Page 2 of 23

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 7:53 pm
by SaintK
C69 wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 7:15 pm
Biffer wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 6:10 pm
Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 4:22 pm

This doesn’t fit nicely into this category given that the TMO spotted and tried to have him red carded, only for Dickson to have a brain fart. He’ll get a 2-4 week ban, potentially would have got less had he been carded.
I bet he gets off with it because the ref looked at it at the time.

An entirely English panel looking at the foul play of the English captain a few weeks before the six nations? I think we can be clear that even if he does get a ban it’ll be structured so he gets a game in before the first game.
Yip the fetid RFU will not ban one of their own for the 6N.
I should bloody well hope so

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 8:15 pm
by Paddington Bear
Biffer wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 6:10 pm
Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 4:22 pm
petej wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 4:02 pm

The thing is throughout his career Farrell has got away with high dangerous hits. There is a reluctance to punish him. If he isn't cited just add it to the pile.
This doesn’t fit nicely into this category given that the TMO spotted and tried to have him red carded, only for Dickson to have a brain fart. He’ll get a 2-4 week ban, potentially would have got less had he been carded.
I bet he gets off with it because the ref looked at it at the time.

An entirely English panel looking at the foul play of the English captain a few weeks before the six nations? I think we can be clear that even if he does get a ban it’ll be structured so he gets a game in before the first game.
Imagine the scandal when the papers discover an RFU panel is all English. The shame!

Of course it’s likely, it’s the same everywhere

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 8:28 pm
by Gumboot
Another shocker by Farrell. He just can't help himself. Clear red, for mine. I hope he cops a lengthy ban.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:18 pm
by Torquemada 1420
C69 wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 7:15 pm Yip the fetid RFU will not ban one of their own for the 6N.
On Marler
Where the option of suspending more than half of the ban comes from is an absolute mystery. It serves no purpose, in our view, other than to ensure Marler has a week of European action under his belt before the Six Nations, an unashamedly self-serving piece of judicial chicanery from the RFU. It would be good if World Rugby were to take the RFU to task over their own wording: “Rugby’s core values are not empty words or slogans which can be signed up to and then ignored. They are not to be treated as useful bolt-ons dreamt up by a marketing team. They are integral to the game and are what make the game special,” and insist that the RFU enforces its own judgement properly.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:39 pm
by sefton
Looked like a good tackle to me, fell into it as Faz attempted to wrap.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:44 pm
by Grandpa
sefton wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:39 pm Looked like a good tackle to me, fell into it as Faz attempted to wrap.
Just watched it again after your comment... the only person who lowered their head was Farrell...

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:55 pm
by Ymx
Grandpa wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:44 pm
sefton wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:39 pm Looked like a good tackle to me, fell into it as Faz attempted to wrap.
Just watched it again after your comment... the only person who lowered their head was Farrell...
There’s always one.




I’m pretty sure he’s joking, right ?!!

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:56 pm
by Yr Alban
It’s the reddest red card in the history of red cards since they changed the laws. It’s a direct shoulder charge to the head with his arms at his sides.

OTOH, I don’t want him to miss the Scotland game because Ford and Marcus Smith are injured and I don’t want England to cap Fin Smith.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:58 pm
by Ymx
Image

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:55 pm
by Niegs
The amount of people saying this is penalty / yellow in the comments. :wtf: No mitigating factors, launches up (flat at least) into his chin, ffs.


Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:05 am
by sockwithaticket
Niegs wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:55 pm The amount of people saying this is penalty / yellow in the comments. :wtf: No mitigating factors, launches up (flat at least) into his chin, ffs.
And, as I said on the previous page, makes no attempt to wrap. That right arm is left trailing to lead with the shoulder and put in a hit rather than a tackle, which means it's an illegal act even without the head contact and thus, according to the framework, no mitigation is possible.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 8:00 am
by Ymx
Found this from Nieg’s link.

I think this was the worst one.



From memory, was it not even a pen or something crazy?

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 8:25 am
by Torquemada 1420
Ymx wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 8:00 am Found this from Nieg’s link.

I think this was the worst one.



From memory, was it not even a pen or something crazy?
I was thinking about that SA game: weren't there 2 incidents in that one? I have some recollection of one under the posts.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 9:12 am
by Lobby
Biffer wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 6:10 pm
Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 4:22 pm
petej wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 4:02 pm

The thing is throughout his career Farrell has got away with high dangerous hits. There is a reluctance to punish him. If he isn't cited just add it to the pile.
This doesn’t fit nicely into this category given that the TMO spotted and tried to have him red carded, only for Dickson to have a brain fart. He’ll get a 2-4 week ban, potentially would have got less had he been carded.
I bet he gets off with it because the ref looked at it at the time.

