The laws of rugby take the view that players not on their feet are out of the game and as such are not able to participate or gather the ball. The fact that he slide in recklessly into the player did not help matters and earned him the yellow.
A weird scenario -- sometimes things happen which are outside the assumption s of the laws, and the referees have to make the most fair interpretation from relatively little guidance. I remember a few years back at a Super Rugby game I was at, there was a race for the ball, the attacker got his foot to it to push it ahead, and was then completely wiped out by a defender coming from the side. Essentially, a soccer foul, not a rugby one, and would be worth at least a yellow in that sport, possibly even a red because he was hit very hard (that, I seem to remember, was my view at the time). But nothing was given -- the referee might not have seen it that well, or might have just struggled to process how to deal with a soccer foul in a game of rugby.
@@DevinZA tough titties. McFadden should either pick the ball up earlier or put his body on the line. Understandably he might not want to put his body lower incase of injury.. but thats not the guy slidings fault. He's going for the ball and had the stronger way of getting it. Either don't bend down and put yourself in a weak position expecting others to wait for you to play the ball, get out of the way to let the dude sliding gather it.. or lower your body and grab the ball and sacrifice a bit to get the ball in a tough situation. It doesn't look great.. but its not illegal as he got to the ball at the same time and played the ball before taking anybody out.
@@ejsmith9194 It's a reckless action that took another player out of contention for the ball. That's why it's a penalty. The same can be said of taking a player out in the air - if you aren't jumping to compete, then any action that touches that player is reckless and potentially dangerous. It's the players responsibility to ensure that their actions are not reckless. In this case, the actions were dangerous as well, so it's a deserved yellow.
@@Savoycabbage hows sliding for the ball in wet conditions reckless? He went low for the ball and the guy hadn't grasped the ball yet so fair game. Had yhe player picked the ball up and he slid and did the same thing i would agree to a penalty and possible yellow. But he didn't have the ball. Why is it that we're taught to dive on the loose ball... and if we do in dry conditions and somebody is standing bending over to pick it up gets mauled over its not a penalty. Same rules apply. Its unfortunate if somebody gets taken out but you either realistically compete for the loose ball or leave it alone for people who are more willing to get it.
@@ejsmith9194He had no control over his body due to the conditions - Are you telling me he could have stopped if he wanted to? If you aren't in control of your body when you take an action it automatically becomes reckless. Like I said, it's the responsibility of the player to ensure that their actions do not result in play which would be considered illegal under the laws. Whether the contact happens a second later or not makes no difference, it's a reckless action. Whether or not he knew this is irrelevant and intent doesn't matter - although I'd argue he knew as he wouldn't have been able to slide far enough to reach the ball under normal conditions. The player taken out was competing for the ball and in the process of collecting it (had his hands on it) when his legs were taken out from under him. The player is not fair game when he doesn't have the ball unless it's a ruck or a maul, and this was neither. By any interpretations of the laws it's a penalty. The action (considered foul play) caused the player to land dangerously and so it's a yellow card at a minimum.
I think the right decision was given for the wrong reasons here. I am a referee, my view. The player slides in from a distance, he is not in control of his actions, he cannot pull out or slow down. This makes the contact reckless and dangerous. Penalty and Yellow card. Anyone who wants to argue the dangers look at the contact point on McFadden to the ground. This is viewed similarly to players in the air, once you go up you are committing because you can do very little to change your path so you must do so safely.
This was not a attempt at a tackle and if it was the Leinster player was not in the air or off his feat before contact and therefore there is no reason why it should be a yellow card.
@@adriaanvanniekerk6641 Hi Adriaan, thank you for your reply. I would categorise this under Law 9.11 "Player must not do anything which is reckless or dangerous to others." In the law book there is no recommended sanction for that offence we can however assume that it is a penalty. We then move onto guidelines, any act which cause a players first point of contact to be head to ground is a red card unless there are mitigating circumstances. McFadden made contact head to ground. Mitigating circumstances he didn't leave the ground, he wasn't driven into the ground etc... The collision is dangerous and reckless, first point of contact is head to ground. Mitigating factors bring it down to a yellow. I'm not trying to argue what the laws and guidelines should say, i'm saying this is how the decision is reached and why i think given the current laws and guidelines it was the correct decision.
How can the ref say there was no attempt to gather the ball when he actually did gather the ball? I was supporting Leinster and still thought this was some terrible reffing.
@@alasdairduncan3 He only gathered the ball because he took the other player out. That’s like tackling someone in the air and you happen to catch the ball after.
@@stevenmcalister826 it's absolutely not like that he went for the ball and made contact with the ball. Black did a knock on before he was touched so he was at fault.
The laws of rugby take the view that players not on their feet are out of the game and as such are not able to participate or gather the ball. The fact that he slide in recklessly into the player did not help matters and earned him the yellow.
