McCaw hit on Louw continued

 I tried to put some images but I couldn't. How do you put pictures, Pakie?

but the thread is still visible (at least for me)

If you continued putting frames you would see how after the hit McCaw's arm is over his shoulder what means that he made the whole correct movement for hitting with his arm, he accompanys the hit with his arm.
That's a perfectly legal charge.

Yeah the thread is visible but I can't see all of the post box, the Submit Comment button is hidden by the graphics at the bottom of the site.

I upload pictures to my tinypic.com account and then link them from there with the Insert An Image button in the post box.

AB, McCaw is leading with the shoulder and it's his shoulder that makes impact. In the frame above Louw's head has already moved from the impact. Any wrapping done after this moment is of no consequence. He presented the shoulder and impacted with it. At the very least it is high. At worst it is illegal and dangerous.

 The picture that you've shown here is before the hit. In the next frame, 0.04 second after, when the hit happens McCaw's arm is already in contact with Louw's body. The contact is also made with his shoulder but this doesn't mean a shoulder charge. After the hit McCaw's arm is over his shoulder.
IMO that was a legal charge. And anyway, very far from being a clear penalty

Yeah we can go back and forth a long time over this. If this was a legal hit I doubt the targeted player would have been out for 8 weeks with a damaged nerve in his neck. Just the height of the impact is already a clear penalty.

 Last year Carter was out for around another 8 weeks, does it means that Bismark's tackle was illegal?

can't see any problem with the height, Louw was bended

 It was illegal simple as that, he lead with his shoulder but this doesn't make McCaw a dirty player it's a physical game shit happens.
But the ref missed it and the match has ended, no point in crying over spilt milk. 

 @sheeza,

"But the ref missed it and the match has ended"

sounds like crying. If, as you said there's "no point in crying over spilt milk"..........
You made like Skinstaad saying that he doesn't want to whinge and whingeing. Is it a custo m in SA?

 You're trying you're hardest to make a meal out of this aren't you, be a good idea to quit while you're ahead. You're pressing on a sore wound my friend, nothing worse than a Kiwi reminding us Saffa's that we lost against you. 

@AbasqueToad
Hansen complained after the match about the Boks slowing the match down It happens.If Mccaw had been cleaned out like that I would imagine many of his fan boys would have complained.
Abasque Toad is actually a French fan boy of the All Blacks. He likes to criticize the Boks who are 2nd in the world when France are no longer a world power in rugby. 
Their national league is just a pension retirement plan for South African players

 @ sheeza,

"You're pressing on a sore wound my friend, nothing worse than a Kiwi reminding us Saffa's that we lost against you."

WTF are you talking about? where did I remind anyone that SA lost against the AB?
I was arguing what happenned in a play of the match, that's all.

 @sharkbok,

"Abasque Toad is actually a French fan boy of the All Blacks"

Abasque Toad? really?
for your information I have no relation with France except may be some friends and going visting there.
I'm Basque. There's a part, the north, of the Basque Country which now is part of France but the south part, where I was born and actually live, is part of Spain now.

No AB, the key is not in the 8 weeks, the key is in the fact that the impact was on his neck.

You're a mouthy little chap aren't you. By arguing about this you're reminding us. 
Say whatever you want, it's not whining is analysing the game.

  @shezza,

"By arguing about this you're reminding us."

pure nonsense. Try a little harder
So you, saffas, you can begin threads like this, say whatever you want about, in this case, McCaw, enjoy the ocasion for crying a little bit for your loss and I cannot argue or say anything at all because it reminds you the loss? WTF?

"But the ref missed it and the match has ended"
this is crying, nothing to do with an anaIysis

 Selective quotes, I like it. Why don't you read the beginning of my first comment. 
"It was illegal simple as that, he lead with his shoulder"
Bloody hell, pull out the Geneva convention and get the UN because I'm attacking you're basic human rights why don't you. Completely blown out of proportion. 


Where have I blamed this incident on this loss? I haven't, I call it how it is. I'm not going to ignore it just for the sake of not coming across as whining, it was a mistake by the referee as simple as that.

 Non issue. Next

 Not much different than Thomas's hit on McCaw, he lead with the head and not the shoulder and was suspended for how long? These things happen in rugby. Noone is saying Richie is a dirty player, but it should have been a penalty. Rev missed it as he missed some of the bok errors  on the day.

 Indeed ,much ado about nothing...

 Hacked waaaaugh you are a one eyed oak if ever there was one and that eye is in bad shape.Warped DUD has two eyes but his inebriated brain cant recieve it' s messages. 

At least his one eye is open Beeno  

 As i posted in another thread, McCaw's charge is totally legal.

In this first video you can see how Louw was bended forwards. In this position it's impossible that McCaw could hit Louw's neck, his head is covering it. The only possible places to hit are the head or the shoulders and upper part of the body.




In the second video you can see that the hit is not in Louw's head, otherwise the head and the rest of his body would have gone backwards. Instead his head went upwards so the hit was made on Louw's shoulder and upper part of the chest.



In the moment of the hit McCaw has already his arm in contact with Louw's body.



And when the hit finished McCaw had his arm over his shoulder which means that McCaw made the correct movement with his arm and accompanyed the hit with it.