An entirely English panel looking at the foul play of the English captain a few weeks before the six nations? I think we can be clear that even if he does get a ban it’ll be structured so he gets a game in before the first game.
You do realise that the ref refused to 'look at it the time' despite the best efforts of the TMO to make him review the tackle, so Farrell's unlikely to get away with it on that basis.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:00 am
by Blackmac
Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 1:09 pm
Blackmac wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:58 am Funny how Farrell always seems to injure himself during these tackles and then makes a miraculous recovery once we get the inevitable play on.
Correct me if I’m wrong but Faz played through all the phases that followed subsequently from my viewing?
Yep, but then as soon as it appeared that the tackle was being reviewed he went down holding his ribs. Standard MO for him to try and deflect from his actions during his many dangerous tackles.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:28 am
by Tichtheid
Blackmac wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:00 am
Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 1:09 pm
Blackmac wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:58 am Funny how Farrell always seems to injure himself during these tackles and then makes a miraculous recovery once we get the inevitable play on.
Correct me if I’m wrong but Faz played through all the phases that followed subsequently from my viewing?
Yep, but then as soon as it appeared that the tackle was being reviewed he went down holding his ribs. Standard MO for him to try and deflect from his actions during his many dangerous tackles.

It shouldn’t really matter if a player is hurt or not, if they’ve committed foul play they should be sanctioned. I recall Geoff Cross being stretchered off to the sin bin after clattering into a player who was airborne

I don’t know why a player would think feigning injury would help their cause, but they do do it, not in Cross’s case ,he was bleeding heavily from the nogin iirc.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:08 am
by SaintK
Tichtheid wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:28 am
Blackmac wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:00 am
Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 1:09 pm

Correct me if I’m wrong but Faz played through all the phases that followed subsequently from my viewing?
Yep, but then as soon as it appeared that the tackle was being reviewed he went down holding his ribs. Standard MO for him to try and deflect from his actions during his many dangerous tackles.

It shouldn’t really matter if a player is hurt or not, if they’ve committed foul play they should be sanctioned. I recall Geoff Cross being stretchered off to the sin bin after clattering into a player who was airborne

I don’t know why a player would think feigning injury would help their cause, but they do do it, not in Cross’s case ,he was bleeding heavily from the nogin iirc.
So holding your ribcage is now feigning injury?

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:46 am
by Tichtheid
SaintK wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:08 am
Tichtheid wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:28 am
Blackmac wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:00 am

Yep, but then as soon as it appeared that the tackle was being reviewed he went down holding his ribs. Standard MO for him to try and deflect from his actions during his many dangerous tackles.

It shouldn’t really matter if a player is hurt or not, if they’ve committed foul play they should be sanctioned. I recall Geoff Cross being stretchered off to the sin bin after clattering into a player who was airborne

I don’t know why a player would think feigning injury would help their cause, but they do do it, not in Cross’s case ,he was bleeding heavily from the nogin iirc.
So holding your ribcage is now feigning injury?

I obviously can't say for sure or not, but he did make a remarkable recovery to score the winning drop goal, and having popped and broken ribs myself, I know what it feels like.


I admired Farrell for his playing ability since I first saw him, but I changed my mind on him in some respects during a Sarries Glasgow game in Glasgow. There was one incident where he was bellowing at the ref and immediately turned round to a team mate and winked at him.

I don't know why but it made me laugh out loud for real and I warmed to him as person because of it.

Make of that what you will.


edit, actually, now that I've thought about it I know why I quite like him, he reminds me of Jonno in his competitiveness.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:54 am
by Paddington Bear
Tichtheid wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:46 am
SaintK wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:08 am
Tichtheid wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:28 am


It shouldn’t really matter if a player is hurt or not, if they’ve committed foul play they should be sanctioned. I recall Geoff Cross being stretchered off to the sin bin after clattering into a player who was airborne

I don’t know why a player would think feigning injury would help their cause, but they do do it, not in Cross’s case ,he was bleeding heavily from the nogin iirc.
So holding your ribcage is now feigning injury?

I obviously can't say for sure or not, but he did make a remarkable recovery to score the winning drop goal, and having popped and broken ribs myself, I know what it feels like.


I admired Farrell for his playing ability since I first saw him, but I changed my mind on him in some respects during a Sarries Glasgow game in Glasgow. There was one incident where he was bellowing at the ref and immediately turned round to a team mate and winked at him.

I don't know why but it made me laugh out loud for real and I warmed to him as person because of it.

