Viewing comments for browner
The whole code has been sent a message by WR recently , its "keep off the neck" , players need to hear the message and adjust.
Applies to tackle/ruck and maul.
Those that don't modify their contact above the shoulder will be off the field, simples !!
3 Months, 2 Weeks ago
Players are still lifting Ball carriers off the ground for what possession reason exactly ? It isn't driving the player very far backwards or taking ball possession off of them, so what is the possession benefit exactly???
Their stupidity is compounded because WR havent ever directed the game to rid these 'potential paralyse'rs' .....oh wait, .....yes they have it seems, several times !!
How much clearer do players need this subject to be?
Did either player land on head or neck, if so then it should be been RED given by the referee - or is this the Union equivalent of RLs shameful 'RC avoidance' policy , often
described as " on report" ???!!!!
3 Months, 2 Weeks ago
I struggle to imagine that the player or his club wouldn't have raised this subject with the Match Observer post match.
IF they did (??) then the only conceivable reason that he has avoided a citing can be that FFR would be without him for the RWC and someone recognises this and can exert political influence.
I cant ever imagine French rugby is capable of such self interest.
If he gets cited, I expect him to employ Horwills genius Lawyer, replay his legendary 'unbalanced'
4 Months, 5 Days ago
Well spotted, should be cited, rid the game of such crap
( even if showboatidiotnumpty almost deserved it!)
4 Months, 1 Week ago
If they werent, then it would be near on impossible to ever defend against someone near /on the try line who was trying to ground the ball.
Not allowing the opportunity to defend is inequitable.
4 Months, 2 Weeks ago
The inescapable fact is Pro rugby encourages financial migration to the best paying locations. (Paying = wage/prospects/endorsements/injury resting longevity)
NZ were the first to attract PI players as their 'shamatuer' rugby structures, because they were better organised & ahead of the game and leading the drive towards 'official' professionalism.
Everyone else has sought to catch up since. The small nations will vote for anything that increases their chance to compete with the powerhouses, even if that means having 'pro tourists' represent them.
If Roman Abramovich ( Chelsea FC owner) decided to buy into Georgian Rugby, then it is certain that you'd see an influx of worldwide Talented players into his well funded Squads .
International rugby is certainly losing national identity credibility, (shrugs with resignation) but notwithstanding that, I still want the 'Rose' to beat 'Wallaby' (substitute any nations) when ever the two badges lock horns, regardless of how many PI / SH descendants are in which side, the same mindset as I do for my (unrepresentative collection of mercenaries) local pro football club !
4 Months, 2 Weeks ago
Only when reading your final comment, are we able to ascertain who the real Numbskull is .... !
I doubt you've the skill/ability to referee beyond your armchair
5 Months, 4 Hours ago
WB was not totting up AW offences ( if any) he was soley deciding on whether or not that collision constituted an offence.
5 Months, 5 Hours ago
On RugbyDumps video the try is awarded at 79.15
30seconds is incorrect !!
..Law 9B (e) says "The kicker must take the kick within one minute and thirty seconds (ninety seconds) from the time a try has been awarded"
The conversion was awarded at 79.57 on the same video clock.
7 Months, 2 Weeks ago
The purpose of a dummy runner is to hold/fix/commit players to a potential tackle, in this case the move did exactly that, there is no way that (having committed himself to tackling Easter) the defender (Biggar?) Was going to be able to readjust his position to make a tackle on Vunipola.
As such, he'd bought the dummy, and the ball was moved away from a position that he could ever have successfully defended.
What did not happen, was Biggars attempt to tackle Vunipola actually being blocked off. Dummy lines are run all the time in pro rugby, and 'might've'... or 'possiblys' .... Are mostly replaced with "would've" thinkings when assessing these 'committing the defenders' run line incidents.
To compound in the fact that several phases/tackles then occurred prior to Attwoods try and its a poor retrospective cancellation decision IMO.
7 Months, 3 Weeks ago