0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/down_dis.png)
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
TOM DECENT
Last updated 06:36, June 21 2018
Rugby Australia official says Angus Gardner was right to send off French fullback Benjamin and has been left 'confused' by World Rugby rescinding the red card.
Rugby Australia has come out in staunch defence of a "confused" Angus Gardner and demanded clarity from World Rugby following the Australian referee's controversial red-carding of French fullback Benjamin Fall on Saturday.
Gardner, who received assistance from TMO George Ayoub, sent Fall from the field in the 11th minute of New Zealand's 26-13 win when No.10 Beauden Barrett landed in a dangerous position.
By the letter of the law, Gardner made the correct decision by sending off Fall for breaching Law 9.17, which reads: "for tackling, charging, pulling, pushing or grasping an opponent whose feet were off the ground".
Beauden Barrett failed an HIA after he was tipped over by Benjamin Fall during the second test in Wellington.
However, an Independent Judicial Committee, selected by World Rugby and including three Australians, deemed Fall's contact with All Blacks centre Anton Lienert-Brown in the lead-up hindered his ability to contest properly for the ball.
A statement read: "We did not consider that the Player would have foreseen the events, which ultimately unfolded, and therefore could not have, in our opinion, given the speed of the events and the dynamics at play, taken any preventative steps to avoid the collision with NZ #10 or to have put himself in a position to contest the ball as he had initially planned."
Fall's red card was dismissed, with a statement saying that on the balance of probability "the referee's decision to issue the red card was wrong".
Gardner is one of the most highly regarded referees in the world but has been left confused about what he should have done if he had his time over.
RA high-performance boss, Ben Whitaker, told Fairfax Media the organisation was firmly behind Gardner and expressed disillusionment at what transpired.
"Angus is one of the best referees in the world and I've had a lot to do with Angus over many, many years and our view is he made the right call on Saturday night," Whitaker said. "It's really unfortunate that a hearing then comes out and suggests he got it wrong. We feel pretty confused when we've been engaged and involved at the highest level of refereeing development, then you have this decision handed down. It's tough for Angus and we're 100 per cent behind Angus to make sure he gets back on the horse and continues to prove he is one of the best referees in the world."
The Independent Judicial Committee, however, insisted it was not critical of Gardner's decision on the field.
They said: "No criticism is made of the referee nor, in our opinion, would any be warranted. Unlike the referee, we had the benefit of all the video footage, which showed various angles of the incident. Unlike the referee, we had the luxury of time to deliberate and consider, in private, the incident".
Nonetheless, Gardner's decision has been portrayed in the media as wrong despite World Rugby making it clear for years now that protecting a player's head is paramount, particularly in high-ball contests.
"We've got in contact with World Rugby at all levels to make sure we understood what was going on so that Angus was well supported," Whitaker said. "How those situations in a game are to be ruled was pretty clear to us. That's why we feel
Angus got it right because World Rugby spent a lot of time looking at how we best adjudicate the sort of things that can happen in those situations.
"We just want to be really clear on why that's the case. That's the cause of our confusion. We want to know the supposed plans going forward."
Gardner has been named as assistant referee for Saturday's third Test between New Zealand and France and Whitaker is adamant this latest furore would not affect him.
"I want to make it clear Angus is not someone where this is going to impact his refereeing," Whitaker said. "He's one of the best in the world and the best we've got. He's really resilient, professional and he's confused. He wants to be 100 per cent sure what the directives are from World Rugby.
"He feels, as does our referees boss in Scott Young and our coaches, he got it right."
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...rugby-official
80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?
Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!
Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!
Some interesting stuff in the comments, most typical of what any home team supporter who got the benefit of the call would say, however I did like what Bernie Larkham has suggested which is that any possible/potential red card be given a yellow and in the 10 minutes off the field the TMO has the ability to upgrade to red. This is basically giving the TMO more time and camera angles to assess the incident so that we don't get WR confusing the matter like they have done in tis instance.
Red cards can ruin a good contest, so we need to ensure they are really worth the offence.
80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?
Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!
Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!
That would seem like a reasonable suggestion; definite red cards (eg, for punching, 2nd yellow, etc) would still be immediate. It might confuse some spectators, but it's rugby - spectators are confused about most refereeing decisions anyway (particularly those which go against them!)
Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon
2 things in that article.
1." Gardner is one of the most highly regarded referees in the world but has been left confused about what he should have done if he had his time over. (Anal Angus?)
2. RA is standing up to World Rugby?
I actually prefer red cards to be 20 minutes in the bin and then being replaced by a team mate. The reason I think 20minutes is due to red being the equivalent of two yellows which equate to two x 10minutes eg. 20minutes.
Then move on and let the citing commissioner deal with any consequences.
Under the current laws that was most definitely a red card. It was horrific watching live. Barrett went off concussed and wont be playing this weekend. His injury has been overshadowed by this embarassing display by world rugby by not clarifying the new law interpretations that came in a few years back. I just hope out of all this Barretts career doesnt suffer as he is a magnificent player.
I remember Jayden Hayward being clobbered in the air by a young Jonah Placid back in 2014. Jonah had eyes on the ball but needed to be more aware. Ended up only getting a penalty.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.
1 thing in that article:
The Independent Judicial Committee, however, insisted it was not critical of Gardner's decision on the field.
They said: "No criticism is made of the referee nor, in our opinion, would any be warranted. Unlike the referee, we had the benefit of all the video footage, which showed various angles of the incident. Unlike the referee, we had the luxury of time to deliberate and consider, in private, the incident".
That is exactly why I like Bernies idea of initially a yellow with the TMO who has time and footage on his side to determine if it should be red. Leave the ref to do exactly that, ref the game in front of him and walk off the filed without being the scape goat.
Thoughts on that one Ecky..
Might even help recruit some more refs![]()
80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?
Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!
Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!
Not sure if it’s league or afl that fine the player him self I’m starting to think that’s the way to go!
When it comes out of your pocket will you throw it away? I don’t know.
May the FORCE be with you!
I think the YC - TMO review - upgrade to RC is a great solution. I hate the "On Report" soft option in League. Under that system you can have your best player out due to foul play, your bench down a man and your player rotation buggered up. The offending team keep all their players available and if a suspension is imposed other teams get the benefit.
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David
Yep, agree as it also takes the crowd and pressure of the field ref. But the TMO has to be realistic when watching and understand the speed of the game. Case in point is Folau’s yellow last night, some TMOs would have demanded a red card for the sake of Folau touching the Irish player in the air despite the single lift by the Irish.
Just to be clear I don’t understand why players are grabbing people in the air especially ex AFL like Folau. I don’t see so the same problems with contesting the ball in the air and landings in AFL like we are seeing in rugby. Then again I don’t pay too much attention to AFL either.
Last edited by cedric rainwater; 24-06-18 at 11:59.
cider my arse
the problem isn't a "challenge" in itself, its how you go about it. There has to be a genuine attempt at marking the ball, you should be looking at the ball, and you can't grab the other player. Folau clearly grabbed the Irish guy after he missed marking the ball (which he didn't site 'coz he wasnt looking at it) and his momentum yanked the Irish guy around and down. I thought it was worth a red.
Usually its almost impossible for a guy running with the kick to genuinely contest a guy running at the kick. Which is as it should be. Interesting that the other week that kiwi guy karate kicking the aussie guy was the opposite, he had everything going his way, going towards the ball, the aussie guy didnt look at the ball, paused the charge and didnt contest in the air, but the idiot stuck out his leg and kicked him in the chops.
The long sobs of autumn's violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor