The head collision rules leave no room for commonsense. Some things leave the players no room or time to react and so it is just a rugby incident. I have the scars to prove it, and the collar bones of people I have tackled all healed. No intent involved.
@@jamiekingdon3404there is a chance because he would have caught the ball in an awkward position and the delay would have allowed the defenders to close the distance. There is a doubt there. Therefore no penalty try. For a penalty try to be given there must have been no doubt that a try would have been scored.
@@nickwoodall4744so what, every ball thrown towards a touchline is potentially going out. The rules say if there is a reasonable chance the player would have caught it and scored it’s a try. No other defenders behind Spencer so a clear penalty try. Shocking decision
The television commentary and associated humour here and there are a cut above the rest. I am a Springbok supporter, and don't know much about this competition, but the commentary is more intelligent and way better than some Southern hemisphere rugby commentary.
Pretty much how Shontanye Hape's career ended - Giteau ran the same play at the guy twice resulting in two headshots in a row. The ref awarded a penalty the first time for Hape tackling the blocking runner (with his head), and they lined up and ran it at him again - while he was visibly barely able to stand. At least these days Hape would have likely had got a HIA to go with his card.
There's a very simple reason for all these yellow and red cards for non-foul head collisions: the governing bodies are being sued by former rugby players who suffered brain damage caused by physical contact playing rugby. The best chance the authorities have of winning these court cases and avoiding paying millions - perhaps billions - in damages is to demonstrate they are making a serious effort to protect players now that they are aware of the damage that can be caused. They don't care about the game, or "fairness". They just don't want to be limbered with huge compensation claims.
Again not a male or female reffing issue. Its a never played Rugby issue. Anyone who has played the game understands that the yellow given is silly because it was a 'Rugby incident'. Ie these things happen sometimes in collision sports and it doesn't mean a player has done something wrong and requires a card or to reprimanded. Cool head needed from the refs
@@Gangai263 Yes it does matter. As according to you any head contact whether accidental or not is a yellow. It called mitagating circumstances for a reason. And the MC on the side step is that the defending player had no chance to change position or angle.
I would expect that all rugby referees had played the game at some level, and that is certainly the case with this ref - although she retired due to injury at 17. There is little-to-no leeway allowed for the referees with head-to-head contact - I disagree with it, but she was reffing according to the current expected standard.
@@whitebear5405 lol are u serious ? Kinda general question but if two players on the same team go tackle the opposition and their heads collide it would be classified as a rugby collision. Most cases it would be considered a rugby collision unless there’s clear intent from one of the teammates to cause the head collision.
Rugby is a difficult sport at times, felt this one was decided by a few calls what didn’t go the way they should off. But it’s impossible for the refs to get everything. Much better job than the saints game, not single awful decisions but just the constant allowing of cynical play and time wasting wasn’t pretty to watch
Women should not referee mens rugby. It is a safety issue. Holly got clattered by a Fijian last week when she got in the way and it was just a glancing blow. Sometimes refs get steam rolled and that is where the female frame will get properly damaged.
which yellow card(s) are you arguing with ? ted hill hmmm borderline but probably right according to the head clash rule, deliberate knock on ... that's a yellow .... this woman .... do you mean the ref ? she seemed to do a fair job, gender immaterial
Viewing figures are falling, clubs are collapsing financially, refs are not qualified so why not rethink your policies..? Even internationals are ruined by the constant whistles and endless reruns of incidents... Lots of athletes, but less skill...perhaps rugby has had it's high water mark and now it's a controlled descent..? How about changing rules to benefit attacking, flowing play, rather than 120kg gym giants..? Score under a penalty and instant plus two points, no waiting for conversions...have each team have challenges for play like tennis, then the refs can focus on the game...
Let’s breakdown all that bs you just wrote then. There was a 10% increase last season for viewers on ITV and TNT. Same for attendances, over 1,000 per game more than the 2022/23 season. And now this year TNT has seen a 30% increase in viewers. 30%, that is a huge increase. And that’s just premiership. And the attendances have risen again. So you’re just outright lying about viewing figures. Clubs are making record revenues, it’s all to do with spiralling costs, some wages sure but mostly it’s just basic costs to do with energy and interest rates. There is literally nothing more these clubs can do about that. They just have to focus even more on other revenue streams. Now there is absolutely no doubt the premiership and the rugby itself has never been more exciting to watch and competitive. We see every year and every World Cup the ball in play time go up. The premiership averaged over 7 tries a game last year and its close to 8 this year. If you compare that to the average of 3 tries per game in the premiership 13 years ago, clearly rugby is way more exciting to watch now. And there’s definitely more skill and flare. And obviously there’s gonna be 120kg giants, it’s rugby mate not cycling. So don’t write such dumb comments under videos again yeah 👍
@24hr_rugby_jake Your figures don't seem to tally with the general agreement about the finances of Rugby. Viewership may go up by a percentage, but from what base...? Rugby has become even more corporatised, with boxes for the 'elites', whilst ordinary people can't afford it. The crowds cannot sustain the business model that will keep the clubs solvent long term, which is the MAJOR point I made. As for the attendances at Club games increasing, how come the clubs are complaining about declining attendance? People watching something behind a paywall only works if you have a product people want to watch in LARGE numbers. As for deciding that the quality of something depends on quantity (number of tries) then perhaps you've not been watching Rugby all that long...and my point about the 120kg players is that they haven't been around long term, this is a recent development of athletes before 'players' (see comments about is a certain player 'big enough ' to play the modern game...) I'm glad you like the modern game, hopefully enough people will agree and replace the older crowd who stop watching...
