Italy v Wales

[Dickie E]

57th minute. High kick by Red caught by Blue #10 who is then tackled by Red #14.
Contact by Red appears to be direct contact to head.
My understanding is:
Was there foul play? YES
Was head contact made? YES
Was there mitigation? YES, Blue #10 dropping
Sanction: yellow card

What happened was ref called play on because Blue #10 always dropping, then came back for penalty only presumably because AR called it in.

All very confusing

 

[Decorily]

Confusing?.....How/why?

 

[Dickie E]

Confusing?.....How/why?

Well, we've got a head contact protocol that allows for 1 level downgrade for mitigation from red to yellow.
Matt Carley has applied 3 levels of downgrade from red through yellow through penalty to land at play on (commenting he was always falling). Then a minute later upgraded to penalty.
Can you walk me through this process please?

 

[SimonSmith]

I'm not sure that it was in fact foul play.

Red was slightly crouched, and I think was always legal. The contact was high solely due to Blue falling. I think Karl Dickson got this right at the last WC - not all head contact is foul play.

 

[Dickie E]

I'm not sure that it was in fact foul play.

Red was slightly crouched, and I think was always legal. The contact was high solely due to Blue falling. I think Karl Dickson got this right at the last WC - not all head contact is foul play.

Ok but if not FP, why come back for the penalty?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

From Dieckie and Simon'sdescription we have: "No foul Play" sanctioned with a PK and a YC Interesting.

 

[Dickie E]

From Dieckie and Simon'sdescription we have: "No foul Play" sanctioned with a PK and a YC Interesting.

No, there was no YC, only a PK that seemed to be the AR(?) correcting the ref, who had seen the incident and called play on.
Unless the PK was for a different offence at the same location

 

[SimonSmith]

Ok but if not FP, why come back for the penalty?

That, for me, was the actual mistake

 

[crossref]

AR and Ref disagreed.
Ref stopped the game when the AR told him, so he was snookered
Only options he has now are
- "Sorry gents the AR is an idiot, all is good, scrum restart"
- PK

All in all PK is the least worst of the two

 

[Marc Wakeham]

No, there was no YC, only a PK that seemed to be the AR(?) correcting the ref, who had seen the incident and called play on.
Unless the PK was for a different offence at the same location

SimonSmith said:


I'm not sure that it was in fact foul play.

Red was slightly crouched, and I think was always legal. The contact was high solely due to Blue falling. I think Karl Dickson got this right at the last WC - not all head contact is foul play.

AR and Ref disagreed.
Ref stopped the game when the AR told him, so he was snookered
Only options he has now are
- "Sorry gents the AR is an idiot, all is good, scrum restart"
- PK

All in all PK is the least worst of the two

Really? Penalising a side is better than hgetting the right outcome?

AR and Ref disagreed.
Ref stopped the game when the AR told him, so he was snookered
Only options he has now are
- "Sorry gents the AR is an idiot, all is good, scrum restart"
- PK

All in all PK is the least worst of the two

Really. A wrong call (if that is what it was) is better than the referee taking control? THe AR is an ASSISTANT to the referee. The AR is NOT the referee. The referee takes the lead not the AR. The referee makes the call. The alternative is "sorry gent I'm an Idiot let's let the AR decide". Wrong picture being sent out.
If the AR "has got foul play" He tells the ref over the comms "I've got a high tackle by Red". Refs says "it's ok I saw it and I'm ok with it Blue was dropping late and red was set low." Or "Ok It looked ok form my angle but lets go upstairs and be sure" and then the verdict is sorted properly.

 

[Volun-selected]

The ref was shouting “Falling …always falling” as he ran in. Seems clear that he didn’t deem this foul play so played on and he seemed to have a pretty clear view.

 

[Dickie E]

Just to clarify for me. What is the difference between "not foul play" and "mitigation"?

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

The ref didn't see it as foul play in real time but the AR or TMO did see it as foul play so called it in.
I thought the ref was wrong at the time and a penalty and yellow card was the correct outcome. Should have been upgraded to red
4 minutes into this highlights if you can see it.

 

[didds]

AR and Ref disagreed.
Ref stopped the game when the AR told him, so he was snookered
Only options he has now are
- "Sorry gents the AR is an idiot, all is good, scrum restart"
- PK

All in all PK is the least worst of the two

Not if the PK ends up being the deciding 3 points in the final scoreline when it was really a scrum but the PK was used to hide the embarrassment of a f4ck up.

 

[SimonSmith]

Just to clarify for me. What is the difference between "not foul play" and "mitigation"?

I'd look at like this:

Tackler always low and legal and BC drops sufficiently to make it high: not foul play.
Tackler was always high but at throat height, tackler drops to make it head high contact - mitigation

 

[didds]

I'd look at like this:

Tackler always low and legal and BC drops sufficiently to make it high: not foul play.

which is why head contact isnt a PK/card when players are diving to score.

Tackler was always high but at throat height, tackler drops to make it head high contact - mitigation

which is what the current protocol does