Make of that what you will.


edit, actually, now that I've thought about it I know why I quite like him, he reminds me of Jonno in his competitiveness.
There’s a world of difference between holding your rib cage and having broken your ribs. Not sure he was in any position to know Dickson was being told that there was foul play, the conversation was very brief and in a noisy stadium

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:02 pm
by Tichtheid
Paddington Bear wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:54 am
There’s a world of difference between holding your rib cage and having broken your ribs. Not sure he was in any position to know Dickson was being told that there was foul play, the conversation was very brief and in a noisy stadium

Sure, and it's not something I care enough about to argue the toss. I was going with the premise that Farrell has a history of it


Kevin Sinfield on tackling low

https://archive.ph/8GCgl

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:13 pm
by Paddington Bear
Tichtheid wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:02 pm
Paddington Bear wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 11:54 am
There’s a world of difference between holding your rib cage and having broken your ribs. Not sure he was in any position to know Dickson was being told that there was foul play, the conversation was very brief and in a noisy stadium

Sure, and it's not something I care enough about to argue the toss. I was going with the premise that Farrell has a history of it


Kevin Sinfield on tackling low

https://archive.ph/8GCgl
He has a history of tackling high, no doubt, but I’m deeply unconvinced on the faking injury part both generally and specifically to Friday night.

Sinfield is spot on and I’ve been a pretty consistent supporter of the safety rules on this and the old bored as well. I live in fear of an English red card for a high shot in a WC qf and also have a sneaking suspicion we’ll get done for backchat at some crucial point as well.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:30 pm
by Kawazaki
sockwithaticket wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:05 am
Niegs wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:55 pm The amount of people saying this is penalty / yellow in the comments. :wtf: No mitigating factors, launches up (flat at least) into his chin, ffs.
And, as I said on the previous page, makes no attempt to wrap. That right arm is left trailing to lead with the shoulder and put in a hit rather than a tackle, which means it's an illegal act even without the head contact and thus, according to the framework, no mitigation is possible.

How to say you've never played rugby without saying you've never played rugby.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:53 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Early in his career, I assumed Farrell was suffering from league influence. The reality is that he is just a cheat shot c**t who has been encouraged in his endeavours by some from of sanction invisibility cloak awarded by officials over the years. He is the sort of tw*t who, if his own career was ended due to a cheap shot, you'd have no sympathy for and simply think "karma".

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:55 pm
by ASMO
Torquemada 1420 wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 8:25 am
Ymx wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 8:00 am Found this from Nieg’s link.

I think this was the worst one.



From memory, was it not even a pen or something crazy?
I was thinking about that SA game: weren't there 2 incidents in that one? I have some recollection of one under the posts.
Funnily eniough he feigned injury after that one too, pattern emerging?

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:57 pm
by Torquemada 1420
ASMO wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:55 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 8:25 am
I was thinking about that SA game: weren't there 2 incidents in that one? I have some recollection of one under the posts.
Funnily eniough he feigned injury after that one too, pattern emerging?
What baffles me is why he gets away with it so often.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 1:39 pm
by GogLais
Kawazaki wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:30 pm
sockwithaticket wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:05 am
Niegs wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:55 pm The amount of people saying this is penalty / yellow in the comments. :wtf: No mitigating factors, launches up (flat at least) into his chin, ffs.
And, as I said on the previous page, makes no attempt to wrap. That right arm is left trailing to lead with the shoulder and put in a hit rather than a tackle, which means it's an illegal act even without the head contact and thus, according to the framework, no mitigation is possible.

How to say you've never played rugby without saying you've never played rugby.
I’ve never played the guitar but I can usually tell when somebody’s crap at it.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 2:02 pm
by sockwithaticket
GogLais wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 1:39 pm
Kawazaki wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:30 pm
sockwithaticket wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:05 am

And, as I said on the previous page, makes no attempt to wrap. That right arm is left trailing to lead with the shoulder and put in a hit rather than a tackle, which means it's an illegal act even without the head contact and thus, according to the framework, no mitigation is possible.