Christ get over it you pair of insecure whingers 😂 Do yous sleep with the night light on in case the scary female referee comes out from under your bed at night to get you??
The head collision rules leave no room for commonsense. Some things leave the players no room or time to react and so it is just a rugby incident. I have the scars to prove it, and the collar bones of people I have tackled all healed. No intent involved.
Rugby incident not yellow for Ted.
Not the ref's fault though; thought she did really well!
@@EvoraGT430 She reffed really well - can't blame her as it was direct head on head.
Not a yellow at all.
Nah she made the right call there there is mitigation w the cut back
I totally agree.
Jean-François
French and past rugby player !
“Scrappy” and “grippy” game. - Finn Russell described it in post-match
The Hill yellow is lunacy.
That was a tough call and I’m a Chiefs fan
How is the Spencer knock on not a penalty try????? Absolute madness
Because it was going out anyway. Look at the trajectory. He barely touches it.
That and even if F-W manages to catch it he had two defenders right on him
@@robreeves9825 absolutely 0 chance any defender is getting him there
@@jamiekingdon3404there is a chance because he would have caught the ball in an awkward position and the delay would have allowed the defenders to close the distance. There is a doubt there. Therefore no penalty try. For a penalty try to be given there must have been no doubt that a try would have been scored.
@@nickwoodall4744so what, every ball thrown towards a touchline is potentially going out. The rules say if there is a reasonable chance the player would have caught it and scored it’s a try. No other defenders behind Spencer so a clear penalty try. Shocking decision
Love Rugby
The television commentary and associated humour here and there are a cut above the rest. I am a Springbok supporter, and don't know much about this competition, but the commentary is more intelligent and way better than some Southern hemisphere rugby commentary.
Great match!
2:20 how is that even a yellow?!?!?!
Poor old Chiefs who were the icon of a new Rugby force only 4 yrs ago but now cannot catch a break😮
That yellow is mental
Shocking decision. It was blatantly obvious it was a collision and not a tackle
No foul play, no yellow card …
So the Lesson is if you are a ball carrier you can head butt a defender and get a penalty and your opponent sent off
Pretty much how Shontanye Hape's career ended - Giteau ran the same play at the guy twice resulting in two headshots in a row. The ref awarded a penalty the first time for Hape tackling the blocking runner (with his head), and they lined up and ran it at him again - while he was visibly barely able to stand. At least these days Hape would have likely had got a HIA to go with his card.
The clash of heads was just a “rugby incident “ and should never have been penalised.
That was about as close to foul play as we are to enthroning a decent government in this country.
I’m not going to comment on Ted’s yellow or the female referee. I’m just so glad Bath is firmly better that Exeter after years of frustration.
Well, Bath blew them out of the water.
Foul play ? Ridiculous. Why do referees think they have to give a card if some colour.
Im biased but all three cards are weak.
Not even a yellow, games gone to bollocks
There's a very simple reason for all these yellow and red cards for non-foul head collisions: the governing bodies are being sued by former rugby players who suffered brain damage caused by physical contact playing rugby. The best chance the authorities have of winning these court cases and avoiding paying millions - perhaps billions - in damages is to demonstrate they are making a serious effort to protect players now that they are aware of the damage that can be caused. They don't care about the game, or "fairness". They just don't want to be limbered with huge compensation claims.
Fkn cards are ruining the game.
Again not a male or female reffing issue. Its a never played Rugby issue. Anyone who has played the game understands that the yellow given is silly because it was a 'Rugby incident'. Ie these things happen sometimes in collision sports and it doesn't mean a player has done something wrong and requires a card or to reprimanded. Cool head needed from the refs
I think that’s the right call according to the laws of the rule. It doesn’t matter played rugby or not it’s what the rules say
@Gangai263 so what would happen if it was a player colliding from his own team? Genuine question. According to your knowledge
@@Gangai263 Yes it does matter. As according to you any head contact whether accidental or not is a yellow. It called mitagating circumstances for a reason. And the MC on the side step is that the defending player had no chance to change position or angle.
I would expect that all rugby referees had played the game at some level, and that is certainly the case with this ref - although she retired due to injury at 17.