A weird scenario -- sometimes things happen which are outside the assumption
s of the laws, and the referees have to make the most fair interpretation from relatively little guidance. I remember a few years back at a Super Rugby game I was at, there was a race for the ball, the attacker got his foot to it to push it ahead, and was then completely wiped out by a defender coming from the side. Essentially, a soccer foul, not a rugby one, and would be worth at least a yellow in that sport, possibly even a red because he was hit very hard (that, I seem to remember, was my view at the time). But nothing was given -- the referee might not have seen it that well, or might have just struggled to process how to deal with a soccer foul in a game of rugby.
Why's that a penalty?
The TMO and ref view that he made no clear attempt to gather the ball and that he only gets hold of it because it bounces off his legs into his arms.
*Gathers the ball cleanly*
"He doesn't make an attempt to gather the ball, he's just sliding recklessly"
?!
He only got the ball *cleanly* because he swiped McFadden out while he was picking up the ball.
@@DevinZA tough titties. McFadden should either pick the ball up earlier or put his body on the line. Understandably he might not want to put his body lower incase of injury.. but thats not the guy slidings fault. He's going for the ball and had the stronger way of getting it. Either don't bend down and put yourself in a weak position expecting others to wait for you to play the ball, get out of the way to let the dude sliding gather it.. or lower your body and grab the ball and sacrifice a bit to get the ball in a tough situation. It doesn't look great.. but its not illegal as he got to the ball at the same time and played the ball before taking anybody out.
@@ejsmith9194 It's a reckless action that took another player out of contention for the ball. That's why it's a penalty. The same can be said of taking a player out in the air - if you aren't jumping to compete, then any action that touches that player is reckless and potentially dangerous. It's the players responsibility to ensure that their actions are not reckless. In this case, the actions were dangerous as well, so it's a deserved yellow.
@@Savoycabbage hows sliding for the ball in wet conditions reckless? He went low for the ball and the guy hadn't grasped the ball yet so fair game. Had yhe player picked the ball up and he slid and did the same thing i would agree to a penalty and possible yellow. But he didn't have the ball. Why is it that we're taught to dive on the loose ball... and if we do in dry conditions and somebody is standing bending over to pick it up gets mauled over its not a penalty. Same rules apply. Its unfortunate if somebody gets taken out but you either realistically compete for the loose ball or leave it alone for people who are more willing to get it.
@@ejsmith9194He had no control over his body due to the conditions - Are you telling me he could have stopped if he wanted to? If you aren't in control of your body when you take an action it automatically becomes reckless. Like I said, it's the responsibility of the player to ensure that their actions do not result in play which would be considered illegal under the laws. Whether the contact happens a second later or not makes no difference, it's a reckless action. Whether or not he knew this is irrelevant and intent doesn't matter - although I'd argue he knew as he wouldn't have been able to slide far enough to reach the ball under normal conditions.
The player taken out was competing for the ball and in the process of collecting it (had his hands on it) when his legs were taken out from under him. The player is not fair game when he doesn't have the ball unless it's a ruck or a maul, and this was neither. By any interpretations of the laws it's a penalty. The action (considered foul play) caused the player to land dangerously and so it's a yellow card at a minimum.
I think the right decision was given for the wrong reasons here. I am a referee, my view. The player slides in from a distance, he is not in control of his actions, he cannot pull out or slow down. This makes the contact reckless and dangerous. Penalty and Yellow card. Anyone who wants to argue the dangers look at the contact point on McFadden to the ground.
This is viewed similarly to players in the air, once you go up you are committing because you can do very little to change your path so you must do so safely.
This was not a attempt at a tackle and if it was the Leinster player was not in the air or off his feat before contact and therefore there is no reason why it should be a yellow card.
@@adriaanvanniekerk6641 Hi Adriaan, thank you for your reply. I would categorise this under Law 9.11 "Player must not do anything which is reckless or dangerous to others."
In the law book there is no recommended sanction for that offence we can however assume that it is a penalty. We then move onto guidelines, any act which cause a players first point of contact to be head to ground is a red card unless there are mitigating circumstances. McFadden made contact head to ground. Mitigating circumstances he didn't leave the ground, he wasn't driven into the ground etc...
The collision is dangerous and reckless, first point of contact is head to ground. Mitigating factors bring it down to a yellow.
I'm not trying to argue what the laws and guidelines should say, i'm saying this is how the decision is reached and why i think given the current laws and guidelines it was the correct decision.
He was trying to play the ball...
he got the ball?
How can the ref say there was no attempt to gather the ball when he actually did gather the ball? I was supporting Leinster and still thought this was some terrible reffing.
@@alasdairduncan3 He only gathered the ball because he took the other player out. That’s like tackling someone in the air and you happen to catch the ball after.
@@stevenmcalister826 it's absolutely not like that he went for the ball and made contact with the ball. Black did a knock on before he was touched so he was at fault.
What a joke, it was a fair contest for the ball.
that's just rugby, tough shit, typical British teams getting protection from home refs
Bad call
Damn how soft
Shit decision.