We had repetitive BS after half time, Every time -
* Willie came into the backline he made kicks that was non=producitve and normally fir the benefit of Ospreys;
* Kriel got red-carded and probably be out of rugby for at least four weeks;
* just after the red card Louw got yellow card for a deliberate knock-down of a ball.
so the team is under poor management.
Jeez, ou Maaik made it sound like they lost.
I do nt thik what happned is that the Bulls discipline went AWOL in the second half of the match and that resulted in the Bulls playing with 13 men in near to half of the seond half of the match. I think they have the wrong captain in the team naming a player that used to be a good playe in the past- Coetzee - as captain. Part of that sudden collapse of discipline in the ssecond half of the match was a reflection of bad team managment for which White is responsible, What he told the players at halftime badly reflected what happeened in the secnd half.
From the playes that did well in he first half Le Roux and Papier lost the plot in the second half of the match. In the disaatrous second half Le Roux made poor decisions by playing Jake ball and not rugby ,
Pakie stop talking BS - I never said the Bulls lost the match - I just pointed out poor pefomancethat against other stronger clubs would have been losing them the match. In plain words in te second half they played Jake ball and not rugby.
The Bulls were the only team that put in a good performance.
Willie Leroux was instrumental in most of the Bok backline tries.
The Bulls played half of the 2nd half with 13 men.
It is not as if players are being coached to get red cards. The other 2 yellows were marginal.
Just checked the highlights. What a ridiculous red for Kriel. Everyone is saying tackle lower, and then when a tackler cops a fend in the throat because he was tackling head high, the carrier gets red. I wonder if the fend wasn't there and the inevitable head clash happened who would have gotten red then.
Not ridiculous reason - Kriel used his elbow to hit the opponents neck while carrying the ball. If ever there was not a red card for that type of idiocy one wonder what is? Only prejudiced idiots like you would call that red card "ridiculous",
It's ridiculous.
Agree wih you - you are ridiculous in this case/ If D Alende did what Kruiel did you would support the red card and suggested a year long ban/
When a tackler goes in that high and causes a head clash or his shoulder hits the carrier's head, everyone goes "oh, duh huh, he should have known you can't tackle that high anymore, what an idiot, deserved red."
But when a tackler goes in that high and the carrier fends to protect himself and the tackler catches it in the throat, no one goes "oh, duh huh, tackler should have known better, can't tackle like that, what an idiot."
No, we red the carrier.
It's ridiculous.
If D Alende did what Kruiel did you would support the red card and suggested a year long ban
Your post was slightly better before this nuthouse edit.
Maaik...it's ridiculous giving a card to the carrier after a collision...I haven't seen the incident...but it sounds bizarre....will get back to you...
Tackler pops right back up like nothing happened. Pussification of the game.
Something illegal did happen and Kriel will face a ban for at least 4 weeks.
Draad
Kriel used his elbow and hit the tackler on the throat in the process. Very dangerous play to do - it is even worse than an ordinary neck high tackle. If Kriel used his hand to fend off te tackler there could have bee n an excuse - using his elbow is not acceptable.
Something illegal did happen and Kriel will face a ban for at least 4 weeks.
Draad
Kriel used his elbow and hit the tackler on the throat in the process. Very dangerous play to do - it is even worse than an ordinary neck high tackle. If Kriel used his hand to fend off te tackler there could have bee n an excuse - using his elbow is not acceptable.
Penalize it by all means. Red, GTFO.
S o using your elbow to hit aa player in the thoat is not z problem as to dangerous play? Tha wa one pic pf what happened a photo from the abck indicayed a direct elow hit on the throat/
Brilliant - fird it was not n offense at all - now suddenly it was a penalty. The people with mpre accurate iformation wil decide whether a ban is necessary.
In the Andre Esterhuizen case we went for the same drama queen story - yet he was banned on the advice of meicl and rugby specialists
S o using your elbow to hit aa player in the thoat is not z problem as to dangerous play? Tha wa one pic pf what happened a photo from the abck indicayed a direct elow hit on the throat/
Brilliant - fird it was not n offense at all - now suddenly it was a penalty. The people with mpre accurate iformation wil decide whether a ban is necessary.
