Monday Jan 7, 2013

Toby Flood faces ban for alleged dangerous tackle on Andy Goode

Toby Flood faces ban for alleged dangerous tackle on Andy Goode
20
Comments

Leicester Tigers flyhalf Toby Flood faces a possible suspension that will rule him out of the Ospreys Heineken Cup clash this coming weekend. His Six Nations campaign could also be threatened, but Richard Cockerill believes there was nothing in it.

Flood was cited for a dangerous tackle on Worcester’s Andy Goode during the Tigers’ 19-14 Aviva Premiership match win on Friday night. 

He will attend a disciplinary hearing in London tomorrow and looks likely to face a ban that could possibly tarnish his chances of reclaiming the England number ten jersey.

Cockerill feels that there was no malice in the tackle though, and they simply fell clumsily.

“I think it was a genuine attempt at a good-quality tackle,” said Cockerill.

“Clearly, Andy Goode ended up in an awkward position. But with Rob Hawkins joining the tackle and pulling Andy to the ground with his collar, it made it look worse than it was.

“If you take the views of the commentators out of the way and look at it in the cold light of day, it was just unfortunate. It is not a tip-tackle or a spear tackle.

“It was just a tackle which left Andy in an awkward position. There was no malice. Toby Flood is not that type of player,” he added.

20 Comments

  •  rdump
    rdump

    This is absolutely ridiculous... Flood gets cleared, and Armitage gets 8 weeks for something nowhere as dangerous. There is absolutely no consistency in the decisions. I understand that refs can make mistakes on the pitch as they need to make decisions without having all the facts in hand. However, when you see such discrepancies in the disciplinary hearings when the guys have several days to watch video footage, the only reason can be that they have received instructions on who to ban or who to save. Hope the IRB is not going to end up as corrupted as the FIFA or the International Cycling Union.

    Reply
  •  chilldoubt
    chilldoubt

    Correct decision by the panel IMHO. When the tackle was made, Flood was wrong-footed and off balance. Then a combination of Goode's weight, both players crabbing sideways and the hooker getting hold of Goode around the neck(pulling him through horizontal) meant that Flood was never in enough control to bring him down safely. Nice to see a bit of common sense for once.

    Reply
  •  rdump
    rdump

    Indeed, not the slightest comparison can be made to Varndels tackle. Tip tackles should be avoided because they are dangerous. What is dangerous about them? The fact that head or neck hit the ground first and get the whole body weight unto them. You just have to look at the slow motion. Agulla lands on the side. Actually, his head doesn't even hit the ground. Goode lands exactly on the neck and he is almost perfectly vertical at 0:17. He would very well be in a wheelchair now... Would anyone then argue that TB shouldnt be banned?

    Reply
  •  katman
    katman

    Look, he'll probably cop a short ban (1 or 2 weeks) because the final moments of the tackle didn't look good. But there was certainly far less malice in this tackle than when Goode rammed his knees into a try scorer in the same game.

    Reply

  • Notice: Trying to get property 'data' of non-object in /var/www/html/php/vo/Comment.php on line 19
  • It seems simple these days, you pick somebody up their safety is responsibility until you put them back on the ground. It's very difficult at times but according to the law if you've taking responsibility to lift somebody like that and they hit the floor as happened there, it comes back to you and you will receive a ban.

    Reply
  •  rdump
    rdump

    Exactly. And the fact that there is malicious intent or not does not change anything to the dangerousness of the action. It's actually quite irrelevant. If there was malicious intent, meaning that he would actually voluntarily try to injur him or break his neck should be prosecuted for it... Of course, TF did not have malicious intent. But did he lift and drive goode into the ground? Yes. Rules are quite clear about this: "- The player is lifted and then forced or 'speared' into the ground (red card offence)" Tolofua against Treviso did not have any malicious intent (he was just stupid), had a clean record and still got 6 weeks for it.

    Reply
  •  cheyanqui
    cheyanqui

    On another note, when will referees start to ding players for throwing the ball into the stands after a try, or in order to avoid a quick lineout?<>, you are required to kick the conversion with the same ball -- the whole spiking or throwing the ball away risks losing that ball. At the very least, you are required to kick the conversion without undue delay -- I think spiking the ball counts as needless. As for the lineouts, does anyone notice when cheeky players (Geordan Murphy comes to mind) run into touch, and then "hand the ball" to a deserving fan in the front row. It's a clear ploy to kill a quick lineout.

