FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Farewell to the fair contest; Rugby 365

Farewell to the fair contest; Rugby 365

Started by Just_win5 REPLIES74 VIEWS· 02 Mar 2015, 23:45
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
02 Mar 2015, 23:45
#1
02 Mar 2015, 23:45#1

Having watched most, if not all of the Super Rugby matches thus far, I have come to the conclusion that referees are making a concerted effort to protect a player receiving a high ball, regardless of whether it's a "fair contest" or not.

I have absolutely no problem with players being protected in potentially dangerous situations but there has to be some clarification as to what is deemed as "intentionally playing the man in the air" and what is merely a fair contest for possession.

DISCLAIMER - In no way am I claiming to be a law guru, especially when it comes to implementing the laws of the game. That I leave to the legend that is Paul Dobson.

What I have noticed is that if a player decides to defy the laws of gravity and hang mid-air, anything and anyone that makes contact with said player will be given sent to the sin bin for dangerous play.

A prime example of this happened in the match between the Chiefs and Crusaders at the weekend. A high ball was kicked by the Chiefs and the attacking player Michael Fitzgerald went charging after it, his eyes stayed glued to the ball the entire way. Both the defending player, Tom Taylor, and Fitzgerald leapt into the air, with both sets of eyes still on the ball. While in the air, Fitzgerald realises he won't be able to fairly contest the ball and bails out at the last second. As gravity pulls him back to the ground, his face makes contact with Taylor's knee and he goes crashing to the ground.

In my opinion, there was absolutely no way for Fitzgerald to avoid contact with Taylor and the Crusaders were awarded a penalty. After reviewing the footage, it dawned on me that the referee was more than willing to dig into his pocket and send Fitzgerald to the bin for, and these were his words, "being reckless in the air". Fortunately for the Chiefs flank, he escaped a 10 minute rest after the TMO made certain the referee noticed it was a fair contest for the ball.

Please do not get me wrong! I am all for the protection of players in the air but not at the expense of losing the concept of a fair contest.

The point I am trying to make is this: protecting players in the air is needed but there needs to be proper implementation of the law and a distinction between what is intentionally playing the man in the air and what simply is a fair contest for possession.

It's all good having a good old' rant but not providing a possible solution. So what I suggest is that the powers that be look to a different sport for help on how to adequately protect players under a high ball, a sport like Field Hockey. Weird I know but it's a fairly simple rule that works well.

A player who is about to receive a high ball has "the right of way" and all opposition players must be at least five metres from him. Furthermore, he also first needs to bring the ball under control before the opposition can make an attempt to tackle him.

By adopting this law, players are not only protected but the dishing out of "dubious" yellow cards will come to an end, albeit for that aspect of the game only. If not, then I am afraid teams will begin to take advantage of the current situation and look to intentionally get opposition players sent off.

It seems to me like Gregor Townsend agrees...


And he has a possible solution of his own...


By Tauriq Ebrahim
@Tagels03

JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
02 Mar 2015, 23:47
#2
02 Mar 2015, 23:47#2
Seems the refs have changed their interpretation on this one. In other seasons some of those calls would not have been made.
Some of the article doesn't display here is the link to the full article.
Full article
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
03 Mar 2015, 01:07
#3
03 Mar 2015, 01:07#3
JW there is a lawyerly vein in rugby at the moment. Take tackling, you can't go high which seems to include the upper chest, you can't hit with just the shoulder, you can't lift the tackled player and drive him into the ground. You can do all these things in football, the only thing you can't do is grab the helmet guard which can really twist the neck.
And most rugby guys think it's a much more rugged game than football. There are still huge hits in football. When last did you see a great crash tackle in rugby? 
A lot of this stuff is hardly dangerous. What is dangerous is what rugby encourages .... standing with your head down over the ball trying to make a turnover and having players smash into that unprotected neck.
CL
ClaydogClub Pro691 posts
03 Mar 2015, 08:24
#4
03 Mar 2015, 08:24#4
 I agree JW. It is fast getting to the point that the player under the ball will be left to catch it unopposed. There also seems to be some guys putting themselves in the air to get the contact and subsequent penalty.
JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
03 Mar 2015, 08:27
#5
03 Mar 2015, 08:27#5
 Its turning into a bit of a mess & I agree it could end up that the player catching the ball will go uncontested. Refs better make it clear what they want. We have seen some fantastic competition for the Ball  in the air, e.g. Cory Jane. For that to disappear would be a shame.
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
03 Mar 2015, 18:38
#6
03 Mar 2015, 18:38#6
 Agreed, this is becoming a bit of a joke. It is much worse when a player gets totalled just as he touches the turf than 2 players colliding in the air. The laws are actually quite clear,  but idiot refs and TMO's get it wrong more often than not. In this instance t he problem lies with the officials and their directives.
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news