Why the referees should really be looking at the Dan Biggar tackle on Samu Kerevi, not Rhys Patchell's
‘It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way – in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.’ (Charles Dickens – The Tale of Two Cities)
Wallabies coach Michael Cheika is in the middle of his own winter of despair after his side were defeated 29-25 by a disciplined and deserved Welsh side in the seminal and controversial pool D match at Tokyo on Sunday.
The combustible coach was left seething after yet more contentious officiating regarding a tackle contest between the ball carrying Wallaby centre Samu Kerevi and replacement Welsh flyhalf Rhys Patchell which ultimately saw Kerevi penalised for reckless conduct with his forearm for indirect contact with the throat of the upright Patchell.
Cheika said, “It was pretty funny because I thought I had seen that tackle before, it could have been Reece Hodge, I am not sure. When our guy makes that tackle and has the high tackle framework in his head, he gets suspended.
“This guy doesn’t think about the high tackle framework and we get penalised.”
Michael Cheika is somewhat justified in his anger, yet the comparison to the Reece Hodge tackle on Fijian Peceli Yato in the opening pool match which saw Hodge suspended for three weeks is not the tackle example Cheika should be comparing the tackle that drew the attention of TMO Ben Skeen.
In fact, Cheika should be looking at the tackle that effectively introduced the reserve Patchell into the contest in the first place.
The Dan Biggar tackle on Samu Kerevi.
Let me explain; The Rhys Patchell tackle on Samu Kerevi is lawful, albeit high, as there is no contact with the head or neck of Kerevi. Ironically its lawfulness is assisted by the ball runner himself.
If you look at Rhys Patchell, he is very upright and appears to be attempting to affect a ‘soak tackle’ on Kerevi thus preventing Kerevi from offloading and creating further attacking momentum for the Wallabies. Yet what would be a probable consequence if Kerevi were to have kept his arms straight down by his side (something very hard to down when you are running)?
I submit that the head and or shoulder area of Patchell would have either directly or indirectly come into contact with effectively the same area of the ball runner Kerevi thus rendering the Patchell tackle unlawful per the new troublesome World Rugby High Tackle Decision Making Framework.
Continue reading below…
Now turning to the Dan Biggar tackle on Samu Kerevi a short time before the Patchell tackle. Here we see Biggar going into tackle Samu Kerevi but importantly Biggar himself places his head in a dangerous position, that being in front of the ball runner.
Kerevi, as he should have complete right to do is looking to bump off the defender Biggar with his right forearm and shoulder. Subsequently, contact was made between Kerevi and Biggar with the ball being dislodged and Biggar being removed from the field for a head injury assessment that he later failed.
The rationale inference is that the head area of Biggar come into direct or indirect contact with the body of Samu Kerevi namely the right shoulder forearm area thus dislodging or contributing to the dislodgment of the ball and injuring his head at the same time.
Yet not a peep out of the TMO, assistant referees or match referee Romain Poite. Why not? We have a player with a head injury. Or were they happy to accept that Dan Biggar contributed to his own demise by poor tackle technique?
Clearly, there is a player who has sustained an injury to the head as a result of contact with a ball runner who is leading with a shoulder forearm, albeit at a lower height. Yet Samu Kerevi was not deemed to have been dangerous or reckless in this incident.
Turning back to the Patchell tackle, at the point of contact Kerevi has his left shoulder and forearm also tucked into his body, it is the follow-through that slides up onto Patchell’s throat, effects no injury what so ever yet is deemed reckless by the officials. Despite advocacy by Wallabies skipper Michael Hooper arguing that poor tackle technique was a factor in the Patchell incident referee Poite was having none of it.
The tackle techniques of Biggar or Patchell were poor. Both had contact made to the head and throat respectively due to where they chose to place their heads not directly due to the actions of the ball runner Samu Kerevi who on each occasion at the point of contact had his respective forearm tucked to his own body.
One received a head assessment injury, the other attracted a penalty for his side. If World Rugby is concerned about player welfare, why was the incident concerning the injured player, not an issue for the officials at the time yet the other ‘reckless’ and worthy of a penalty?
It is contentious and inconsistent officiating that frustrates player, coach and fans alike and such accompanying confusions breed discontent, despair and ultimately disillusionment with the game. It is difficult to fathom that during a World Cup, the showcase of the game, that the Code’s governing body World Rugby has facilitated such a tense atmosphere when it comes to the point of collision during a match despite its good intentions with its new High Tackle Decision Making Framework.
Whilst the Code is not dying, I suggest the officiating of the point of collision in this tournament requires a ‘recall to life’. I’m not convinced justice is actually being done to the players affected by the officiating and the World Rugby’s Judicial officers.
“Whatever is, is right” is the dictum of the Old Bailey. Should not apply to World Rugby and how it administers the game but I fear it is heading in that direction and perhaps further judicial reform is required to avoid further contention.
It is a game of two teams and a game of two halves, but to prosper it should only ever be a game of one clear understanding.
Cheika and Hooper reflect on loss to Wales:
Comments on RugbyPass
A wallaby front-row of Bell, Blake and Tupou…now that would be hefty
1 Go to comments“But with an exceptional pass accuracy rating “ Which apart from Roigard is not a feature of any of the other 9s in NZ. Kind of basic for a Black 9 dont.you. think? Yet we keep seeing FC and TJ being rated ahead of him? Weird if it’s seen as vital to get our backline beating in your face defences.