That was a perfectly legal charge. Even if Luw had to, unfortunately, undergo neck surgery

 ABF thanks for the frame by frame images and I noted that they are in colour too - that will make it easier for Beanhead and Co to understand (we can only hope)

 Guys, that was still dangerous and high and borderline on the shoulder charge thing. He leaded with the shoulder, but in my opinion that's how rugby is played and why we love the game. These things happen. I'm sure Louw wouldn't hold any grudges, why should we.  Move on. Lot's of similar and worse things go unnoticed in every game played today. Some you win, some you lose, that's life.

ABan
Sorry to disagree.  MccCaws left hand remains down - he charged wih his left shoulder and hit Louw in the enck and face area with his shoulder.   
The nature of the injury of Louw indicates a hit in the neck and head area - which is illegal -  so that is to my mind the end of the argument.    

You have no chance of convincing ou ab ass, hacked waaugh and warped DUD guys.
Yoiu will recall the Bissie tackle on Carter, the kbbs were up in arms crying a river.That the ref was sanctioned for the shocking (Another shocking call that cost the Boks the RC yet again) and that Carter himself said the tackle was legit mattered not a bit to the one eyed kbbs. Claydog warped DUD might have tow eyes but they are unfortnately like this!!  

 The car is definitley not what ou wapred DUD drives!! More like this 

My final words:

1. You can't determine the exact point of impact from the footage. The fact that the injury was to his neck is the most accurate indicator since nothing happens after the impact that could have caused nerve damage to his neck.

2. It was a shoulder charge. Even when McCaw's arm comes through after the impact it is bent at the elbow and in a fending position, which may indicate he stuck an elbow into Louw as well. There is no wrapping of the arms going on like in a legal tackle at any stage here. None whatsoever. The arm only straightens once Louw is already hitting the ground.

3. Much ado about nothing, as others have said.

I don't blame this incident for our loss, I'm not calling for a card or a ban. I'm not saying the poor Saffas got stiffed again. It is what it is: a dangerous cleanout that was missed by the officials. Not the first, won't be the last.

 Agreed Pakie!

 @Pakie,
with you and some other posters here like Ddrad or mike is possible to argue but there are some other bok fans (Mr. Beeno is his maximum exponent) who from the moment they see a ref's mistake all their arguments are about how bent the refs are or how cheaters the AB are. And as we all know refs make mistakes in every single match.

These will be also my final words about the incident.
you are right that it's very difficult to determine the point of impact but the fact that the injury was to his neck doesn't indicate anything.
If you just fall backwards (no one hitting you) in a bad position and when impacting the ground your head goes violently backwards you can injure your neck. This is not the case but it can happen. A hit on the shoulders as well can provoke a neck injury if it makes your head go backwards violently.

The position Louw had makes imposible that the first hit was in the neck. And given that position McCaw has no other option that hitting on the head (what he didn't do) or on the shoulders.
it's dangerous, yes, but not illegal.

here's another play from last year's match at Ellis Park:




What Alberts did is, at least, as dangerous as McCaw's charge, B. smith could have been seriously injured. But did Alberts have another option? No
Was it illegal? No, it was very dangerous but perfectly legal

 BP wasting your time with that beansh!t farkwit .Try allblacksopenforum.com Hope we see ya there !

 Stay over there then Wardad, stop advertising for another forum on here. D ick move there mate, this forums administrators work hard and yet ungrateful people like you are ruining it. 

Let them go . . . if anyone is so thin-skinned as to allow a drooling-half-wit like Baboon-ou to drive them away then we're probably better off without them.

I hope we haven't lost the likes of Wardad but if we have, imagine being beaten by Baboon-ou! Waaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha!

 Whoa, stop, boys theres no need to fight, we've got this

 Dangerous and reckless play is illeagle. Vlag, some help here with the laws please.

  ABFan
I do not know what all this is about.  The final whistle put an end to the game - and nothing anyboidy says will change the result of havew any impact whatsoever.
I am not too happy about the ckearing out play of McCaw - but nothing anyone says will change the situation one iota.   There are players who plays on the edge of dangerous play in any team and you cannot paint teams with one brush because of individual actions.   
However, what the AB's has in advantage - they haven't got thick planks like Alberts playing for them.    
So lets leave the matter there.

 How very kind of you Mike.
Does that mean we will not discuss Eben's late hit on Retallick (Yellow card worthy) and Coetzees shoulder charge on McCaws head (Again Yellow card worthy) in that infamous sandwich tackle - what did McCaw do? he got up like a man and kept playing.
What did Justin Marshall do? He sqwealed like a girl in delight at the thought of McCaw getting hurt.
You lot are SOFT.

 Hakwa, go ask your prescious AB team how soft we are. The problem is that you lot are so blinded by success that you can't take any critique. Go google windgat.

 Does that mean we will not discuss Eben's late hit on Retallick (Yellow card worthy) and Coetzees shoulder charge on McCaws head (Again Yellow card worthy).

They all fall into the NON ISSUE category DbDraad. You cannot pick and choose.

 No problem discussing anything Hakwa, put up the vids and I'll give you my honest opinion. My comment was aimed at your "SOFT" remark.

 Interesting the debate and disagreement after going over videos and stills of the incident but the ref is expected to make the correct ruling after one look in real time wh ile also watching the ball. Tough job.