How to say you've never played rugby without saying you've never played rugby.
I’ve never played the guitar but I can usually tell when somebody’s crap at it.
Even if he weren't completely wrong, it's not only a childish deflection because someone's dared to say something vaguely negative about a Saracens player, but also completely irrelevant

The current framework and how it's applied by officials wasn't around when I was playinga little over a decade ago, let alone when he was long before that. Thankfully we have plenty of examples from the televised rugby of refs going through the framework with their officials and thus we are educated.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 4:00 pm
by Uncle fester
sefton wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:39 pm Looked like a good tackle to me, fell into it as Faz attempted to wrap.
Sefton and Toga up a tree K.I.S.S.I.N.G

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 5:58 pm
by Kawazaki
sockwithaticket wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 2:02 pm
GogLais wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 1:39 pm
Kawazaki wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:30 pm


How to say you've never played rugby without saying you've never played rugby.
I’ve never played the guitar but I can usually tell when somebody’s crap at it.
Even if he weren't completely wrong, it's not only a childish deflection because someone's dared to say something vaguely negative about a Saracens player, but also completely irrelevant

The current framework and how it's applied by officials wasn't around when I was playinga little over a decade ago, let alone when he was long before that. Thankfully we have plenty of examples from the televised rugby of refs going through the framework with their officials and thus we are educated.


It's nothing to do with what club he plays for. It is your bizarre description of what happened and how players tackle. Even in my day you were taught to drive in with the shoulder when you tackle.

The only thing Farrell got wrong with this tackle is he went about 6" too high so he hit the chin. Everything else was fine. FFS, he even held the player up after the hit, how could he do that if he didn't wrap his arm?!

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:25 pm
by GogLais
Kawazaki wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 5:58 pm
sockwithaticket wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 2:02 pm
GogLais wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 1:39 pm
I’ve never played the guitar but I can usually tell when somebody’s crap at it.
Even if he weren't completely wrong, it's not only a childish deflection because someone's dared to say something vaguely negative about a Saracens player, but also completely irrelevant

The current framework and how it's applied by officials wasn't around when I was playinga little over a decade ago, let alone when he was long before that. Thankfully we have plenty of examples from the televised rugby of refs going through the framework with their officials and thus we are educated.


It's nothing to do with what club he plays for. It is your bizarre description of what happened and how players tackle. Even in my day you were taught to drive in with the shoulder when you tackle.

The only thing Farrell got wrong with this tackle is he went about 6" too high so he hit the chin. Everything else was fine. FFS, he even held the player up after the hit, how could he do that if he didn't wrap his arm?!
Granted I’ve never played rugby since 1968 but how long does it take to move your arm from waist level to shoulder level?

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:44 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Kawazaki wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 5:58 pm Even in my day you were taught to drive in with the shoulder when you tackle.
Awesome line of reasoning. I can still remember when blacks were not allowed the vote in SA.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:48 pm
by Uncle fester
Toga
There has never been a time when it was legal to shoulder charge somebody in the head.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:52 pm
by Kawazaki
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:48 pm Toga
There has never been a time when it was legal to shoulder charge somebody in the head.


Yes I know. Thank you for that non sequitur.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:52 pm
by Kawazaki
Torquemada 1420 wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:44 pm
Kawazaki wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 5:58 pm Even in my day you were taught to drive in with the shoulder when you tackle.
Awesome line of reasoning. I can still remember when blacks were not allowed the vote in SA.

You really are an offensive thick cunt.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 7:01 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Kawazaki wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:52 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:44 pm
Kawazaki wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 5:58 pm Even in my day you were taught to drive in with the shoulder when you tackle.
Awesome line of reasoning. I can still remember when blacks were not allowed the vote in SA.

You really are an offensive thick cunt.
The thicko is self-evidently you with your risible attempted defence of the indefensible. Don't ever consider a career in the law.

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 7:02 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:48 pm Toga
There has never been a time when it was legal to shoulder charge somebody in the head.
It appears no-one told his mum and the result is here for all to see. :think:

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 7:31 pm
by Ymx
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 4:00 pm
sefton wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:39 pm Looked like a good tackle to me, fell into it as Faz attempted to wrap.
Sefton and Toga up a tree K.I.S.S.I.N.G
:lol: :lol:

Sometimes, it’s the little things

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 9:07 pm
by C69
Ymx wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 7:31 pm
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 4:00 pm
sefton wrote: Sat Jan 07, 2023 9:39 pm Looked like a good tackle to me, fell into it as Faz attempted to wrap.
Sefton and Toga up a tree K.I.S.S.I.N.G
:lol: :lol:

Sometimes, it’s the little things
Ball deep

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 9:29 pm
by Ymx
C69 wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 9:07 pm
Ymx wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 7:31 pm
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 4:00 pm

Sefton and Toga up a tree K.I.S.S.I.N.G
:lol: :lol:

Sometimes, it’s the little things
Ball deep
Low blow !




* Unlike Farrell

Re: Law question- Farrell tackle

Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2023 9:31 pm
by I like neeps


Rfu really have gone six nations is coming up lads let's allow some headhunting by our key players.