1 Go to commentsThanks BeeMc! Looks like many teams need extra time to settle from the quadrennial northern migration. I think generally the quality of the Rugby has held up. Fiji has been fantastic and fun to watch
13 Go to commentsLets compare apples with apples. Lyon sent weak team the week before, but nobody raised an eyebrow. Give the South African teams a few years to build their depth, then you will be moaning that the teams are too strong.
41 Go to commentsDid footballs agents also perform the scout role at some time? I’m surprised more high profile players haven’t taken up the occupation, great way to remain in the game and use all that experience without really requiring a lot of specific expertise?
1 Go to commentsSuper rugby is struggling but that has little to do with sabbaticals. 1. Too many teams from Aust and NZ - should be 3 and 4 respectively, add in 2 from Japan, 1 possibly 2 from Argentina. 2. Inconsistent and poor refereeing, admittedly not restricted to Super rugby. Only one team was reffed at the breakdown in Reds v H’Landers match. Scrum penalty awarded in Canes v Drua when No 8 had the ball in the open with little defence nearby - ideal opportunity to play advantage. Coming back to Reds match - same scrum situation but ref played advantage - Landers made 10 yards and were penalised at the breakdown when the ref should have returned to scrum penalty. 3. Marketing is weak and losing ground to AFL and NRL. Playing 2 days compared with 4. 4. Scheduling is unattractive to family attendance. Have any franchises heard of Sundays 2pm?
11 Go to commentsAbsolutely..all they need is a chance in yhe playoffs and I bet all the other teams will be nervous…THEY KNOW HOW TO WIN IM THE PLAYOFFS..
2 Go to commentsI really hope he comes back and helps out with some coaching.
1 Go to commentsI think we are all just hoping that the Olympic 7s doesn’t suffer the same sad fate as the last RWC with the officials ruining the spectacle.
1 Go to commentsPersonally, I’ve lost the will to even be bothered about the RFU, the structure, the participants. It’s all a sham. I now simply enjoy getting a group of friends together to go and watch a few games a year in different locations (including Europe, the championship, etc). I feel extremely sorry for the real fans of these clubs who are constantly ignored by the RFU and other administrators. I feel especially sorry for the fans of clubs in the Championship who have had considerable central funding stripped away and are then expected to just take whatever the RFU put to them. Its all a sham, especially if the failed clubs are allowed to return.
10 Go to commentsI’m guessing Carl Hayman would have preferred to have stayed in NZ with benefit of hindsight. Up north there is the expectation to play twice as many games with far less ‘player management’ protocols that Paul is now criticising. Less playing through concussions means longer, healthier, careers. Carter used as the eg here by Paul, his sabbatical allowed him to play until age 37. OK its not an exact science but there is far more expectations on players who sign for Top 14 or Engl Prem clubs to get value for the huge salaries. NZR get alot wrong but keeping their best players in NZ rugby is not one of them. SA clubs are virtually devoid of their top players now, no thanks. They cant threaten the big teams in the Champions Cup, the squads have little depth. Cant see Canes/Chiefs struggling. Super has been great this year, fantastic high skill matches. Drua a fantastic addition and Jaguares will add another quality team eventually. Aus teams performing strongly and no doubt will benefit with the incentive of a Lions tour and a home RWC. Let Jordie enjoy his time with Leinster, it will allow the opportunity for another player to emerge at Canes in his absence.
11 Go to commentsLove that man, his way to despise angry little men is so funny ! 😂
4 Go to comments“South African franchises would be powerhouses if we had all our overseas based players back in situ. We would have the same unbeatable aura the Toulouses, Leinsters or Saracens of this world have had over the last decade or so.” Proof that Jake white does not understand the economics of the game in SA. Players earning abroad are not going to simply come back and represent the bulls. But they might if they have a springbok contract.
24 Go to commentsA lot of fans just joined in for the fun of it! We all admire O'Gara and what he has done for La Rochelle
4 Go to commentsThe RFU will find a way to mess this up as usual. My bet is there will be no promotion into the the Premiership, only relegation into National League One. Hopefully they won’t parachute failed clubs into the league at the expense of clubs who have battled for promotion.
10 Go to commentsWell that’s the contracts for RG and Jordie bought and paid for. Now, what are the chances we can persuade Antoine to hop over with all the extra dosh we’ll have from living at the Aviva & Croke next season…??? 🤑🤑🤑
35 Go to commentsWow, that’s incredible. Great for rugby.
35 Go to commentsYou probably read that parling is going to coach the wallaby lineout but if not before now you have.
17 Go to commentsIf someone like Leo Cullen was in O’Gara’s place I don’t hear Boo-ing. It’s not just that La Rochelle has hurt Leinster and O’Gara is their Irish boss. It’s the needle that he brings and the pantomime activity before the game around pretending that Munster were supporting LaRochelle just because O’Gara is from Cork. That’s dividing Irish provinces just to get an advantage for his French Team. He can F*ck right off with that. BOOOOO! (but not while someone is lying injured)
4 Go to commentsDid the highlanders party too hard before the game? They were the pits.
1 Go to comments