    Reply
  •  cheyanqui
    cheyanqui

    I a tackler brings a player beyond the horizontal, he (and therefore his team) is still responsible for a safe outcome. That Flood's teammate came in and aggravated the tackle unforunately does not solve the problem. Thus, I think that the safety lesson here should be that if Flood lifts the player, his teammate should be helping to guid the player to safety, not making it worse. Regardless, it's Flood that should get the penalty and sanction, even if he is being hard-done. That said, the one brining the most disrepute to the game is Andy Goode's barber.

    Reply

  • Notice: Trying to get property 'data' of non-object in /var/www/html/php/vo/Comment.php on line 19
  • A lot of tip tackles happen IMO when the tackling player also falls over. When the tackler loses their footing, they're hardly able to correct the angle in which they're holding the tackled player. In this case, it looks throughout most of the tackle, Flood keeps his feet. Plus, he does lift Goode. Flood doesn't strike me as a mean player, so I don't think he meant to tip him, but at the very least he didn't make much of an effort not to tip him. Whether or not that's grounds for a ban I don't know.

    Reply
  •  davejames11
    davejames11

    Flood ban for bad tackle , No2 doubled for malice and Cockless barred for cheering on thunggery from his hiding place behind the laptop, if he wants to be a cage fighter get in the cage rugby does not need cheepshot merchants.

    Reply
  •  smiffy_ref
    smiffy_ref

    Started off as a good strong tackle but due to the fact that AG landed on his head/neck (agreed, mostly due to the secondary tackler [no.2]) and that TF could have gone down with him to prevent AG landing in such a way I expect it to be a ban. Probably around 2/3 weeks as there was no malice.

    Reply
  •  smiffy_ref
    smiffy_ref

    Started off as a good strong tackle but due to the fact that AG landed on his head/neck (agreed, mostly due to the secondary tackler [no.2]) and that TF could have gone down with him to prevent AG landing in such a way I expect it to be a ban. Probably around 2/3 weeks as there was no malice.

    Reply
  •  colombes
    colombes

    no malice in this tackle, more reckless and stupid than anything else but to guess rfu sanction, u just have to find the first 6N fixture of england ;) 5 weeks for the tackle, reduced to 2 weeks for an "impeccable" behaviour...

    Reply
  •  willwillrob
    willwillrob

    I was at the game and the way i read it was that. It was a dangerous tackle but flood did not intend to spear him more drive him back with a bang (henson on tait style). I felt that a yellow card and move on would suffice.

    Reply
  •  dgenerator
    dgenerator

    Landing on the Head / Neck before feet = Red & Citing. Lifting Feet Above the Shoulders (assuming player does not land on head or neck) = Penalty & Yellow card. nothing to do with Floods body position but rather the body position of the tackled player. Agree there was no malice (unlike with Goode's dropped knee!), but unfortunately for Flood a citing offense. Matt Smith received a post match Yellow card for the elbow on Groves. One of many infringements missed by the superbly astute Doyle.

    Reply
  •  yster7
    yster7

    If you watch Floods' body position throughout the tackle, he's driving him backwards/sideways and NOT lifting him at any point! No way a spear tackle!! Goode landed awkwardly due to the supporting players interfering. At worst a penalty..

    Reply
  •  jeroo
    jeroo

    I don't think malice has anything to do with it does it? (in the rule book). Pretty sure it will be a ban either way. RD - would love to see the footage of the elbow to the back of Alex Groves bonce if you can find it. I take it there has been no citing for that?

    Reply

  • Notice: Trying to get property 'data' of non-object in /var/www/html/php/vo/Comment.php on line 19
  • I'm still confused why players even lift these days. As I've said before sometimes with a big hit a player is naturally taken off the ground but in tackles like these when they lift the player up it's just asking for trouble. Floods intent might not have been to put Goode on his head but as we've seen with supporting tacklers etc... coming in anything can happen.

    Reply
  •  pretzel
    pretzel

    Hmmm, difficult... As the pundits have said, started off fine, ended up not fine... For me it's the point at 0:11 which is where my focus is where TF is standing up holding AG... If TF had fallen to the ground with AG at this point I doubt there'd be any problems but then skipping along to 0:14 TF is still completely upright and holding AG who is now horizontal... I don't think TF is entirely to blame as I feel that the number 2 (assisting tackler) is the one who cocks it all up... But I am not sure you can punish an assisting tackler (as guy suggests)...precedent perhaps?.. Or perhaps as always it is the tacklers (initial tackler) responsibility for the safety of the opposition player, i.e. "had TF not lifted AG in that manner then No.2's collar grabbed would not have done anything etc etc etc"

    Reply
  •  guy
    guy

    To be honest: don't even think Flood is to blame. Number 2 (supporting tackler) citing would have been more appropriate. He seems to be pushing Goode down.

    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
Toby Flood faces ban for alleged dangerous tackle on Andy Goode | RugbyDump - Rugby News & Videos