Monday Mar 26, 2018

Taniela Tupou escapes red card for brutal no arms tackle

Taniela Tupou escapes red card for brutal no arms tackle
13
Comments

Reds tighthead prop Taniela Tupou has been cited for this dangerous tackle against the Stormers in Cape Town on Saturday. Tupou will face a disciplinary hearing to determine how his next few weeks will look. The Reds lost the game 25-19.

The 21-year-old, affectionately known as ‘Tongan Thor’, escaped a red card according to former Springbok coach Nick Mallett, who watched on in dismay and shared his thoughts from the Supersport studio.

“I do not know how this foul went unpunished. It was impossible for all four (referee, two assistant referees and the TMO) to miss it,” he said. His views were echoed by Naas Botha, who said it was a ‘straightforward decision’.

Referee Marius van der Westhuizen said that his TMO had a look. But with no immediate stop in play, the match continued and the referee felt compelled to move on, rather than have another look, therefore leaving it for the citing commissioner. 

Tupou was later cited, alleged to have contravened Law 9.13: A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously.

The citing commissioner shared the view of Mallett and Botha, believing that the offence did indeed meet the Red Card threshold for foul play. Tupou will face a discplinary hearing this week.

UPDATE: Tupou received a Warning for this offence. 

A Warning can be issued for acts of Foul Play that are viewed by the committee to come close to but do not warrant the player receiving a Red Card.

In the finding handed down by the Judicial Committee Chairman Robert Stelzner SC, the Committee ruled the following:

“Having conducted a detailed review of the citing commissioner’s report and all the available evidence, including all camera angles and additional evidence, consisting of a written statement from the Player’s opponent, Craig Barry, and from the Stormers’ physician, oral evidence from the Player himself and the submissions from his legal representative, Mark Martin QC, the Judicial Committee concluded that the level of offending did not breach the Red Card threshold yet warranted a warning under the above Rule.”

“The Judicial Committee concluded that the Player, whilst attempting to use his arms, failed to properly grasp his opponent in the tackle, which resulted in the point of contact being between the Player’s right shoulder and his opponent’s upper chest area, causing the opponent to bounce off the Player.

“An inadequate attempt to grasp his opponent immediately before the point of impact resulted in the action being reckless as to the consequences thereof. This was in contravention of Law 9.11, and close to, but not crossing, the Red Card threshold. As a result the Judicial Committee issued the Player with a Warning.”

13 Comments

  •  katman
    katman

    Oh, I get what you're saying. Yes, I suppose that is possible. But unlikely.

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    Hahaha, you may be 100% right 45678, I really would love another chance to review it.

    Reply
  •  im1
    im1

    I'm not saying it is. Only saying that there could be another angle that shows there wasn't actually contact with the head. Seems a long shot, but the only way I could think of it not being a red.

    Reply
  •  katman
    katman

    Really? This is easily the worst tackle I've seen this year. You cannot possibly suggest it was only a yellow, even with only one camera angle.

    Reply
  •  im1
    im1

    agree it was a terrible tackle, but we only get one angle. It does look like there is shoulder to head contact, but perhaps there are other angles that show there wasn't? Pausing the video at 0.42 could suggest that it was shoulder to (very high on the) chest, so that's why only a yellow?

    Reply
  •  katman
    katman

    UPDATE: Sanzaar has concluded that the tackle was not a red card offense. Off field yellow only, apparently. What a joke.

    Reply
  •  katman
    katman

    Even Ma'a Nonu winced when he saw it.

    Reply
  •  jimmy23
    jimmy23

    Even league fans would frown at that one.

    Reply
  •  the_osprey
    the_osprey

    How does the TMO check that and think it's "fine"?

    Reply
  •  alasdairduncan3
    alasdairduncan3

    The 'dislodging the ball' tackle type where one arm remains low and the shoulder hits the ball is still allowed. In the Aki tackle, the penalty was still given I guess due to the head on collision and the fact that the other arm failed to fully wrap around the player - but otherwise it was legal.

    Reply
  •  45678
    45678

    Do you have a video of the aki hit RD?

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    I remember seeing Aki's 'tackle' and thinking there could be trouble, but I can't remember it particularly now. I just googled it and it came up with: REF: "There is one arm and a bit of a head-knock between the two... So I'm thinking penalty only here guys" TMO: "Green 12 leads with the shoulder but only a penalty. The clash is head on head." So seems to say head on head, rather than shoulder on head... Again, I can't remember it 100%, so you may very well be completely right, but that's what I've come up with so far..

    Reply
  •  katman
    katman

    Disgusting tackle. And while it might have been his worst of the game, it certainly wasn't his only illegal tackle.

    Reply

Great Tries

View All

Big Hits & Dirty Play

View All

See It To Believe It

View All

Funnies

View All

Training Videos

View All

Player Features

View All
Taniela Tupou escapes red card for brutal no arms tackle | RugbyDump - Rugby News & Videos