[Law] How would rugby union handle it?

didds

, Resident Club Coach
#4
I feel they both need sanction. I have a slight sympathy for white as while it IS his fault he was in a position to collide with a player in the air, that only _really_ happened because the blue player did something he wouldn't have expected ie put a limb where normally one wouldn't think there would be one.

That leg was clearly there deliberately however for exactly this reason, and given its height etc can only be dangerous.

YC for both, PK to blue would seem reasonable to me, in current RU land.
 

thepercy

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#5
I feel they both need sanction. I have a slight sympathy for white as while it IS his fault he was in a position to collide with a player in the air, that only _really_ happened because the blue player did something he wouldn't have expected ie put a limb where normally one wouldn't think there would be one.

That leg was clearly there deliberately however for exactly this reason, and given its height etc can only be dangerous.

YC for both, PK to blue would seem reasonable to me, in current RU land.
Would you consider it similarly dangerous play, if it was his knee that hit the oppo player in the face?
 

didds

, Resident Club Coach
#6
That's a fair question .

It might depend on "how" the knee ended up in the face, includign how tight it was to his body or hanging out to dry. So my answer would be "potentially" I guess.

The foot however could only be there for the intended purpose of stopping players getting too close by endangering the head area for coming too close. That's not a natural action. IMO. YMMV.

didds
 

Guyseep

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/canada.pn
#7
I would RC purple and then penalty for white. There was no need to have his leg extended like that an have his foot in that position.
The only reason he has his foot in that kicking position is to make deliberate or reckless contact with the opposition.

At the moment of contact, white has not yet made an infringement(ie taking out a man in the air) so I wouldn't sanction him at all
 

thepercy

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#8
That's a fair question .

It might depend on "how" the knee ended up in the face, includign how tight it was to his body or hanging out to dry. So my answer would be "potentially" I guess.

The foot however could only be there for the intended purpose of stopping players getting too close by endangering the head area for coming too close. That's not a natural action. IMO. YMMV.

didds
I ask, because that's how I was taught to catch a high ball, by raising a knee to "protect" yourself.
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#9
Slater's sprigs hit White 16 in the face before White 16 had a hand on him. Its doubtful that White 16 would have even contacted Slater before Slater came down had it not been for the leg stuck out

Slater received an official warning from the NRL Judiciary, who stopped short of charging him with Dangerous Contact

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...who-cant-put-a-foot-wrong-20130322-2gl5n.html

I'm with referee boss Bill Harrigan on this. Slater should have been charged.

However, you all know where I stand on this issue. In RU, I would have PK and YC Slater for dangerous play.
 

Not Kurt Weaver

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#10
How would rugby union handle it?

1. WR would describe in great detail the "karate kick". Complete with guidance on determining if in fact it is a "karate kick", such as the angle of thigh to trunk and degree of leg extension. WR would require a Redcard for maneuver known as "karate kick"

2. The RFU would send it via email to select recipients and expect that it will be forwarded to all referees worldwide.

3. The "karate kick" law will be place between the flying wedge and cavalry charge in Law 10 with the distinction "this usually happens when..."

4. Referees will develop a secondary signal for Law 10 "karate kick"

5. Referees will develop a tertiary signal for the roundhouse "karate kick"

6. The Asian Rugby Union files a claim against WR and the RFU for discrimination and predjudice
 

beckett50

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#11
I ask, because that's how I was taught to catch a high ball, by raising a knee to "protect" yourself.
I was always taught that the raising the knee gave extra lift - a la high jump & basketball jump for a basket (when you're not 7' what ever!)
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#12
I ask, because that's how I was taught to catch a high ball, by raising a knee to "protect" yourself.
Raising a knee is one thing.

Raising a leg straight out with a foot at head height offers no extra lift or balance benefits. The sole purpose of doing that is to threaten opposition players with a face full of sprigs if they get near you.
 

ctrainor

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#13
Straight red to purple full back for dangerous kick. Clearly deliberate and if he hadn't have done it White player may not have touched him.
That is not a natural action when jumping. If White had jumped for the ball in and even contest it would be clear.
Ref was spot on with his assesment
 

menace

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#14
How would rugby union handle it?

1. WR would describe in great detail the "karate kick". Complete with guidance on determining if in fact it is a "karate kick", such as the angle of thigh to trunk and degree of leg extension. WR would require a Redcard for maneuver known as "karate kick"

2. The RFU would send it via email to select recipients and expect that it will be forwarded to all referees worldwide.

3. The "karate kick" law will be place between the flying wedge and cavalry charge in Law 10 with the distinction "this usually happens when..."

4. Referees will develop a secondary signal for Law 10 "karate kick"

5. Referees will develop a tertiary signal for the roundhouse "karate kick"

6. The Asian Rugby Union files a claim against WR and the RFU for discrimination and predjudice
Now now. No need to mock WR! We all know they're the greatest bunch of 12 year olds law writers in the universe!
 

Pinky

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/scotland.
#15
This happened in the (I think) 2011 Scotland Wales international. Hugo Southwell retired hurt (boot in the face) and Leigh Byrne (I think it was he) there was no sanction. At the time the commentators suggested HS should have had a yellow card, but his blood replacement was allowed on immediately so I don't think there was a sanction other than the penalty to Wales. I have a recollection of another time when the Scottish player was yellow carded as he was carried from the pitch on a stretcher, but I may be confusing that with the collision with Leigh Byrne the year before in Wales when Geoff Cross was knocked out by Byrne's knee, when to be fair to Byrne that time, Cross should have been more aware of the possibility of Byrne jumping to catch the ball.
 

Paule23

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/scotland.
#16
I was always taught that the raising the knee gave extra lift - a la high jump & basketball jump for a basket (when you're not 7' what ever!)
This is something you will see football goalkeepers do a lot, and is purely a defensive measure or a way to prevent the opposition jumping with them. Look at other players who jump for balls and you will see they don't lift their knees in this way.