Bath v Leicester

[FKAS]

I'm surprised they didn't play more on Muir dropping his height just before contact as that is material to the head contact occuring.

I'm not sure about Muir making ground through the tackle. He drops the ball and then gets dropped. I suppose it's not the biggest hit we've seen, don't think that's mitigation though.

[Mikey Brown]

Yeah that’s actually worse than I remembered. Not buying that mitigation at all.

Of course Muir is dipped a bit, but isn’t this the whole point? Don’t go flying in to contact fully upright, especially when you’re 6’7”.

[Danno]

Yeah that’s actually worse than I remembered. Not buying that mitigation at all.

Me too. Counsel has definitely earned his fee.

[Puja]

Just read the judgement - the citing officer said that he considered it to be a high degree of force, direct to the head, no mitigations (overriding the on-field decision of medium force), hence the citing. Chessum put up the argument that he had rushed up to pressure Russell and then swam off him at the pass and was making a soak tackle to wrap Muir up and prevent and offload, rather than going for a dominant hit, and noted that Muir makes ground in the tackle to back that up. He also showed stills showing simultaneous contact between chest->shoulder and shoulder->jaw, which would've diluted the force anyway. Panel agreed with him that it's not high degree of force and kept it at a yellow.

Right call, from reading that.

Puja

i haven't looked back at the tackle, but that all sounds pretty ropey to me. Sort of surprised that is your conclusion. CO sees force to the head but Chessum shows stills and the logic of why it wasn't a dominant hit.

I mean, the CO sees force to the head, but ref and TMO didn't, and citing panel didn't, cause they think the force is going through the body as well. I wouldn't be calling it a travesty of justice if they had found him guilty, but it doesn't seem out of line to call it a yellow either.

Puja

[Danno]

Just read the judgement - the citing officer said that he considered it to be a high degree of force, direct to the head, no mitigations (overriding the on-field decision of medium force), hence the citing. Chessum put up the argument that he had rushed up to pressure Russell and then swam off him at the pass and was making a soak tackle to wrap Muir up and prevent and offload, rather than going for a dominant hit, and noted that Muir makes ground in the tackle to back that up. He also showed stills showing simultaneous contact between chest->shoulder and shoulder->jaw, which would've diluted the force anyway. Panel agreed with him that it's not high degree of force and kept it at a yellow.

Right call, from reading that.

Puja

i haven't looked back at the tackle, but that all sounds pretty ropey to me. Sort of surprised that is your conclusion. CO sees force to the head but Chessum shows stills and the logic of why it wasn't a dominant hit.

I mean, the CO sees force to the head, but ref and TMO didn't, and citing panel didn't, cause they think the force is going through the body as well. I wouldn't be calling it a travesty of justice if they had found him guilty, but it doesn't seem out of line to call it a yellow either.

Puja

If we're serious about head contact that's a ban all day long - and it was a certain red two years ago too, which I personally think was the standard to aim for.

I think the bunker system is diluting the process a bit (with the upside that refs can perhaps skip another minute of replays to decide the colour of card themselves). Refs get to shirk the awkward decisions a bit, by design rather than desire I suppose, and the 20 minute red is a farce to me.

As an example of how poorly the game is taking player safety as a serious issue, it's a pretty good one, I think. Bend your hips. It's not that difficult unless you're as unfit as me.

[FKAS]

Yeah that’s actually worse than I remembered. Not buying that mitigation at all.

Of course Muir is dipped a bit, but isn’t this the whole point? Don’t go flying in to contact fully upright, especially when you’re 6’7”.

As there's contact on the chest and head had he not dipped there may have not been head contact. May still have been.

It's still a stupid tackle from Chessum, just reminding everyone he's still quite young. Going into the game too eager to make an impact early doors, charging in rashly.

I thought the yellow was the right call but that was more luck on Chessum's part than anything else.

[FKAS]

i haven't looked back at the tackle, but that all sounds pretty ropey to me. Sort of surprised that is your conclusion. CO sees force to the head but Chessum shows stills and the logic of why it wasn't a dominant hit.

I mean, the CO sees force to the head, but ref and TMO didn't, and citing panel didn't, cause they think the force is going through the body as well. I wouldn't be calling it a travesty of justice if they had found him guilty, but it doesn't seem out of line to call it a yellow either.

Puja

If we're serious about head contact that's a ban all day long - and it was a certain red two years ago too, which I personally think was the standard to aim for.

I think the bunker system is diluting the process a bit (with the upside that refs can perhaps skip another minute of replays to decide the colour of card themselves). Refs get to shirk the awkward decisions a bit, by design rather than desire I suppose, and the 20 minute red is a farce to me.