There is little-to-no leeway allowed for the referees with head-to-head contact - I disagree with it, but she was reffing according to the current expected standard.
@@whitebear5405 lol are u serious ? Kinda general question but if two players on the same team go tackle the opposition and their heads collide it would be classified as a rugby collision. Most cases it would be considered a rugby collision unless there’s clear intent from one of the teammates to cause the head collision.
So is the visiting team gonna take a Bath?
How is that head on head contact a yellow card it’s just a accidental collision that’s it rugby rules are becoming a joke
Refs a cutie
Are the referees incapable of making decisions on their own instead of having to check every single time? It’s ridiculous.
If they made the decision without the TMO you would still complain.
@@K1llerTunes No, I would not. This is rugby not Premier League bullshit football.
Terrible yellow
Rugby is a difficult sport at times, felt this one was decided by a few calls what didn’t go the way they should off. But it’s impossible for the refs to get everything. Much better job than the saints game, not single awful decisions but just the constant allowing of cynical play and time wasting wasn’t pretty to watch
Women should not referee mens rugby. It is a safety issue. Holly got clattered by a Fijian last week when she got in the way and it was just a glancing blow. Sometimes refs get steam rolled and that is where the female frame will get properly damaged.
It’s an accidental clash of heads…the game is becoming a mess!!!
Something doesn't need to be deliberate to be a card. When will the commentators actually understand that?
Someone needs to tell this woman that she doesn't have to give a yellow card every time she blows for a penalty 😂😂😂
Cheers for the ridiculous comment mate
get over yourself pal
which yellow card(s) are you arguing with ? ted hill hmmm borderline but probably right according to the head clash rule, deliberate knock on ... that's a yellow .... this woman .... do you mean the ref ? she seemed to do a fair job, gender immaterial
In an effort to make the game safe youve succeeded in making it stupid
Viewing figures are falling, clubs are collapsing financially, refs are not qualified so why not rethink your policies..?
Even internationals are ruined by the constant whistles and endless reruns of incidents...
Lots of athletes, but less skill...perhaps rugby has had it's high water mark and now it's a controlled descent..?
How about changing rules to benefit attacking, flowing play, rather than 120kg gym giants..? Score under a penalty and instant plus two points, no waiting for conversions...have each team have challenges for play like tennis, then the refs can focus on the game...
Let’s breakdown all that bs you just wrote then. There was a 10% increase last season for viewers on ITV and TNT. Same for attendances, over 1,000 per game more than the 2022/23 season. And now this year TNT has seen a 30% increase in viewers. 30%, that is a huge increase. And that’s just premiership. And the attendances have risen again. So you’re just outright lying about viewing figures. Clubs are making record revenues, it’s all to do with spiralling costs, some wages sure but mostly it’s just basic costs to do with energy and interest rates. There is literally nothing more these clubs can do about that. They just have to focus even more on other revenue streams. Now there is absolutely no doubt the premiership and the rugby itself has never been more exciting to watch and competitive. We see every year and every World Cup the ball in play time go up. The premiership averaged over 7 tries a game last year and its close to 8 this year. If you compare that to the average of 3 tries per game in the premiership 13 years ago, clearly rugby is way more exciting to watch now. And there’s definitely more skill and flare. And obviously there’s gonna be 120kg giants, it’s rugby mate not cycling. So don’t write such dumb comments under videos again yeah 👍
@24hr_rugby_jake
Your figures don't seem to tally with the general agreement about the finances of Rugby. Viewership may go up by a percentage, but from what base...?
Rugby has become even more corporatised, with boxes for the 'elites', whilst ordinary people can't afford it. The crowds cannot sustain the business model that will keep the clubs solvent long term, which is the MAJOR point I made. As for the attendances at Club games increasing, how come the clubs are complaining about declining attendance?
People watching something behind a paywall only works if you have a product people want to watch in LARGE numbers.
As for deciding that the quality of something depends on quantity (number of tries) then perhaps you've not been watching Rugby all that long...and my point about the 120kg players is that they haven't been around long term, this is a recent development of athletes before 'players' (see comments about is a certain player 'big enough ' to play the modern game...)
I'm glad you like the modern game, hopefully enough people will agree and replace the older crowd who stop watching...
what an absolutely terrible game!
Yellow card poor decision it was only an accident rugby fix the quickly you have ruined what was once a great hame to now not worth watching
BS yellow card for that...get a proper male referee also,.
They'll be letting them vote next...
It took 'til after the 80 minute mark for these highlights to include some running rugby - Feyi-Waboso through the middle.
What are women doing in mens sport???
Because they can't let us have anything for ourselves.
Are you 11 years old? I refuse to believe anyone with a brain has an issue with something so minor.
Christ get over it you pair of insecure whingers 😂 Do yous sleep with the night light on in case the scary female referee comes out from under your bed at night to get you??
Refereeing
Refs positioning is poor all game
No it should have been a RED