AR being struck

#1
Watch from 1:38:48 on this video clock.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hsIFyini-10


Any issues with Blue 22s interaction with the AR after the try has been scored??

Using the Nathan Hughes decision as a precedent .....then what , min 24 weeks ??

Maybe the DC decision would read like this .....
As Blue 22 was running towards the line she could only lawfully be attempting to congratulate her teammate who'd scored, but Blue 22 was in the wrong position to do this. We accept Blue22 ' evidence that she gave no thought to the risk of striking the AR as she was kicking the ball , but we consider that there was a real risk that this would occur. Blue did make an attempt to stop just before her foot struck the ball, but by then it was too late and the striking of the AR was inevitable.
Just gotta be Low end 24 week ban , only because the AR wasn't concussed, surely (sarc) ???
 

Taff

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/wales.png
#4
To me, the body language immediately after the kick suggests that it is accidental.

Stupid? Probably. Deliberate? I don't think so.

A polite word at worst I reckon. And if they still have post match dinners these days, Blue 22 should get a round in.
 
#7
was this in a 7's match?

Video has been removed

No, France v England Womens match.

For anyone who didnt see it, after a try was scored F22 defender arrives very very late on the scene and (in apparent frustration) boots the ball and it smacks the AR positioned a few Meters away.

Removed?!!!! Hmmnnn

Conspiracy theories can now commence...... women's development, RWC year, image, selection , etc..
 
Last edited:
#9
That's the one.
Anyway, clearly couldnt have been aimed, since when could ladies hit any target they aimed for !!!??? :pepper:( & ducks !! .....only bantering ladies :biggrin: )