As an example of how poorly the game is taking player safety as a serious issue, it's a pretty good one, I think. Bend your hips. It's not that difficult unless you're as unfit as me.

The lack of consistency annoys me. Dunn's a high tackle so he gets a harsh yellow. Chessum gets a yellow and a citing. Ewels elbows OHC in the face and that's play on presumably as it's not a high tackle. Yeah, not so fussed with player safety.

[Danno]

I mean, the CO sees force to the head, but ref and TMO didn't, and citing panel didn't, cause they think the force is going through the body as well. I wouldn't be calling it a travesty of justice if they had found him guilty, but it doesn't seem out of line to call it a yellow either.

Puja

If we're serious about head contact that's a ban all day long - and it was a certain red two years ago too, which I personally think was the standard to aim for.

I think the bunker system is diluting the process a bit (with the upside that refs can perhaps skip another minute of replays to decide the colour of card themselves). Refs get to shirk the awkward decisions a bit, by design rather than desire I suppose, and the 20 minute red is a farce to me.

As an example of how poorly the game is taking player safety as a serious issue, it's a pretty good one, I think. Bend your hips. It's not that difficult unless you're as unfit as me.

The lack of consistency annoys me. Dunn's a high tackle so he gets a harsh yellow. Chessum gets a yellow and a citing. Ewels elbows OHC in the face and that's play on presumably as it's not a high tackle. Yeah, not so fussed with player safety.

Agreed. Plus Roots sticking his elbow into someone's face on the weekend, I forget who.

None of these players had the raking at rucks or actual fights after a scrum, you can't - well, shouldn't- get away with the dirty stuff anymore. Gotta show some smarts and some care for the opposition (within reason... keep smashing them to hell and back)

NB - not saying Chessum was playing foul, that was mistiming every day of the week, but I still think he's got away with one

[Puja]

i haven't looked back at the tackle, but that all sounds pretty ropey to me. Sort of surprised that is your conclusion. CO sees force to the head but Chessum shows stills and the logic of why it wasn't a dominant hit.

I mean, the CO sees force to the head, but ref and TMO didn't, and citing panel didn't, cause they think the force is going through the body as well. I wouldn't be calling it a travesty of justice if they had found him guilty, but it doesn't seem out of line to call it a yellow either.

Puja

If we're serious about head contact that's a ban all day long - and it was a certain red two years ago too, which I personally think was the standard to aim for.

I think the bunker system is diluting the process a bit (with the upside that refs can perhaps skip another minute of replays to decide the colour of card themselves). Refs get to shirk the awkward decisions a bit, by design rather than desire I suppose, and the 20 minute red is a farce to me.

As an example of how poorly the game is taking player safety as a serious issue, it's a pretty good one, I think. Bend your hips. It's not that difficult unless you're as unfit as me.

No bunker in that game though - ref made decision on the pitch watching the replays.

Agreed with you on bending the hips, but I don't think there'll be genuine change in the game until the tackle height is lowered at the top level. Chessum goes in like that because he wants to wrap and stop the offload and, most of the time, that exact same technique will result in a legal and very effective tackle, so there's very little incentive for him to change because the odds are in his favour even if it's a straight red. If the tackle height is changed so above the sternum is a penalty, then he's going to get lower, because that technique is going to give away a pen even if he's "lucky".

Puja

[Danno]

Fair enough on all counts.

He has had an excellent defence KC in my humble opinion. Muir gets a head clobberrer there and I stand by the notion that Chessum is straight off at the WC. Again, not pinning any sort of deliberate foul play on Chessum (who would?) But it still seems a bit of a dodged bullet to me.

[Mikey Brown]

Fair enough on all counts.

He has had an excellent defence KC in my humble opinion. Muir gets a head clobberrer there and I stand by the notion that Chessum is straight off at the WC. Again, not pinning any sort of deliberate foul play on Chessum (who would?) But it still seems a bit of a dodged bullet to me.

Yeah. Struggling to see any other interpretation of this to be honest.

The ref not giving a red at the time is kind of the point of this argument, so I’m not sure how it’s evidence of Chessum’s hit being okay. We’re seeing refs do everything they can to back out of red cards almost every week.

[Danno]

Fair enough on all counts.

He has had an excellent defence KC in my humble opinion. Muir gets a head clobberrer there and I stand by the notion that Chessum is straight off at the WC. Again, not pinning any sort of deliberate foul play on Chessum (who would?) But it still seems a bit of a dodged bullet to me.

Yeah. Struggling to see any other interpretation of this to be honest.

The ref not giving a red at the time is kind of the point of this argument, so I’m not sure how it’s evidence of Chessum’s hit being okay. We’re seeing refs do everything they can to back out of red cards almost every week.

Absolutely this and I absolutely hate it