RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:

Beasties wrote:Do we really need to spell it out in law what Lavanini did by bringing in no knee tackles? Or should a panel just look at it and use common sense to ban the fekker for straightforward horrendous thuggery?

Ouch btw Diggers.....

Yes, else all you've reasonably got is him cynically killing the maul imo if in other instances that's a legal tackle

Not so - Laws 9:11-13 provide plenty of latitude:

11: Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others.
12: A player must not physically or verbally abuse anyone. Physical abuse includes, but is not limited to, biting, punching, contact with the eye or eye area, striking with any part of the arm (including stiff-arm tackles), shoulder, head or knee(s), stamping, trampling, tripping or kicking.
13: A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.

11 is the catch-all, but you could argue that it is striking with the shoulder or a dangerous tackle (as that is specifically not limited to being high).

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Beasties wrote:Do we really need to spell it out in law what Lavanini did by bringing in no knee tackles? Or should a panel just look at it and use common sense to ban the fekker for straightforward horrendous thuggery?

Ouch btw Diggers.....

Yes, else all you've reasonably got is him cynically killing the maul imo if in other instances that's a legal tackle

Not so - Laws 9:11-13 provide plenty of latitude:

11: Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others.
12: A player must not physically or verbally abuse anyone. Physical abuse includes, but is not limited to, biting, punching, contact with the eye or eye area, striking with any part of the arm (including stiff-arm tackles), shoulder, head or knee(s), stamping, trampling, tripping or kicking.
13: A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.

11 is the catch-all, but you could argue that it is striking with the shoulder or a dangerous tackle (as that is specifically not limited to being high).

Puja

Someone did actually get tackled in the knee at the side in recent times, was it Robson? I don't recall anything happening when that happened, which I presume is because the action itself is deemed legal, or at least not illegal

Is it a tackle? Hughes did not have the ball and was part of the maul.

Oakboy wrote:Is it a tackle? Hughes did not have the ball and was part of the maul.

No, but if the motion involved is legal in a tackle it'd be hard to say it's illegal foul play elsewhere is my contention, leaving one able to ping the honest Argie lock only for cynical play

England by 8-10.
We're essentially into knock-out rugby now, and things tighten up. We should win, and away from a RWC, is back this England team to put a 15-20 point margin on this Argentine team, but not in knock-out mentality.
With the quality difference, and knock-out mentality, we need to be looking to deny Arg a LBP.
I'm looking for a coherent performance, without any particular dips in intensity. If we get that, I'll take a 1 point custody without complaint. If we don't get that, I'll reserve the right to complain, even if we win by 14 (3 scores up, and I'll forgive a lapse)

Daly just showed Farrell how to kick. Farrell's earlier kick led to Arg getting 3 points.

Can someone remind what HIA stands for?

I was under the impression that it was for Head Injury Assessment, but it seems to be for "Loss of Conscioussness Assessment".
That's the 2nd clean hit to the head for Farrell in as many games - he should at the least, have to be getting an HIA.

Which Tyler wrote:Can someone remind what HIA stands for?

I was under the impression that it was for Head Injury Assessment, but it seems to be for "Loss of Conscioussness Assessment".
That's the 2nd clean hit to the head for Farrell in as many games - he should at the least, have to be getting an HIA.

It stands for How Injured Are you - it's the question they ask players who have just taken a direct shoulder to the head to make sure they don't have to interrupt their game by taking them off the pitch to be checked.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:Can someone remind what HIA stands for?

I was under the impression that it was for Head Injury Assessment, but it seems to be for "Loss of Conscioussness Assessment".
That's the 2nd clean hit to the head for Farrell in as many games - he should at the least, have to be getting an HIA.

It stands for How Injured Are you - it's the question they ask players who have just taken a direct shoulder to the head to make sure they don't have to interrupt their game by taking them off the pitch to be checked.

Puja

I agree, it's a disgrace he wasn't sent for one.