.

British Rugby is soft and it's because it's a game domineered over by upper class people. Instead of acknowledging the problem and getting working people involved in the game what happens? The posh sorts try to hold the game back and stop it from getting too athletically, physically-orientated. So when these burly Islanders and Saffas emasculate us we cry that they're dirty. But why are they dirty? Well they're dirty because we say so, and we make the rules. What we say goes.

Look at this season of School of Hard Knocks. Half the team would be semi-professional, some fully professional, if given half a chance. But they are poor and therefore they never got that chance.

You're all kidding yourselves if you think the upper class are half as tough.

In 50 years(after the elite institutions have crumbled) everyone in the England team will be talking in Northern accents and patois. And that won't be coincidental either.

You are an idiot mate.... Are you trying to say that affluent families go through no hardship? For all you know I could have hade seven shades kicked out of me by my dad for years but gone to a private school and taken up rugby union and your trying to tell me that a normal lad with no violence from his background is automatically tougher? Get in the real world

Contact on the head or neck is counted as high, whether it was the first point of contact is there or not. It is a player safety issue and is the responsibility of the tackler because they are in more control of the contact.
The NFL is having huge issues with head injuries and there has been a number of suicides by retired players claiming that their was depression caused by concussions the received while playing.
So protecting players from head injuries is important and Tuifua hits him in the head and it is his responsibility to make a safe tackle

Hey Buzz - your avatar's on the related videos... As it caught my eye I went in and watched it again, not at all dissimilar to this one. But jesus that is some hit from Owen Franks!

O Buzz i always love reading your comments, never a dull read. I nearly always disagree completely with what your saying, but interesting all the same. I personally wouldn't want to call Stephen Ferris a mud wrestling girl to his face, he was immense against the far tougher and better in every way SH Australians at the world cup.

As for the tackle, it looked fine to me, maybe a penalty but the player ducked into it

Good tackle glad to see no card.

That was a dangerous, high tackle to the head, but with a mitigating factor that Robinson was slipping down as the tackle was made. At least yellow card. Can't believe Barnes thought that was legal. Even if his arms were around the player, contact was strong and forceful to the head.

This was not rugby ....shame on Vunipola and the referee...bad, very dangerous and sad example for the youth and rugby tradition...this is not sport, just stupid and violent cowardice.

Pause the video as Tuifau shapes up to tackle; at this point his shoulder is level with Robinson's chest and he's just trying to make a big hit, you can see his arms coming round. Robinson is falling as the tackle is made which meant it was high, it was a bit clumsy and nothing more, shit happens

I suspect I am going to be a minority on this one:

Good call, no action needed... or penalty for high tackle at the most!

That is my honest opinion... Let's face it if Tuifua's head was on the other side we'd all be screaming about how amazing awesome TSRB-esque this tackle was... his head was on the wrong side and he made head on head contact...

Some of the crap that really does piss me off is hearing commentators talking about parents and their kids... I am sorry but this is a tough sport... People CAN get seriously injured in 100% legitimate plays... If the parents do not like it then pull their kids out by all means.. do NOT water a game down so that it is all pretty and cosy.. We are seeing men most of whom weighing over 15 stone running into each other in some cases travelling and huge (human) speeds.. Should we have a speed limit in the game too? A weight limit? How about in the future we have the Rugby World Cup 2015 light weight, middle weight, and heavy weight... I suppose we could even show the heavy weight rugby match after the watershed and rate it 18 as well?

I just get so wound up with this whole "lets make it gentle for the parents and kids sake" I must admit I never consider bad injuries the day of a match, however on other days I am not oblivious to the fact I could get seriously injured playing... Sadly it comes with the territory...

Doesn't look like you are in the minority here mate. Comments so far seem to show 3 for and 3 against...

"Some of the crap that really does piss me off is hearing commentators talking about parents and their kids... I am sorry but this is a tough sport... People CAN get seriously injured in 100% legitimate plays... If the parents do not like it then pull their kids out by all means.. do NOT water a game down so that it is all pretty and cosy..."

Well said mate.

So what if you ultimately get fewer players, at least the ones who play are there for the right reasons.

Then again, I'm not in favour of all this growing the game dogma. Far too many ill-mannered yobbos in it already for my liking.....

Totally agree with you Pretzel. I reply this over and over..still I think the tackle has nothing into it. A BIG MISS ASS TACKLE. The only contact was the arms trying to hold on to him..but then he slip downward which makes it looks bad and high.

