Jerome Garces

[mikerob]

Anyone tell me why play was brought back and sarries were given the penalty when Luke Marshall was in for a try?

Bowe knocked the ball on so Marshall was offside when he took the ball up the pitch or it could have been deliberate knock on. Bowe definitely knocked on at any rate.

[Rooster]

If Payne had jumped it wouldn't even have been a penalty. Disgracefully refereed. Linesman not much better

Anyone tell me why play was brought back and sarries were given the penalty when Luke Marshall was in for a try?

Linesman said Chad slapped the ball down, looked like he tried an intercept to me

[mikerob]

Therefore the decision becomes was he guilty of Foul Play and while the Law does not use the word "intent' the word Foul implies intent.

To be guilty of Foul Play there must be evidence of intent to play the man and not the ball and if there was no intent then was no offence and no penalty never mind card .

This is rubbish.

Firstly, the relevant section of the laws are for dangerous play. Secondly, intent is irrelevant. If there is dangerous play, the player is penalised whether they meant it or not and the only point of debate is the severity of the punishment.

[Bangors]

The ref ruined the game - imo it was a yellow card - there was NO intent Payne NEVER took his eyes off the ball
This was not my only problem with his interpretation of the rules for instance haw many times did they ''roll away'' form the ball only to lie in amongst the feet of both PR and PM surely that is interference
and how many times did they refuse to engagement at the scrum
However having watched the game when I got home the thing that I find most unacceptable was Borthwicks post match interview when he pretended to be unaware of the fact that Goode was walking about and smiling 20 minutes after been stretchered off apparently at ''deaths door''
I'm left with the impression that Saracens milked the incident in their usual cynical manner - they are undoubtedly the most hateful club in the world
-

[OneMore]

Anyone tell me why play was brought back and sarries were given the penalty when Luke Marshall was in for a try?

Bowe knocked the ball on so Marshall was offside when he took the ball up the pitch or it could have been deliberate knock on. Bowe definitely knocked on at any rate.

If Payne had jumped it wouldn't even have been a penalty. Disgracefully refereed. Linesman not much better

Anyone tell me why play was brought back and sarries were given the penalty when Luke Marshall was in for a try?

Linesman said Chad slapped the ball down, looked like he tried an intercept to me

Bowe/Chad/Marshall, one of those fellas in white.

It was one of those where he tries to intercept with one hand, and whilst he didn't deliberately knock forward, they seem to be given as such anyway.

[Joe Schmo]

Goode made a complete meal out of it. Payne actually hit him with his face, why would you run into someone with your face if you were intent on causing injury to other player, he could have easily been knocked out himself. In fact that's where he went wrong, he should have done a Goode and gone down like a dead elephant.

[OneMore]

Goode made a complete meal out of it. Payne actually hit him with his face, why would you run into someone with your face if you were intent on causing injury to other player, he could have easily been knocked out himself. In fact that's where he went wrong, he should have done a Goode and gone down like a dead elephant.

No one says Payne intended to hurt him. The fact is he hurt him and should take responsibility for that.

[breakdown]

Does anyone have links to the Borthwick/other Sarries post match interviews?

[Harold7]

If Payne had jumped it wouldn't even have been a penalty. Disgracefully refereed. Linesman not much better

Anyone tell me why play was brought back and sarries were given the penalty when Luke Marshall was in for a try?

Deliberate knock on by Marshall. He went for the one handed intercept and missed.

Think it was by Henry rather than Marshall but I though a penalty was harsh, however Marshall (I think) was in front of the man who touched it down so for that alone it should have been a penalty but I don't think that was what it was given for.

[Harold7]

Last penalty of the game should have gone to ulster, Brad Barritt was the tackler and made no clear release of the player before competing for the ball, Garces blew within 10seconds

I was at the game and that was my impression but haven't seen it on TV>

I was watching on TV and that was my impression too. There wasn't really analysis of it though as it was the last act of the game.

[rumncoke]

Mike exactly what did Payne do that was dangerous?

Section 10 of the laws are defined as Foul play .

Section I defines it as dangerous TACKLE a player in the air and the important word in that statement is tackle.

That Payne was in contact with a player who was in the air is not the point the point is was he trying to tackle the player or deliberately playing the player rather than the ball ? if the answer to that question is No then offence has occurred .

For example a full back is perfectly in position to catch a ball both feet on the ground a wing runs up jumps for the ball and goes over the full backs shoulder has the full back committed an offence because he hasn't jumped for the ball?

The only diference is Payne was running waiting for it to drop while Goode jumped and went over his shoulder.

To have committed an offence Payne would have needed to be deliberately playing the man and not the ball.

[Snipe Watson]

If Payne had jumped it wouldn't even have been a penalty. Disgracefully refereed. Linesman not much better

Anyone tell me why play was brought back and sarries were given the penalty when Luke Marshall was in for a try?

Linesman said Chad slapped the ball down, looked like he tried an intercept to me

if you go for the ball one handed and don't get it, you're going to get penalised.

[Eggs]

I can not believe the gibberish being spoken here.

Rum is right, he did not tackle the player in the air, he was going for the ball. If it is right that apparently the recommendation was a yellow (don't know, was at the match), then that is even more appalling.

It wasn't 14 v 15 it was 14 v 16.

There was a pass at least 6/7 yards forward in the lead up to their second try, I was in line with it. They were offside from almost every of our rucks.

I struggle to think of the last time that a referee dictated a result like that.

And to say that french referees take into account the injury as some sort of vindication is further gibberish, the laws don't.

[Snipe Watson]

Mike exactly what did Payne do that was dangerous?

Section 10 of the laws are defined as Foul play .

Section I defines it as dangerous TACKLE a player in the air and the important word in that statement is tackle.

That Payne was in contact with a player who was in the air is not the point the point is was he trying to tackle the player or deliberately playing the player rather than the ball ? if the answer to that question is No then offence has occurred .

For example a full back is perfectly in position to catch a ball both feet on the ground a wing runs up jumps for the ball and goes over the full backs shoulder has the full back committed an offence because he hasn't jumped for the ball?

The only diference is Payne was running waiting for it to drop while Goode jumped and went over his shoulder.

To have committed an offence Payne would have needed to be deliberately playing the man and not the ball.

Try running that past a referee who enforces the laws week in week out. I've asked two and they both gave me the same answer. Payne was the attacking player and he was responsible for the safety of the player in the air. Had he jumped it wouldn't have been a penalty, but the fact that he didn't gave Goode all the protection. The fact that Jared's eyes were on the ball is no mitigation, but is part of the problem with the law as it stands. If a player on the ground makes contact with a player in the air causing him to fall on his head and shoulders it is a reckless action causing a potentially serious incident and the offending player gets a red card. intent is irrelevant, so is the fact that it was only the fifth minute. I was also told that there was probably a post Warburton aspect to the red card. Perviously, he may have got away with a yellow.
I don't like it and neither did either of the referees who I spoke to, but it is the letter of the law.

What annoyed me was the lack of action against Vunipola for repeated offside and Burger for leading with his shoulder on several occasions. He also failed to ref the offside on every restart.

[Scholar]

...