Viewing comments for DanKnapp« back to profile

Tusi Pisi sees red for in the air challenge during breakthrough Bristol win

I assume this video, from World Rugby, would be entitled: 'UP AND UNDER DANGER: WHEN WILL THIS MADNESS END!' if it was released by them now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ptckxuOBAQ

View Video

1 Month, 3 Weeks ago

Connacht snatch win over Wasps after new law directive calamity

The ink wouldn't even be dry before a new one had to be issued. Don't blame the referees for getting confused sometimes!

2 Months, 5 Days ago

Connacht snatch win over Wasps after new law directive calamity

You are absolutely right, Oliver. I stand corrected.

2 Months, 5 Days ago

Player banned after filthy off the ball tackle on female referee

What is this 'sex' thing of which you speak?

2 Months, 1 Week ago

Connacht snatch win over Wasps after new law directive calamity

The issue that many will have with this is that the referee was talked out of his decision by the captain. I actually don't mind this, because the referee should be in dialogue with the captain, who was respectful at all times.

I have a massive problem with the fact that this referee didn't know the laws hadn't come into affect yet, and as a result made an incorrect decision which probably cost Wasps the game.

Connacht might still have scored a try from a tap and go or after winning the scrum, but it wasn't certain. EPCR should have overturned the rest, if you ask me, because the captain was wrong in what he said. They were complicit, albeit innocently.

Not a Wasps supported and don't particularly care whether they go through or not, before anyone says anything.

2 Months, 1 Week ago

Connacht snatch win over Wasps after new law directive calamity

I expect this will be a nice quiet thread.

2 Months, 1 Week ago

World Rugby announce zero tolerance approach to contact with the head

Comment order is fooked, so don't know which I'm replying to, but basically...

Dangers abound. Fine. You can't remove the danger from the game, nor should you. At the same time there is nothing wrong with trying to limit the danger of catastrophic injuries.

Attempting to limit the risk of injury to the head through conventional tackles is not the same as trying to reduce all risk.

For what it's worth I think World Rugby has backed itself into a corner. The latest directives have simply caused a situation where we've seen card after card in the European competition. We need to get current players and referees on the panel to discuss how to make sense of the current laws. At the moment it's all over the place.

2 Months, 1 Week ago

World Rugby announce zero tolerance approach to contact with the head

Absolutely what I was arguing, thank you for your contribution. Wouldn't it have been a shame if a sensible thread got sidelined into a series of ridiculous straw man arguments?

Look, we have players who are retiring with serious problems due to the number of concussions they've received. Those brain injuries can lead to serious conditions later in life. Players across all levels of the game are getting bigger as our knowledge about weight training, nutrition, and so on improves. Our brains remain the same.

Why the hell wouldn't we want to protect people who are playing the game?

I know you, and others, have an issue with the gladiatorial nature of the game being (you feel) stripped away. I'm afraid it's a view that I have little time for. Rugby remains, for 99.9% of the people who play it, a game which they enjoy playing on the weekend and then they go back to their lives. For the game to not take into account what we know about the dangers of concussions is, for me, unforgivable.

In Cane's case, and in many others like it, people get injured because of an accidental collision. This rule change simply clarifies that there IS something wrong if two players clash heads, and if the person initiating the tackle (and argue what you like, but Cane was moving into position to tackle) hasn't gone low enough to prevent a head injury, then they have committed an offence. The tackler has a duty of care towards the person they are tackling.

Cane was not standing still, as you know, but was instead moving to cover an attacker.

2 Months, 1 Week ago

World Rugby announce zero tolerance approach to contact with the head

Because he was moving into the tackle area, he was clearly approaching the guy to tackle him. Yes, he had him step towards him, but he was initiating contact. He has a responsibility to take the other player's safety into consideration.

He wasn't standing still. Penalty, no more. He wasn't completely blameless, but no card was deserved.

2 Months, 1 Week ago

Player banned after filthy off the ball tackle on female referee

Agreed that three years isn't enough.

2 Months, 1 Week ago