In the Andre Esterhuizen case we went for the same drama queen story - yet he was banned on the advice of medica l and rugby specialists
Brilliant - fird it was not n offense at all
I said red for it was ridiculous. I never said it was no offense.
I'm a child of the 80s. Seeing this kind of shit get red carded will never not bug me. Hell, even recent legends like Jerry Collins and Schalk Burger won't be able to play the game today. They'd get red first collision every game. Now tell me that's in service of the game. As Tana so famously said once, "this isn't tiddlywinks." Tackler got up from this straight away and back to his spot, nothing ill suffered.
But you guys are of course welcome to enjoy this namby pamby World Rugb y stuff all you like, have fun.
In the Andre Esterhuizen case we went for the same drama queen story -
Esterhuizen made a perfectly legal tackle with an unfortunate head clash. Again, nothing deliberate, it's a contact sport, shit happens.
A few weeks later, Cane smashes Kolisi's face with his head in what should be a clear red - no sanction, not even a penalty.
Keep buying into this bullshit.
I really look at incidentswith an open mind and your defense of Esterhiozen and Krile is pathetic.
Ther was a problem in the Kolisi case - the ref and the touch judages did not see it happening and neother did yjr YV ,omtpr = so their was no action taken. Your rgumnts are childish and unprofessional.
Here's a video exposing how Owen Farrell, a serial offender, gets away with shoulder to the head time and again - including having an on field red card reversed afterwards just before the World Cup (gee, I wonder why) last year, others without sanction. "How is this not being looked at?" asks even the English commentator of one incident. It also shows how Lappies Labuschagne copped a three week ban for a far less clear incident.
And then Esterhuizen gets a 4 week ban for this tackle, with a full wrap well below the shoulders.
As I say, keep buying into this corrupt red card bullshit.
I agree with you Pakie
I have mentioned this a few times in the past before, it is so bloody inconsistent, in fact it's farcial
At the time I also discussed the Farrell reversal that you mentioned here, because it was just so convenient at the time.
Disgraceful
Dave
I agree with you about the Bulls first half performance - what worrie me was the collapse of discipline of he team in the second half of the match. For most of the second half the Bulls played with 13 man on the field. Against a weaker team it was not a problem - against any stronger team they would have lost the match purely for that reason.
Willie took over te backline functioning in the first half it worked ot well - in te second half it was a failure - too many of his kicks went nowhere. I waqs happy about Chambrlain at 10 - he had a quieter but effective game and his kicjking at goal was good.
Pakie
See what peoepe on the following website said about the Kriel incident
incident,https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/1g28cog/david_kriel_red_card_vs_ospreys/
Onse started off by saying it was not a red card offence - just like you did. The rest said it was a red card offense, You later on change to admission that it was a red card offence and then start diversion as to other players like Farrell being a "protected species",
Lots of things are red in rugby nowadays. I think about 80% of them are ridiculous. Cane's RWC Final red - ridiculous. Kriel's red - ridiculous. Esterhuizen's red - ridiculous, the ban farcical. Lappies red in that video - ridiculous, the ban even more farcical. Anyone who's gotten a red for attempting a genuine challenge for the ball in the air but getting their timing just a fraction wrong - ridiculous. Red for any legal tackle with accidental head clash - ridiculous.
That's my opinion. Get it? You can agree or disagree with it.
Pakie
BS galore on most of the offences mentioned because most can cause serious injuries in matches.
Then double down on player protection. Outlaw any tackle above waist height because even legal tackles above that height can cause head clashes. Outlaw contesting the ball in the air because even genuine challenges can upend one of the players and have them come down on their necks. Ban a prick like Farrell who has been hitting people with the shoulder for a decade permanently from the game. Then you're protecting.
A red card handed out after the fact protects nobody. A red card for a player acting within the rules but accidentally making illegal contact in the heat of a contact sport protects nobody.
Actually though, now that red cards are only 20 minutes it's not such a big issue anymore. So sure, let the red cards rain.