Not late. But it is high. Why is it high? Partly because as Robinson catches the ball he sees this monster closing in on him and goes "Shiiiiiiiiiiiit" and instinctively tries to duck out the way! I don't blame him either, but it left Tuifua grasping at thin air with his arms and evidently clattering the poor bastard in the head, where he might have expected to hit him in the chest. Tuifua's gone for the classic set-yourself-low-and-drive-up-through-it type of tackle, which is great but the slightest change in target's body position and it goes spectacularly wrong.

Despite the above mitigation, I reckon this is unnecessarily aggressive/violent and it's quite clearly high and dangerous. Very surprised there's no citing...

Don't know if you can blame Barnesy though. He's watching in real-time and he's seen a bloke at least attempt to grasp the player, which after all is all that's required.

i think if nicky robinson got up and walked away, there won't be any calls for a card or anything.

poor fella seems to be knocked out cold.

i think its a good tackle, attempt to use his arms, just abit too high.

It's a shame for Rugby to see how referees are at that level !!

Could have made more of an effort to wrap around, but its difficult when players insist on committing to the ridiculous passing technique whereupon they stop mid flow, if Robertson hadn't of put his heels in to make the pass the tackle would have been a whole lot cleaner. The onus on a bad tackle shouldn't all be put on the tackler, sometimes the victims make it hard on themselves.

Good point

crap is defending such a dangerous playing...it is also stupid because harming rugby...RUGBY IS NOT SOCCER dudes

Not a late tackle, but it's clearly high,
aiming the head is clearly dangerous at this level.
Reverse the penalty is even a bad call, as i didn't really see vunipola kick or punch the player...

Barnes is famous to be permissive ( >> tuilagi punch vs ashton...), but when u need to sanction, do it!
every ref can have a bad day

but after his poor match during the semi's clermont-leinster, it begins to be an habit

Tuifua's intention was clearly just to put on a monster hit, rather than head hunt. But, just as with dump tackles, it is his responsibility to adjust to Robinson's body position, not the other way round. Very surprised there is no citing.

You can talk about hard and soft rugby all you like but if a player recklessly drives his head into the head of another player it is foul play and all of you keyboard warriors bemoaning the sanitisation of the sport are into the sport for the wrong reason.

There are accidental clashes of heads and accidental high tackles when a player is ducking or skipping. This is not one of those. It is a bull charge in which he knew he would inflict damage upon the player.

Haha thanks for your some of your less constructive comments from some people. Highly entertaining!

Thought the hit was reckless tbh, a penalty perhaps but intent was minimal I believe!

It seems to me that Robinson ducks to try to avoid the tackle, which is a perfectly natural reaction. Tuifua was just trying to put in a brutal, though legal hit by hitting the chest and driving up. If Robinson hadn't ducked, this would have been a spectacular tackle. But obviously you can't really blame either player for it.

Seems pretty legal to me, goes on the shoulder with the intention to make a good, big hit and tries to wrap his arms around him. I think we've seen lots of dubious tackles being penalised lately and I think we should let ones like these pass more often. We're not playing chess, remember?

When is a penalty not enough? I would think intent would be the mitigating factor. Does every high tackle or tip tackle need to result in a carding? Have a great weekend players, refs, and fans!

lol robinson just got hit so hard that he wasnt able to wrap his arms around you idiot, that definately wasnt a red card offence so you can shut it, its always the white boys complaining about these hits.

Just out of interest, how do you know the race of the people commenting?

No, no , no! It was high and dangerous, plus he left his feet to make the tackle. Yeah he slightly duck into it but not enough to get bash in the head like that.

I thought it was just a good hit. Maybe a bit high.
Certainly not worth all the fuss.
In league at least this would be perfectly fine.

Looks like a lot of fuss about nothing to me...High tackle, should have been a penalty and at the very worst a yellow card..Definitely not a red and definitely not ban worthy...He tries to get his arms around but because he hits him high the player falls too quickly..

IRB really needs to sort out the mess that is tackling...They really need to firstly decide upon a set of rules that, all international teams(or their boards) agree upon, and secondly clarify what the new rules are..At the moment the refs don't seem to know what to do and everything and anything is being cited...

I mean if a player only gets a yellow card or just a penalty against him, but is then cited and banned for a couple of weeks, surely that means the offence was red card worthy..If it wasnt red card worthy then why the ban and vice versa for red cards with no ban...

LOL... Samoa vs Tonga
;)
thats all i wanna say..